Tag Archives: Government

From afterthought to mentor: Exploring the evolution and significance of the vice presidency

The New York Times Chief White House Correspondent Peter Baker speaks at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Museum (Courtesy, Deborah Reed WKTV)



By Deborah Reed

WKTV Managing Editor

deborah@wktv.org


The New York Times Chief White House Correspondent and MSNBC political analyst Peter Baker recently visited Grand Rapids to talk about an element of our constitutional leadership that often goes unnoticed – the vice presidency.

Gerald R. Ford Presidential Museum is celebrating its 50th anniversary (Courtesy, Deborah Reed WKTV)

Renowned for his incisive journalism and extensive first-hand knowledge of presidential administrations, Baker presented his journalistic view on the evolving role of the vice presidency at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Museum on April 23. “Covering the Vice Presidency: Lessons Learned on the Road” brought insight to a role deemed by one historian as the resting place for mediocrity.

The first vice president, John Adams, defined his role as “…the most insignificant office that ever the invention of man contrived or his imagination conceived.”

But while those who hold the office of vice president may feel their job lacks significance, Baker believes understanding the often underrated role is more important than many people realize.

“It definitely is more important than people recognize,” said Baker. “We collectively ought to know more about our vice presidents because, in fact, a large number of them ultimately become president. Either because of the vacancy in the office or because they run for the office later.”

​​Baker continued, ”Aside from being next in line to the presidency, the office of the vice presidency has evolved a lot in modern times. It’s evolved a lot in the last few decades into a much more substantive and significant role.”

A useless appendage

Since our country was founded, vice presidents have struggled to find a foothold in the political realm.

With the office of vice president more of an afterthought to the Constitution rather than a priority, it is no wonder the person stepping into the role is left floundering to find purpose.

Nearly every vice president has struggled to feel seen and heard while in office (Courtesy, Deborah Reed WKTV)

Benjamin Franklin went so far as to suggest that the vice president should be addressed as “Your Superfluous Excellency.”

“They didn’t have an office in the White House,” said Baker. “No president actually gave them an office in the White House until Lyndon Johnson came along as the first one to argue he should have an office in the White House. And even then he didn’t get it in the White House itself – he only got it in the Executive Office Building across the street.”

Breeding insecurity

While reporting on the last five vice presidents, Baker said he learned the vice president’s job is far from easy.

“A vice president’s power is entirely derivative of the president that he or she works for,” said Baker. “You have as much as they’re willing to give you, and nothing more. You’re wholly dependent on the president.

“The vice presidents are always waiting for a president to tell them what they can do, what they shouldn’t do, and so forth. It just breeds insecurity.”

Even though the vice president is the second highest official in the land and the next in line for the presidency, the person holding that role can feel enormously uncertain about their place in the White House.

Refusing to be marginalized

Walter Mondale called it,” said Baker. “He said the vice president, over American history, has always been standby equipment.”

President Ford was the first vice president to be chosen under the terms of the 25th Amendment (Courtesy, Deborah Reed WKTV)

Mondale took notice of his predecessors’ marginalized capacity – and refused to follow in their footsteps.

“When [Mondale] became Jimmy Carter’s vice president, he got Carter to agree to give him an office in the West Wing, just down the hall and around the corner from the Oval Office,” said Baker. “He got to be the first vice president ever to live in an official government residence.”

Most importantly, Mondale drafted a memo with an expansive interpretation of how he saw the job, and how he could be useful to the administration. That memo has been used by several vice presidents to make their own arguments to the presidents they serve.

Richard (Dick) Cheney, serving as vice president to President George W. Bush, was also a key player in expanding the role of vice presidents.

Cheney has been described as the most powerful vice president in history.

“He knew Washington, he knew his players,” said Baker.

But the most important factor lay in Cheney’s ability to build a relationship with President Bush, who empowered him to be an influential vice president.

“Bush gave Cheney access to every meeting, every decision,” said Baker. “He involved Cheney in every aspect of the presidency. It’s such a contrast to his predecessors.”

Through Mondale and Cheney, the role of vice president experienced extensive and unprecedented growth.

(Courtesy, Deborah Reed WKTV)

From standby to partner

In the last several administrations, vice presidents have taken on more of a role as mentor and guide to the presidents they serve.

“[The vice president] has become more of a partner riding shotgun for the president heading into a political administration, given much more responsibility, and sometimes even more visibility, than in the past,” said Baker.

More from Peter Baker

The full “Covering the Vice Presidency: Lessons Learned on the Road” presentation at the Ford Museum will soon be available on the Museum website. Click here for updates.

To view Peter Baker’s interview with WKTV Journal Managing Editor Deborah Reed about the importance of journalism and its core values, and the evolution of our country’s presidential administrations, click on the video below.

Secretary Buttigieg praises Ford Airport funding at local speech

U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg talks about the $8.7 million federal grant for the Gerald R. Ford International Airport on Monday in Grand Rapids. (WKTV)

By Cris Greer, WKTV Managing Editor

greer@wktv.org

U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg announced a nearly $8.7 million grant to the Gerald R. Ford Airport to media and guests on Monday morning in Grand Rapids.

Speaking at the airport where construction workers were expanding Concourse A in the background, Buttigieg spoke highly of the federal grant.

“As part of the terminal gate expansion project, this grant is going to help fund eight new passenger boarding bridges so this airport is able to handle more travelers, and so they can walk or roll more comfortably from their gate to their plane,” Buttigieg said. “It’s going to make traveling better, and allow Grand Rapids to accommodate that increasing passenger growth, and support the economic opportunity that is emerging across West Michigan.

Improving airport experiences

“Today, when you look at global rankings of great airports, not a single airport in the United States ranks among the world’s top 25. And we feel those shortcomings too often flying through terminals that need a lot of work, and now we are in a position to fix that. We’re making sure people are going to be proud of their airport experiences across America and support the good work that is already happening in communities like Grand Rapids.”

The bridges also will enhance energy efficiency with pre-conditioned air and auxiliary power.



Buttigieg said the Department of Transportation fielded nearly $14 billion worth of applications and awarded $1 billion.

“That gives you the sense of just how much need is out there,” he explained. “For the long term, we have to modernize the infrastructure itself … for the decades ahead. This was a very, very competitive program.”

Bipartisan Infrastructure Law

“This President and Congress finally delivered,” said Buttigieg, of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. “The Biden Harris administration has already announced about $3 billion headed to Michigan to improve a range of transportation and infrastructure assets, and we are just getting started.

“We are not just building infrastructure, but building better futures and building careers. What we’re really talking about is creating jobs. It’s part of a bigger picture.”

Tory Richardson, CEO and president of the Gerald R. Ford International Airport, shakes hands with U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg on Monday in Grand Rapids.

On a Personal Note

Buttigieg said it was a pleasure to be in Grand Rapids, whose Mayor Rosalynn Bliss often had conversations with him when he was the mayor of South Bend, Ind.

“I’ve often compared notes with Mayor Bliss about what it means when you have civic pride and a lot of energy and commitment to growth,” Buttigieg said. “This is also a city where we spent some time last fall when our little guy was being treated at DeVos (Children’s Hospital). We couldn’t be more thankful for the care he received from the medical staff there.”

He and husband Chasten adopted twins (Joseph “Gus” August and Penelope Rose Buttigieg) last year.



Traverse City Home

Buttigieg also revealed why they recently relocated to Traverse City.

“We are here (Michigan) because of family,” he explained. “When I married Chasten, I married into Michigan, at some level to begin with. But it was really the arrival of our children that cemented our relationship to Traverse City.

“We depended on the help we got from my mother- and father-in-law (the kids’ grandparents) and found that it really is a great home and we have a great support network there for raising our kids.”

Attorney General Dana Nessel

Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel welcomed Buttigieg to his new home state of Michigan.

“Mr. Secretary, you could not have picked a better state in the union to become a resident of,” she said. “I certainly hope that you like college football. We have a lot going on in this state. We are so thrilled to have you as a Michigander or a Michiganian, depending on who you speak to about that.”

Gerald R. Ford International Airport awarded $8.7 million for improvements

By Cris Greer

WKTV Managing Editor

greer@wktv.org


The Gerald R. Ford International Airport will receive nearly $8.7 million in federal funding to install eight new passenger boarding bridges.

Gerald R. Ford International Airport to receive nearly $8.7 million for terminal improvements. (Courtesy)

The Federal Aviation Administration funding, announced by U.S. Senators Debbie Stabenow and Gary Peters, was made possible by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act Signed into Law Last Year

“This funding will support eight new passenger boarding bridges in 2023 to further enhance the guest experience and provide growth opportunities for airline service in West Michigan for years to come,” said Torrance Richardson, president and CEO of the Gerald R. Ford International Airport. ”We are thankful for the investment in community infrastructure by Senator Stabenow and Senator Peters, which allows the Gerald R. Ford International Airport to compete nationally for Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) funding to invest in our passenger terminal.”

This funding is from the Airport Terminal Program. Senators Stabenow and Peters helped secure these funds in the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.

“Having reliable and safe air service is crucial for tourism, commerce, and economic development,” Senator Stabenow said. “This funding is another critical piece of the infrastructure investments coming to our state and will improve customer experiences at our airports.”

Gerald R. Ford International Airport. (Courtesy)

The Airport Terminal Program is one of three aviation programs created by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. The law provides $1 billion annually for five years for Airport Terminal grants.

“Airports play a critical role in boosting Michigan’s economy by connecting communities and businesses to important destinations and resources,” Senator Peters said.

“I was proud to help secure this federal support through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to help Gerald Ford International Airport make necessary upgrades to critical infrastructure, ensuring it can continue to welcome and transport travelers safely and efficiently for years to come.”

The Airport also will receive a $3.6 million federal grant from the U.S. Department of Transportation for infrastructure improvements. The funding will go toward expanding the airport’s snow removal equipment building, as well as reconstructing existing airport service roads, runway lighting systems and the aircraft rescue and firefighting building.

Are federal tax dollars high or low?

Courtesy Michigan State University Extension

By Darren Bagley, Michigan State University Extension

 

How have federal income tax rates changed over time? Do you think taxes go up, down or stay the same? If we didn’t have an income tax, how would we pay for things like the military, national parks, federal courts and prisons, agricultural research or the many other things the federal government does?

 

This is the latest article about citizenship activities anyone can conduct with children. This can be done within a family, as part of school activities, a 4-H club or with any group working with young people. Have a robust dialogue about these issues, and encourage young people to find data to back up their opinions. During the discussion, try to limit interjecting your own opinions, and let the youth discuss it among themselves.

 

The United States had its first federal income tax in 1861 to help pay for the Civil War, kept until 1873 when it was repealed. It started up again in 1894 for one year and left again until 1913, and has been with us ever since. Tax rates have varied widely since that time.

 

Should tax rates be the same regardless of your income? The taxes paid on the highest income bracket have ranged from as low as 2 percent in 1894 to as high as 94 percent in 1945. What do you think of a 94 percent tax rate? It is important to consider that amount was not paid on all their income, but only on the amount made in that bracket. For example, for the high bracket of 94 percent in 1945, you would only pay that 94 percent rate on income earned over about $200,000 ($2.8 million adjusted for inflation in 2018 dollars). Income less than that would be taxed at a lower rate. For every $1 you earned over that $200,000, the government would take 94 cents of it.

 

Why would the government tax wealthy folks at such an exorbitant rate? Taxes for the highest earners stayed above 90 percent from 1944 to 1962. Are there any major events that happened during that time? World War II occurred from 1939-1945. We built the federal interstate highway system starting in 1956.

 

Would any events justify those kind of taxes today? Another world war? The war on terror? Paying off the national debt? Improving our schools? Providing universal higher education? High-speed internet across the country?

 

Many things are funded by taxes, individuals could also purchase on their own or the government could not regulate. Are there things the government is doing that it should not? Do we need to invest in traveling to outer space? Should parks or prisons be run by private companies who can make a profit?

 

Another item to consider is that dollars reinvested into a business are not income, but expenses. For example, if you have a company that makes ice cream and you do really well and make millions of dollars, if you use those millions to buy more ice cream stores or ice cream making machines, or hire more people, those are considered business expenses and not a net profit. If an individual or company keeps recirculating money into entrepreneurial enterprises, it keeps the economy going. Perhaps that is what the government of the time wanted to encourage.

 

Tax dollars are used to fund government programs, from preschool to roads to the military. Spending of tax dollars create jobs, but so does spending in the private sector. It could be argued that high taxes on the wealthy are a “Robin Hood” approach of taking from the rich and giving to the poor. It could also be argued that high taxes are because the government doesn’t trust people with their own money. Where do you fall on those arguments?

 

Hopefully these questions will get some good discussion going about the value of your tax dollar. If you have some great ideas, share them with your county, city or township, or your state or federal legislators.

 

To learn about the positive impact of Michigan 4-H youth leadership, citizenship and service and global and cultural education programs, read our 2016 Impact Report: “Developing Civically Engaged Leaders.” Additional impact reports, highlighting even more ways Michigan State University Extension and Michigan 4-H have positively impacted individuals and communities in 2016, can be downloaded from the MSU Extension website.

 

This article was published by Michigan State University Extension. For more information, visit http://www.msue.msu.edu. To have a digest of information delivered straight to your email inbox, visit http://www.msue.msu.edu/newsletters. To contact an expert in your area, visit http://expert.msue.msu.edu, or call 888-MSUE4MI (888-678-3464).

 

Data for this article comes from Tax Foundation.

Governments and Nonprofits: New Partnerships or Paradigm Shifts?

 

By K. Caldwell, Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy at Grand Valley State University

 

As priorities of government have shifted away from directly providing services and programs, there has also been an explicit and implied expectations shift between government and philanthropy (defined here to include donors, volunteers, charities, and foundations). The partnerships between governments and philanthropy have evolved from working on similar issues independently, to working together or in place of one another. Consequently, there are new challenges in terms of roles, responsibilities, resources, and repercussions that merit exploration.

 

In recent years, philanthropy has undeniably taken on a larger role in meeting community needs and serving as an economic engine. Nearly one-third of nonprofit sector revenues come from public sources to fund vital services (McKeever, 2015). And one in ten workers in America are employed by a nonprofit organization. That workforce is growing in response to society’s demands (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2016).

 

What is more fascinating (and perhaps alarming), is the many ways, in which philanthropy is now temporarily substituting for, or flat out supplanting, the traditional roles of government. A few examples from Michigan present very different, yet similarly complicated examples of sector role conflation.

 

Kalamazoo, Mich. launched the Kalamazoo Promise — an effort to provide higher education opportunities for all public-school graduates — with the support of five anonymous donors (Bartik, 2015). In that same community, two other donors have committed their wealth toward the creation of a new nonprofit, the Foundation for Excellence, which provides funds to maintain a stable property tax rate and structure and funds innovative community solutions as defined by city government.

 

Flint, Mich. experienced one of the nation’s greatest infrastructure failures when the city switched its public water source to the Flint River without proper anticorrosion treatment, thereby damaging the plumbing system, and leaching lead into the drinking water (Bosman, 2016). Foundations and nonprofits stepped up as first responders, delivering bottled water and water filters to residents. A group of foundations ultimately
stepped in to underwrite the costs of switching the water back to the original source, and the community foundation launched a response fund to provide for the long-term nutrition and education needs of the children affected by the increased lead levels (French, 2016).

 

When Detroit, Mich. filed for bankruptcy in July 2013, its debt was estimated at $18-$20 billion. Several foundations pooled their resources to help ensure that pensioners could survive on their fixed incomes, while the Detroit Institute of Arts (which was otherwise headed for the auction block) was reinvented as a nonprofit with a solid financial footing. A new fund was developed through the local community foundation to disperse settlement funds to various individuals and organizations involved in the settlement. (Ferris, 2017)

 

If paradigm shifts such as these are a good thing for the sector and demonstrate the versatility and leadership philanthropy can demonstrate, there are important questions to address as these new “muscles” are exercised. Can philanthropy’s assets substitute for those provided through the public sector? If so, are the sector’s current fiscal and operational systems ready to deal with the change? What are the accountability and transparency responsibilities of philanthropy if it is asked to step into leadership roles traditionally occupied by elected bodies? It is important to be cognizant of the challenges that unclear boundaries and unrealistic expectations can bring to such paradigm shifts.

 

Reprinted with permission from Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy at Grand Valley State University.