Proposal 1 – Term Limits | 2022 Midterm Election

Categories 2022 Midterms, Editorial, Local News, Regional News, State NewsPosted on
2022 Midterms | Michigan Proposal 1 - Term Limits Information - Featured Image

Hello there! Today, we’re going to talk about Proposal 1 – Term Limits, that will be on your November 8, 2022 ballot. I will go over the language that will appear on your ballot itself, as well as the actual language that will be written into our State Constitution, should it pass the November election.

Ballot Language

Here is the language that you will see on the Ballot for Proposal 1. It will be under the “Proposal Section” and “State” subsection.

“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?”

The Initial Takeaway & Opinion

This, as presented on the ballot, seems fairly innocuous.   But, it really doesn’t come close to showing you the entire picture.  Please read the full language below to see what is actually going on…

The Michigan political class seems to be hiding behind language that we all want to see (because they know that we really don’t approve of the job they’ve done).  But really, it seems an attempt to consolidate their power and actually lengthen the amount of time they can serve.

Full Proposal Language & How It Will Look If Approved

INITIATIVE PETITION

AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION

Constitutional amendment to: require members of legislature, governor, lieutenant governor, secretary of state, and attorney general to file annual public financial disclosure and transaction reports after 2023; require legislature to enact laws with disclosure rules at least as stringent as those required for members of Congress under federal law; replace current term limits for state representative and state senator with a 12-year total limit in any combination between the House and Senate, with exception that someone elected to Senate in 2022 can be elected the number of times allowed when the person became a candidate.

Full text of the proposal to amend sections 10 and 54 of article IV of the constitution (language to be added in capital letters, deleted struck with a line):

ARTICLE IV

LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

§ 10 Legislators and state officers, government contracts, conflict of interest.

        Sec. 10, (1) No member of the legislature nor any state officer shall be interested directly or indirectly in any contract with the state or any political subdivision thereof which shall cause a substantial conflict of interest.

        (2) AFTER DECEMBER 31, 2023 A MEMBER OF THE LEGISLATURE, THE GOVERNOR, THE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR, THE SECRETARY OF STATE, AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SHALL ELECTRONICALLY FILE AN ANNUAL FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE REPORT AND PERIODIC FINANCIAL TRANSACTION REPORTS WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF SUBSECTIONS (2) TO (4), WITH THE REPORTS DISCLOSING INFORMATION REGARDING THE FOLLOWING:
        (A) ASSETS AND UNEARNED INCOME.
        (B) PURCHASES, SALES OR EXCHANGES OF A SECURITY OR REAL PROPERTY
        (C) EARNED INCOME
        (D) LIABILITIES
        (E) POSITIONS HELD AS AN OFFICER, DIRECTOR, TRUSTEE OF AN ORGANIZATION, PARTNER, PROPRIETOR, REPRESENTATIVE, EMPLOYEE, OR CONSULTANT OF ANY CORPORATION, FIRM, PARTNERSHIP, OR OTHER BUSINESS ENTERPRISE, NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION, LABOR ORGANIZATION, OR EDUCATIONAL OR OTHER INSTITUTION OTHER THAN THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, EXCLUDING POSITIONS HELD IN ANY RELIGIOUS, SOCIAL, FRATERNAL, OR POLITICAL ENTITIES AND POSITIONS SOLELY OF AN HONORARY NATURE.
        (F) AGREEMENTS OR ARRANGEMENTS WITH RESPECT TO FUTURE EMPLOYMENT, A LEAVE OF ABSENCE WHILE SERVING AS A STATE OFFICER, CONTINUATION OR DEFERRAL OF PAYMENTS BY A FORMER OR CURRENT EMPLOYER OTHER THAN THE STATE OF MICHIGAN OR CONTINUING PARTICIPATION IN AN EMPLOYEE WELFARE OR BENEFIT PLAN MAINTAINED BY A FORMER EMPLOYER.
        (G) GIFTS, AS DEFINED IN SECTION 4 OF 1978 PA 472, MCL 4.414.
        (H) TRAVEL PAYMENTS AND REIMBURSEMENTS.
        (I) PAYMENTS MADE BY OTHERS TO A CHARITY IN LIEU OF HONORARIA.
        (3) REPORTS UNDER SUBSECTION (2) MUST BE FILED IN THE FORM AND MANNER PRESCRIBED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE, WHICH SHALL MAKE THE REPORTS AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC ONLINE.
        (4) The legislature shall further implement this provision SECTION by appropriate legislation. LEGISLATION IMPLEMENTING SUBSECTION (2) AND (3) MUST NOT LIMIT OR RESTRICT THE APPLICATION OF SUBSECTIONS (2) AND (3) AND MUST BE NO LESS STRINGENT THAN THE REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO ANNUAL FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE AND PERIODIC FINANCIAL TRANSACTION REPORTS BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS UNDER TITLE I OF THE FEDERAL ETHICS IN GOVERNMENT ACT OF 1978, AS AMENDED, 5 USC APP 101 TO 111.
        (5) IF LEGISLATION IMPLEMENTING SUBSECTIONS (2) AND (3) IS NOT ENACTED BY DECEMBER 31, 2023, A RESIDENT OF THIS STATE MAY INTIATE A LEGAL ACTION AGAINST THE LEGISLATURE AND THE GOVERNOR IN THE MICHIGAN SUPREME COURT TO ENFORCE THE REQUIREMENTS OF SUBSECTIONS (2) TO (4).

