MICHIGAN: House Approves Bill Cutting Funding To Gay-Friendly Universities - Polidicks

The GOP-dominated Michigan House [URL="http://michiganmessenger.com/48816/house-approves-penalty-for-colleges-that-offer-partner-benefits"]has approved a bill[/URL] penalizing state universities that offer same-sex partner benefits to members of their faculties. If the bill becomes law, any state college that offers domestic partner benefits will see their funding cut by 5%. The measure was authored by Tea Party-backed Rep. Dave Agema (left). Todd Heywood reports at the [I]Michigan Messenger[/I]: [quote] The Michigan House approved an amendment to the education budget on Thursday night that will penalize state universities and colleges five percent for offering domestic [URL="http://michiganmessenger.com/47294/house-could-eliminate-domestic-partner-benefits?lc=int_mb_1001"]partner benefits[/URL] for same-sex or unmarried partners. Shortly after 8 p.m. Thursday night, State Rep. Dave Agema (R-Greenville) posted the following status update to his Facebook page announcing the amendment: [INDENT]I had an amendment put into the [URL="http://michiganmessenger.com/35241/granholm-threatens-to-veto-budget-if-education-is-cut?lc=int_mb_1001"]education budget[/URL] that takes 5% away from colleges that give same sex/unmarried benefits and places up to $60 million of that into the MPSRS K-12 budget if colleges do not stop skirting the law and the will of the people. Colleges can’t say they are short of money when they skirt the law and give such benefits. The Dems didn’t like this – it passed. [/INDENT] The approved [URL="http://michiganmessenger.com/9104/budget-cuts-coming-but-not-to-legislator-health-care?lc=int_mb_1001"]budget cuts[/URL] millions of dollars in state funds from the state’s K-12 system while shifting some of the funding from the school aid fund into community college funding. State universities and community college were cut 15 percent in the Senate version of the funding, but in the House funding proposal, those entities are cut by 22 percent unless they hold tuition increases to no higher than 7.1 percent. Both bills now head into a conference committee where they will be combined into a final bill, which will then face up and down votes in both chambers. If approved, it would head to Gov. [URL="http://michiganmessenger.com/tag/rick-snyder?lc=int_mb_1001"]Rick Snyder[/URL]’s desk. Agema has introduced the same amendment measure for years without much success. But with the public battle between the state civil service commission and Republican lawmakers over that MCSC January decision to extend partner benefits to unrelated adults living in the same home as state employees, the amendment is likely a head nod to anti-gay activists. The GOP majority in the House [URL="http://michiganmessenger.com/48235/house-once-again-fails-to-eliminate-partner-benefits"]fell short of the needed 2/3 majority[/URL] to over ride the benefits allowing the proposal to become law. That happened over the protests of Gov. [URL="http://michiganmessenger.com/tag/rick-snyder?lc=int_mb_1001"]Rick Snyder[/URL] and the GOP dominated Senate, which easily [URL="http://michiganmessenger.com/47022/senate-moves-to-rescind-domestic-partner-benefits"]mustered the 2/3 majority[/URL] to approve the resolution rescinding the MCSC decision. The move by the House to put the penalty in the [URL="http://michiganmessenger.com/35241/granholm-threatens-to-veto-budget-if-education-is-cut?lc=int_mb_1001"]education budget[/URL] raised the ire of advocates for the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender community which has fought hard to attain and protect [URL="http://michiganmessenger.com/47294/house-could-eliminate-domestic-partner-benefits?lc=int_mb_1001"]partner benefits[/URL] are colleges and universities in the state. “Representative Agema has used creative accounting to force Michigan’s colleges and universities to deny their employees’ families access to good health. Our institutions of higher learning could now suffer a five percent penalty for operating in a responsible and forward thinking way toward the very individuals that work hard to make our students successful and prepared for the world economy,” said Emily Dievendorf, director of policy for [URL="http://equalitymi.org/"]Equality Michigan[/URL]. “Budgeting taxpayer dollars is not a game for our our elected leaders to play but an opportunity for each legislator to demonstrate their values and commitment to the well being of their constituency. Rep. Agema’s amendment is a thinly veiled expression of personal ideology and not a reflection of what is best for the families he represents. This is exactly why no Michigander should lose interest when their legislator starts talking dollars. We are reminded today that budget negotiations can result in less food on the table and basic and essential rights being stripped away.”[/quote] The bill now goes into a conference committee between the two state chambers. Heywood notes that Agema has introduced a similar measure several times in recent years. Source: [url]http://michiganmessenger.com/48816/house-approves-penalty-for-colleges-that-offer-partner-benefits[/url]

How is that legal?

Republicans. That is all.

