Frustration

I know a lot of my posts have been about education, but I feel that it is an important subject. The reason is, the quality of education in this country is something that affects every single person living in this country, even if they themselves aren't in school or don't have children in schools. The students in school today are the future doctors, inventors, lawyers, and yes even future Presidents. Every single person has a personal stake in the quality of education. The people in school right now are my future co-workers or employees. They are the people that are going to build my house, grow my food, and save my life. Just because people don't see how education impacts their lives doesn't mean that impact isn't there. We need to make people realize that improving education, improves their lives.

The cold hard truth is that right now in Michigan schools are endangered. Republicans won't let anything through the Senate that doesn't include massive cuts to much needed services and therefore are causing schools to gasp for air.

The sad part is that schools aren't going to get any help to improve themselves anytime soon. Schools have to try to tackle large issues on their own, all while giving students a quality education. If education is continually over looked, things will never get better in Michigan. You think it's bad now, keep cutting spending for education and see how bad things get.

Technology in Schools

So the iPod idea was a little blown out of proportion by the MSM (big surprise), but I hope that it opens a discussion of the role of technology in education, or really the lack thereof right now. As I've stated in my iPod post, industry is using technology for many different things, including using mp3 players as training tools, so if schools are supposed to ready students for the “real world” why isn't technology playing a larger role in education?

Even stocking shelves at the local supermarket requires you to scan bar codes and it is only going to get more technology dependent. If you walk into many class rooms around the country though you'll be lucky to find one computer in a class room of thirty. Right now if you enter the workforce and you don't know Ctrl+Alt+Delete you are screwed. Technology is supposed to be the future of Michigan's economy, and if that is true why aren't we preparing our students for that?

Education has a lot of problems, and it seems clear that it requires new ways of thinking in order to truly improve education.

iPods & Schools

The iPod idea is already starting to make some waves, but this idea though isn't one that should be discarded right away however. Let's not forget where the idea came from, Duke University (and I'm sure there were others but I not sure who they were) began giving iPods to every incoming freshmen.

Right now I am helping a company develop a new training system to get it's new employees up to speed faster and more efficiently. Right now this company gives an mp3 player to all of the new associates for the first few months to help train them, along with what are basically podcasts on their private website that also contain training material in both audio and video formats. These combined resources have helped this expanding company train people quicker, cheaper, better, and the associates come away with a better understanding of the material.

Of course the success of something like this would all depend on how it is implemented. If used correctly it could indeed be a powerful tool to help educate students. The hardest part would be training educators on how to best use the technology and developing lessons to be used on the iPods.

Both MIT and Stanford have their own Podcast on iTunes that contain prominent lectures from some of their classes. Other universities have entire recording available for free download on their websites.

If you buy into the idea that this could have a potential pay-off to our educational system, the question becomes is now the right time to invest in this? The idea arose in a discussion over how to fix the states budget problems, and therefore was immediately under attack since it meant making an investment rather than making a cut. The implementation of this idea of course will not yield results for sometime, and the short term impact to the budget will be the cost of implementing the program. There is no doubt that a program such as this would be a hard sell the the general public. How does one justify the cost of giving students a high tech device that little in the public will see the educational value of during such hard economic times?

I have long thought that education has always been a little behind the times. Schools have always been on the back end of adopting technology, and it would be nice to see schools embrace technology for once; not to mention adopting to the way students intake information now days. It truly is time to schools to evolve beyond text books and chalk boards. I would like to see more computers and technology in the classroom (many classrooms only have one computer in them).

I'm not sure if this is the right idea right now but I'm certainly not opposed to it, nor do I think it is a silly idea. I am actually very encouraged by this idea! This shows that the Democrats are willing to think out side the box, are willing to make long term investments rather than the quick fixes proposed by the Republicans, and that they realize it takes more than mandating higher tests scores to fix education. It's important to remember that without long term investment, any budget “fix” will be only short term.

Quick idea, maybe the idea would be received better if iPods were switched to PDAs. Most PDAs can do just about everything an iPod can (short of sycning with iTunes).

As far as the Detroit News Editoral goes, This is all you need to remember from it:

Democrats are either entirely indifferent to the idea that extreme hard times demand extreme belt tightening, or they are bone stupid. We lean toward the latter.
-Snip-
Stop the stupidity. Michigan can't tax or spend its way out of this economic catastrophe.

Ah, yes. Gotta love that liberal media.

