News and analysis from The Center for Michigan •
©2015 Bridge Michigan. All Rights Reserved. • Join us online at

Original article URL:

Phil's column

Phil Power is founder and chairman
of the Center for Michigan.

Bipartisanship registers a heartbeat

Finally. After months of struggle, Michigan’s state senate passed legislation last week to accept Washington’s offer to extend Medicaid to nearly half a million of our state’s working poor.

The vote was close – 20 to 18 — and the run-up to it was complicated, intense and very partisan.  But when crunch time came, eight (out of 26) Republicans joined with all 12 Senate Democrats to ratify one of Gov. Rick Snyder’s main policy priorities.

At first glance, it looks as if the day was won by solid bipartisanship, fostered by a decision by the lawmakers to govern like adults. And that is true, up to a point — at least when it comes to last week’s vote.

Those who argue the state has both a moral responsibility to 470,000 poor and uninsured Michiganders and a financial incentive to glom onto billions in federal support for expanded Medicaid should now give big pats on the back to at least four adults in the room, all Republicans: Gov. Rick Snyder, who persisted in fighting for this for months; House Speaker Jase Bolger, who constructed a similar bipartisan coalition in the House; Senate Majority Leader Randy Richardville, who worked hard to persuade a minority of fellow Republicans to go along; and Sen. Roger Kahn, a doctor from Saginaw, who led the work group that thrashed out the final compromise.

But underneath, the main political dynamics in Lansing remain much the same as they’ve been for the past two and a half years: An uneasy mixture of ideological Republican opposition to anything that smacks of support for President Obama, heightened by even more intense snarls from the Tea Party. That group is playing an outsize role in Michigan politics by threatening insufficiently intransigent GOP officeholders with primary election opposition from the right.

Senators opposed to Medicaid expansion cited concerns about increasing the size, cost and intrusiveness of the federal government.  Some questioned whether Michigan could really believe the feds would keep their end of the deal.

Others worried that future generations might be saddled with costs of another entitlement. However, I’m inclined to think these arguments are only semi-plausible smoke screens masking the real basis of opposition: Intensely hostile feelings toward President Obama and anything connected with his Administration, especially “Obamacare” – otherwise known as the Affordable Care Act.

Time after time, opponents railed that any – any – version of Medicaid expansion in Michigan reeked of the hated Obamacare, possibly because the folks it would add would otherwise be obliged to buy health insurance.  Sometimes I wonder if some Republican lawmakers would even vote against something called “Obamataxcut”!

One main factor in the difficult road to passage was opposition from vocal Tea Partiers like GOP chair wannabee Todd Courser, who threatened incumbent state senators with opposition in primary elections next year, adding the motive of self-preservation to ordinary partisan ideology.  Already, three sitting Republican senators representing normally Democratic districts are in the Tea Party’s cross hairs.  All are considered “toss-up” races by Inside Michigan Politics.

Nick Sundquist, an announced primary opponent of Sen. Geoff Hansen (R-Hart) demanded Hansen “explain his support for Obanacare-supporting legislation.” Sen. Tom Casperson (R-Escanaba) who cast the key vote for passage was called on the carpet for “Betrayal.” Meanwhile, former state rep Leon Drolet, once known for parking “Mr. Perks,” an enormous pink pig, in front of the Capitol, may go after Sen. Tory Rocca (R-Sterling Heights.)

There’s an added sub-plot going forward that will certainly crystallize concerns about opposition to Medicaid expansion.  After the expansion was approved, 14 GOP Senators voted against giving the bill “immediate effect”, i.e. instead of taking place on New Years’ Day, Michigan will have to wait until April. That’ll cost Michigan $7 million a day in money the feds otherwise would have made available to states to get people to sign up for Medicaid coverage.

That would mean $630 million down the drain. Taxpayers ought to encourage the senate to reconsider, pronto.

Besides, those same senators are not only in danger of being called sore losers, they are also at risk of being branded hypocrites.  As Brian Dickerson of thevDetroit Free Press noted last week, every one of the 18 GOP senators who voted against Medicaid expansion also voted two years ago for giving all but one of their ranks lifetime health care at taxpayer expense. (The exception, Patrick Colbeck of Canton, didn’t qualify because of a technicality.)

