Holy Crap, The Federal Government Is Conceding!

[GregS]

So the budget committee is key.

[Celliach]

No the budget committee has nothing, nada, nil, to do with it.

[GregS]

So the budget committee is key.

 

No the budget committee has nothing, nada, nil, to do with it.

After having looked more closely, it is the appropriations committee in each chamber that determines how much money departments and agencies get, after having been informed by the State Budget Office (http://www.michigan.gov/budget/0,4538,7-157-11462-34950--,00.html). The terms are, for these purposes, identical, and it is only that appropriations is arbitrarily used in this specific case that "budget" is not appropriate here. On the other hand, some counties handle police funding through their budget committees or, for that matter, whatever your locality chooses to call its funding authority, and they need to be taken to task too.

Edited September 1, 2013 by GregS

[MightyMightyMezz]

The upshot is the Federal Government is willing to co-operate to some degree with states that have passed recreational legalization.  Certainly a historic milestone in the legalization effort, almost as much as Colorado and Washington's bold initiatives.

[Celliach]

After having looked more closely, it is the appropriations committee in each chamber that determines how much money departments and agencies get, after having been informed by the State Budget Office (http://www.michigan.gov/budget/0,4538,7-157-11462-34950--,00.html). The terms are, for these purposes, identical, and it is only that appropriations is arbitrarily used in this specific case that "budget" is not appropriate here. On the other hand, some counties handle police funding through their budget committees or, for that matter, whatever your locality chooses to call its funding authority, and they need to be taken to task too.

 

They don't apporpriate confiscation money anywhere but law enforcement.  It has nothing to do with budget or appropriations.  You need to go to the judicial or criminal justice committee to stop confiscations. The funding the police get from confiscations never leaves their area.

[mibrains]

as I recall..

some cities in MI just recently removed the "auction" step and made it so they could just keep the vehicles, items or properties.. they don't even have to auction them now... they have streamlined the process so efficiently these days that they can just keep what they want when they want to..

[GregS]

They don't apporpriate confiscation money anywhere but law enforcement.  It has nothing to do with budget or appropriations.  You need to go to the judicial or criminal justice committee to stop confiscations. The funding the police get from confiscations never leaves their area.

I'm not talking about appropriating forfeit assets. No forfeit dollars are appropriated. It is, rather, entirely possible to approach the governor and legislature to diminish enforcement dollars in the state budget because the enforcement load has been diminished, forfeit dollars notwithstanding, banging the drum to do just that as a responsible approach to controlling the state budget, which monies come straight out of the tax base.

Edited September 2, 2013 by GregS

[Celliach]

I'm not talking about appropriating forfeit assets. No forfeit dollars are appropriated. It is, rather, entirely possible to approach the governor and legislature to diminish enforcement dollars in the state budget because the enforcement load has been diminished, forfeit dollars notwithstanding, banging the drum to do just that as a responsible approach to controlling the state budget, which monies come straight out of the tax base.

 

Think about that Greg........

 

So we cut off the funding, making them confiscate more stuff to balance their over-inflated budgets.  Doesn't sound like a good idea to me.

 

Better to just stop the confiscations through the proper channels then trying to blackmail through other channels.

 

(Seriously Greg, do you ever think things through beyond the first step?)

[GregS]

Think about that Greg........

 

So we cut off the funding, making them confiscate more stuff to balance their over-inflated budgets.  Doesn't sound like a good idea to me.

 

Better to just stop the confiscations through the proper channels then trying to blackmail through other channels.

 

(Seriously Greg, do you ever think things through beyond the first step?)

Maybe then you would explain your version how the budget works, without speculation, and with facts.

[GregS]

Something to be said is that Rep. Irwin is already onto the forfeiture issue, and is making noise to trash it. I have submitted my remarks regarding the same to the judiciary committee, and they are a matter of record.

 

What has not been mentioned are the assets that are confiscated but never appear in police inventories because they disappear as if by magic.

Edited September 2, 2013 by GregS

[Celliach]

Maybe then you would explain your version how the budget works, without speculation, and with facts.

 

For this circumstance, I just did.  You even commented on the post asking me to explain it to you.  I really didn't think it needed an explanation.

 

Cut off state funding to law enforcement and they confiscate MORE goods to make up for the decreased budget.  I don't know how to explain it better than that Greg.

[Celliach]

What has not been mentioned are the assets that are confiscated but never appear in police inventories because they disappear as if by magic.

 

What does that have to with the budget committee?

[GregS]

Okay Celli. I'll explain this for you. I am talking about police funding to include both budgeted dollars and about forfeiture, looking at the wider view. It was my mistake to think that you would understand that, and that you are somehow able to entertain more than one concept at a time.

 

I regret the error.

Edited September 2, 2013 by GregS

[Celliach]

Okay Celli. I'll explain this for you. I am talking about police funding to include both budgeted dollars and about forfeiture, looking at a wider view. It was my mistake to think that you would understand that, and that you are somehow able to entertain more than one concept at a time.

 

I regret the error.

 

Nice Greg can't win the argument with facts so you resort to making fun of people.  

[Celliach]

Greg,

Read Mal's post above.  Maybe it will give you more insight to the subject.

[Highlander]

Looking at this, you don't have to wonder why they're whining. They stand to lose loads:

 

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/msp/2012_Asset_Forfeiture_Final_Per_Col_388020_7.pdf

 

Federal shared dollars are 44% of Michigan's $25.7M total proceeds.

 

I'm having loads of fun watching the drama.

 

 

Michigan's total executive budget for 2014 is $50.9 billion, of which, about 6%, or $3.05 Billion is allocated to public safety.

 

So if we have $25.7 million in federal asset forfeiture (this is total mind you - not only MJ-related) with 44% going back to Michigan, that's $11.3 million LEOs get from the feds.

 

That means MI's share of forfeiture is about 0.37% of the total public safety budget.

 

Then reduce it down to MJ-related forfeiture.....who knows what that annual figure is...but even it if it half of all forfeiture, that means that less than 2 tenths of 1% of the public safety budget would be affected.  This won't be an eye-opener to very many people.

 

 

I'm NOT saying that LEOs aren't desperate to preserve forfeiture......rather, what I'm saying is that if you try to have a policy discussion with lawmakers and they see what a tiny fraction of the overall public safety budget forfeiture represents, they aren't going to look at this as a high-priority matter. 

Edited September 2, 2013 by Highlander

[greenbuddha]

I don't see anything in that story about Sept. 10 Kriya.  What is happening Sept. 10?

 

 

Ozz, Sept 10th the Senate Judicial Committee (Federal) will hold a hearing on how the feds are going to deal with state laws that have legalized cannabis.

 

I believe it is related to the legislation that is coming up that would, if passed, make the federal LEO agencies respect these new state laws.

[GregS]

Michigan's total executive budget for 2014 is $50.9 billion, of which, about 6%, or $3.05 Billion is allocated to public safety.

 

So if we have $25.7 million in federal asset forfeiture (this is total mind you - not only MJ-related) with 44% going back to Michigan, that's $11.3 million LEOs get from the feds.

 

That means MI's share of forfeiture is about 0.37% of the total public safety budget.

 

Then reduce it down to MJ-related forfeiture.....who knows what that annual figure is...but even it if it half of all forfeiture, that means that less than 2 tenths of 1% of the public safety budget would be affected.  This won't be an eye-opener to very many people.

 

 

I'm NOT saying that LEOs aren't desperate to preserve forfeiture......rather, what I'm saying is that if you try to have a policy discussion with lawmakers and they see what a tiny fraction of the overall public safety budget forfeiture represents, they aren't going to look at this as a high-priority matter. 

The point is that the entire funding process needs to be addressed, and not only forfeiture. There has to be a lot of expense going toward mj offenses that comes out of tax dollars. With those offenses no longer illegal, there is every argument to be made that it is sensible to reduce the overall funding schema. If your 3B estimate is correct, that is a ripe target. So the budget is reduced by a few million to several hundred million dollars. I'm okay with that. Multijurisdictional task forces should be the first to go. It is widely held that mj enforcement is the lion's share of their work. Once Michigan jumps on board with Colorado and Washington state, and it will, they will be an anachronism.

Edited September 3, 2013 by GregS

[ozzrokk]

Ozz, Sept 10th the Senate Judicial Committee (Federal) will hold a hearing on how the feds are going to deal with state laws that have legalized cannabis.

 

I believe it is related to the legislation that is coming up that would, if passed, make the federal LEO agencies respect these new state laws.

 

 

Thank you..........

 

Yea it would be better if they could put something on the books instead of relying on their little memos.........