April 18, 2025 | This Week in Government: Election Materials Subpoena Issued

The House Oversight Committee approved the issuance of a subpoena for the Department of State on Tuesday, which will ask the department to turn over documents related to the training of clerks for the administration of elections.

Rep. Jay DeBoyer (R-Clay), who chairs the committee, said obtaining the information was necessary for its work.

“Election integrity is of the utmost importance to the functioning of our public form of government in the state of Michigan,” he said. “The Department of State has been unacceptably difficult in ensuring transparency regarding how the department is training local clerks to administer our state’s election.”

The motion passed the committee 9-6 along party lines. Rep. Reggie Miller (D-Van Buren Township) voted to abstain.

House Speaker Matt Hall (R-Richland Township) said he supported the subpoena.

“The direction I gave Jay DeBoyer and the Oversight Committee is that if the administration is not responding to you, if the departments are not responding to you, go ahead and issue the subpoenas,” Hall said. “We want to know what it is (they’re) giving to local clerks…and does it comply with the law?”

The subpoena resulted from Rep. Rachelle Smit (R-Martin) requesting election training materials last November. In a press release, Smit said a thorough review of election training materials was critical given “the concerning track record Benson has with handing down illegal guidance and rules to clerks.”

“We’re not talking about state secrets here; these are just basic election training materials regularly provided to Michigan clerks,” Smit said. “Secretary Benson had five months and ample opportunities to be transparent and work with us to strengthen our election systems. She refused, leaving us with no choice but to issue a subpoena.”

The Department of State said the House Oversight Committee has repeatedly rejected the department’s attempts to provide the requested materials in a secure way, said a statement from Angela Benander, a spokesperson for the Department of State.

The materials include active screens of the Qualified Voter File; specific information that could be used to compromise the technology used by local election officials; specific procedures for securing voting equipment including ballots and other election-related materials; information that could be used to gain improper access to secure communication channels used to report security risks; specific locations of election training; and templates for official election notices, Benander said.

“The committee has hijacked what was supposed to be a legitimate oversight process. They have made the committee chair – a single individual with no legal background – judge and jury with the power to force state employees to disclose sensitive election security information or face discipline,” Benander said. “It’s now clear that the plan all along was to weaponize this process and continue to undermine the public’s faith in the security and legitimacy of our elections.”

She went on to say that the department has been in communication with DeBoyer and Smit and is working to provide the eLearning center documents when it has been able to review and redact sensitive information related to election security. The information will be delivered by April 30.

“We will take all necessary steps to protect the security and integrity of Michigan’s elections and are more than willing to make these arguments in court,” Benander said.

Rep. Penelope Tsernoglou (D-East Lansing), who chaired the House Elections Committee last term and currently sits on the House Oversight Committee, said she was uncomfortable with authorizing a subpoena that she hadn’t seen.

“I am still at a loss for why they want those documents because it doesn’t seem that they want to draft any legislation to change clerk training, or I’ve never heard them before suggest that there was anything wrong with the clerk training,” she said. “If there was some issue with the clerk training, we would have taken it up last term, and in working with all the clerks, I’ve never heard this mentioned by any of the clerks, and a majority of the clerks actually are Republicans. So, I just haven’t heard that suggested before. I know that Rep. Smit has called the 2020 election into question and suggested that there was fraud, so I don’t know if her personal beliefs surrounding some of the past elections might be reflected in her reasoning for wanting those documents.”

The committee also adopted new rules regarding depositions and subpoenas.

DeBoyer said that the powers would be used fairly and responsibly, and the vote of the committee would be the safeguard against either tool being used politically.

“The people in your district, your constituents, will make a decision whether it’s political or whether it’s warranted,” he told committee members. “I have been very clear since I have been appointed the chair of the Oversight Committee that this is going to be done in a manner that is appropriate, professional, not for political fodder, and that’s a judgment that the citizens of Michigan have made.”

