4A - Monday, October 5, 2009 The Michigan Daily - michigandaily.com 4 I c Micl igan 4 Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890. 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 tothedaily@umich.edu ROBERT SOAVE COURTNEY RATKOWIAK EDITORIAL PAGE EDITOR MANAGING EDITOR 4 GARY GRACA EDITOR IN CHIEF Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily's editorial board. All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views ofttheir authors. A busted budget Compromise budget must include funding for education While students were still asleep on Thursday morning, Michigan's government shut down. A habit repeated every few years, legislators again failed to pass a bud- get by the Oct. 1 deadline. Though a complete government shut- down was temporarily forestalled by the passage of an interim budget, last week's budget debacle - the state legislature's second in the past three years - was embarrassing. Legislators need to do their jobs and make the tough decisions necessary to fix a $1.8 billion deficit. As they make those decisions, they need to keep in mind this state's future - one that won't be possible if the state This is not tag and release." - Todd Morris, CEO of BrickHouse Security, commenting on his firm's "Child Locator" that allows parents to track children's location electronically, as reported yesterday by the Associated Press. CHRIS KOSLOWSKI E-MAIL CHRIS AT CSKOSLOW@UMICH.EDU Imean, he gave a speech in Chicago didn'gec the Copenhagen! I don'tThsaltBshsfault. Oba eras and Oprah on our a Ding ding ding! side. How could we se Stupidy comng inIts alltoo easy,lks' * * * Tesecond-worst state 4 4 doesn't invest in education. Last week, legislators narrowly pre- vented a complete shutdown of Michigan's government by passing a last-minute, after- deadline, extension budget that provided enough money for the government to oper- ate for another month. This temporary fix came about because legislators have, after months of arguing, failed to come to any agreement about how to fill a $1.8 billion deficit. Now, they've promised to drag out the arguments for another month, leaving issues that immediately impact people's lives - like whether students will receive needed financial aid - up in the air. This situation is absolutely inexcusable. Producing a budget is the primary task of our state legislature, and that budget was due by Oct. 1. Lawmakers knew that get- ting a budget passed by then would require making some tough decisions. They didn't make those decisions and consequently they missed their deadline. In other words, they didn't accomplish the basic job they were elected to do. Instead, they left the state's financial fate up for grabs for another month. While many students probably don't care much about the nuts and bolts of the Michi- gan legislature's budget proceedings,-the financial fate now up for grabs is especially pertinent to them. Among the numerous programs on the choppingblock, the Michi- gan Promise Scholarship has seen its fund- ing cut from the budget, added back and cut again so many times that determining the scholarship's status from hour to hour has been dizzying. But that legislative see- saw has consequences. This scholarship program was expected to provide more than 6,000 students on this campus with as much as $4,000 this academic year - a fig- ure that has an important impact on many students'lives. This should gravely concern lawmak- ers. College students throughout Michigan are relying on the Promise Scholarship to attend college this year in the face of ris- ing tuition costs. That's not to say that other groups are not being affected by the state legislature's cuts. Almost everyone is. But the state's investment in education is one that will affect our state's long-term prosperity unlike almost any other issue. It will determine whether Michigan has a workforce educated enough to compete in the 21st century or one that continues to drive itself into industrial obscurity. Help- ing these students isn't just an investment in them, but an investment in the future of the state economy itself. Congressional Republicans need to face the reality that some tax increases are nec- essary to get the state the revenue it needs. Democrats, for their part, will have to con- cede cuts in order to craft a workable budget for next year. But one area that can't afford a cut is funding for education. It is simply too important. hile browsing the Internet on Sunday, I came across Forbes.com's fourth annual "The best states for business," which is° just what it sounds like - a ranking of the 50 states based on their appeal to businesses. The article took into account such fac- tors as business ROBERT costs, labor, regula- tory environment, SOAVE economic climate, growth prospects and quality of life. Even before I opened up the slideshow with the results, I wasn't too optimistic about Michigan's placement. In all honesty, I wasn't expecting Michigan to appear until I made it to the 40s. But it was still depressing as I