>>> Welcome back to "Off the Record.

It's been a busy week with the new tax-cut plan for the governor and a new one.

On the OTR panel Dave Boucher, Jordan Herman, Jonathan Osler and Bill Ballenger sit in with us as we get the inside out "Off the Record.

>> Production of "Off the Record is made possible in part by Martin Wehmeier a full-service strategic communications agency partnering with clients through relations, digital marketing and public policy engagement.

Learn more at their website.

And now this addition of "Off the Record with Tim Skubick.

>>> Thank you very milk much in welcome back to "Off the Record.

We are here with the correspondence edition with lots of news this week including the Republicans passed yesterday a tax-cut plan and the governor offered on her own and they are not there yet.

>> In this day of instant gratification Governor Gretchen Whitmer is proposing to send a one time $500 tax rebate record to all families now.

The Senate Republicans argue that their tax cut is permanent allowing every taxpayer regardless of income levels to take out the savings at tax time every year.

Unless future lawmakers change that.

Under the proposed Republican $2.5 billion tax-cut this would have been.

The state income tax rate would be sliced.

There would be a hike in the personal exemptions.

There would be an expansion of needy family aid, the child tax credits would be increased and seniors would get a tax break.

The Governors $500 one-time tax break would not go to wealthy taxpayers.

>> We don't need political tricks that are going to award millionaires and billionaires instead of hard-working men and women with families.

>> The Republican chair of the Senate Finance Committee reports that this plan was written to include some of the elements the governor wanted.

After she vetoed the first Republican plan earlier.

This Democratic Senator dismissed the Republican plan as just a promise in an election year when families need relief right now.

That relief is about $200 while billionaires get relief at $3.5 million.

>> A millionaire would get $18,000 a year.

A multimillion dollar $75,000 a year.

A billionaire $3.5 million per year.

Under your income tax cut, a billionaire gets a yacht, a millionaire gets a new boat and a family gets a dinghy.

In the middle of a crisis, you are going to use that as an excuse to give those who are richest among us the largest part of a tax-cut.

And not even until next year.

Colleagues, these families cannot wait.

>> The Senate Republican leader dismissed the plan as pandering to cover up her actions of the last two years.

He suggested that families would get more lasting relief.

>> Our plan is sustainable, it's ongoing, it would result in a $1,300 year for the average family of two kids ongoing, not just a one time $500 attempt to pay off.

>> 22 Republicans said yes and 14 Democrats said no.

The plan goes to the Michigan house where Republicans are likely to adopt it.

What happens after that?

Perhaps the governor and the Republicans will sit down to try to find a compromise on these two divergent tax-cut plans.

>>> Jordan, in the business, this is the opening invitation to dance, right?

>> Yes, it is.

I feel like we have been here before.

A couple weeks ago we were in a similar position where Republicans were proposing this exact same number of $2.5 billion tax-cut.

Although with some differences.

Now this current iteration contains an increase of the earned income tax credit up to a percent which is what the governor wanted.

That's what she's been touting.

That is what the proponents are calling for a 30%.

This is almost exactly what they want and what they are looking for.

There is a slight discrepancy between what the house was saying the $2.5 billion and the Senate fiscal analysis put it at $2.7 billion.

There is discrepancy over a veterans property tax and a portion of the bill regarding who will claim it or not.

While it is the opening of the dance, we may have to pull the plug, so to speak, before we start because the governor says I don't want to talk about this.

I don't even think this is a viable plan because despite Republican saying there is ongoing funding, they are saying show me how and show me the numbers.

>> And you say posturing?

>> Sure.

Every day the legislature we see posturing.

We saw this plan that could cost more than $7 billion over four years come out of thin air in the matter of four or five hours and get passed by the legislature in that amount of time.

It seems very clear that if the governors team and the Republicans can show the legislature come together and have open hearings on how they wanted to spend tax dollars, they could do that.

Time and time again whether it's with supplementals or a tax-cut plan or any aspect of the budget, we find out about the information hours in advance.