The war on Education

You gotta love it when someone tries to make an argument and they don't think it through all the way. Check out this quote from the Livingston Daily in their article about making all teachers state employees:

Every three years or so, you'd have one big set of contract negotiations between the various unions representing school employees and state education authorities.

One result might be a statewide pay scale that directly links teacher pay to educational outcomes.

If things were settled with one big negotiation, you could bake merit pay for top performers into the system

Moving past the idea of making all teachers directly state employees (they really already are) let's look at the sentence in bold. Making the pay scale directly linked to student grades; ever heard of cooking the books? What is to stop a bad teacher from just giving the bulk of his students good grades regardless of whether or not they earned it? There are some bad teachers out there and there are some immoral teachers out there.

Of course the proponents of this idea would say, that's why we have standardized tests. But anybody that actually thinks about this, can easily find holes in tests being the savior of this idea. First, standardized tests are only given every few years. What is to stop a bad teacher from saying, “It's not my fault they did bad on the test, they got good grades in my class.” Or a bad teacher could say “In order to do well on this test you not only have to be good at the subject I teach, but also other subjects that I don't teach.” So to try an fix these holes we would have to test every year, taking more away more time teachers have to actually teach, and wasting that time on trying to keep teachers “accountable.” The tests would have to be rewritten to be more specific in order to test on only the subjects as they are taught rather than testing how students integrate the knowledge they have (which is a much better measurement of a student than testing on facts). And then comes another problem, Michigan is switching from the MEAP test you take as a junior to the ACT, are you going to ask the ACT people to to bend over backwards to redesign all of their tests to fit this new testing scheme that would have to be implemented? When you jump through all these hoops to make the testing better reflect an individual teacher's performance, then are you really still testing the student?

The article also mentions that by consolidating schools to be state ran it would eliminate the need for each district to have a lawyer. But if they are going to base pay on “teacher performance” you can bet there would be a lot more lawsuits. Even if testing measures were redesigned to better test on only one teacher's effectiveness, there would still be an insane amount of loopholes. Every teacher that thought they weren't getting paid enough would sue the state for unfair wages.

Then there is still a problem of what to do about the classes where they don't give standardized tests. How are they going to judge how a teacher is doing there? Are they going to create a standardized test for band? If they do what are they going to test? Can you write out all of your scales, or how musical each student is? What about an art class, or gym, or shop, or CAD, or any number of other classes offered by different schools?

If you are going to make an argument on how to better schools, make it a valid one. Think things through, don't just come up with a bunch of ideas that aren't possible to implement, or would cost millions to implement. (I though we were trying to save money, and if you don't think this idea would cost millions, then how are you going create all the new tests that would be needed. On top of that, how would you pay to have those tests updated every year, because you can't just create them one year and use them for the rest of time.) I guess my point is stop coming up with these hair brained ideas to “fix” schools that would actually do just the opposite. Spend a little more than two seconds thinking over an idea and what it would actually mean and cost rather than just babbling on about how you think teachers make to much and aren't actually teaching students anything (or as some people think schools are teaching liberal propaganda).

What would it mean to Michigan if GM bought Chrysler?

There have been quite a few different articles popping up about the possibility of GM buying Chrysler and my question is what would that do to Michigan's all ready ailing automotive industry? Would the good out weigh the bad?

This question is of course not an easy one to answer. There is no quick fix to either GM or Chrysler's problems. Even if GM were to buy Chrysler and get it out of the red while helping GM itself turn around, these things aren't likely to happen any time soon. For any of the benefits of a marriage such as this there would first have to be some house cleaning, meaning redundant managerial departments would be rolled into one (lay-offs) and most likely plants would be combined to make better use of economies of scale (more lay-offs). Not to mention it would compound GM's growing health care problems. The UAW would have a problem with lay-offs (as would I) that the new super company would have to over come. Then there would be the problems integrating dealers.

It's easy to see how the combining of these two companies could be bad for Michigan, but could it be good? The merger would allow the company to take advantage of greater economies of scale by sharing parts and R&D between more cars. It would allow Chrysler to better integrate it's engineering into it's parent company in ways that Daimler could only dream of (there aren't a whole lot of Mercedes built on Chrysler bodies, but it would be no problem building a Buick on a Chrysler body). The benefits of the the two companies coming together could save them billions and ensure their future better than if they were alone.

Then course you can't bring this subject up without mentioning the possibility of Toyota knocking GM out of the number one automaker spot. This spot isn't something GM wants to give up and combining the two companies would make GM that much harder to knock from it's spot. Not to mention that both Renault-Nissan and Hyundai want an American brand and are interested in a Chrysler buy. GM can't be very happy about the idea that either of these companies getting their hands on Chrysler.