The rules passed the committee in a vote of 9-2. Tsernoglou and Rep. Dylan Wegela (D-Garden City) voted no; the five other Democrats on the committee abstained.

“My main issue with the rules is that allowing depositions would be non-transparent to the public, and also allowing discretion of only the chair just doesn’t give it the balance that we need,” Tsernoglou said. “There’s just too much discretion with that and too much potential for abuse.”

House members are confident that this term, the Public Safety and Violence Prevention Fund will make it all the way to the governor’s desk to be signed into law.

The bills took the next step in that journey on Wednesday when the House Government Operations Committee reported HB 4260 and HB 4261, which would earmark sales tax revenues for public safety in counties, cities, villages, and townships as part of the fund.

“I’ve seen firsthand the toll that violent crime pays on our communities and our families, and it’s really important that we get this dedicated funding across to our law enforcement and our community violence intervention and to our victims,” said Rep. Mike Harris (R-Waterford Township), one of the bill sponsors. “This is truly a nonpartisan issue, or even a bipartisan issue, that is something that we see as a real problem, and we have a real solution to address these needs.”

The bills were unanimously reported with H-1 substitutes that would deposit $115 million of sales tax revenues into the fund. The money would be distributed to municipalities based on their share of violent crime, with a chunk of money also going to sheriff’s officers. $1.5 million each would go to the Crime Victim’s Rights Fund and toward grants for community violence intervention initiatives.

During the committee hearing, Detroit Police Chief Todd Bettison testified on the effectiveness of community violence intervention.

“Our community violence intervention program has been high successful,” he said. “We have six groups. They have been attributed to helping us achieve record drops in our homicides by 45 percent when we closed out the year.”

The program in Detroit was started in 2023 with federal stimulus money, but it will run out in 2025, Bettison said.

Dujuan Zoe Kennedy, executive director of Force Detroit, also testified in support of the funding for community violence intervention.

“You build relationships. Once you build relationships, you develop influence, and once you develop influence, and you’re educated on how to use your influence, you use your influence to mediate and mitigate conflict,” he said. “We’re able to prevent, intervene, de-escalate, mitigate, because we have relationships in the community, because we’re from the community.”

The bill package is a reintroduction of legislation that passed both the House and the Senate last term but ultimately died in the chaos of last year’s lame duck.

Although there have been slight modifications to the legislation, Rep. Alabas Farhat (D-Dearborn), the other sponsor on the bill package, said he was confident that it would move through both chambers and be signed by Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.

“The governor agrees with us. Last year, the Senate voted on it, so there shouldn’t be an issue there,” Farhat said. “I would expect quick action on this.”

Some Democrats in the Senate have expressed the desire to see a measure of police accountability tied into the package, but Farhat said he saw that as a separate issue.

“A chronic problem, or disease, we have a little bit here in Lansing is tying unrelated things to each other,” he said. “Are they tangentially related? Sure, but the purpose of this is to bring down our state’s homicide rate – is to bring down the murder, and the rapes and the killings that we’re seeing, to put it very bluntly. And I welcome those conversations.”

Last term, the fund was included in the budget, but the policy bills were never enacted. This year, with the House Republican majority making it clear they intend to reduce the size of the state budget while providing for a $3.1 billion road plan and a reduction of the individual income tax rate, the budgeting process will be different, even if the policy bills are passed.

“A lot of it is going to come down to a settling of priorities,” Farhat said. “I think a big priority for all of us should be public safety, and I think the governor saying there’s $75 million for it … the speaker has also said it, and I don’t think the Senate has shut it down. … When we want to prioritize things, we have a miraculous way of finding the money for it.”

Harris added that in writing the bills, he and Farhat had worked closely with House Appropriations Committee Chair Rep. Ann Bollin (R-Brighton) and House Speaker Matt Hall (R-Richland Township).

“It’s not like we’re just throwing a dart at our dartboard and seeing if we can find the money,” he said. “This has been a conducted effort.”

