UPDATE: Pete's Pilgrimage - A Return to More of the Same from the Mackinac Center's Man

by: Hector Solon

Wed May 13, 2009 at 17:44:28 PM EDT

UPDATE: Hoekstra's Tuesday "Interview" of David Littmann on the Auto Crisis at the Mackinac Center during his day as policy pupil there now posted.

"Hoekstra, who plans to look for other sources of state government revenue, government cuts and efficiency moves, visited the Midland-based Mackinac Center for Public Policy Tuesday. The Mackinac Center is a research and educational institute -- also known as a think tank -- with a free market orientation."

"To help Michigan's economy, U.S. Rep. Pete Hoekstra wants to phase out or significantly reduce the Michigan Business Tax if he's elected governor in 2010.

A way to replace some of that "complicated" tax's revenue might be to get money from state "assets." Hoekstra said in Midland Tuesday."

Translation: "Assets" is code for our infrastructure, schools, forests, lakeshore, water, air, etc.

Cut taxes, privatize everything that isn't nailed down.

Rather than Hoekstra, why doesn't the Heritage Foundation (read: 'State Policy Network', the Mackinac Center is merely a Heritage satellite office of sorts) just send over one of their staffers to be their candidate, they might actually say more that Hoekstra, who only talks in platitudes. Platitude Pete, that's his new handle.

At least the same old Mackinac/Heritage content is predictable, but it's really getting old, isn't it?

More of the same, more of EXACTLY the same...sigh.

*UPDATE*: Hoekstra's Tuesday "Interview" of David Littmann on the Auto Crisis at the Mackinac Center during his day as policy pupil.

Just one clip:

Littmann: "What we need is a competitive economy with a labor force that's competitive - a right-to-work state, among other things - so that there's competition to give us the kick in the Bahamas that we need. But to just be answering to special-interest groups, labor in particular, is to make the state so uncompetitive that as it stands now, the surveys show that half of the prospective new startups and expansions in business by businessmen - half of those people - won't even look at Michigan because it's not a right-to-work state. So if we can't really focus on what's ailing us, we'll never do anything but continue down in a poverty way compared to the other states. That's what we've done; that's what we'll do."

Hoekstra: "So if things remain status quo, if the economic landscape of Michigan stays as it is right now, how long do you think it would take for us to ... turn things around? Can we ever turn things around?"

Littmann: "No. Nature doesn't work that way. There are too many people both in this country (other states) and other lands that want to get where Michigan was 45 [years], 50 years ago. If we are complacent, careless, reckless as we have been, of course, who cares about Michigan? We lose financial clout, as you've suggested; we've lost economic clout; but mostly we'll continue to lose political clout. "So, what turns it around? When people say, 'I've had enough.' Give ... back the competitive market system that we used to have in capital, management and labor."

Hoekstra: "For the state - the policymakers, the decision makers - who may be watching this video right now, what message would you have for them?"

Littmann: "The single most important element in reform - long-lasting, durable economic and financial reform - for this state, so that we can become a magnet for attraction of business and jobs, is to make it a right-to-work [state]. A free-to-choose labor state. Without that, there's no reason to be in Michigan. Absolutely no comparative advantages. "We have essentially removed the comparative advantage we used to have in our water. Water is such a scarce and lovely resource to have [in] home appreciations, wealth, income: It was a magnet. With an uncompetitive workforce and a deteriorating infrastructure, we've essentially offset those wonderful comparative advantages. "

*End of UPDATE*

Hey, Pete don't you have some explaining to do about how all that torture happened while you were the chairman of the House congressional oversight committee? Or don't you need to continue keeping the lid on those who tried to stop such abuses?