The same with the governors plan.

The $500 rebate plan we found out 30 minutes before it was announced.

They announce it and it doesn't go anywhere and then both sides attack each other.

It's questionable whether that's in the best service of taxpayer money.

It seems likely we will see that play out again and again.

>> It's about having actual negotiations.

That is not happening now.

Republicans can say we gave the governor something she wanted, but I tried to ask leaders yesterday.

When Rick Snyder the former governor had ever signed a $2.5 billion tax cut that his office did not help negotiate, there is no way.

It is posturing.

Perhaps on both sides.

The governor put out her plan without negotiating either.

Witmer met with GOP leaders and Republican leaders the morning of this debate.

Senator said they informed her what they were going to do and she handed them the letter that she was about to release.

That was pretty much the extent of their talks about these huge tax cuts that both sides said they really want.

There are no real negotiations at this point.

It is posturing on both sides until there are.

>> It's not like Witmer gets out of this scot-free.

Her proposal to send $500 to needy families is completely lacking at least from what we understand any sort of real substance.

>> She said the Treasury Department would figure it out.

Who elected the Treasury Department to make these decisions?

What is your take on this, Bill?

This is not the good old days of everybody sitting down in working on a compromise, right?

>> Right.

This is not Bill Milliken and the quadrant.

I agree with everything everybody has said.

It was ever thus.

If anything has been proven in the last three and a half years it is difficult with this governor and this legislature to spend money as it is to cut the budget in times of crisis.

Nobody thought that would ever happen, but it's happening now.

In California you have a Democratic governor who has proposed exactly what Gretchen Whitmer is proposing now and she's got an overwhelmingly Democratic legislature and they cannot agree on how they should handle this.

This will sputter along here in the real question is whether the Republicans can get the governor to blink and sign the bill because she's afraid to veto it again.

In the house you will notice all sorts of marginal Democrats voted for the Republican plan.

They are running for election this year.

They realize, basically, what the Republicans are proposing is a sensible approach, permanent relief, and they don't want to take the risk of voting know on a massive tax-cut.

>> The question is, this is instant gratification.

Politically would you rather have a $500 check now or wait for your income tax filings next year, the money you will never see.

It will all be on papal paper.

Does the governor have the upper leg here?

>> It certainly sounds like a good idea.

It's the auto insurance rebate checks all over again.

Get money in the pocket of voters is always a good move in an election year.

And from a budgeting standpoint it does make some sense to do a one time.

Maybe you do it again next year if they're still a surplus.

From a long-term budgeting standpoint the tax cuts Republicans are proposing would be in perpetuity and perhaps if the economy sputters or tax revenue sputter, then they would be in trouble at some point in the future.

That said, Republicans have effectively backed Witmer into a corner for a second time.

They sent her a bill that seemingly will be popular with voters who like tax cuts and they are daring her to veto it for a second time.

As far as a public relations standpoint Republicans will come out ahead here.

>> I know that on the floor yesterday House minority leader Donna Laczynski tried to push the fact that the tax cuts like you pointed out are in the future.

People are feeling the effects of high gas, no baby formula.

They are feeling that right now.

I am saying on that hand if Democrats are able to keep on that messaging, if they keep on the fact that this sounds great and this is in perpetuity and we will get a $500 tax credit for children, but you won't get it now when you need it most.

I feel that's the only upper hand here, at least in the moment.

>> I think there will be a tax-cut at some point.

Whatever posturing happens in May will feel like ancient history in October when all of these lawmakers including the governor are campaigning.

When they all vote on a bill that the governor signs it will be hard to say the first version of the bill you vetoed and you weren't there for working families.

Everybody seemingly is on the same page and they want to spend billions of dollars in pandemic relief and giving it some of it back in the form of tax rebate or a straight cash rebate.

The idea that this will hurt Republicans in November and/or or the governor in November, it feels early.

At some point they will agree to some plan.

>> Even if they do, I would not be surprised to see television commercials with Witmer vetoes tax cuts.