My question still remains though, would this be a good deal for Michigan in the long run? I would have to think that anyway you slice it, if GM were to buy Chrysler it would hurt Michigan in the short term. But are they any ways that Michigan's ecomony comes out a winner in a deal like this? And would it really hurt if Chrysler were sold to Nissian or Hyundai? Right now it is already held by a German company. Also is it really worth all the hoops GM would have to jump through in order to make a deal like this profitable for them? Right now I think Michigan would get the short end of the stick when it comes to a deal like this, but really I have no idea. If all the talk in various media outlets are any indication this is a real possibility.

Here are just a few links to articles on the Subject:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17186447/
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070217/BUSINESS01/702170320/1014
http://www.businessweek.com/autos/content/feb2007/bw20070220_219247.htm
http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/feb2007/db20070218_013874.htm

A quick google search will turn up a lot more

Think before cutting benefits for teachers

The school funding problem has been brewing for awhile now here in good old Michigan. There has been a lot of ideas thrown around as to how to fix this problem and one of those ideas is cutting benefits to the staff. To that I say hold your horses and think about this for a minute.

As if it isn't already hard enough to get good teachers, now there are people out there saying we should give them less (to be fair there were already a lot of people out there saying teachers get to much, but now there seems to be a few more, or at least those people are louder now that the shit is starting to hit the fan). Being a teacher is such a thankless job, and being a good teacher is a lot of hard work that doesn't end when the school bell rings. A good teacher can make more money and probably with less effort working in the private sector. Teachers not only have to have a degree and teaching certificate, they have to have X amount of schooling after they get that certificate to keep it. Then they need more training for the state, and more on top of that for the district. Some of that the school pays for, most of it they don't.

One of the things that has set Michigan schools apart from schools in other states are their benefits to staff. Because Michigan schools have a good union and good benefits because of that, they have enough teachers and are therefore able to keep class sizes smaller. If you look at schools in some other states, they have poor or no unions, and weaker benefits. And those same schools are always in need of teachers because of that. Teachers may hire into schools in those states, but many move away after a few years of teaching to other states like Michigan. I'm not saying that every state that needs teachers has lossy benefits, just that every state that has lossy benefits needs teachers. In some of those states the teacher even has to eat lunch with the kids because there is no lunch room staff.

I've talked a lot about schools on this blog in the past, and that's because I think they are important. But the thing that makes or brakes a school is the people who work there, most importantly the teachers. Without teachers a school is just a building with text books in it. Until we get some sort of Universal Health Insurance, schools need to continue to provide benefits to their teachers, or they won't have any more.

The Daily Telegram shows it's stripes once again.

In a recent Editorial they yak about how how the Democrats in the US House locked Republicans out of debates, wouldn't allow amendments and yada, yada, yada. They repeat the exact same talking points against these bills as every other Republican shill. And come on, you have to love this last paragraph:

It’s no surprise that Michigan’s newly elected District 7 Rep. Tim Walberg, R-Tipton, has voted “No” — as have most Republicans — on the first four of these issues. (He voted “Yes” on the student loan bill.) Until Pelosi’s Democrats pay more than lip service to their pledges of reform and bipartisanship, perhaps the best thing anyone can say is “No.”

They praise Walberg for voting no on every other bill and basically blast him for voting yes on the student loan bill (in an earlier paragraph they blast the bill). Reading this article it really seems that they don't really follow the national news that they are supposedly reporting on and commenting on. If this is the way that a lot of local newspapers are run and if people actually read those newspapers, I guess it isn't any wonder why there are so many red states.

http://lenconnect.com/articles/2007/01/19/news/news06.txt

N.A.I.A.S. and the Auto Industry

Well, the 2007 North American International Auto Show is here and along with it some insight on what the year holds for auto makers. As I said in my last post I wasn't able to go an cover the show during Press Week as I was last year, I was still able to get a press pass for the Industry days. Industry days are days were the press that couldn't make it to Press Week, or just wanted some more time with the cars, and those who work for the Auto Industry are able to get into the show before the public. The only problem is you have to deal with a few of the booths still switching over from Press Week to Public. I was actually there at the same time as The Governor, however we didn't see her anywhere at the show.