The committee also reported HB 4233 and HB 4234 (See Gongwer Michigan Report, March 26, 2025). Both bills were reported with substitutes that remove individual foreign nationals without citizenship from the list of those who cannot purchase farmland.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is working to update its timeline on the environmental impact statement and permits for the Enbridge Line 5 tunnel project beneath the Straits of Mackinac after it said this week the process will be expedited under a federal emergency declaration.

On Tuesday, the Army Corps formally said the Line 5 project meets the terms set under an emergency declaration made through an executive order from President Donald Trump.

Environmental groups decried the decision while those supporting the project said the tunnel is designed to protect the Great Lakes and make the pipeline safer, so it should move forward.

Carrie Fox, spokesperson for the Army Corps’ Detroit District, said it is working to establish an updated timeline for permit review under the emergency procedures.

She said additional resources will be dedicated to speed up the schedule as it continues to prepare the environmental impact statement, with a draft expected in June.

Sean McBrearty, campaign coordinator for Oil & Water Don’t Mix, called the expedited permitting allowance a “sham.”

“By avoiding looking at the impact the Line 5 tunnel would have on the Great Lakes that families, industries, and Indigenous peoples rely on, the Army Corps is simply taking orders to not do their job and avoid looking at the actual problems with building this monster,” he said in a statement. “Folks shouldn’t forget that a major Trump donor stands to profit off the tunnel getting built, and this apparent tit-for-tat will come at the expense of 20 percent of the world’s fresh, available surface water just because of wealthy fossil fuel corporations’ interests.”

Enbridge spokesperson Ryan Duffy said in a statement that Line 5 is “critical energy infrastructure.”

“Enbridge submitted its permit applications to state and federal regulators five years ago – in April 2020 – for the Great Lakes Tunnel, a project designed to make a safe pipeline safer while also ensuring the continued safe, secure, and affordable delivery of essential energy to the Great Lakes region,” Duffy said.  “In 2021, the State of Michigan issued its environmental permits for the tunnel project, and in 2023, the Michigan Public Service Commission approved placing the new pipeline segment in the tunnel as Line 5 crosses the Straits of Mackinac. However, the project still awaits action by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on an environmental impact statement and a permitting decision. Earlier this year, Enbridge re-applied for its state environmental permits, which are set to expire in early 2026.”

Other environmental groups called the decision “reckless.”

“Building a tunnel under the Great Lakes to house an outdated and dangerous pipeline is risky. Expediting that process is reckless,” Beth Wallace, climate and energy director for the National Wildlife Federation, said in a statement. “The permitting processes exist for a reason. We cannot afford to bypass safety in order to line the pockets of a foreign oil company.”

Labor unions supporting the project praised the move, along with industry leaders expecting the construction of the tunnel to create jobs.

“Michigan workers back Line 5, and we support construction of the Great Lakes Tunnel,” Brent Pilarski, business manager for the Michigan Laborers District Council, said in a statement. “This is about jobs. It’s about wages. It’s about affordable energy. It’s time to move the permitting process forward so we can move this project forward.”

When the plan for the project was first crafted at the end of 2018, Enbridge estimated it could be completed by 2024. It has faced fights on multiple fronts since then.

Originally, the Army Corps expected the draft environmental impact statement to be completed by fall 2023. In an update on the project in 2023, it said to expect a final impact statement in early 2026.

Gov. Gretchen Whitmer instructed the Department of Health and Human Services to report on the potential impact of large slashes to Medicaid, and slammed congressional Republicans for being willing to trade millions of Americans’ health care coverage for a drastic reduction in federal spending.

In the wake of budget discussions that are ongoing in Washington, D.C., and a proposal from U.S. House Republicans to cut up to $880 billion in Medicaid and other health care funds from the federal budget, Whitmer has directed DHHS to study how those cuts would impact Michiganders and report back to her.