>> That absolutely will happen.

We are seeing things that the Republicans and Democrats have agreed upon.

Political posturing that is loose with the facts will absolutely happen.

At the end of the day it seems clear that the governor and legislature will find something.

Whether or not they agree to that sooner or later, that includes components in making the tax cuts.

We will see.

>> This is a 10 minute negotiation.

Do both.

>> Absolutely.

The public is sitting out here looking at the spectacle and saying why can't these people get it together?

We elected them to govern.

Why can't they negotiate?

This started with the gas tax hike proposal by Witmer three and a half years ago of 45 cents per gallon.

You know what the reaction to that was.

She said herself, I see this as a start of negotiations.

It never happened.

The Republicans never met her halfway and they did have some proposals contrary to criticism against them.

But the point is there was no sitdown negotiation.

We are going through it all over again.

Everybody so far on this show has said the same thing and they are absolutely right.

I think finally something is going to happen, but what it is I am not sure.

>> The stage for this was set on Mackinac Island win they altogether saying Kumbaya and signed a no-fault car insurance legislation because in the governors island she came away from that talk with the assurance in her mind that they were going to play ball with her on the gas tax and that is when things started to fall apart.

They have and put Humpty Dumpty back together again.

Are they going to get in the room and do it soon?

>> I would argue that the no-fault auto insurance thing was not the Kumbaya moment some people made it out to be.

They put the governor in a corner on that one.

She signed a bill that did not mirror what she actually wanted.

Republicans got what they wanted, but now they can all celebrate rebate checks going out to motorist.

Everyone will take credit for that, certainly.

This has been a tense relationship from the start.

The pandemic exacerbated things exponentially and here we are.

>> It's interesting to note that if you're looking at a piece of legislation where the legislature and the governor agreed you can argue that it came during the pandemic when it came to local control at the education level of who would decide mask mandates, social distancing policies in schools.

Not us.

>> Exactly.

>> Everyone agreed that local control was a really good idea.

They shifted this control and then like you were talking about, Republicans have come out and said the governor is shutting down schools or is mandating masks and have blamed her for school lockdown policies, quote/unquote, when in actuality this plan was put together with the governors team and Republicans of the legislature are voting against it.

Of course, we will see the same political fighting even when there is an agreement on this moving forward.

>> Billy, let's shift gears to the COVID thing.

The numbers are starting to look like they are coming back.

What is your take on this?

Are we on the verge of another surge?

>> Probably.

I don't think in terms of long-term policy it will make any difference.

If you are asking whether the governor will change her tune again on how she is handling COVID, it's not going to happen.

>> I am not asking that.

I know the answer.

What do we do?

She had a soundbite the other day that was interesting.

She said basically everybody is pretty much on their own to decide what they want to do.

>> That will continue.

>> Personal responsibility for a while.

It's essentially since the director has taken over at the state department of health it's been more of a focus on the concept of personal responsibility, which on one hand Republicans say that's what we've been advocating from the start.

On the other hand conservative critics say Ann Arbor schools have a mask mandate and so do Detroit schools.

Somehow that is coming back on the state health department and the governor.

That's where the criticism is.

>> You cannot say we want local control.

I put this question to, I believe it was, Thomas Albert in the house.

You guys are championing local control, but there is an issue with mask mandates in school.

You don't like them.

You are trying to stop schools from having enough local control to do what they want because you disagree with the choices.

They just run counter to each other and you cannot have something like that if you are trying to say the school should decide.

The schools decide in you don't like it, send your kid to another school.

I guess I don't understand.

>> You cannot have it both ways.

Either let the locals make the calls or you will make the calls or do it cooperatively.

They didn't want to get into that mess for obvious reasons because who wants the parents on their back for making that decision?

The numbers are basically up about 8%.

They were up 30% over the last five weeks.

I guess that is sort of a blip but not a trend.

Hospitalizations are up and we are watching this stuff.