[QUOTE=Tigster;29727420]How is that legal?[/QUOTE] You think Republicans give a shit about the legality of their agenda?

God dammit my State... :( I want Granholm back.

I LIVE THERE GOD DAMN IT. THIS IS HORRIBLE AND I AM PISSED.

Go suck a veiny dick, republicans.

[img]http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lhbvr3Jt331qafhplo1_500.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=Swilly;29727818][img_thumb]http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lhbvr3Jt331qafhplo1_500.jpg[/img_thumb][/QUOTE] There's nothing to say except, [I][B]THIS!!![/B][/I]

Pretty sure this would be unconstitutional. If it becomes law the supreme court won't let it stand.

See, my image macroing skills are improving :3:

How can people be so prejudicist as fuck and get into a political position and [U][I][B]get away with it.[/B][/I][/U]

It's like the GOP knows I need a reminder of why I'm not a republican. fucking cunts

[QUOTE=Zeke129;29727935]Pretty sure this would be unconstitutional. If it becomes law the supreme court won't let it stand.[/QUOTE] Oh wait, now lets pass this law so it can go to supreme court, get laughed at, ruled unconstitutional, laugh at republicans even more.

How can anyone stand by the Republicans through things like this?

[QUOTE=Megafanx13;29728075]How can anyone stand by the Republicans through things like this?[/QUOTE] I feel like anymore it's just loyalty to the party. If it has the Republican name on it, it must be right. Just look at when the Dems called them out, and let them almost pass a terrible terrible terrible piece of legislation, and when the Republicans saw that they were actually going to pass it, they backpedaled and changed their votes.

[QUOTE=Megafanx13;29728075]How can anyone stand by the Republicans through things like this?[/QUOTE] the Republicans can pass any bill they want in their House - it still has to go through the rest of the lawmaking process, which bills like these [i]won't[/i] do

[QUOTE=Macktastic;29728305]the Republicans can pass any bill they want in their House - it still has to go through the rest of the lawmaking process, which bills like these [i]won't[/i] do[/QUOTE] Think of all the time and money that would be saved though if they stopped doing this stupid bullshit

[QUOTE=Tigster;29728321]Think of all the time and money that would be saved though if they stopped doing this stupid bullshit[/QUOTE] Republicans don't care about money, they just pretend they do.

[QUOTE=Zeke129;29728403]Republicans don't care about money, they just pretend they do.[/QUOTE] but the problem is nobody cares about them. So we should get rid of them. Better yet, let's turn us into a three party system: Republicans Democrats People As in actual people. not fucking retards.

Every time I hear anything about the GOP, I think to myself, "Well, what are they gonna fuck up today?" I see they still have a solid record for doing that sort of thing. :froggonk: Hopefully this won't actually pass.

Except in America, whats the difference? At least half the people are uneducated and get all their information about the world from the television. The thing I'm most confused is people using the phrase 'gay agenda'

Why doesn't everyone smart in Michigan move to canada? [editline]9th May 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Nikota;29728501]Except in America, whats the difference? At least half the people are uneducated and get all their information about the world from the television. The thing I'm most confused is people using the phrase 'gay agenda'[/QUOTE] They like to pretend the side they're oppressing has an agenda too, so they can feel better about their own.

[QUOTE=archangel125;29728519]Why doesn't everyone smart in Michigan move to canada?[/QUOTE] They like the roads and the

[QUOTE=Zeke129;29728532]They like the roads and the[/QUOTE] Shit, son, my town has great roads.

The gay agenda: Right to marry, Protection from bigots, Equal rights. QUICK STOP THEM!

The Republican party is one with ideals built on the shining principles of greed and hatred.

I'm fine with why they are cutting it, but it shouldn't be limited it to only gay families. It says that they will be shifting the money to community college funding, which seems fair. I mean you shouldn't get benefits when you've got someone else to help you pay for your education where as someone else has to make due with a community college and has to pay for everything by him/her self.

[QUOTE=dark soul;29728604]I'm fine with why they are cutting it[/QUOTE] That isn't why they're [b]actually[/b] cutting it, you know that right

[QUOTE=dark soul;29728604]I'm fine with why they are cutting it, but it shouldn't be limited it to only gay families. It says that they will be shifting the money to community college funding, which seems fair. I mean you shouldn't get benefits when you've got someone else to help you pay for your education where as someone else has to make due with a community college and has to pay for everything by him/her self.[/QUOTE] The reason that initiative existed is because it's still legal in 40 out of the 50 States to discriminate for employment based on sexual orientation. [editline]9th May 2011[/editline] I'd even go so far as to say that in some of those states, that discrimination is actively ENCOURAGED by the government.