Michigan citizens deserve better.

Editor’s Note: Former newspaper publisher and University of Michigan Regent Phil Power is a longtime observer of Michigan politics and economics. He is also the founder and chairman of The Center for Michigan, a nonprofit, bipartisan centrist think-and-do tank, designed to cure Michigan’s dysfunctional political culture. He is also on the board of the Center’s Business Leaders for Early Education. The opinions expressed here are Power’s own and do not represent the official views of The Center. He welcomes your comments at

2 comments from Bridge readers.Add mine!

  1. Mike Ritenour

    The Senate’s repeat failure within the past few hours to give the medicaid expansion immediate effect underscores the “cut off our nose to spite our face” mean-spiritedness and hypocrisy rightly called out by Mr. Power. The Republican majority has deliberately denied Michigan sorely needed $600 million in aid on “ideological” (a word that gives them far too much credit for having a reasoned basis for their position) opposition to anything coming from or associated with President Obama. These latter-day Luddites need to get over it: the Affordable Care Act was passed by Congress, signed by the President, upheld by the Supreme Court, and partially implemented over the past three years. It is a fact, and it is not going away. The Michigan Senators can continue to make fools of themselves (as has the US House of Representatives in taking several dozen pointless, embarrassing repeal votes), or they can start acting in the best interests of the citizens of this state. For a change.

    1. Javan Kienzle

      Mike hits the nail on the head when he says that “ideological” is a word that gives them far too much credit for having a reasoned basis for their position.
      They are predictably Pavlovian in their reaction to anything proposed by any Democrat or even any moderate; their opposition to anything coming from or associated with President Obama is a response that smacks of visceral hate.
      All to the detriment of the citizens of Michigan, including the constituents such legislators are supposed to represent.
      Their “thought” processes, as such, belong on a shelf in Harvard Medical School.

Leave your comment...

Your email address will not be published.

Currently on Bridge

Will we be better off if Proposal 1 passes? Former treasurer says yes

An Earth Day pitch: When you hang up the phone for good, toss it the right way

Michigan’s roads affect everyone, so a 'yes' vote on Proposal 1 makes sense

‘Diplomacy Begins Here’ conference aims to illuminate international relations

What NOT to post on Facebook: Jokes about prison rape, when you’re in charge of preventing prison rape

A program to give young offenders a second chance is sending many to prison

Similar accounts in suit over alleged teen prison rapes pose challenge to state's defense

‘New fish’ ‒ One teen inmate’s account of alleged sexual assault

Early learning summit in June could impact Michigan’s children

Money Smart Week: Be penny wise, and pound savvier

Plan B or no Plan B, here’s what happens if road proposal fails

The political tale behind the selling of Proposal 1

A Bridge primer: Untangling the pothole promise of Proposal 1

Who supports, and opposes, Proposal 1

Let's rebuild Michigan through its greatest asset: its water

Could a public boarding school model work in Detroit?

Coalition supporting Detroit schools a step in the city’s road back

Chasing fads? Today’s schools are struggling too much for that

For one Michigan legislative staffer, an hour or two in the spotlight

A cull is a kill, and it’s an overreaction to deer ‘problem’

Lack of college guidance keeps poor and rural students from applying

Those who can, do – and get their hands ‘dirty’ in the process

For one Detroit mom, a complicated path to employment

Detroit by the numbers – the truth about poverty

Michigan should require dental screening for all children entering kindergarten

Where in the world is the Center for Michigan?

After two years, hard to call ACA anything but a success

Bridge’s Academic State Champs emphasizes all the wrong measurements

A graying population poses challenges for Up North counties

Up North, isolation impedes health care for seniors

Enbridge oil pipes and the Straits of Mackinac: Too risky to ignore

Not bigger government, but better services when Community Health and Human Services merge

Two Michigans gaze across a widening gap

In northern counties, workers and business find each other lacking

Hidden poverty stalks a Pure Michigan setting

Postcard: How a git-’er-done spirit helps one rural school district

Postcard: When elk is for dinner

Postcard: Luxe life at Bay Harbor reflects changing economy

Postcard: A roof and a bed

Invest in non-partisan journalism.

Donate to The Center for Michigan. Find out why.