Hummel fights high taxes, big government

Rep. Scott Hummel

Position: State Representative
District: 93rd (Clinton and Gratiot counties)
Political Party: Republican
Committees: Education (Vice Chair), Insurance, Transportation, Tax Policy.

Background: Rep. Hummel received a BA in economics from Michigan State University. He worked at General Motors for nearly 24 years in the experimental assembly department of the vehicle engineering division. Before his election to the House, Hummel was twice elected as a Clinton County commissioner.

Hummel is a member of the National Rifle Association, the Michigan Coalition of Responsible Gun Owners, the St. John’s Chapter of the Sons of the American Legion, Clinton County Right to Life, Gratiot County Farm Bureau, the St. Johns Area Chamber of Commerce and the Gratiot County Chamber of Commerce.

Rep. Hummel lives in DeWitt with his wife and their four children. They are active in 4-H activities and numerous community sports programs. He is an outdoorsman and enjoys hunting and fishing.

Q. How did you get interested in politics?
A. I had always enjoyed U.S. history. I worked at General Motors for 23 years as a skilled tradesman, until GM moved all its engineering work to the Detroit area a few years ago.

Then, a marketing course I took at Lansing Community College, where we discussed campaigns, revived my interest in politics. I ran for a county commission seat in Clinton County and actually won, simply by applying the principles from class—going door to door, marketing myself.

I beat a well-established candidate for an open seat in the DeWitt area—that was a great experience. Then, in 2001, when Valde Garcia ran for Senate, I ran for the House seat he vacated.

Q. What committee work are you most involved in?
A: The Tax Policy committee work is something I care strongly about—it is important for the whole state. I firmly believe that we are overtaxed as a society.

It’s not just income tax and sales tax—it’s the licensing fees for things like hunting or fishing, or the heavy taxes on every gallon of gas. It all adds up and takes money out of people’s pockets.

I love working on that committee—we have similar views about the way tax policy has limited Michigan’s economic growth and made it more difficult to compete with other states for jobs.

Q. Are you happy with the way the budget compromises got worked out?
A. I realize it’s a compromise process, but I wish we had been a little more frugal. I was disappointed that we increased so many fees instead of focusing on cuts.

We raised almost $250 million in fees, and I voted against almost all those bills—they were just revenue raisers. We can say we didn’t have a general tax increase, but instead we raised it on this person and that person in the form of increased fees.

Q. How do you view the Streamlined Sales Tax issue?
A. Some consumers might view it as a tax increase, but it’s really an enforcement issue, a matter of collecting the taxes that we are legally due as a state.

If we do enact legislation to enforce the sales tax on remotes sales, and thereby collect another $200 million, I’d like to see tax cuts somewhere else. I don’t know if it’s realistic to hope for this, but I’m always interested in lowering taxes.

I see taxes on remote sales as an enforcement issue. Right now, paying this tax is voluntary. The average citizen does not see the benefit of tax revenues, so they won’t pay it.

Q. What is your stand on Michigan’s item pricing law?
A. Although I personally like item pricing, I realize that it’s a huge burden to retailers. I have heard consumer groups out in my district talking to people about it, and they may not be presenting an accurate view of what would happen under a change. It’s an education issue for the public.

We have to let consumers know we are not going to make things more difficult, we just want to help the retailers with a huge labor cost. But most people hate change, so it could be difficult.

Q. What has been the biggest surprise since you began your legislative career?
A. The people I’ve met— the legislators, the lobbyists, state workers, and people in the district—have been a very pleasant surprise.

Before I got here, I was involved in the community with my kids. But I had very little experience with state government, and I had an image of “lobbyists” and “politicians.” It was a real surprise to learn that politicians are just people.

The legislature is made up of farmers, nurses, small business people, teachers, lawyers, factory workers—we are a cross section of the state, and we’re genuinely trying to do what’s best. We agree, for the most part, on what would be best for Michigan, although we might disagree on how best to get there.

Q. Tell us about your philosophy of the relationship between business and government.
A. I was raised in a home where politics wasn’t a big issue. My dad worked at GM and was a union member but not active. I may have voted Democratic in my first major election.

In 1980, I had a significant spiritual event that made me examine my beliefs critically, and I realized that I am truly a Republican. I want to see less government intrusion in the lives of people and of business. I would love to get rid of the Single Business Tax, for example.

Small business is the major U.S. employer—it is the economic engine that runs this country, not the huge corporations. I’m here to protect small businesses from government intrusion.

In this country, we have to change our thinking about what government can and cannot do. An example is the breakup of the family, which is putting a tremendous burden on our state and country.

We try to find government solutions for these problems, but mostly we’re just throwing money at programs, which usually don’t get at the core issues of changing people and relationships. The truth is, government is not the best vehicle for doing this.

How can our society address the core issues? I believe it happens one person at a time, learning about responsibility and commitment.