>> WELCOME BACK.

 

"OFF THE RECORD" STARTS

 

HAVE RICK PLU TAF AND CHAD

 

LIVENGOOD ALONG WITH PAUL EGAN.

 

HERE IS THE RUN DOWN, RIGHT TO

 

WORK IS MOVING AND THE GOVERNOR

 

SO ON BOARD.

 

LATER ON, SCOTT HAGERSTROM FROM

 

THE MICHIGAN CHAPTER OF

 

AMERICANS FOR PROSPERITY WILL BE

 

ON BOARD.

 

ALL THIS AND MORE COMING UP

 

RIGHT NOW, "OFF THE RECORD."

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

>> NOW THIS EDITION OF "OFF THE

 

RECORD" WITH TIM SKUBICK.

 

>> Tim: THANKS.

 

WELCOME TO THIS EDITION, RIGHT

 

TO WORK, HERE IS WHAT WAS GOING

 

ON IN OUR TOWN YESTERDAY.

 

>> THE GOVERNOR CONCLUDED THE

 

ISSUE WOULD NOT GO AWAY SO WHY

 

NOT CONFRONT IT.

 

>> THIS IS ABOUT TAKING CARE OF

 

HARD WORKING PEOPLE OF MICHIGAN

 

ABOUT HOW THEY FREELY WHO THEY

 

ASSOCIATE WITH.

 

I DON'T VIEW THIS AS AGAINST THE

 

UNIONS.

 

>> TELL THAT TO THESE

 

DEMONSTRATORS.

 

MANY HE CONTENDS HE IS NOT UNION

 

BUSTING.

 

>> THAT IS NOT THE GOAL.

 

THIS IS ABOUT THE WORKERS.

 

>> TELL THAT TO PRESIDENT BOB

 

KING.

 

>> THE RIGHT WING FORCES IN

 

MICHIGAN, THEY ARE TRYING TO

 

TAKE POWER AWAY FROM WORKING

 

FAMILIES.

 

THEY WANT WORKING FAMILIES THAT

 

HAVE LOWER INCOME AND LESS

 

SECURITY.

 

THIS IS ABOUT PARTISANSHIP AND

 

NOT ABOUT BRINGING THE STATES

 

TOGETHER.

 

>> MEANWHILE, THE STATE

 

DEMOCRATIC LEADER WANTS TO

 

WITHHOLD FEDERAL DOLLARS FOR THE

 

BRIDGE AND MASS TRANSIT PROJECT

 

IN DETROIT IF THE GOVERNOR SIGNS

 

THE BILL.

 

>> WE ARE REACHING OUT.

 

WE ARE HOPING WHEN PRESIDENT

 

OBAMA COMES TO MICHIGAN THIS

 

WILL BE ON HIS RADAR SCREEN.

 

HE IS GOING TO SAY MICHIGAN

 

DOESN'T CARE ABOUT THE

 

MIDDLE-CLASS, WHY SHOULD WE BE

 

BENDING OVER BACKWARDS TO MAKE

 

SURE THE GOVERNOR IS ABLE TO

 

DELIVER ON HIS PROMISES.

 

>>> LET'S BEGIN WITH THIS STORY.

 

WHY DID THE GOVERNOR DO WHAT HE

 

DID?

 

>> THERE WAS A LOT OF PRESSURE

 

FROM CONSERVATIVE ACTIVISTS,

 

BUSINESS GROUPS AND MEMBERS OF

 

HIS OWN PARTY.

 

HE SAID, LET'S NOT THIS LINGER

 

ON FOR TOO MUCH LONGER.

 

LET'S DO THIS NOW.

 

>> IT SEEMS LIKE HE RECOGNIZED

 

THIS HAD REACHED CRITICAL MASS.

 

HE WAS GOING TO BE FACED WITH A

 

PRETTY STARK CHOICE, EITHER

 

SIGNING OR VOTING A BILL SO STEP

 

IN AND GET THE BEST HE COULD AND

 

MAKE A DECISION.

 

>> Tim: WHAT DEAL DID HE GET?

 

>> HE WANTED COOPERATION WITH

 

REPUBLICANS FOR THE

 

TRANSPORTATION.

 

>> HE SAYS HE IS NOT A HORSE

 

TRADER.

 

I'M ON THE RECORD, I AM NOT A

 

HORSE TRADER?

 

>> HE THOUGHT HE WAS NEGOTIATING

 

WITH THE UNIONS ON THIS.

 

ALTHOUGH AGAIN, IT'S NOT

 

ENTIRELY CLEAR WHAT THEY CAN

 

CONCEIVABLY GIVEN UP.