GM's booth was rearranged, and pushed back against the wall from last year. It was a nice booth, nicer than last year. I was really hoping to see the Chevy Volt, however it must have been out for a photo shoot or something because it was nowhere to be seen on the show floor. I did get a look at the new Malibu. I have to say I wasn't impressed. It looks a little better than the old one I guess, but nothing exciting. GM does seem to understand that they have to step up their designs as evident by them winning both the car of the year, Saturn Aura, and the truck of the year, the Chevy Silverado. I have to say, sitting in some of their new cars, they have stepped up their interiors on a lot of cars and trucks; one step in the right direction to better compete with Toyota and Nissan.

Ford's booth was set up much like last year's, only not as flashy. Gone are the giant video walls that surrounded the booth on the outside, replaced with two slightly smaller video screens. The Ford emblem embedded in the floor in the center of the booth is gone as well. The cars Ford was showing were I think a little more interesting however this year as opposed to last. The Ford Intercepter and Airstream were much more exciting concepts than last year's Super Chief. Of course one for Fords biggest announcements at the Auto Show was their team up with Microsoft for their Sync. Sync seems like a very interesting idea, and if they are able to make it work as well as advertised may help pull Ford out of it's slump. For those of you that don't know what Sync is, it is a package of voice commands, mp3 input and controls, wireless interfacing with bluetooth phones, and audible text messages. Sync will be available in twelve different Ford, Lincoln, Mercury models by the end of the year starting with the Ford Focus.

Chrysler's booth was almost identical to last year's in layout (well at least the parts that were completely switched from Press Week to Public while I was there). They had a few concepts there, along with the new Dodge Avenger and Dodge Challenger, both very cool, and new models of their minivans. The car that I was most interested in was the Dodge Magnum, a car I am thinking about getting. It has all the room for my video gear, and has better millage than SUVs. (I wish I didn't need a big car, but to lug around all of my video equipment for shoots I need a lot of room.) Across the hall from Chrysler the other half of Daimler-Chrysler, Mercedes booth was busy. The floor was interesting, ice. The ice has something frozen into it to give it treads while other parts of the ice were covered with carpeting. Something new NAIAS this year was a small booth across from Chrysler's, Smart. Smart is a tiny little car, made by Mercedes, due out in the US next year

Toyota and Lexus's booth were interesting. While they are poised to displace GM as the largest auto maker, their floor space at the show still isn't as large as the Big 3. Looking through their booth it is easy to see why some would buy those cars over the Big 3's, they are nice cars and fuel efficient. But it is also easy to see where GM, Ford and Chrysler can catch up in the near future (in many ways they have already started).

The rest of the show was interesting, and some of the booths showed major changes in them, while others retained the lay out of years past. The Scion booth was kinda cool as they had cars stacked on racks on their back wall. Also this year, VW went from occupying space both upstairs and downstairs to only having space upstairs and in that space had few cars.

It it interesting to look at this show and see how it relates to the industry itself. From my friends that did cover the Press Week, most said they saw quite a difference show from last year to this year. The Industry itself flies in reporters from all over to cover this show, and this year less money was spent on flying in press from outside the area. Also they said the press conferences themselves where less flashy and the giveaways to impress the press were not as plentiful this year. Their consensus from Press Week, the auto industry isn't what it once was.

The thing I came away with from the Auto Show is that the industry hasn't given up. It is still fighting and will continue to fight. As the Governor said, Michigan has the largest amount of auto research than anywhere else. Companies like Tesla Motors are coming to Michigan for engineering and are considering Michigan for manufacturing as well. The Big 3 are calling on companies and the Federal Government for research on Batteries (at least one of three main companies tapped to do the research are in Michigan) to power the next generation of Hybrids and Electric Vehicles such as the Chevy Volt.

North American International Auto Show

Well, the Auto show is here again. I am more than a little disappointed that I am not there covering press week this year as I was last. The decline of the auto industry has caused a decline in the need for people like me (video producers) to work for the auto makers in the booths (during press week even the smallest booths there have a crane there for the automaker, and the larger automakers have cranes, steadycams, and three other cameras covering the event to show on the booths huge videos walls at the press conference) and few people are needed to cover the show. Last year the company I was covering the show for (think very big company that is one of the sponsors of the show if not the main sponsor) hired ten people to help them cover the show along with their own internal press team. This year they hired one person outside their own press team. In years past anybody who was anybody that has to do with video in Michigan would be at the Auto show either covering it, or working in one of the booths. Long story short, not so this year.

