Michigan lawmakers and local governments seek the right balance on expanding voting rights

Ralph Freso/Getty Images

Over the past six years, Michigan has gone from 31st in the nation for election administration to second , as voters approved measures overhauling the state’s election laws and enshrining the right to vote in the state constitution.

Changes like no-reason absentee voting and nine days of early voting have expanded Michiganders voting options while additional options for voter registration — including same day absentee voting — have made it easier for voters to get on the rolls, with Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, a Democrat, telling the Advance in May the changes in the state’s voter registration laws have had the greatest impact of the many changes to the election process.

While the new laws have garnered praise from local officials and national voting rights advocates, Democrats who control the Michigan Senate are pushing for additional protections for voters, introducing a four-bill package aimed at bringing aspects of the federal Voting Rights Act into state law and filling gaps created in the 1965 law, which has since been weakened by the courts.

“Last year, we spent really a lot of effort and time ensuring that our election administration officials have all the tools and resources that they need, not only for this very high profile 2024 election, but for every election moving forward. … Now we really have to focus not just only on the election administrators, but also the voters,” said state Sen. Jeremy Moss (D-Southfield), chair of the Senate Elections and Ethics Committee as well as the sponsor of one of the bills in the Michigan Voting Rights Act.

“This is about voter protection. This is about ensuring that if you are a legal registered voter here in the state of Michigan, that your right to participate at the ballot box does not face any barriers or hurdles based on any factors, and specifically your race, your mobility and your language,” Moss said.

The bills in the Michigan Voting Rights Act — Senate Bills 401 – 404 — are aimed at protecting minority voters from vote dilution, expanding language access, providing protections for voters with disabilities and creating an institution to create an institute collecting voting data and records from each county in partnership with one or more of Michigan’s research universities.

During committee hearings this year, democracy and voting rights organizations including Promote the Vote, the League of Women Voters, ACLU Michigan, Campaign Legal Center, the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, APIA-Vote Michigan, the Brennan Center for Justice and the Center for Democracy submitted a deluge of verbal and written testimony alongside cards in support of the bills, with members of the Senate Elections and Ethics Committee referring the package back to the Senate floor.

While the bills almost came up for a vote at the end of June, the Senate adjourned for its summer recess without taking up the legislation.

“That last day of session was pretty hectic, and we really wanted to make space to talk about this as a standalone item, because it’s incredibly important for a lot of communities here in Michigan and every lawful voter and their right to cast a ballot here in the state,” Moss said.

The package has support from the Michigan Department of State and widespread praise from voting and civil rights groups, disability advocates, and groups representing Asian Americans, Arab Americans and Latino Americans. But it’s not without its detractors, as Republicans have argued the package places an additional burden on election clerks.

“I continue to feel that the bills are, for the most part, quite unnecessary,” said Sen. Ed McBroom (R-Vulcan) who serves on the Senate Elections and Ethics Committee.

“In their best light, they’re simply duplicating what’s already in the federal Voting Rights Act and what’s already and what’s already explicitly stated within our own constitution and at worst, they are adding a huge layer of additional work for our local clerks and a lot of opportunity for our local clerks to not check the box, metaphorically speaking, and open themselves up to various liability from groups that are seeking to harass them, harangue them or make other trouble,” McBroom said.

McBroom and Sen. Ruth Johnson (R-Holly), the committee’s minority vice chair, voted against reporting the bills out from committee.

Organizations representing local and county governments raised similar concerns in their testimony, with many pointing to the recent changes in election law and the increasing levels of scrutiny and hostility election workers face as additional areas of concern.

“There are increasing difficulties in recruiting and retaining election workers. Every time we add complexity or new downsides to what is a fairly voluntary position with a local government we make it harder to recruit folks,” Scott Smith, the city attorney for Wyoming, told the committee in May.

The Michigan Association of Municipal Clerks also sent a letter to the committee noting its support for codifying a voting rights act in Michigan, but warning that the bills, while well-intentioned, could paralyze clerks from making necessary ministerial decisions out of fear of incurring potential lawsuits.

While the Michigan Voting Rights Act would allow residents to bring claims at the state level if they feel their rights have been violated, it also encourages them to negotiate with their local jurisdiction in order to avoid legal action. However, the Michigan Association of Counties noted that whether a complaint is valid or not, this process would mean local governments would need to retain legal counsel in order to address voting rights concerns, which could cost thousands in legal fees for each complaint.