 

HE SAID YESTERDAY THERE IS

 

SOMETHING THAT UNIONS COULD HAVE

 

POUT TABLE THAT COULD HAVE

 

STOPPED THIS.

 

>> THE UNIONS SAID THEY PUT ON

 

THE TABLE EVERYTHING THEY COULD.

 

WHEN THEY PUT IT ON TABLE, IF

 

YOU DON'T LIKE IT TELL US WHAT

 

YOU WANT.

 

THEY NEVER GOT A RESPONSE BACK

 

FROM THE GOVERNOR.

 

TAKE THIS TO RICHARDVILLE AND

 

NEVER GOT BEYOND IT?

 

>> WE'RE HEARING CONFLICTING

 

STORIES, HOW THE NEGOTIATIONS

 

TRANSPIRED THAT THE UNIONS

 

DIDN'T COME ACROSS.

 

THEY DIDN'T COME ACROSS WITH

 

ENOUGH.

 

UNIONS SAYING WHAT DO YOU WANT.

 

THEY KNEW THE DAY AFTER THE

 

NOVEMBER ELECTION THEY WERE

 

GOING TO HAVE TO START TRADING

 

STUFF.

 

THEY WERE GOING TO AVOID THIS.

 

>> SNYDER NEEDED BIPARTISAN

 

SUPPORT WAS REGIONAL TRANSIT

 

AUTHORITY.

 

HE COULD DO EVERYTHING ELSE JUST

 

WITH REPUBLICANS.

 

IT DIDN'T SEEM LIKE THERE WAS

 

MUCH LEFT.

 

>> Tim: AS I ASKED, WHY DID IT

 

TAKE THREE YEARS TO GET HERE?

 

>> THERE IS TWO SCHOOLS OF

 

THOUGHT ON THAT.

 

THE CYNICAL VIEW THIS IS

 

SOMETHING THAT HE WAS OKAY WITH

 

AND HE PLAYED DOWN THE SUPPORT.

 

>> BUT THERE IS A VIDEO FROM THE

 

CAMPAIGN WHERE CANDIDATE SNYDER

 

SAID THAT IF IT WAS PUT IN FRONT

 

OF HIM HE WOULD SIGN IT.

 

>> RIGHT.

 

>> SO THERE IS THAT SCHOOL OF

 

THOUGHT.

 

>> AND THE OTHER VIEW IS WHAT

 

THE GOVERNOR SAYS HIMSELF IS

 

THAT HE FELT THERE WERE OTHER

 

PRIORITIES EVEN AS RECENTLY

 

YESTERDAY, HE SAID IF IT WAS

 

TOTALLY UP TO HIM HE WOULDN'T

 

BRING IT UP AT THIS TIME.

 

IF IT CAME TO BE AN ISSUE, IT

 

WAS PUT ON THE TABLE WHETHER HE

 

WANTED IT OR NOT.

 

HE TOOK A POSITION HE DOES

 

BELIEVE IN THERE SHOULD BE

 

FREEDOM FOR PEOPLE TO CHOOSE.

 

>> I GOT THIS STORY ABSOLUTELY

 

WRONG.

 

I READ THIS GUY THE WRONG WAY.

 

I THOUGHT HE WAS BUYING TIME TO

 

WAIT THIS OUT.

 

THE LONGER WE CAN TALK ABOUT IT

 

I DON'T HAVE TO DEAL WITH IT.

 

WHEN HE SAID IT'S NOW NOT ON MY

 

AGENDA, I SAID HERE IT GOES.

 

I GOT THAT WRONG.

 

>> YOU WEREN'T ALONE IN THAT.

 

YOU WEREN'T ALONE IN THAT.

 

THERE WERE A LOT OF PEOPLE

 

WONDERING IF THIS WAS TAP DANCE

 

TO GET ALL THE WAY THROUGH LAME

 

DUCK AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS OR IF

 

THERE WAS SOMETHING ELSE GOING

 

ON.

 

AND WAS THIS JUST A CHANCE TO

 

MAKE LABOR TWIST IN THE BREEZE

 

FOR HAVING PUSHED PROPOSAL 2.

 

>> HE'S NOT A VINDICTIVE GUY?

 

>> HE IS NOT, BUT LIKE WHAT

 

HAPPENED TODAY HAS NOTHING TO DO

 

WITH WHAT HAPPENED YESTERDAY.

 

HE SAID HE WARNED THEM IF THEY

 

WENT AHEAD WITH PROPOSAL 2, TO

 

COME UP AND IT MIGHT BE RIGHT TO

 

WORK.