But enough bitching about about how a big chunk of money from that show won't be coming my way this year; let's look at the few things that will be happening there. GM and Ford's biggest goal this year will be to try to show the world that they are still relevant. And Chrysler will try to show it's German co-owners that they were not a bad investment. Not only that, but the Big Three will also be interested in the Chinese autos that will be on display for the second year in a row at Cobo.

GM this year is trying to show that they too can be green. They have reintroduced an electric concept car that also has a three cylinder flex fuel internal combustion engine in it to recharge the car on long trips. This is of course a great thing, however GM states that a car such as this is still years away from being in production. They announced a plug in version of their Satan Vue hybrid at the LA auto show last year, but once again stated it is a at least a year away from being in production.

Ford's big announcement will be a partnership with Microsoft to make their cars more applying to younger buys by offering MP3 integration, voice commands, text messages, and of course some flash and dash.

Michigan Health Care

A while back it was asked on one of the Michigan Blogs what we should be fighting for now that the 2006 election is over. Well, I vote for universal health care. This is something that is way past due and will become even more of an issue if (and most likely when) more high paying manufacturing jobs move out of the state (and the country for that matter). If a plan was devised that could save employers money on health care, we could see more new jobs created here.

Now would be a great time to take up this fight, as it seems we may have some help now - Joe Schwarz. He is working on a plan to create a new board appointed by the Governor and the Legislature to create a universal health care system for the state.

We need to get behind the idea of universal health care. We need to blog about it, write to our representatives, and we need to make those in Lansing know that this is an important issue to a lot of people in our state.

There is some talk of universal health care at the national level, but we shouldn't wait. Michigan needs a shot in the arm right now.

This is an issue that I really care about, and an issue that I think needs all the help that it can get. Maybe this issue needs it's own blog. I would offer to start it up, but I don't really have the health care knownledge to do it justice.

Article on Mr. Schwarz and Health Care
http://freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061226/NEWS06/612260388/1008/NEWS

Michigan and the Film Industry

Being a film guy, I was really happy to hear that Michigan is finally going to be giving some incentives for films to be shot here. Films can bring a lot of money to a state through sales taxes and jobs. Big cities have a whole film office, Michigan has one person for the entire state.

Michigan has been all over the place with trying to get filmmakers to come here. A few years back I had a friend that worked for the Michigan film commissioner. Their job was to supposed to be to attract films to shoot in Michigan, but most of their job ended up being sending Michigan license plates to films set in Michigan but shot elsewhere. For a very brief time Michigan had a film council to help the film commissioner but that didn't last very long ( I only remember hearing of a few meetings). A few years ago Michigan was battling with Chicago for the title of 3rd coast, but neither followed through with the title.

The sad thing is, at one point Michigan had the 3rd largest film industry in the country since most of the auto companies would shoot their commercials, running footage, and b-roll packages here. More feet of film was shot in Michigan than in New York and LA combined. There are still some of that kinda of stuff shot here, but most of the crews that do it now are from Chicago.

I really would like to see at least the films that are supposed to be set in Michigan shot here. Locations are much cheaper to get here than in LA and NYC and most places you don't need a permit to shoot; if you do they are much cheaper.

I have worked on three independent feature films shot here in Michigan, so it does happen. You just don't see many big films come here, the kind that bring a lot of money. The last big film that shot in Michigan that I know of is The Island. It shot for two weeks in Detroit.

I joined Walberg Watch

I joined Walberg Watch. I figured it is a good way to keep on one what he is doing and a good place to bitch and wine about the crap he will try and pull. Look for my first post there soon (I have to finish a post I am working on for this site first, it's almost done.)

Since Blogger is screwy I had to use a different account other than this one, but it is me.

More on HB 6456

I was asked for some more info on HB 6456 after my last post, so here goes.

I am on the fence about this bill. Michigan needs more than just Comcast (or whom ever may have the small part of Michigan that Comcast doesn't cover) offering terrestrial video services. But this bill isn't perfect. I think I would fully support this bill if it included provisions insisting the service be rolled out to all parts of the state not just the wealthy, most profitable parts. (The bill states that 25% of the customers enrolled in the service must be low income within 3 years, and 50% within 6 years so that is at least a start. But it also states that if proving video through the phone line, IPTV, it does not have to service an area larger than what it already services.)

Google is the entity pushing the hardest for net neutrality in this bill, and as mentioned in my previous post, for good reason. The other groups that have jumped on board over this issue have done it for much the same reason Google has, to raise awareness of the issue. Part of the problem is, the reporting on this issue hasn't been very good. Most articles about the bill only talk about Google's opposition to the bill in regards to net neutrality making it seem like this bill deals much more with the internet than it does. (It only mentions the internet four times and once it is in regards to advertising, and once in the definition of IPTV.)

