Michigan voters approve Proposal 2 on money in politics
Archived — this story has rotated out of today’s deck. It is kept here in full.
The gist
Michigan voters approved Proposal 2, which bars regulated utilities and big state contractors from political contributions.
The measure now faces a federal lawsuit claiming it violates free speech.
Background
Proposal 2 was a citizen-led initiative by Michiganders for Money out of Politics, a ballot committee that gathered more than 560,000 signatures to put it before voters. It amends the Michigan Campaign Finance Act of 1976 to restrict political contributions by regulated utilities and organizations with state contracts of at least $250,000 a year — plus their executives and immediate family — and to expand disclosure rules for political ads. Supporters pointed to the influence of DTE Energy, Consumers Energy and Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan in Lansing, arguing bills holding utilities accountable for prolonged outages have stalled because the companies donate to lawmakers' campaigns.
How it unfolded
- Sep 18, 2026The UAW endorsed a Yes vote on Proposal 2, saying it would stop a monopoly utility like DTE from "owning elected officials in Lansing."
- Oct 1, 2026A WDIV/Detroit News poll (Aug. 31–Sept. 3) showed 71.5% yes, 15.6% no and 12.8% don't know or refused.
- Oct 23, 2026State Court Report noted polling above 70 percent support despite opposition from utility companies and major state contractors funding the "no" campaign.
- Oct 26, 2026Bridge Michigan reported updated campaign finance filings for Michiganders for Money out of Politics were unavailable due to a filing error.
- Nov 3, 2026Voters approved Proposal 2; the AP called the race at about 9:38–9:45 p.m., with early returns showing roughly 4 out of every 5 votes in favor.
- Nov 3, 2026By 10:10 p.m., the Mackinac Center for Public Policy sued in the US District Court for the Western District of Michigan, arguing the measure is unconstitutional and seeking to block parts of it.
- Nov 4, 2026As of 12:09 p.m., 81.1% of voters had approved and 18.9% opposed, according to unofficial results.
Who’s saying what
- Support
- Sean McBrearty, co-founder of Michiganders for Money out of Politics, said "the days of lawmakers representing their wealthy donors instead of their constituents are over."
- Support
- Christy McGillivray of Voters Not Politicians said representatives failed to hold "corrupt pay-to-play politics" accountable, so voters delivered.
- Caution
- The Mackinac Center for Public Policy called the measure "a nasty tool" that can punish people for "daring to speak their minds," and sued to block parts of it.
- Analysts
- The Citizens Research Council of Michigan noted that US Supreme Court decisions over 50 years have treated political spending as protected First Amendment speech, requiring restrictions to clear a very high bar.
Still unverified
Vote totals are unofficial election results. The Mackinac Center's claim that the measure is unconstitutional is a lawsuit allegation, not a court ruling.