 

IN FACT THAT IS WHAT HE SAID.

 

HE WAS NOT WRONG.

 

>> THE GOVERNOR SAID LOOK AT THE

 

POLITICAL REALITY.

 

THERE IS NO BETTER TIME FOR ME

 

STRATEGIC STANDPOINT THAN TO DO

 

THIS IN LAME DUCK AND DO IT WITH

 

A 64-MEMBER MAJORITY AND GO TO

 

59 AND SIX REPUBLICANS IN THE

 

HOUSE THAT VOTED AGAINST IT.

 

THOSE SIX WOULD VOTE IT AGAINST

 

IT NEXT MONTH.

 

THEN IT WOULD BE THREE VOTES.

 

THEY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO PASS

 

THE BILL NEXT SESSION.

 

>> ONE OF THE REASONS IT WAS

 

INTENSE THEY SAW THIS AS LAST

 

MOMENT TO GET THIS DONE.

 

ALL THE PEOPLE RETIRING GOING

 

OUT THE DOOR WHO COULD CAST THE

 

VOTE.

 

>> THAT IS WHY IT IS INTERESTING

 

IN TERMS OF THE ARGUMENTS.

 

IT'S HARD TO ARGUMENT AGAINST

 

FREEDOM OF CHOICE AND GOVERNMENT

 

MAKES THE ARGUMENT WELL.

 

UNIONS HAVE TO MAKE A BETTER

 

CASE THEY ARE DOING A GOOD JOB

 

AND LET PEOPLE DECIDE ON MERITS.

 

SOME MIGHT ASK SHOULDN'T THE

 

SAME ARGUMENT APPLY TO THE

 

LEGISLATION.

 

IF THESE BILLS ARE SO GOOD, WHY

 

NOT GIVE THE PUBLIC A CHANCE TO

 

REALLY HAVE A LOOK AT THEM.

 

WHY DOES IT HAVE TO BE DONE SO

 

QUICKLY AND GAVE THE POLITICAL

 

ANSWER.

 

>> MORE BOLGER SAYS THIS IS NOT

 

A NEW ISSUE.

 

I BROUGHT IT UP TWO YEARS AGO.

 

IT'S BEEN ON THE TABLE.

 

>> WHY DO WE HOLD HEARINGS AT

 

ALL?

 

>> Tim: THAT IS A GOOD QUESTION.

 

IF YOU GOT THE VOTES YOU RUN THE

 

STUFF.

 

WOULD THE HEARINGS HAVE MADE ANY

 

DIFFERENCE IN THIS DEBATE?

 

>> NO, IT WOULD HAVE DRAGGED IT

 

ON FOR A COUPLE MORE DAYS.

 

IT COULD HAVE MADE A COUPLE

 

HOUSE REPUBLICANS A LITTLE MORE

 

SKITTISH ABOUT VOTING FOR IT.

 

>> I THINK HEARINGS WHERE PEOPLE

 

ARE MAKING ARGUMENTS TRYING TO

 

FIND SOMETHING NEW, IT COULD

 

CONCEIVABLY DELAYED THIS INTO

 

THE NEXT SESSION.

 

>> Tim: WHAT IS NEXT FOR LABOR?

 

WHAT DO THEY DO?

 

>> REMEMBER FOR A LONG TIME.

 

>> ARE THEY GOING TO SHOW UP

 

AGAIN... WHAT ARE THEY GOING TO

 

DO?

 

>> WHAT THEY DID THIS WEEK TIMES

 

TWO.

 

YEAH, THERE IS 2,000 TO 3,000

 

PEOPLE THERE WILL BE DOUBLE THAT

 

ON TUESDAY.

 

>>> WE ASSUME THEY LOSE, DO THEY

 

DO RECALLS OR PETITION DRIVE OR

 

WAIT FOR THE NEXT ELECTION

 

CYCLE?

 

>> THEY SAY A RECALL OF GOVERNOR

 

SNYDER IS PROBABLY IMPRACTICAL.

 

>> THEY CAN TAKE LAWMAKERS ONE

 

BY ONE DOWN IF THEY WANT TO.

 

>> ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HAS

 

BEEN PUT OUT THERE, RIGHT NOW

 

WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE MARGIN IN

 

THE NEXT LEGISLATURE THAT THE

 

PROSPECTS FOR THE DEMOCRATS

 

TAKING CONTROL OF THE HOUSE OR

 

SENATE APPEAR PRETTY DIM, BUT IF

 

YOU CAN FIND A COUPLE VULNERABLE

 

REPUBLICANS ESPECIALLY IN THE

 

SENATE AND DO A REPEAT OF THE

 

1982 RECALLS THEN ALL OF A

 

SUDDEN THINGS THAT SEEM TO BE

 

REALLY CHALLENGING IN 2014 LOOK

 

WITHIN REACH.

