Engler's first two terms were good. In fact, the first person I voted for was Engler. But I do not recognize the John Engler in their now. He's not the same anti-tax warrior he was in 1993.
This is why term limits have such appeal. New office holders arrive with the desires of their constituients fresh in their minds. Then, day after day, hearing after hearing, all they hear is from those that want something. Opponents to spending don't have the time to debate every new initiative. Hearings are dominated by advocates 20-1, 50-1, 100-1. The cost-benefit ratio always favors those who want the money so they fight for it. So taxpayer becomes the frog in the slowly heating pot, oblivious as we slowly boil to death.
Then crap happens and they have to make a grab for more of your money. You say, "Wait a minute, I didn't budget for that. I've got all my income tied up in housing, food, insurance, transportation, clothing, etc."
They say, "Cut something, we need the cash."
You say, "You cut."
As far as I can tell, these guys never, ever ask themselves, "How are the folks at home going to come up with the extra dough."
All tax increases need super majority votes in a referundum. I'd support 65% to pass.