My question is, does the governor have a COVID problem on what she did during the two-year period of time?

If you talk to the Republican candidates running for governor in a debate last week the answer was a resounding yes.

>> I believe that the science behind it was political science and polling data that we saw time after time.

>> That was just the beginning as Governor Gretchen Whitmer took more rants from some of the Republicans running for her job.

>> The vaccine, my friends, was pushed on us by a tyrannical governor and a tyrannical president.

>> About a year ago the governor changed her tune on how to confront the virus.

She was still pushing the shots, but she said nothing about masks or vaccine mandates or other strategies that might trigger more public discontent.

But that didn't stop the criticism in that debate.

>> Every decision she made for two years was devoid of any common sense.

>> Other candidates had a different view.

>> I believe that the data shows there were certain people that their lives were saved because they had the COVID-19 vaccine.

>> Kennedy Garrett Saldano said the same thing.

Likewise with Perry Johnson.

>> Coercing people for the vaccines is anti- American.

>> Mike Markey said if you wanted the shots, take them.

Meanwhile one of the governors staunchest supporters dismissed the whole COVID debate.

>> I don't think a COVID compact will be having any impact on the election this year.

The governor gets an enormous amount of credit for the leadership that she provided.

Her actions save thousands and thousands of lives.

>> Republicans believe the governor is vulnerable on how she handled COVID and voters will decide which side is right.

>> It would not have any impact on the election.

Is he whistling through the graveyard, Jonathan?

>> Certainly some of these Republican candidates when you played a clip from Saldono, they are running for governor because of the governor's pandemic policy.

They rose by protesting those policies.

Of course they want it to be a big issue because it's their number one issue.

We have seen polling out for the Detroit chamber a couple weeks ago.

COVID was very low on that list.

It was tenth, I believe.

Number one was jobs and the economy.

Republicans you saw yesterday in the Senate like the Senate Majority Leader is trying to make a direct connection.

He argued that Governor Whitmer is complicit in inflation, his words, because she was among the governors pushing stronger policies that lead to all these federal stimulus programs that have been led to inflation.

Now it's a long connection to make, perhaps, in voters minds.

But to the extent that Republicans can make that extension, it could be a good issue for them this fall.

>> There will be messaging on school closures again and on business closures.

I talked to a conservative activist who brought the idea that people who had family members in nursing homes or family members that passed away and weren't able to have an in person funeral will remember that they couldn't do that.

I think to some degree Republican candidates will put that messaging in advertising more and more as the campaigns heat up.

>> Is there a risk that the public is fed up altogether?

Is it a deciding issue for Witmer is what I am asking?

>> That's a real question, whether COVID is going to be a big factor as inflation and other issues this year.

In terms of her image, it's extremely negative as a result of the way she handled COVID, particularly on the Republican side.

I have seen antipathy toward Democratic governors from Republicans in the past.

Jim Blanchard and Jennifer Granholm, whatever.

I've never seen the level of hatred and loathing for a governor and what they consider to be her irrational and tyrannical policies as I have for Gretchen Whitmer.

She will not be able to shake that and it fits in to the way she has approached a lot of other issues and their reaction, the Republicans reaction to it.

And for that matter, a lot of the general publics reaction.

>> To Bill's point the idea that she is tyrannical, they can brand her as such on virtually any issue.

I know it came about due to COVID, but in so far as whether COVID will be a deciding issue for people at the polls, personally like Jonathan said it is low on peoples minds.

We always new there would be a threshold of individuals who would and wouldn't get the vaccine.

I believe we have hit that threshold at this time.

Folks are moving on with their lives and taking precautions if they want to take precautions.

They are wearing masks in places where they want to where a mask.

They are traveling if they want to travel.

Right now like we have been pointing out, you are feeling gas prices and inflation.

You are feeling the effects of the economy.

You are not directly feeling COVID unless you are having COVID or hospitalize with COVID.

A lot of people who have gotten COVID say I feel terrible and now I'm better two weeks later.