 

>> THE OTHER ISSUE THAT HURT

 

SOMEBODY RIGHT NOW IS LABOR IS

 

ON ITS HEELS.

 

THEY SPENT MILLIONS ON PROPOSAL

 

2 AND LOST.

 

THERE ARE UNION MEMBERS THAT ARE

 

QUESTIONING THE DECISION TO GO

 

AHEAD WITH PROPOSAL 2.

 

THEY ARE QUESTIONING WHAT WAS

 

THE POINT OF NEGOTIATIONS.

 

THEY HAVE BEEN IN THE LAST

 

COUPLE OF WEEKS WHERE EVERYBODY

 

WAS TOLD TO KEEP THEIR HEADS

 

DOWN AND KEEP QUIET.

 

NOW, THEY GOT WHAT THEY FEARED.

 

IT'S NOT IN THE BEST POSITION TO

 

FIGHT A BATTLE AGAINST STATE

 

LAWMAKERS.

 

>> ONE THING THEY DO A BALLOT

 

INITIATIVE OF LAW AT 8% OF THE

 

VOTE TO GATHER SIGNATURES

 

BECAUSE THIS RIGHT TO WORK BILL.

 

>> WILL BE A REFERENDUM.

 

>> BUT THAT IS NOT OUT OF THE

 

REALM OF POSSIBILITIES BUT THEY

 

WOULD HAVE TO PUT AN INITIATIVE

 

ON THE BALLOT THAT WOULD NEED A

 

YES VOTE.

 

REFERENDUM THEY COULD PUT THIS

 

LAW ON THE BALLOTED AND GET YOU

 

TO VOTE NO.

 

>>> LET'S EXTEND THIS.

 

RIGHT TO WORK STATE OR NOT RIGHT

 

TO WORK STATE.

 

MICHIGAN IS POSTER CHILD OF THE

 

LABOR MOVEMENT.

 

IT WAS BORN HERE.

 

IF THEY CAN DO IT IN MICHIGAN,

 

CAN'T THEY DO IT IN KANSAS?

 

IN MISSOURI?

 

IT'S A NATIONAL MOVEMENT NOW

 

BECAUSE IT HAPPENED IN MICHIGAN.

 

>> THE SYMBOLIC VALUE IS LARGE

 

NOT JUST BECAUSE OF THAT BECAUSE

 

IT WILL BE 24th STATE.

 

THAT PUTS THE RIGHT TO WORK

 

MOVEMENT CLOSE TO HALFWAY.

 

>> WHAT ABOUT THE WHITE HOUSE

 

ANGLE, GETTING THE PRESIDENT

 

INVOLVED.

 

WERE YOU SURPRISED BY THAT?

 

>> THE PRESIDENT HAS ALWAYS BEEN

 

AGAINST RIGHT TO WORK LAWS AND

 

REITERATED NOW A NEW WRINKLE THE

 

DEMOCRATS LOBBYING FOR WHITE

 

RAIL OF WOODROW AVENUE AND EVEN

 

THE GOVERNOR'S BRIDGE.

 

I HAVE A HARD TIME BELIEVING

 

THAT DEMOCRATS WOULD TRY TO

 

DERAIL A PROJECT THAT WOULD PUT

 

ORGANIZED LABOR TO WORK.

 

>> Tim: THAT IS THE ONLY

 

LEVERAGE THEY HAVE TO GET A VOTE

 

OUT OF THIS GUY.

 

DO WE AGREE OR NOT?

 

>> HE MAY NOT WANT THE BRIDGE

 

THAT BAD AT THIS POINT.

 

>> Tim: THE GOVERNOR?

 

>> LAST TIME I CHECKED....

 

>> THE OTHER THING TO A LOT OF

 

THE REPUBLICAN SUPPORTERS OF

 

THIS WAS SAYING THIS REALLY

 

HAPPENED INDEPENDENT OF PROPOSAL

 

2.

 

DO YOU BELIEVE THAT?

 

>> I DON'T KNOW.

 

DO BELIEVE THAT?

 

>> CERTAINLY NOT FOR SOME

 

PEOPLE.

 

>> CLEARLY THERE IS SOME LINKAGE

 

THERE.

 

>> THIS WAS GOING TO HAPPEN

 

REGARDLESS OF PROPOSAL 2.

 

THAT IS WHAT THE LABOR GUYS WILL

 

TELL YOU.

 

IT WAS TEED UP.