Another group opposed to the bill is local municipalities. They throw around a lot of reasons why they are against it, but really it boils down to money. Local governments make the decisions right now as to who gets to operate in any given area, in exchange for a list of provisions and a nice little franchising fee, the company gets to operate in that area. A lot of numbers are being tossed around as far as how much local governments could lose if this bill passed, but all of them I have seen look largely over estimated. When those numbers do get published, all local monies are pooled into one, making the loss per city look much larger than it actually will be. The bill actually provides for some of the money collected from the franchising fees to be given to the local municipalities, but they argue that would not be as much as they would get if they themselves issued the franchise.

The local municipalities other qualm with this bill is that it will take away local bargaining control. Right now the local governments can bargain with the telecos, stating that if they want to operate in the area they have to give free cable to prisons, schools, and other public buildings. They can also request public access channels, and define the areas that the company must provide services for. This new bill will take control over these areas from the local government and give it to the state. The local municipalities argue that doing so will take away the local access channels and take way the free cable to prisons and schools, however that is not the case. It will not take local access away, but instead will make the requirement and the number that must be offered uniform across the state. The bill actually states that the same amount of local access channels that are provided now is required if the company wants to operate in a given area. Also I think this will give us more bargaining control over things like free access for schools since they will be bargaining to cover the entire state verses one town None of these issues seems to be really striking a chord with the Michigan people so now some local municipalities have jumped on the net neutrality band wagon and are stating that the new bill will leave large areas of the state not covered by any service.

There are also a couple smaller arguments they raise as well. They list right-of-away issues (where the new wires will be ran, what poles can the new wires go on, will they need new poles) that would have to be somewhat rethought as a reason against this bill. As I see it rights-of-ways have been figured out many times in the past, they should be able to be figured out again. Local municipalities argue that consumers will have to complain to the state rather than local governments in order for their issues to be heard and therefore it will take longer for complaints to be resolved. To me, this is a very bold augment to be made since my local government has been bullied in the past from Comcast. Our government complained to Comcast that we are over paying for our service compared to other towns and cities. The city council stated that Ann Arbor pays the same amount of money that we do, but gets a lot more channels, something in the order of 10-15 more than us. Comcast said they were not going to lower their rates and they would not give us more channels.

Yet another argument against this bill is, heavy opposition to and a dislike of AT&T. Right now AT&T is pushing for this bill to go through so they can begin to offer terrestrial video services (their IPTV which sends cable programing through the internet) in Michigan. People argue that this bill is really a give away to AT&T since it would allow them to expand their IPTV which right now is only in a few areas of the country. This bill really isn't designed to be any kind of giveaway, right now AT&T has shown the most interest in proving a service in Michigan that they can not provide right now. That is not to say that some other company might not went to offer their services in Michigan in the future as well.

All in all, I don't think the bill is bad, but it could use some work. I don't think it needs to be completely rewritten as some have called for (this bill already is a compromise of an earlier bill that tried to set up multiple terrestrial video services in Michigan), but a couple extra items could help making it easier for some to swallow. I love the idea of opening up competition in Michigan. As far as net neutrality goes, I am not that worried about it at the state level, yes it would send a message to Washington, but it would do little to ensure an actual neutral internet. Also, something that has been brought to my attention is that if the Telecos actually do go to a two tiered system and congress did nothing about it, they would take their fight to the Department of Justice's Anti-trust devision.

Mini disclaimer: I am not an expert on this bill, but I have read parts of it (it's 24 pages long) and have read some reporting on it prior to the whole net neutrality issue being raised, along with a bunch after the issue was raised. Also I am very, very fed up with Comcast and their very poor service and insanely high prices. But I also was Telecommunications major at MSU.

Here are a couple of links explaining the anti-trust route Google may take
http://government.zdnet.com/?p=2416
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2006/07/google_neutrality.html

Here is a link to the bill
http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2005-2006/billengrossed/House/pdf/2006-HEBH-6456.pdf

Once again cross-posted at Michigan Liberal

HB 6456

In Michigan right now there is HB 6456 that is being talked about. This bill didn't get much attention until Google called for net neutrality to be added to the bill.