“Medicaid provides a lifeline to 2.6 million Michiganders, whether they need their annual physical or their third round of chemotherapy,” Whitmer said. “Cuts to Medicaid could take health care away from 750,000 of our friends, neighbors, and families. That’s why I’m proud to support access to Medicaid in our state by signing this executive directive. I’m committed to helping folks get the care they need without worrying about the bill, because here in Michigan, getting sick shouldn’t mean going broke. I’ll work with anyone who is serious about protecting access to affordable health care.”

Whitmer signed the directive in Royal Oak at Corewell Health’s Beaumont Hospital, where she was joined by medical professionals and U.S. Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Ann Arbor), U.S. Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Detroit), and U.S. Rep. Haley Stevens (D-Birmingham). The congresswomen said Democrats in Washington are working to illustrate how devastating any cuts to Medicaid would be for people who rely on the program for health coverage.

“Let me make this very clear, we will make sure every Republican is on record that what they are cutting (is) children’s health care, disability health care and long-term care for seniors,” Dingell said.

Whitmer’s directive asks DHHS to prepare a report on the number of Michiganders who would lose health care if the proposed cuts go into effect, the effect of the proposed cuts on hospitals, especially in rural and underserved communities, the impact on timely access to care and the ways in which reductions in federal money would impact the state’s budget.

Stevens said the improvements Michigan has made in securing access to health care could be undone if Medicaid is slashed by Congress.

“Here in Michigan, we boast some of the lowest levels of uninsured in the country, and we still want to see everyone get insured, but somehow, very strangely and very upsettingly, we have to have this press conference and pay witness to our governor signing an executive order to say that we won’t let Medicaid get rolled back,” Stevens said. “How is that happening five years after a COVID-19 pandemic? I think we can reject that, and I think that we can recognize this seriousness of what this moment represents; that people deserve better, that they deserve stability and consistency and access to medical benefits.”

The congresswomen said although some Republicans in congress have begun to break away from the party line on Medicaid and say they won’t vote for a budget that includes vast Medicaid cuts, it’s necessary to put a human face on the data behind health care access to further convince their colleagues across the aisle not to support the reduction in spending.

“Behind every single number, every single percentage cut, every single proposal, is a life for many of our neighbors. I’ve never seen so many breakdowns at town halls as I have seen in the past few months – this is life or death for many of our neighbors and our family and loved ones,” Tlaib said. “I’m incredibly proud of Gov. Whitmer for leading with compassion, knowing, again, the humanity that is behind again these proposed cuts. We’re going to continue to fight together and continue to share those stories.”

Whitmer, who said her husband’s first grandchild was born at a Corewell Health facility on the west side of the state last week, pinned the potential for rising health care costs squarely on congressional Republicans, saying Democrats need to make them and state level Republican lawmakers “hear loud and clear” their opposition to Medicaid cuts.

“Right now, Republicans in Washington, D.C. are trying to terminate access to health care by slashing $880 billion from Medicaid so they can deliver a $4 trillion tax cut, primarily for the rich,” Whitmer said. “That’s what we’re talking about. If this goes into effect, the cost of health care will go up for every single American.”

Senate Democrats questioned House Republicans at length Wednesday on their $3.1 billion road funding plan, seeking more specifics of how the proposal would avoid affecting critical state services.

Key House sponsors of the plan told the Senate Appropriations Committee it would take time to identify cuts as they combed through the budget, but it could be accomplished without additional revenue to a budget that has grown in recent years.

“Michigan families are already being squeezed by rising costs, and that’s why we’re committed to fund this plan entirely with existing state resources,” Rep. Pat Outman (R-Six Lakes), chair of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, said. “While residents have had to make tough financial decisions, the state government has not.”

Despite obtaining bipartisan support last month when it cleared the House (See Gongwer Michigan Report, March 19, 2025), Democrats have largely voiced opposition to the plan.

Republicans have said long-term road funding can be found within the existing state budget, but Democrats have countered that it would have a significant negative effect on other parts of the budget.

The package includes HB 4180, HB 4181, HB 4182, HB 4183, HB 4184, HB 4185, HB 4186, HB 4187, and HB 4230.

