Michigan Senate Passes Bills Threatening Election Integrity

The Michigan state Senate passed a slate of election bills that would pose a serious threat to election integrity, creating an “elections database and institute” and letting individuals interact with voters in line at the polls.

Senate Bills 401, 402, 403, and 404 — which proponents call the “Michigan Voting Rights Act” — passed Sept. 17 along party lines in the state Senate, where Democrats hold a slim two-seat majority. The bill is now headed to the state House, where its timeline is uncertain, state Rep. Ann Bollin told The Federalist.

“This is bad legislation,” Bollin, a Re said. “I think this just further drives a wedge and removes responsibility.”

The bills’ effective date is not set in stone since they still need to pass the House, according to Bollin. She laid out two potential scenarios that could occur if the bills pass the House. 

In one case, the bills could take effect the usual 90 days after passage, meaning they would not affect November’s election.

In the other case, Bollin said the bills could be changed to take effect immediately after passage. If Democrats rushed the bills through the House to be signed by Democrat Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, they would face a lengthy rule process that would still likely put their implementation beyond the election. But Democrat Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson could rush that process.

“That rule process is something that generally takes months to process because you have a public hearing, public comment period,” Bollin said. “But Benson has shown that she is willing to request waivers of the process, and I think that is totally unfair to the voters and to our local clerks.”

Republican state Sen. Ruth Johnson opposed these bills but was unsuccessful.

“These bills go far beyond the voting rights protections already afforded to all of our citizens,” Johnson said in a press release. “These measures would also set a dangerous precedent — and eviscerate long-standing norms about the sanctity of polling places — by allowing individuals who are not voters to actually enter polling locations and interact with voters waiting in line.”

Reshaping Elections

SB 401 would ban any action by election officials creating a supposed “disparity” in “voter participation, access to voting opportunities, or the equal opportunity or ability to participate in the political process” for a “protected class.” 

The bill includes a list of racial criteria for deciding “impairment of the right to vote,” like “history of discrimination,” the “use of overt or subtle racial appeals by government officials or in political campaigns,” and “racially polarized voting.”

“It also is left to one’s own interpretation of what is limiting my ability as a voter,” Bollin said. 

The bill lets courts determine “remedies” for supposed disparities, including “alternative” election methods like ranked-choice voting, “adding or changing voting days or hours,” and adding “polling places, early voting sites, or absent voter ballot drop boxes.” It also creates a “voting rights assistance fund” in the state treasury.

“Where’s that money coming from?” Bollin asked. “It will impose a lot of additional costs burden on the state and local clerks.”

SB 402 would create a “voting and elections database and institute” in at least one public research university by Nov. 5, 2025. The bill text says the “centralized” database would supposedly be “nonpartisan,” and it would “collect, archive, and make publicly available at no cost an accessible database pertaining to elections, voter registration, and ballot access.”

Bollin said she has seen appropriations bills suggesting this would be at the University of Michigan. She raised concerns the center could compromise the privacy of “proprietary information.”

“It’s supposed to be guarded by the secretary of state and our local and county clerks,” Bollin said. “I find this to be a great breach of the public’s trust, and there is no reason that we have to involve a public university in our election process.”

Garrett Wheat, Johnson’s chief of staff, told The Federalist the institute would collect data seemingly “for the purpose of handing it over to interest groups to sue local units of government and clerks.” He said this became a concern because the data might become available to “outside interest groups” and could be used as evidence in lawsuits. 

SB 403 requires clerks in many communities to print election materials in languages other than English. Wheat emphasized that this would place “new requirements” on clerks. Bollin said this is “duplicative,” as the state already offers election language assistance.

SB 404 would require local clerks to provide the secretary of state with additional information, including information about changes to the method of elections. Bollin said this would place “a lot of additional burdens of reporting and directives to the local clerks.” The bill would also remove the requirement to reject any ballots that voters allow others to view. 

The bill would let individuals offer “food, warmth, or other necessities to electors who are in line to vote inside or outside” “at the discretion of the appropriate clerk,” so long as they do not “interfere with the voting process.”

Johnson said in the press release that candidates or volunteers could take advantage of this to sway voters. “Under this bill, I could enter a polling location — even if I was a candidate on the ballot — and say ‘Hi, I’m Ruth Johnson, please accept this snack while you’re waiting in line to vote,’” Johnson said in the release. “I strongly believe the vast majority of people would say that this type of activity is inappropriate and a violation of the spirit of the current ban on campaigning inside polling locations.”

Johnson tried to amend the bill and limit the distribution of incentives inside polling locations, according to the press release. These efforts were “defeated.”

The Michigan Senate Democrats issued a press release, saying the bills advanced critical “protections” of elections. “The Michigan Voting Rights Act will ensure all our voters can confidently and safely exercise their rights at the ballot box,” said Democrat state Sen. Darrin Camilleri, who sponsored the bill, in the release. “We will keep working with the House and governor to advance these bills across the finish line.”

Powerful Interests

Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson has been a major force behind the legislation. According to the release from state Senate Democrats, the legislation was “developed” with input from Benson and “numerous constituency organizations.” 

“The Michigan Voting Rights Act will not only build on the federal Voting Rights Act but will add new protections at the state level to shield us from future attacks on our democracy,” Benson said in a press release the same day the legislation passed. Benson’s office even maintains a webpage with a “fact sheet,” sample letters to the editor, and social media graphics. “You can help support the passage of the MVRA by contacting your state legislator and by spreading the word about the benefits of the MVRA,” reads the official secretary of state webpage. 

One of the main groups pushing the legislation is Voters Not Politicians, according to Bollin. VNP’s Washtenaw County Chair Marie Knoerl admitted to WEMU 89.1 Radio that the group is “pushing for a package of bills called the Michigan Voting Rights Act.” VNP has a webpage called “Michigan Needs Its Own Voting Rights Act,” claiming it will “Protect Voters of Color and Voters with Disabilities and Strengthen Michigan’s Democracy.” The page links to a document supporting the legislation, by ACLU Michigan and the NAACP Legal Defense Fund.

The VNP was formed in 2016, and its first large issue was to change Michigan’s redistricting practices, according to InfluenceWatch. The group later explored issues like weakening term limits. It takes funding from leftist powerhouses like the National Education Association, Service Employees International Union, and the Sixteen Thirty Fund — part of the dark money network Arabella Advisors.

Bollin said she hopes this legislation will be “put on hold.”

“Give the local clerks and the public, the voters, an opportunity to comment on it,” Bollin said, “not just special interest groups.”

Logan Washburn is a staff writer covering election integrity. He graduated from Hillsdale College, served as Christopher Rufo’s editorial assistant, and has bylines in The Wall Street Journal, The Tennessean, and The Daily Caller. Logan is originally from Central Oregon but now lives in rural Michigan.