I have to say Michigan badly need more competition in terrestrial video services. Right now Comcast has franchising rights to most of Michigan, meaning most of the places you go in Michigan they will have Comcast cable. As things stand right now only one cable operator is allowed to operate in a given town. The reason behind this is that more than one cable company operating in the same area meant that each company would need to run their own cable on the poles. Things are changing. There is now IPTV which more or less sends TV over the Internet. People are used to choices, you can even choose your phone company now, and people want a choice in who they get their terrestrial video services from. Cable companies right now are able to operate as legal monopolies and they want to keep it that way.

There was a bill offered up in the Michigan House to allow multiple video services in the state, however Comcast fought it tooth and nail and it didn't make it very far. HB 6456 was later offered as a compromise. The bill, which made it through the House, gave the power to the state, rather than local communities, the power to grant franchising rights. The underlying goal of the bill was to lay the ground work for multiple terrestrial video companies to compete.

Google saw this as an opportunity to work in something very near and dear to its heart, net neutrality. They warned that if net neutrality was not added to the bill, when the cable operators decided to move to a two tiered internet they would be able to affect the entire state, including Google's new offices in Ann Arbor.

We need net neutrality, but we also need competition in terrestrial video services. That being said, I'm not sure if net neutrality needs to be addressed in this bill, it could be addressed in it's own bill and still have the same affect.

Michigan is not the first state to take on this problem. Eight other states have enacted a bill allowing multiple video services to compete for customers. I haven't found any hard information on this (basicly because I get tired if sorting through Google results) but is looks like the other states that have passed a bill like this have not included net neutrality in them, but rather have introduced other bills to cover that issue. The way I look at it is that I would love to see net neutrality added to this bill, however I will take the victory of having multiple competing services over nothing. As I said I see net neutrality as a very important issue, but not necessarily one that has to be addressed in this bill.

I'm not saying that this bill is perfect, or even that it needs to be passed, but we do need competition in terrestrial video services in Michigan. Please don't get me wrong, I am all for net neutrality, I have even writen a letter to Senator Levin about the issue, but let's not try to make this bill into something that it is not. If passed this bill will not kill a neutral internet in Michigan. It only creates the potential of network abuse statewide if the Telecos decided to take up war against the consumers.

Why we must win the correct elections

In my posting “Beyond the All district strategy” I talked about how important it was for Democrats to win not only as many seats as they can but the correct seats. I argued that it is important to win the races where the Republican would actively work against us in congress. Well, Tim Walberg won Michigan's 7th district and has vowed that he will see his agenda through, even with Democrats in control of both houses of Congress.

He has stated that he will vote against any repel any of Bush's tax cuts. He also states that we will pursue “rolling back abortion rights” and banning gay marriage even if it is only bit by bit. He at least acknowledges that it will be hard to push his agenda with the Democrats controlling both houses, but he says that won't stop him.

This man will work against everything The Democrats try to do. I don't just see him voting against any bill the Dems try to past, but actively working against them. I can't waite to get rid of him.

http://battlecreekenquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061118/NEWS01/611180309/1002

Way to go Corporate America

What is this world coming to? Eaton Corp is planning on cutting up to 190 jobs in the Jackson Michigan area and sending them to Mexico. The important thing to realize about this is that Eaton Corp is a defense contractor and makes much needed parts for our military. In order to work at either of the two Jackson area plants, one must under go a background check and be given a security clearance. Each part that is made is stamped with a number that tells exactly who made the part and who inspected the part (my understanding, and I could be wrong, is that the Government can hold those people accountable if the part fails in combat use).

So now this company wants to close one of it's plants in Jackson and send those lines to Mexico, even after Eaton Corp's third quarter profits rose 25%. It's it great that we can send jobs, making important parts for the US Military, to Mexico.

How isn't this a National Security issue?

http://www.mlive.com/news/jacitpat/index.ssf?/base/news-19/116360851374430.xml&coll=3&thispage=2

Solar Power to the rescue, maybe

I watched Who Killed the Electric Car today, it's good movie that you should all check out. It highlighted one part of what got GM into trouble, their inability to have any foresight, but it also highlighted something that be a huge help to Michigan- solar energy. There is a plant right here in Michigan that make thin film solar panels.

What needs to be done now is Michigan needs to start giving tax brakes to businesses and home owners that use these solar panels (and those tax breaks need to be widely known in the state). Michigan needs to start driving the demand for a product that is made right here in our own state! We need to show the rest of the country how it is done so they too will start to buy solar panels made right here in Michigan. As a state we need to stand up and start yelling from the roof tops that the country, and the world, needs to embrace solar energy; and oh by the way we know some really good solar panels you should look into. Once the demand goes up there will be a need for higher production rates and more workers. We can help solve the country's energy problems, and build the Michigan economy.

