Michigan Republicans reject voting rights bills | News, Sports, Jobs

(Photo: Kyle Davidson/Michigan Advance) State Senator Ed McBroom (R-Waucedah Township) questions stakeholders at a meeting of the Michigan Senate Elections and Ethics Committee.

Earlier this month, members of the Michigan Senate Elections and Ethics Committee voted to advance a package of legislation to strengthen the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965, addressing issues of vote dilution, speech access, protections for disabled voters, and protections against voter intimidation, coercion or deception.

While Democrats celebrated progress on the package, the bills did not resonate with Republicans. Lawmakers in the House and Senate have criticized the measures, as well as other bills that would change the requirements for requesting a vote recount and the voting rights laws passed by voters in 2022.

After several weeks of extensive hearings on the package, which consists of Senate Bills 401 through 404, committee members voted 5-2 to send the bills to the Senate for a vote. Senators Ruth Johnson (R-Holly) and Ed McBroom (R-Waucedah Township) – the two Republican committee members – voted against sending the bills.

This comes after Michigan voters enshrined voting rights in the state constitution through two votes in 2018 and 2022. These include nine days of early voting, no-reason absentee voting, same-day voter registration and more. Republicans have also been critical of these changes, proposing a series of voter restrictions last term that were vetoed by Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.

During his testimony, McBroom expressed concerns about these measures, arguing that some provisions would increase the burden on poll workers and expose them to potential legal threats.

“This so-called ‘State Voting Rights Act’ law is intended to protect the right to vote, but our right to vote is already well protected under the Michigan Constitution. Passing more legislation is unnecessary and only creates confusion.” McBroom said in a statement. “These completely unnecessary bills would, in reality, create new hassles for local officials by significantly increasing their reporting requirements and overall election-related workload, and cost taxpayers millions of dollars.”

While the bills received strong support from various voting rights groups and civil rights organizations, the Michigan Association of Municipal Clerks and local government organizations also expressed concerns that the bills would place an additional burden on clerks and create financial and legal problems for local governments facing complaints of voting rights violations if the Michigan Voting Rights Act were to become law.

In recent years, officials in Michigan have had to adapt to a number of changes in the state’s election law and constitution, and they have adapted well to those changes, Wyoming City Attorney Scott Smith said in testimony before the committee.

While political and media figures continue to spread false narratives that question the integrity of the electoral process, election officials face open hostility from voters and challengers and face onerous Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests and demands for information that question their integrity, Smith said.

“It is becoming increasingly difficult to recruit and retain election workers. Every time we add complexity or new disadvantages to a relatively voluntary position in a local government, it becomes more difficult to recruit people,” said Smith. “When we have more proposed amendments, as in these bills, and these bills provide for possible fines that officers may face, they are concerned.”

Under Senate Bill 401, local governments would be prohibited from implementing laws, practices, policies, or voting methods that would create inequality between a protected group of voters and other voters or that would impair voters’ ability to participate in the electoral process. The bill defines what such violations would look like and allows individuals to take legal action to ensure their rights are protected.

Mike Batterbee, legislative staff for the Michigan Township Association, testified against Senate Bill 401, arguing that it places responsibility for election law violations on public officials. It also raises concerns about harassment complaints that would force local authorities to hire a lawyer to handle them, whether or not the complaints go to court.

But Lata Nott, voting rights counsel at the Campaign Legal Center in Washington, DC, argues that this policy would give voters more power after the central provision of the federal Voting Rights Act was overturned by various court decisions.

This would also encourage voters and local governments to work together and correct potential violations before legal action is taken.

“Voters alleging racial discrimination must send their local government a notification letter detailing the potential violations. After that, there is a protection period, they cannot file a lawsuit for at least 60 days – more time if the government begins implementing a solution – but during that time both parties have the opportunity to work together in good faith to find a solution to the alleged problem.” Said Nott.

“SB 401 recognizes that many local governments act in good faith and, given the opportunity, would proactively address issues affecting the voting rights of historically disadvantaged communities,” Said Nott.

The Michigan Voting Rights Act also includes simplified tests to determine whether a law or regulation denies or impedes access to the ballot for a minority community, or whether a card or voting system minimizes a minority community’s ability to vote. This will allow the state’s courts to avoid the lengthy litigation that is common in state voting rights cases, Nott said.

Before the bills were presented to the Senate, the committee also adopted updated versions of each bill that addressed some stakeholder concerns.

Senate Bill 401 now proposes to establish a fund in the state treasury from which the State Department can reimburse plaintiffs and local agencies up to $50,000 for certain expenses before the trial begins. Committee Chairman Jeremy Moss (D-Southfield) said this would provide an incentive for plaintiffs and agencies to settle disputes in court while potentially sparing taxpayers from lengthy litigation.

“Too many members of marginalized communities face discriminatory barriers when they try to exercise their most fundamental right as American citizens – their right to vote. Our committee has heard extensive testimony about the need to ensure access to the ballot box for all eligible voters. After working intensively with voting rights advocates and election officials, I am proud that we have now submitted the Michigan Voting Rights Act to the full Senate for consideration,” Moss said in a statement.

“The MVRA underscores our commitment to protecting the right of every Michigan voter to feel empowered to shape the future of our state – free from discrimination and intimidation,” he said.

Michigan Advance is part of States Newsroom, a national 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization. For more information, visit https://michiganadvance.com/.