 

>> THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE

 

LOOKING AT THIS.

 

WHAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED

 

PROPOSAL 2 BEING A SWEEPING

 

VISTA OF LEGISLATIVE ACTIVITY

 

REPEALING ALL KINDS OF THINGS

 

HAD BEEN A SIMPLE ONE SENTENCE

 

THOU SHALT NOT MESS WITH

 

COLLECTIVE BARGAINING RIGHTS.

 

>> OR RIGHT TO WORK.

 

DON'T MESS WITH IT.

 

YOU WERE GOING TO SAY, WHAT

 

ABOUT THE ACTIVITY OF MORE DID

 

HE VOSS AND MORE RISER?

 

>> VERY QUIETLY.

 

THAT DID YOU THREAT REPUBLICANS

 

WITH RECALLS.

 

>> I SAW YOUR COLUMN.

 

IT WAS INTERESTING THAT DICK

 

DEVOSS SAID HE DIDN'T THINK THE

 

TIME WAS RIGHT TO WORK.

 

HE IS CERTAINLY ONE OF THOSE

 

THAT HAVE BEEN FUNDING THE TV

 

ADS ON THIS.

 

HE IS ONE OF THE PEOPLE THAT PUT

 

THIS ISSUE IN FRONT OF THE

 

GOVERNOR IN A WAY THAT MADE IT

 

HARD....

 

>> IT'S THE INCIDENTS BETWEEN A

 

CANDIDATE AND BEING SOMEONE WHO

 

IS JUST....

 

>> IN FAIRNESS TO HIM BECAUSE

 

PEOPLE WOULD EXPLAIN CHANGE OF

 

HEART WAS PROPOSAL 2.

 

THAT SAID, THAT WAS THE STRAW

 

THAT BROKE MR. DE VOGS S'S BACK?

 

>> THEY THOUGHT PROPOSAL 2 WAS

 

REFERENDUM ON RIGHT TO WORK.

 

>> EVEN THOUGH WE NEVER HAD

 

DEBATE ON PROPOSAL 2 CAMPAIGN.

 

>>> LET'S CALL IN SCOTT AT THIS

 

POINT.

 

>> SCOTT HAGERSTROM FROM THE

 

MICHIGAN CHAPTER OF AMERICANS

 

FOR PROSPERITY L HE SPENT 15

 

YEARS IN THE PROCESS AND FIVE

 

AND A HALF YEARS TO A STATE

 

REPRESENTATIVE.

 

HE HAS BEEN WITH THIS

 

ORGANIZATION FOR THE LAST FOUR

 

AND A HALF YEARS.

 

>> WELCOME TO OUR PROGRAM, SIR.

 

PAUL HAS THE FIRST QUESTION.

 

>> WHAT STATE IS GOLD STANDARD

 

IN TERMS OF PUBLIC POLICY AS YOU

 

ADVANCE YOUR AGENDA, WHAT STATE

 

WOULD YOU POINTED THAT YOU WOULD

 

LIKE TO SEE MICHIGAN BECOME THE

 

MORE LIKE?

 

>> IN TERMS OF JOBS AND LIMITED

 

GOVERNMENT AND ECONOMIC IT WILL

 

BE, PROBABLY TEXAS IS RIGHT UP

 

THERE.

 

NO INCOME TAX, TRITE WORK STATE.

 

THERE IS A LOT OF JOB GROWTH

 

THERE.

 

ANOTHER STATE WE ARE LOOKING IS

 

INDIANA.

 

THEY ADDED 43,000 JOBS SINCE

 

PASSING.

 

WE WANT AN ENVIRONMENT WHERE

 

THERE IS JOBS COMING TO MICHIGAN

 

AND INCOMES ARE GROWING.

 

NOT THE ENVIRONMENT FROM 2001 TO

 

2010 WHERE WE LOST POPULATION.

 

IN 1960s WE WERE ECONOMIC

 

POWERHOUSE.

 

WE HAVE OVER 9% UNEMPLOYMENT.

 

AND GOVERNOR AND LEGISLATIVE

 

LEADERS ARE COMMITTED TO

 

RETURNING MICHIGAN TO ECONOMIC

 

PROMINENCE.

 

WE DON'T AGREE ON EVERY ISSUE.

 

I THINK THEY ARE COMMITTED TO

 

THOSE VALUES.

 

WE WANT TO MOVE MICHIGAN

 

FORWARD.

 

>> WHEN YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT

 

THAT PERIOD, IT WAS A PERIOD

 

WHEN THE UNION MOVEMENT WAS VERY

 

STRONG.