As passed by the House, all $2.2 billion collected in Corporate Income Tax would be moved to road funding, including more than $1 billion earmarked for corporate incentives. It would also end the existing collection of sales tax on fuel and increase the fuel tax by an equal amount.

The House plan would raise the Michigan Business Tax to help fill the gap created in funding. This would basically end Michigan Economic Growth Authority credits, providing $500 million. The plan would also shift $600 million from higher-than-expected state revenues, as well as $500 million from the elimination of budget earmarks.

Revenue from the sales tax on fuel generates funds for the School Aid Fund and statutory local revenue sharing. The House plan would hold funding harmless by placing $750 million in sales tax to the School Aid Fund and $95 million in sales tax to local revenue sharing. Another $50 million currently provided to the Housing and Community Development Fund would be retained.

Gov. Gretchen Whitmer earlier this year announced a $3 billion proposal of her own, which includes a new tax on marijuana, would require all taxes collected at the pump go to roads and would redirect $500 million in existing spending as well as mix of unspecified tax and fee increases (See Gongwer Michigan Report, Feb. 10, 2025).

Sen. Sarah Anthony (D-Lansing), the committee chair, said if the plan was adopted as a whole, it would require significant cuts to the budget.

“Did you all contemplate where the revenue would come from?” Anthony said. “Knowing that we have to meet the needs of the entire state, where would some of those reductions come from?”

Outman said the state needs to reprioritize existing monies.

“We’re not looking to cut any essential services. … You have my word on that.” Outman said. “We can find that money pretty easily. … We’ve just got to trim back some of these nonessential services a little bit.”

Sen. Kevin Hertel (D-St. Clair Shores) said he believes changes are needed to Public Act 51 of 1951, the state’s road funding formula. While any proposal the Legislature may pass would increase overall funding, he said, without changes, it would be distributed through a formula that benefits lesser-populated parts of the state while roads in southeast Michigan continue to crumble.

“When you look at this distribution per mile per capita by county, it is Macomb and Wayne which I represent, and Oakland, which are at the bottom of the list for increases, meaning we put all of this revenue into this formula and the places that need to see the benefit the most will not see it,” Hertel said. “I think we need to take the opportunity that we have in front of us, find more revenue for roads, but put it into a reformed formula that actually makes sense and gets the money to where it needs to go.”

House members replied that despite a small increase, every county would benefit from the plan.

Outman said there would be a $24.9 million increase for Lansing, the largest community in Anthony’s district, and $10.5 million for St. Clair Shores in Hertel’s district.

“We’re very much putting the money where it needs to go,” Outman said.

Sen. John Damoose (R-Harbor Springs) expressed concerns about the effects of corporate income tax.

“Is this going to drive more of our important manufacturing businesses and corporations that we need to have, we built our economy on, out of the state?” Damoose said.

Outman said that crumbling roads and infrastructure are an underlying issue that prevents economic growth in the state and must be addressed. Relying on incentives is not an answer, he said.

“We can’t continue to bribe ourselves into prosperity,” Outman said. “We can’t continue to bribe these corporations into either retain their operations in Michigan or to come to Michigan. At some point, we have to address the underlying issues.”

Following the hearing, Anthony told reporters any final package needs to be structured for the long term, compared to packages in the past that she said were half-measures that left permanent solutions up to future legislatures.

“What you heard in this committee is that some things are just still very much uncertain,” Anthony said. “We don’t have guarantees that School Aid is held harmless. We don’t have real specifics about where they would find real reductions in places like DHHS and Corrections and higher education. Those things have to be fleshed out.”

Sen. Veronica Klinefelt (D-Eastpointe), chair of the Senate Appropriations Transportation Subcommittee, described the House proposal to reporters as a conversation starter.

“I don’t believe it’s going to be as simple as they think it is going to be, and it’s one of the reasons that we haven’t been so quick to throw something out there without taking into account the rest of the budget,” Klinefelt said.