Get talking about health care

There is a great discussion going on over at Michigan Liberal about a state health care plan. Head over there now and participate. A buddy of mine who is in med-school right now told me that universal health care was most likely to start at the state level (I believe he got that info from the American Medical Association).

Get over there and talk about it! The only way to get the ball rolling is to get people talking about this issue.

http://www.michiganliberal.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=7559

Dear Dr. Dean and Mr. Brewer

Dear Dr. Dean and Mr. Brewer,
I am writing to you in hopes that you can help my district. I live in Tecumseh Michigan, which is part of Michigan's 7th congressional district. Last week our district was dealt a hard blow, ultra right-winger Tim Walberg was elected as our US Representative. Tim Walberg unseated a moderate Republican, Joe Schwarz who lost The Republican primary.

My plea to you is to make an example of our district in the next election circuit, make a red part of a blue state blue. Part of the problem this time is that some people felt that the Democratic candidate, Sharon Renier, wasn't a strong candidate. My plea to you is help us to find a strong candidate, someone the people of this district can take seriously. This year our district became purple, and many of us here would like to see it become blue, please help.

This district is a middle class district of hard working Americans. We have seen a lot of our high paying manufacturing jobs disappear to be replaced with lower paying, less attractive jobs. We want someone to work for us; we don't expect miracles, just someone who will look out for us. Michigan has gone through some hard times these last few years and we want someone to help change that. We want someone who is going to help us afford health care. We want someone who can help the economy grow strong enough so it doesn't just help those at the top.

This year Tim Walberg heavily out spent Renier. A few weeks before the election he was was out spending her 45 to 1, and while she started to close that gap a little in the week before the election, it wasn't enough. I don't think it would take a large sum of money if we had a strong candidate. This has been a district the GOP has taken for granted in the past, but this year they had to put it on their last push list.

I have heard you, Dr. Dean, say that it is a sign of respect to ask for the electorate's vote, well, ask for our vote. Our district isn't as conservative as Walberg is and we want a strong Democratic candidate to vote for next election cycle. Please ask for our vote.

Thank you both for your hard work.

Detroit News and the Auto Industry

Every once and a while, I have to question if the Detroit News is the print edition of Fox News. They are clearly very conservative and don't have a problem letting people know that.

In an article this Sunday titled “Michigan Democrats must protect autos,” the News states that with Democrats in control of Congress, Michigan's auto industry could be in danger. The article states that it is up to the Democratic representatives from Michigan to “rein in the ultraliberal Democrats who are beholden to environmentalists, unions and other special interest groups that promote their agendas without consideration of cost or common sense.” Is the Detroit News saying that Unions are bad? And if they are, they are saying in MICHIGAN?

“[Michigan Democrats will] have to work from the top. Incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has supported anti-automotive proposals at every opportunity. She has lobbied for plans that would force stricter fuel economy standards for her home state of California, and she's supported lawsuits by environmentalists that blame the automakers for contributing to environmental damage and global warming...Fortunately, at least for now, parties on all sides are promising to get along and set aside impractical legislation that could force the automakers -- and heavy manufacturers in general -- to adhere to unrealistic environmental or safety standards.”

Damn those Democrats trying to make a safe working environment. Damn them for trying to save the American people money by raising fuel economy standards. Damn them for looking to the future and trying to stop the globe from turning into an oven. What are these Democrats thinking?

Come on News get with the program here. Do you really think Democrats want to kill manufacturing in America? It seems to me that they are the ones fighting for fair trade agreements so all the manufacturing jobs don't get shipped over seas. It seams to me that they are the ones fighting for wages so the American people can afford to buy the things that they themselves manufacture.

Are you really saying that better fuel economy is a bad thing? I know I think it is. I love going to war for oil. I love not having enough money for other things because I have to spend it all on gas. And man-oh-man am I thankful that the oil companies are making record profits at my expense. I think it is great that everything is shipped now days because that means the cost of goods will go up when the cost of gas raises. Thank God someone isn't trying to raise fuel economy standards!

Yes it is true, Michigan's automakers need help (and I doubt they will get any from their meeting with Bush), but that is not to say they should be allowed to do whatever they want. What they need is to be able to better compete in the global economy. They need to be pushed to better themselves. They need huge help when it comes to health care costs.

Here is the article:
http://detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061112/OPINION01/611120310/1008