 

THAT THE CLOTHES SHOP WAS A

 

REALITY IT WAS THERE -- CLOSED

 

SHOP WAS A REALITY.

 

HOW DOES IT HELP RESTORE IT?

 

>> AS THE PROBLEM NOW.

 

WE LIVE IN A WORLD ECONOMY.

 

WE HAVE TO BE COMPETITIVE AND

 

WE'RE LOSING JOBS AND LOSING

 

POPULATION.

 

ALL OF US KNOW PEOPLE THAT HAVE

 

HAD TO LEAVE THE STATE OR

 

CONSIDER LEAVING THE STATE FOR

 

GOOD EMPLOYMENT.

 

TIMES ARE CHANGING.

 

>> GIVING PEOPLE NOT TO JOIN THE

 

UNION WILL HAVE THEM STAY HERE?

 

>> WHEN WE LOOK AT COMPANIES AND

 

WHERE THEY WANT TO INVEST THEIR

 

DOLLARS THEY SPECIFICALLY RULED

 

OUT STATES, SINCE THE END OF THE

 

RECESSION....

 

>> Tim: THIS ADMINISTRATION SAYS

 

THEY ARE NOT HUNTING FOR JOBS IN

 

OTHER STATES.

 

WHAT DO THEY THINK ABOUT

 

MICHIGAN IS IRRELEVANT.

 

>> I THINK THAT IS MISTAKEN.

 

THEY ARE GARDENING TO GROW JOBS

 

HERE AND BRING NEW JOBS AND NEW

 

INVESTMENT.

 

>> AND A POLICE OFFICER IN

 

DETROIT OR FIREFIGHTER IN GRAND

 

RAPIDS BE EXEMPTED?

 

>> THERE WERE CONCERNED ABOUT

 

CONSTITUTION, THEY ARE

 

PROHIBITED FROM STRIKING UNDER

 

PA-12.

 

THEY ARE CONCERNED N WITHIN

 

LEGISLATIVE CIRCLES ABOUT PA-12.

 

WE CAN LIVE WITH POLICE AND FIRE

 

EXCEPTIONS.

 

THERE MAY BE A DUE PROCESS

 

QUESTION THERE AND WE'LL SEE IF

 

THERE IS A LAWSUIT.

 

>> Tim: YOU HAVE BEEN CRITICAL

 

OF THIS GOVERNOR.

 

WHERE ARE YOU ON GOVERNOR SNYDER

 

TODAY?

 

>> BASED ON THE STATEMENT

 

YESTERDAY, VERY, VERY PLEASED.

 

WE'RE NOT GOING TO AGREE ON

 

EVERY ISSUE.

 

WE DON'T AGREE ON EVERY ISSUE.

 

WE WANT ECONOMIC LIBERTY BUT I

 

THINK ON THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE,

 

IF I COULD HAVE TWO THINGS TO

 

PUT US FORWARD ECONOMICALLY AND

 

BRING JOBS, IT WOULD BE PASSING

 

RIGHT TO WORK LEGISLATION AND

 

EVENTUAL LIMITATION OF THE STATE

 

INCOME TAX.

 

WE ARE COMPETING WITH NINE

 

STATES THAT HAVE NO INCOME TAX.

 

>> Tim: IS THAT NEXT ON THE

 

AGENDA?

 

>> THAT HAS BEEN ON THE AGENDA

 

FOR THE PAST SIX YEARS AND WILL

 

CONTINUE TO BE.

 

>> IF THE RIGHT TO WORK

 

LEGISLATION IS PASSED, WHAT

 

IMPACT WILL IT HAVE ON THE

 

POLITICAL POWER OF THE UNIONS

 

AND AS A MAJOR FUND-RAISER OF

 

THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY?

 

>> THAT IS A GOOD QUESTION.

 

THERE ARE A LOT OF UNION

 

PROTESTORS THERE YESTERDAY.

 

THE THING FOR THEM NOTHING HAS

 

TO CHANGE.

 

THEY CAN CONTINUE TO BELONG TO A

 

UNION AND CONTINUE TO

 

COLLECTIVELY BARGAIN AND IF THEY

 

MAKE A GOOD SERVICE, PEOPLE WILL

 

CONTINUE TO PAY DUES AND

 

CONTINUE TO HAVE THEIR INCOME

 

BUT THEY WILL HAVE TO EARN THAT.

 

THEY WON'T HAVE A CAPTIVE

 

AUDIENCE AND REQUIRED TO PAY

 

UNION DUES.

 

>> DO YOU EXPECT THE LAW WILL

 

HAVE AN AFFECT ON MEMBERSHIP IN

 

MICHIGAN?

 

>> POLLING SHOWS THAT SOME WOULD

 

DROP THEIR MEMBERSHIP BUT THE

 

UNIONS HAVE TAKEN FOR GRANTED

 

THEIR MEMBERSHIP.

 

THEY KNEW THEY WERE COLLECTING

 

THE MONEY NO MATTER WHAT THEY

 

DID.

 

THEY WILL HAVE TO OFFER ON

 

OFFERING SERVICES AND BE A GOOD

 

REPRESENTATIVE OF THE WORKERS.

 

IF THEY DO THAT, I DON'T THINK

 

UNION MEMBERSHIP WILL DROP AT

 

ALL.

 

>> HOW ARE YOU PREPARED TO HELP

 

REPUBLICANS WHO VOTED WITH YOU

 

WHO MAY BECOME THE TARGETS OF

 

POLITICAL ACTION, EITHER RECALLS

 

OR MAYBE SOME AGGRESSIVE

 

ACTIVITY IN 2014?

 

>> SURE.

 

WE DON'T GET INVOLVED IN

 

ELECTIONS OR SUPPORTING

 

CANDIDATES.

 

HOWEVER, WE WILL GO THROUGHOUT

 

THE STATE.

 

IT'S ALMOST LIKE WINNING THE

 

HEARTS AND MINDS OF MICHIGAN

 

RESIDENTS AND WE WILL EDUCATE

 

THEM ABOUT THIS LAW AND BENEFITS

 

THAT WILL OCCUR TO MICHIGAN AND

 

TO OUR ECONOMY.

 

I THINK THAT IS VERY IMPORTANT.

 

>> IS THAT IN YOUR GAME PLAN

 

RIGHT NOW?

 

IS THERE ADVERTISING EFFORT THAT

 

WILL BE LAUNCHED?

 

>> THERE NO BUDGET, THERE IS NO

 

ADVERTISING CAMPAIGN.

 

IT'S GOING TO BE AGGRESSIVE AND

 

TOUGHER, TOWN TO TOWN.

 

>> Tim: WHERE DO YOU GET YOUR

 

MONEY FROM?

 

>> WE HAVE OVER 3,000 DONORS.

 

>> Tim: OUTSIDE MICHIGAN MONEY?

 

>> VERY, VERY LITTLE.

 

>> Tim: SO YOU DON'T HAVE A

 

BENEFACTOR SENDING YOU MONEY?

 

>> I DON'T, UNFORTUNATELY.

 

>> EDDIE MOUR OON ONE OF YOUR

 

DONORS?

 

>> WE DON'T DISCUSS OUR DONORS

 

AND OUR DONORS ARE FREE TO

 

DISCLOSE THEMSELVES BUT WE DON'T

 

DO THAT.

 

>> Tim: WHY DON'T YOU DO THAT?

 

>> WE DON'T DO THAT BECAUSE WE

 

MAKE A PROMISE WE WON'T, DONORS

 

ARE OUR MEMBERS AND THEY FALL

 

UNDER THE MEMBERSHIP.

 

>> Tim: ARE YOU GOING TO COME

 

BACK WITH THE BALLOT PROPOSAL ON

 

TAX INCREASES AGAIN?

 

>> THAT WASN'T OUR BALLOT

 

PROPOSAL BUT WE DID SUPPORT IT.

 

I CONGRATULATE THE GOVERNOR.

 

THEY DID VERY GOOD JOB.

 

WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT ON THE

 

BALLOT IN THE FUTURE BUT THAT IS

 

NOT A PRIORITY AT THIS TIME.

 

>> WHAT IS YOUR NEXT PRIORITY?

 

>> TO CONTINUE TO FIGHT FOR

 

LIMITED GOVERNMENT AND ECONOMIC

 

GROWTH.

 

>> Tim: WHAT WOULD LIMIT

 

GOVERNMENT IN YOUR MIND?

 

>> THE INCOME TAX, THE INCOME

 

TAX.

 

LIKE I SAID WE COMPETE WITH NINE

 

STATES.

 

>> HOW WOULD YOU REPLACE THAT

 

REVENUE?

 

>> THROUGH ECONOMIC GROWTH.

 

I THINK WE CAN STILL DO A LOT OF

 

CUTTING IN GOVERN.

 

>> IF YOU TOOK AWAY COUPLE

 

BILLIONS OF DOLLARS, IT WOULD BE

 

ECONOMIC GROWTH TO REPLACE THAT

 

MONEY.

 

HOW LONG, YOUR LIFETIME?

 

>> WE COULD CUT IT BY .1% FOR

 

NEXT TEN YEARS.