>> One issue that is moving up is the abortion issue.

We had a ruling this week which a lot of people paid attention to.

Why?

>> Michigan has this old abortion ban law on the books that if Roe vs. Wade is overturned by the Supreme Court, which appears likely now, it will go back into effect.

Abortions would be banned except for the life of the mother and the Court of Claims judge this week ruled basically putting the law on hold.

She suspended enforcement of the law.

At least that is what she tried to do in her order.

Conservative attorneys are arguing that she doesn't actually have the authority to tell County prosecutors what they can and can't do.

>> If she can, who can?

>> It's an open question, I suppose.

It's a big ruling.

It's not the final say on this 1931 law.

It suspends it while the larger arguments about the Constitution of it continues.

But for abortion rights activists it's a huge win because it buys time.

There is an ongoing petition drive seeking to overturn the 1931 law and there is the larger case from Planned Parenthood and a request by Governor Whitmer for the Supreme Court to weigh in, the Michigan Supreme Court, that is, on the constitutionality of the 1931 law.

This gives abortion rights activists time to pursue those other avenues to overturning this law.

>> Even as recently as yesterday Democratic group suede the Attorney General saying that Michigan's abortion laws should be brought up to equal of the E.R.A.

We are one of the state's that has ratified the E.R.A.

Our abortion laws should comply with what is outlined in the E.R.A.

for bodily autonomy for a woman.

Democrats will try to use every single avenue they have two stymie, stifle in do everything they can to stop Michigan's abortion law from going into effect.

Whether it's this one or and one I saw it earlier in the Detroit news back from the 18 hundreds that is more restrictive.

They are going to keep fighting.

They will not let the issue die.

If it continues to be an issue it will serve to fire Democrats up.

>> It's important to note that for years polling has indicated that a majority of Americans either support keeping Roe vs. Wade in place or at least some access to abortion.

That has been part of the national narrative for a long time.

At the same time, conservatives and others are questioning the process playing out here.

The judge that was involved in the Court of Claims case previously represented Planned Parenthood in what had been a seminal ruling going before the Court of Appeals.

She worked on behalf of the ACLU.

Dana has said she is not going to defend the law and not using any process in the law.

It's a friendly proceeding.

All three sides, the judge, the defendant and the plaintiff all agree with each other.

There is no adversarial process.

There's a question about whether or not the system is supposed to work that way.

Let's take something else that has nothing to do with abortion and make it a policy on guns, education, COVID.

Somebody, Democratic or liberal group sues the Democratic attorney general and the judge agrees in there's no adversarial process.

Is that house the system is supposed to work?

If and when there is a Republican General and Republican Governor relit work to the Republicans benefit?

That's a question that people are continuing to ask.

>> Go ahead, Bill.

>> This is a liberal democratic judge, Elizabeth Gleicker.

She should have recused herself.

She is a contributor to Planned Parenthood.

It's a very bad move on her part.

I think it is a questionable validity and legality that she did it.

In the long run it will not make any difference, but obviously it gets big headlines now.

At something that shouldn't have happened.

This will be resolved down the road particularly with respect to the U.S. Supreme Court decision.

>> To Jordan's point, you mentioned the conventional wisdom that this will motivate Democrats.

That's obviously going to be true.

A lot of Democrats will be inspired to vote and sign the petition, et cetera.

I talked to pollster Steve Mitchell and he said he is seeing that this is motivating Republicans too.

Republicans already had very high motivation in this election partly because of issues like we mentioned about the rank over Governor Whitmer and her pandemic orders.

To the extent that this motivates Democrats as well and levels the playing field on motivation, perhaps it will benefit Democrats electorally a bit.

Both sides seem fired up.

>> I am motivated now to say good night.

Sorry, we have to put a top on this.

Great discussion.

We appreciate it.

We will see you next week right here for more "Off the Record.

>>> Production is made possible in part by-- for more "Off the Record visit WKAR.org.

Michigan public television stations have contributed to the production costs of "Off the