10/26/22 - General Election 2022 - Proposal 1

Proposal 1: Michigan voters will decide how long state lawmakers should stay in office and what financial information they should disclose.

Proposal 22-1 A    Proposal To Amend The State Constitution To Require Annual Public Financial Disclosure Reports By Legislators And Other State Officers And Change State Legislator Term Limit To 12 Total Years In Legislature

This proposed constitutional amendment would:

• Require members of legislature, governor, lieutenant governor, secretary of state, and attorney general file annual public financial disclosure reports after 2023, including assets, liabilities, income sources, future employment agreements, gifts, travel reimbursements, and positions held in organizations except religious, social, and political organizations

• Require legislature implement but not limit or restrict reporting requirements.

• Replace current term limits for state representatives and state senators with a 12-year total limit in any combination between house and senate, except a person elected to senate in 2022 may be elected the number of times allowed when that person became a candidate.

Should this proposal be adopted? Yes No

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Michigan Constitution currently allows people to serve three terms in the House of Representatives and two terms in the Senate.              However, due to the scarcity of opportunities to win a Senate seat, few legislators make it to the maximum length of service allowed under current rules. 

If passed, Proposal 1 would amend the Michigan Constitution to end the separate limits on each chamber and instead put a 12-year cap on the total amount of time that could be served in the Legislature. 

James Hohman, director of fiscal policy for the Mackinac Center for Public Policy says, "Voters ought to ask whether the likelihood of longer service for their lawmakers will help ensure that they better reflect the will of constituents." 

Proponents of the initiative have argued it would strengthen transparency and allow lawmakers to serve longer in one chamber but reduce the overall cap on their tenure.  Longer terms would bring in a variety of lawmakers and make them less prone to influence from lobbyists because they would have more time to learn about writing and passing legislation. 

Opponents argue that lawmakers voted to lengthen their time in the state Legislature and criticized the initiative as a "scam."   The proposal would allow both current legislators to serve up to twice as long and allow former legislators to return.