Let there be no doubt, he plans on enacting gas tax increases:

"In response, the legislature is considering a package of bills that would, among other things, increase the state's gas tax by 9 cents a gallon and annual vehicle registration fees by about $60. The tax and fee hikes are expected to raise $1.4 billion annually for road repair work."

But isn't that the NORMAL route for those on the left who can't find it in their heart to cut spending elsewhere?  Big dollar piggy banks like smokers, gasoline, liquor, and utilities, and land ownership are easy to hit, even when the revenue goes to programs and expenditures that are not even remotely related. Snyder, in his efforts to raise taxes and oppose the super majority limit provided by prop 5 is actually opposing the (Abridged)RNC platform itself :

Balancing the Budget

Cutting spending is not enough; it must be accompanied by major structural reforms, increased productivity, use of technology, and long-term government downsizing that both reduce debt and deficits and ignite economic growth. We must restructure the twentieth century entitlement state so the missions of important programs can succeed in the twenty-first century.   ..   The budget process gave us the insidious term "tax expenditure," which means that any earnings the government allows a taxpayer to keep through a deduction, exemption, or credit are equivalent to spending the same amount on some program. ..  It refuses to recognize the beneficial budgetary impact of lower tax rates, and it calls a spending increase a cut if it is less than the rate of inflation. .. We call for a Constitutional amendment requiring a super-majority for any tax increase, with exceptions for only war and national emergencies, and imposing a cap limiting spending to the historical average percentage of GDP so that future Congresses cannot balance the budget by raising taxes.

Government, both large and small has specific responsibilities.  States might well have more latitude on the programs offered to its constituencies, but the waste remains no matter WHOM might be in charge. The type of limit considered by prop 5, or its counterpart wish in the Republican national platform, is merely a mandate to look first for that waste, and then if necessary consider other means to meet immediate needs.

And frankly, arguments challenging the legitimacy of amending the Michigan constitution for such a thing as a 2/3rd limit are nonsense.  In fact, it is probably the most legitimate initiative on the ballot.  The constitution, is a box which holds the rules to which our legislators and other government functionaries are bound.  It provides LIMITS and a STRUCTURE (constitution) to which legislation or regulation must adhere.

It is EXACTLY why there is an initiative process.  It gives more control of limiting abusive legislative process to those who presumably hold the ultimate power.

We the people.

Snyder needs to reconsider his position as flag bearer in Michigan Republican politics.  Failure to abandon the Granholm policies, and leftward progressive bent that has destroyed Detroit, Flint, free markets, and our manufacturing base will only confuse voters and continue to reinforce negative stereotypes of who we are as Republicans.

Indeed, I had nearly bought in to the reasoning offered by those who say "we will be limiting our options for reform." Many of us can relate to difficulty in passage of legislation that is tough because of structural safeguards put in place by those before us. No one likes things to be 'difficult'.  Yes, a higher bar set for those bent on imposing further costs on a heavily taxed citizenry is a bar harder to reach.