Last week, I called Eric Sharp (Free Press outdoor writer) a man for admitting that he was wrong in the recent financial faux crisis. I thought that maybe he had been hoodwinked along with some others who fought for the increased fees. I’ll take that back now. He’s just a pissy sore loser who does not want to concede defeat. This Sunday he decided to blame the National Rifle Association (NRA) ahead of time for any future defeat of a proposed fee increase that has not even been proposed yet.
Following a format where many writers do a two man piece, where one gives an opinion and the other agrees or disagrees with it. I decided to have a little fun with it, and put in some of the points brought up by Mr. Sharp, and throw back a counterpoint from myself. There won’t be too many agreements in this one that I can see ahead of time.
Point: Sharp calls the legislature spineless for not standing up to the “gun lobby” in passing even a modest increase of $3 or so.
Counterpoint: I say the legislature is playing it smart in the face of investigations not even being completed in the last farce. One fact, yes $3 doesn’t seem like a huge increase, but it is a 20 percent increase. Secondly the members of the legislature should not be afraid of the NRA, they need to be afraid of their constituents and their ability to get re-elected.
Point: Sharp says the legislators are weaseling out of their responsibilities when they did not pass the recent outrageous fee increases.
Counterpoint: I say they are playing the part of representing those who voted them, as it should happen in a representative democracy. There was an overwhelming outcry not to increase the fees the last time out and those in the house and senate listened. Turns out that there was not a deficit, and so no need to increase the fees. One nice thing about term limits is that it seems like the those in Lansing actually listen more often than not to their districts.
Point: Sharp quotes Frank Wheatlake, a member of NRC that sets policy for the DNR and one responsibility is submitting fee increases. “Whether we have a $10 million fund balance is irrelevant,” says Wheatlake. He finishes off with, “What we need is to get back to the employment levels of 2005 to run the department properly.”
Counterpoint: Good thing this guy is not running a publicly traded company in the private sector, or he would be out of a job. Fat gets trimmed, and if you can prove that you can run the company at the same level with less employees, then you have some happy investors.
Point: The DNR should be given some license increases simply to bring it up to par with the cost of inflation.
Counterpoint: Whose rate of inflation would you go by? The government’s rate which is about 4 or 5 percent per year, or the wage increases of the workers in the state which falls a lot closer to 2%.
Point: Sharp says, “No one with a lick of sense would suggest that the DNR can defray 2008 prices a 1980’s revenue stream”
Counterpoint: He acts like the DNR’s only revenue comes from the hunters and anglers in the state. The campers who use the State Parks have had to face increased fees over the past few years. The state charges more for less, while you can go to a private campground and get more for less. For less than the cost of an unimproved campsite in a state park, the campers can go to a private facility and get electricity and water. That’s revenue lost to the state, because they were not competitive.
Point: Sharp says he has had a hard time convincing people that the recently “found” $10 million isn’t a surplus in the Game and Fish fund. That, by law, there must be a balance of that exact amount kept from one year to another.
Counterpoint: Thank goodness its a balance, because if it was a surplus there would be new and inventive ways to spend it.
Point: Sharp says, “As for the NRA, it can have a say in our DNR funding when its willing to drop its membership fees to 1980’s levels. Until then, butt out.”
Counterpoint: I am not a member of the NRA, I was during the Clinton years when there was a serious threat to our Second Amendment rights. The NRA is not a state agency, they represent those members who pay their dues, and those members face attack to their hunting privileges from PETA, and the anti-gun lobbies. The DNR however is a state agency, and they have to listen to the people at some point. Although they are politically appointed, those who do the appointing can be forced to listen to the will of the people. This time the will won.
Conclusion: It amazes me that Mr. Sharp is still touting the company line here. Is this, or is it not, the same folks who just as recently as two weeks ago “pulled the wool” over his eyes? Instead of taking these same people at their word, why not look deeper into their practices and work out a practical solution. Yes the resources of Michigan belong to all those who live in Michigan, doesn’t matter if your idea of a vacation is fishing the salmon rich waters off Ludington, or walking the pier to the lighthouse and getting ice cream at the House of Flavors in the same city. All I have to say is look around you, the state is financially a mess, jobs are leaving left and right, workers are losing their benefits and there is no turn around in sight with the present administration running things in Lansing. There should have been a businessman elected the last time out, and the state agencies need to be run like a business today, trim the fat like the rest of us. At some point times will be better, until then, leave our wallets alone.