 

WE NEED, THERE ARE NINE OTHER

 

STATES THAT DO IT.

 

WE COULD HAVE A HIGHER SALES

 

TAX.

 

>> WHERE DOES SERVICE AND

 

INFRASTRUCTURE FIT INTO THE

 

PROSPERITY AGENDA AMERICANS FOR

 

PROSPERITY?

 

>> INFRASTRUCTURE IS VERY

 

IMPORTANT.

 

WE HAVE THE FIFTH HIGHEST TAX ON

 

GASOLINE IN THE COUNTRY.

 

SO CERTAINLY WE HAVE TO COME UP

 

WITH SOLUTIONS.

 

WE BELIEVE THERE NEEDS TO BE

 

MORE MONEY PUT INTO THE ROADS.

 

WE BELIEVE IT NEED TO COME FROM

 

THE MONEY THAT IS ALREADY

 

COLLECTED.

 

>> Tim: THE GOVERNOR IS WRONG

 

WHEN HE SAYS HE NEEDS $1.4

 

BILLION IN NEW REVENUE?

 

>> HE NEEDS IT FROM THE PUBLIC

 

BUT TAKE IT FROM OTHER AREAS OF

 

THE GOVERNMENT.

 

>> Tim: SO HE NEEDS TO CLOSE

 

SOME DEPARTMENTS DOWN AND PUT IT

 

INTO ROADS?

 

>> WE DO NEED TO BE MORE

 

EFFICIENT.

 

>> WHERE?

 

WHAT WOULD BE THE SORT OF

 

THINGS?

 

>> MacKINAC STUDY HAS A GREAT

 

STUDY THEY DID, STATE AND LOCAL

 

AND THE STATE OF MICHIGAN

 

CONTRIBUTED THE SAME AMOUNT THAT

 

PRIVATE SECTOR WORKERS TO HAVE

 

CONTRIBUTED TO THEIR HEALTH CARE

 

AND TO THEIR BENEFIT PACKAGE.

 

THAT WOULD BE A $5.7 BILLION

 

SAVINGS.

 

MAYBE AS THE BIT OVERSTATED BUT

 

IF WE TOOK A LITTLE BIT OF THAT

 

MONEY AND REQUIRED PUBLIC SECTOR

 

WORKERS AND CONTRIBUTE THE SAME

 

TO THEIR PENSIONS AND TO THEIR

 

HEALTHCARE, IT WOULD BE ENORMOUS

 

AMOUNT OF MONEY, YOU COULD

 

REDUCE INCOME TAX AND REALLY PUT

 

MICHIGAN ON THE PATH TO ECONOMIC

 

GROWTH.

 

>> 20% OF THE PREMIUM HEALTHCARE

 

HOW MUCH DO YOU CONTRIBUTE TO

 

YOUR HEALTHCARE?

 

>> THAT IS A GOOD QUESTION.

 

THEY ONLY PROVIDE HEALTH CARE

 

FOR MYSELF AND I HAVE HEALTH

 

SAVING ACCOUNT.

 

THEY DON'T PROVIDE FOR MY

 

FAMILY.

 

STATE GOVERNMENT WORKERS I THINK

 

IT IS PROVIDED FOR THEM AND

 

THEIR FAMILY.

 

>> Tim: SO YOU ARE ASKING FOR

 

NEW REVENUE BUT IF HE DOES, YOU

 

ARE GOING TO HAVE A FIGHT ON HIS

 

HANDS WITH YOU GUYS?

 

>> WE WILL OPPOSE IT.

 

>> Tim: TAKE HIM TO THE MAT ON

 

THIS ONE?

 

>> WE'LL HAVE TO SEE WHAT THE

 

PROPOSAL IS.

 

>> DO YOU COME TO AN

 

ACCOMMODATION ON THE NEW BRIDGE?

 

>> WE BELIEVE THERE WILL BE NEW

 

BRIDGE.

 

WE BELIEVE WHAT THEY DID, GO TO

 

CONGRESS AND GET A FRANCHISE AND

 

TO A PRIVATE COMPANIES.

 

LET'S NOT USE FEDERAL MONEY.

 

>> Tim: THAT IS NOT GOING TO

 

HAPPEN?

 

>> THAT IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.

 

>> Tim: THANK YOU, SIR.

 

OUR THANKS TO PAUL, RICK AND

 

CHAD.

 

DON'T FORGET OUR E-MAIL ADDRESS

 

AND DON'T FORGET WE'RE ON

 

TWITTER AND WE'LL SEE YOU NEXT

 

WEEK ON "OFF THE RECORD."