cycled through the slideshow, my slow Internet connection forcing me to dwell on state after state that is better off than the one I've lived my whole life in. Finally, Michigan made its appear- ance at No. 49 (if you're curious, Rhode Island was last). Michigan was ranked last in the crucial catego- ries of economic climate and growth prospects, and also scored badly on business costs (39th) and labor (46th). Some of these factors have to do with the decline of the auto industry and aren't immediately fixable. But one contributing factor in Michigan's failing grade can be fixed and should be, soon - the astronomical cost of doing business in this state. In other words, taxes. It's somewhat ironic that Michi- gan's oppressive business tax is such a pressing concern when the govern- ment gave it a complete overhaul just two years ago. The Michigan Busi- . ness Tax replaced the Single Business Tax - which was widely regarded as overly complicated and burdensome - in January 2008. Jeffrey Guil- foyle of the Michigan Department of the Treasury predicted in a study released in September 2008 that 72 percent of Michigan taxpayers would pay the same or less under the new system. If a government study predicts something, it must come true, right? But just one month later, the Michi- gan Chamber of Commerce conduct- ed a poll of its members. Of the 700 who responded, about 80 percent said they paid more in taxes under the new system. A separate survey by the Chamber of Commerce found that the MBT - and the surcharge tacked on to it - were Michigan's number one problem. The 22 percent surcharge, which is among the most egregiously burden- some components of the MBT, pays for tax breaks for the film industry, among other things. While business- es in the state struggle to stay afloat in the midst of a disastrous economy and mounting tax burden, their dol- lars are being handed out to already wealthy studio executives. These executives are just waiting to flee the state as soon as the money they're leeching from local businesses runs out. And if the MBT stands for much longer, the money will run out. I asked a friend of mine who is a businessman in the apartment business what his tax burden is like under the new sys- tem. He told me that his tax burden increased substantially from the SBT to the MBT. And he most certainly isn't alone. According the Mackinac Center for Public Policy's Oct. 30, 2008 assessment of the Chamber of EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS: Commerce poll, "One-third of those reporting hikes said the increase was in excess of 100 percent over the SBT; eleven percent reported a hike of more than 300 percent and one mem- ber reported a tax increase of 1,000 percent." The assessment also found that 15 percent of those hit with the tax increase planned to stop expand- ing or leave the state. The Michigan Business Tax will kill the economy. So there you have it. Businesses are leaving Michigan and, if the Forbes.com ranking is an indication, no business in its right mind would ever want to come to Michigan. This reality should put the state legisla- ture's current budget debate in an entirely different context. It doesn't really matter whether legislators cut enough programs to solve a multi- billion-dollar deficit - the deficit is clearly going to be worse next year when there are even fewer businesses left to pay taxes. If the legislature has any interest in salvaging the disaster that is the state economy, it will repeal the MBT and make Michigan a slightly more attractive place for business. As long as the MBT remains, legislators might as well make it official that their goal is "No. 50 in 2010!" Rhode Island will even thank them for it. SEND LETTERS TO: TOTHEDAILY@UMICH.EDU Reid's dueling column a bad hope the Spartans know that we're not all like that - but unfortunately, they probably don't. example ofsportsmanship They get a yearly dose of arrogance right before the game, and they can point to it as an example of how all Michigan fans mustbe. TO THE DAILY: This year I was pleasantly surprised to see that I'm a current Ph.D. student and I also did my the State News writer didn't do that. I thought it master's and undergraduate study here. So, I've washilarious, even to me - a die-hard maize and been reading the dueling columns that run before blue fan. I appreciate his takingthe high(er) road. the Michigan-Michigan State football game for I'm sure Rich Rod - I mean, "Name Redacted" - quite some time now. It seems to me that every had his doubts about being able to beat Michigan year, the Michigan Daily writer assigned to the State, and I know many of us still have our doubts column gets more and more arrogant. about him too. The writer always says that they're not our By the time this letter prints, we will already real rivalry and that Michigan State is only know what happened: The "adorable" Michigan good at basketball and hockey. Or that people State fans got an uplifting, improbable win and only go there because they couldn't get in to it made Reid look like an idiot, or we beat them Michigan. This year, Andy Reid didn't break down again and they continue to gripe at our the trend. arrogance. Many times the State News' response to the Either way, we lose. Thanks, Andy. Michigan column has been to call us on our arro- gance, and justly so. Reid's column makes us look John Harvey like classless, uppity, self-entitled windbags. I Rackham JASON MAHAKIAN E-MAIL JASON AT MAHAKIAJ@UMICH.EDU I ;fAT Yo. 13 t T YOU. v - 2 ?AT NJU... ~L fEA T YUc. --v ~E 6eAT YOU... Ix fYryn MY U WAT HMe TwO Tts, THAN YU oAT i~VEFJTFfN4 / _ ; ( / - - Robert Soave is the Daily's editorial page editor. He can be reached at rsoave@umich.edu. 4 Nina Amilineni, Emad Ansari, Emily Barton, Ben Caleca, Brian Flaherty, Emma Jeszke, Raghu Kainkaryam, Sutha K Kanagasingam, Erika Mayer, Edward McPhee, Harsha Panduranga, Asa Smith, Brittany Smith, Radhika Upadhyaya, Rachel Van Gilder, Laura Veith MICHELLE DEWITT| W Celebrities' kids need privacy My name is Michelle and I am addicted to celebrity gos- sip. Okay, that's a slight exaggeration. But I do read People magazine on a regular basis, and I refuse to believe any information that I did not read on perezhilton.com. I'm exactly the type of celebrity-crazed lunatic that makes the planet dumber, but I can't help it. In spite of this, I do make an exception when it comes to the children of celebrities. The scrutiny young people receive from their peers can be disturbingly cruel. In fact, I am confident that if Dante had been a teenager living in the 21st century, an army of denim-mini-skirt-clad middle school girls would have been one of the circles of hell. But I digress. The point is that dealing with the cruel judgment of peers is awful all on its own, and even worse when you add the blogosphere into the mix. Judgments, sadly, are what the daughters of Span- ish Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero were recently forced to deal with. Laura, 16, and Alba, 13, with the help of Spanish laws, had until recently managed to remain out of the public eye despite being the prime min- ister's daughters. In Spain, it's against the law for any media outlets to publish photographs of the girls without the permission of their parents. This had allowed the girls to maintain the privacy that children should rightly have. But when a photograph of the girls with their parents and Barack and Michelle Obama was put on the White House flickr page, Laura and Alba were thrust into the spot- light. The photo was promptly taken off the website, but the Internet is well-known for keeping things from ever going away (sorry, Kanye). In addition to the presence of the photo online, several Spanish newspapers, contrary to requests of the Spanish government, decided to place the photo on the front page of their papers. For the first time in their lives, the girl's faces were all over newspa- pers and the Internet - and their choices of hairstyle, makeup and clothing have been extensively ridiculed by countless websites. Why is something that is so taboo in Spain no big issue in the United States? How can there be any debate over protecting the privacy of children? I don't have a good answer for this question, because there is no good answer. The fact that pictures of the children of public figures are fair game to anyone with a camera is clearly wrong. These children did not request to be the offspring of celebrities or politicians, and they should not have to request that their privacy be protected - that should be a given. A Google Image search of "Malia Obama" turns up pic- tures of her as she is being dropped off at school. Paparaz- zi camp outside of celebrities homes after their children are born in hopes of procuring the first photographs of the offspring, which is hugely invasive. Photographers also follow celebrities to parks, toy stores and other places where a great number of non-famous children are pres- ent. Perhaps having the bodyguard equivalent of Andre the Giant follow celebrity children around every step would not be as necessary if there were laws in place that adequately protected the privacy of these children. We all have awkward phases, but most individuals can avoid having these phases broadcast to the entire web- surfing world. Just because a person's parent is a diplo- mat, movie star, singer, television personality or reality television star does not mean these young people should lack basic rights to privacy. This is truly an issue of common sense - until an indi- vidual reaches the age of 18, privacy laws should keep them safe. Michelle Dewitt is an LSA sophomore. LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: Readers are encouraged to submit letters to the editor. Letters should be less than 300 words and must include the writer's full name and University affiliation. Letters are edited for style, length, clarity and accuracy. All submissions become property of the Daily. We do not print anonymous letters. Send letters to tothedoily@umich.edu.