§ 54 Limitations on terms of office of state legislators.

        Sec. 54 (1) No A person shall MAY NOT be elected to the office of state representative more than three times. No person shall be elected to the office of state senate more than two times. OR STATE SENATOR FOR TERMS OR PARTIAL TERMS THAT COMBINED TOTAL MORE THAN 12 YEARS. HOWEVER, THIS LIMITATION DOES NOT PROHIBIT A PERSON ELECTED TO THE OFFICE OF STATE SENATOR IN 2022 FROM BEING ELECTED TO THAT OFFICE THE NUMBER OF TIMES PERMITTED AT THE TIME THE PERSON BECAME A CANDIDATE FOR THAT OFFICE. Any person appointed or elected to fill a vacancy in the house of representatives or the state senate for a period greater than one half of a term of such office shall be considered to have been elected to serve one time in that office for purposes of this section. This limitation on the number of times a person shall be elected to office shall apply to terms of office beginning on or after January 1, 1993.
        (2) This section shall be IS self-executing. Legislation may be enacted to facilitate operation of this section but no A law shall MUST NOT limit or restrict the application of this section. If any part of this section is held to be invalid or unconstitutional, the remaining parts of this section shall not be affected by will remain in full force and effect.

Provisions of existing constitution altered or abrogated by the proposal if adopted:

ARTICAL IV
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

§ 10 Legislators and state officers, government contracts, conflict of interest.

Sec. 10. No member of the legislature nor any state officer shall be interested directly or indirectly in any contract with the state or any political subdivision thereof which shall cause a substantial conflict of interest. The legislature shall further implement this provision by appropriate legislation.

§ 54 Limitations on terms of office of state legislators.

Sec. 54. No person shall be elected to the office of state representative more than three times. No person shall be elected to the office of state senate more than two times. Any person appointed or elected to fill a vacancy in the house of representatives or the state senate for a period of greater than one half of a term of such office, shall be considered to have been elected to serve one time in that office for purposes of this section. This limitation on the number of times a person shall be elected to office shall apply to terms of office beginning on or after January 1, 1993.

This section shall be self-executing. Legislation may be enacted to facilitate operation of this section, but no law shall limit or restrict the application of this section. If any part of this section is held to be invalid or unconstitutional, the remaining parts of this section shall not be affected but will remain in full force and effect.”

Final Takeaway & Opinion

My opinion is… Don’t vote for this.  We already have term limits.  There’s simply no need to lengthen the amount of time any single politician can serve in one chamber.

There are 38 seats in the State Senate and 110 in the State House.  Honestly, there’s not a lot of crossover in representatives going from the House to the Senate so, this actually adds to the amount of time a bad representative can serve in the house, and adds time to those who solely serve in the State Senate as well.

If you are to assume that Representatives and Senators want to stay in their post – this Constitutional amendment would actually double a State Rep’s ability to serve and add 4 years to State Senators.  This amendment proposal would allow them to fill a seat in the House for 12 years instead of the current 6.  If you follow the same path for State Senators, this would lengthen their ability to serve from 8 years to 12 years.

It also bears mention that this proposition will change the term lengths as well (because it sure isn’t mentioned in any of the verbiage anywhere)…  State Representatives will, if passed, serve 4 year terms while State Senators will serve 6 year terms.

So much for “transparency” eh?

Key question… with anything political is: “Why would they want to do this?”

Stay tuned for more…

There are two other proposals on this ballot.  Those two are orders of magnitude worse than this one.  We will be covering those very soon.

In the meantime if you want to get into the fight against the Lansing swamp trying to slip radical extremist Constitutional Amendments via ballot proposals, you can get involved at the Michigan Says No Website.  They’re doing great things over there and any help to spread the word about Constitutional Ballot Proposals 1, Proposal 2, & Proposal 3, is needed at this point.

Patriotically yours,
Jeff
Editor in Chief

2 comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *