Reference to a current Michigan bill or law that relates in some way to your proposal:
Why this proposal will make a difference in the lives of students of all ages across Michigan, or a significant subgroup (by age, background, economic status, and/or region, etc.) of students in Michigan:
How and where did you learn about the issues underlying your proposal?
How has your service activity influenced your thinking about this proposal?
Link to your media artifact(s) giving background on the issue:
My news article on Federal After-School Programming CutsConsultations
Talk directly with at least 3 real live people who have special knowledge about this topic or the impact your proposal would have, and summarize their comments. These may include people appearing in your media artifact (video, podcast, etc.).
Describe the specific issue or problem, being sure to provide sufficient context so that someone less familiar with the issue has a sense of the bigger picture, but know that your focus here is on a more detailed spelling out of the specific problem or issue that you’ve identified. (250 words minimum)
Describe three reasonable, feasible potential solutions or approaches that would help address this problem.
SOLUTION 1: State matched funding
After attending a town hall with Rebecca DeVooght, I learned of a potential state and school district bipartisan funding solution. If the school districts will cover 25% of the costs for the afterschool programs, then the state government will match and cover the rest of the programs’ cost (75%). According to the Afterschool Alliance, there are 278 Michigan communities served by 21rst Century Community Learning Centers. (Afterschool Alliance) Once broken into school districts, the districts will be able to allocate funds from their budgets to meet the 25% requirement. The state government can meet the 75% requirement by allocating funds from the annual Michigan School Aid Fund budget. The School Aid Fund budget was created in 1963 and is used exclusively for “school districts, higher education, and school employee's retirement systems.” (Michigan Government) The 21rst century community learning centers fall under the jurisdiction of this fund’s budget.
SOLUTION 2: Private funding similar to 826 Michigan
After speaking with a consultant at my service location 826 Michigan, I came up with a funding solution that emulates their current financial system of private donations and charities. 826 Michigan is a local branch of a nationwide non-profit writing and tutoring organization. The 21rst CCLC programs will be privately funded through their communities, like 826 Michigan’s current model. To incentivize local residents, the state will create a program that gives tax credits to those who donate to the centers. While obviously donating to these centers is not at the level of taking care of a child full time, this tax credit can emulate the Child Tax Credit system. The Child Tax Credit declares that if the filer has a dependent child, they can qualify up to $1000 per child in credits. (IRS) The tax incentive solution to the 21rst CCLC programs would have a lower credit threshold but would be based on per child basis as well. If someone donates enough money to support a child on a quarterly or annual basis, they are eligible for one child in tax credits. This can be increased as the amount of money donated increases.
SOLUTION 3: Creating a Caucus
Instead of looking specifically at budgets and money for solutions, a caucus could be created to make it clear how important after school programs are to lawmakers. Representatives can create a state-level after school program caucus that emulates the US Senate’s and House of Representatives’ Afterschool Alliance caucus. Afterschool Alliance is a national nonprofit organization like Afterschool Alliance to convince congress to keep the 21rst CCLC programs funded.
Reaction or advice from a Topic Coordinator:
You must solicit a critique from a topic coordinator, and explain the impact that advice has had on the final draft of this proposal.
Describe your research process — indicate who you talked to (including but not limited to consultants), what you read, what your thinking was, how it changed over time, and how your consultants changed your thinking. This description of your research process definitely could include “dead ends,” or ideas you had that didn’t ultimately bear fruit. In short, we want to know what you did and how it led to your legislation, and we also want you to give us a window into your thought process.
Please delineate--in detail--who made what contributions to the process and to the finished proposal? Who took on which responsibilities in researching ideas, drafting language, etc.?
The sections below should comprise your final proposal language, submitted for consideration by your peers and potential inclusion in the MSC Platform.Preambulatory clauses
These set up the PROBLEM, but not the solution.
(Add more "Whereas" clauses if necessary.)Operative clauses
These describe in detail, the solution you are proposing (not the problem itself; those should go in the "Whereas" clauses above).
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED....
(Add more "Resolved" clauses if necessary.)Counter-arguments:
What are three reasonable arguments against this proposal?
3.Costs and funding:
What will your proposal cost (in direct expenses, lost tax revenue, lost economic opportunity, and/or non-monetary costs)? How will you pay for your proposed legislation? Where will/could the funding for your proposal come from? Who might object to dedicating resources to your proposal (competing interests)?
These can include websites or other information you have found about the issue.