In addition to letting the dust settle on the recent changes to Michigan’s election law, some stakeholders questioned why the protections against vote dilution, suppression and discrimination in Michigan were needed if the state hadn’t had an extensive history of federal voting rights complaints.

Parties testifying in support of the bill noted examples of legal action taken against barriers to voting access, such as a lawsuit against the city of Detroit and Wayne County arguing that many government buildings are inaccessible to those with disabilities. But McBroom sid that the reason why these cases had been identified is due to the laws that are already in place, comparing it to disproven claims of rampant voter fraud pushed by Republicans.

“I kind of felt like both sides are playing up these certain fears in their base, and then when they have control, they have to then show that they’re doing something about it,” McBroom said.

However, proponents of the package also noted that these additional protections would cover gaps in the federal Voting Rights Act, such those for voters whose first language is not English, as well as protecting the rights of historically disenfranchised communities and filling gaps in the federal policy that had been created through various decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Moss also told the Advance that his piece of the package, Senate Bill 402 , would create an institute compiling voting data from Michigan’s 83 counties to monitor trends, connect the dots if there is a barrier for specific communities within the state, and provide policymakers the research needed to resolve those barriers.

“This institute, I think, is one of the more important pieces of it, to have a central location taking in data from all 83 counties, and being able to output research that we can continue to use in real time to assess whether people’s voting rights are in threat,” Moss said.

Although some groups, including the Michigan Association of Municipal Clerks, asked the sponsors to narrow aspects of Senate Bill 401 — the bill defining violations of the Michigan Voting Rights and outlining the process for voters to address potential violations — to better mirror the federal Voting Rights Act, Moss stressed the need for additional voting protections following the 2020 election.

“We have to do everything we can in the world that we live in today to make sure that bad actors don’t parachute into Michigan and disrupt our democratic process. Obviously, there’s a heightened sensitivity around Michigan elections following 2020 and there was a concerted effort led by the then-president of the United States [Donald Trump] to make it difficult for some Michiganders to vote, and then on the back end, tried to throw out their votes altogether,” Moss said.

“So there’s an opportunity to strengthen voting rights, even if it goes beyond what’s in the 1965 Voting Rights Act, if it makes sense, we will try our best to achieve it. And I think that’s what we have here in this product,” Moss said.

Proponents like the Legal Defense Fund have also argued the package is a necessary response to efforts to restrict voting, pointing to at least 42 restrictive voting laws passed in 21 states since 2021. The Legal Defense Fund also notes that Michigan’s system of administering elections on the local level makes it uniquely susceptible to threats to voting rights.

While the Michigan Municipal League, the Michigan Association of Municipal Clerks and the Michigan Association of County Clerks’ legislative committee have taken a neutral stance on the bill, Judy Allen, director of government relations for the Michigan Townships Association, said the personnel needed to implement these changes remains a concern, particularly in Senate Bill 404 which requires election administrators to provide voting assistance for individuals who are unable to enter a polling place or early voting site.

“If I come up and I’m in line and I’m waiting, but then you come up and you want to do curbside voting, you’ve got to make sure you’ve got the adequate staff to go out, a Republican and a Democratic [inspector] to go out and monitor that what’s happening. And I’m waiting in line, so are you putting me on hold then, or do we have to have additional staff?” Allen said.

Election staffing is an issue the association hears from a lot of local units of government, Allen said, alongside finding sufficient numbers of Democratic and Republican election inspectors, with state law requiring local election board to appoint at least one inspector from each major political party, and as equal a number as possible of inspectors from both parties in each precinct.

In requiring precincts to offer curbside voting services, the Michigan Voting Rights Act would enshrine recommendations and best practices that are already in the state’s election manual, Moss said before acknowledging the concerns around election staffing.

“We’re trying to change the culture around our elections here in the state of Michigan, and create a less hostile, chaotic and divisive environment when people go into the polls and vote,” Moss said pointing to new laws creating penalties for harassing, intimidating and assaulting poll workers, in hopes of keeping them in the profession and on the team headed toward Election Day.

There is also a bill banning firearms in polling locations moving through the Legislature , which Moss said would also help reduce tension and hostility in polling places.

Should the Michigan Voting Rights Act be passed into law, Moss confirmed there would be additional conversations around funding to ensure the provisions on paper can be implemented.

“The right to vote is sacred in this country, and there should not be any cost barrier that’s so insurmountable that somehow we should cede on people’s right to access their ballot,” Moss said.

SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX