2023: Fewest Unanimous Michigan House Votes Since 1849
Question 1): The Michigan House of Representatives voted unanimously on legislation a mere 19 times out of 586 roll call votes this past year, the fewest number of unanimous votes in a regular session since the year after the U.S.-Mexican War in 1849, according to a MIRS analysis of roll call votes and a review of House journals from 1849-2022.
MIRS, a Lansing-based subscription newletter, did a yeoman job of research and found that, in 1850, at the beginning of the President Millard FILLMORE administration, it took Michigan legislators only until March 14 to earn 20 unanimous votes. For the next 172 years, there was not a regular session in which the House took longer than Mother’s Day to earn at least 20 unanimous votes.
Some years, it took lawmakers only a few weeks into January, MIRS says. In some cases, the House even recorded 20 unanimous votes in abbreviated special sessions that lasted only a few weeks.
Still, despite the state House adjourning by June for most of its history, its regular sessions featured more recorded roll call votes with zero “No” votes than what was seen in Lansing this year.
The 2023 House session featured a slim Democratic majority operating with a Democratic-controlled Senate and a Democratic governor for the first time since 1983. Anxious to finally advance their own policies, the Democrats spent much of their time (when they had 56 members present) turning back the clock on what Republicans advanced when they were charge.
Meanwhile, a philosophically driven “Freedom Caucus,” composed of conservative Republicans, found objectionable government expansion at every turn while a sharply polarized political environment always hung in the air.
To keep the 19 unanimous votes from 2023 in perspective, consider this: Just in this 21st century, from 2001 to 2022, the average number of unanimous votes cast in the House was 285. The number ranges from 697 unanimous votes in 2002 to 92 in 2022.
Never prior had there been fewer than 19 votes since 1849, six years before Michigan State University was founded, when only six unanimous roll call votes were recorded, out of fewer than 100 total votes taken.
So, what to make of all this?
Answer 1): We all know that politics nationally has become more polarized than at any time since the 19th century, and the Michigan Legislature is no exception. The major party caucuses are divided into two armed camps, and the possibility of unanimity on a vote shrinks when that happens.The days of moderates within political parties are over, making it more difficult to find overlap and consensus on legislation. Add in a change of majority control, and Republicans suddenly find themselves frozen out. Democratic spokesperson Amber MCCANN blames the extreme decline in unanimous support to several repeat no-voters in the Republican caucus who “are just not going to vote for anything that isn’t part of an extreme, right-wing agenda. .. We’ve seen (bipartisan) support for many bills, but it’s been extraordinarily difficult to gain unanimous support given the holdouts from those more focused on party politics than the priorities of Michiganders,” she said.
Yes, McCann can be accused of partisan bias, but it appears true that a number of Republicans from the so-called “Freedom Caucus” exerted an inordinate amount of influence on attempts at unanimity. These half-dozen or so Republicans did vote “No” on a majority of Democrat-led bills, according to an earlier analysis done by MIRS (See “Aiyash Most Liberal In House, Schriver Most Conservative,” 11/17/23).
That includes Rep. Josh SCHRIVER (R-Oxford), who voted “Yes” on only one of the 49 bills, Rep. Neil FRISKE (R-Charlevoix), who voted Yes on two of them, Rep. Matt MADDOCK (R-Milford), who voted Yes on three and Rep. Steve CARRA (R-Three Rivers), who voted Yes on four. Other members of the Freedom caucus like Angela Rigas (R-Alto) and Rachelle Smit (R-Shelbyville) had similar scorecards. Remember, a vote of 109-1 is not unanimous. It takes only one recalcitrant member to block unanimity.
By contrast, there is no such “Freedom Caucus” in the state Senate. Many of the Republican lawmakers in that chamber are very conservative, but that didn’t keep them from racking up 70 unanimous votes on legislation with their Democratic colleagues.
In the House, however, Carra contended that his frequent “No” votes were due to policy disagreements over Democratic priorities and his desire to shrink down government oversight. “The reason why you see less unanimous support for something is because the Democrats get to decide what comes up for a vote now,” Carra said.. He argued that the large number of bills with unanimous Democratic support can be viewed as Democrats “not even thinking for themselves. They’re just doing what Gretchen WHITMER wants.”
It’s also less about what Democrats brought forward and more about what they didn’t.
With a strong concentration on high-priority issues, there was less focus by Democrats on easy fixes, or “dog and cat bills,” which are fairly minor in impact but easily agreed upon by both parties. There have been far fewer of those measures this year than ever before. Many bills that might have achieved unanimous support with small policy tweaks were not pushed through the pipeline. Democrats didn’t bother to contact stakeholders about minor fixes within bills that could have gotten more interest groups and Republicans on board.
What’s been most astounding has been that all this has happened with the Democrats holding only a two-seat majority. In the past, you wouldn’t have thought it was possible for the majority party with such a razor-thin edge to accomplish this. The Democrats have acted as though they’re in control by 80-40. They’ve just rammed things through and steamrollered the Republicans. They’ve given GOP lawmakers very little input, very little consultation, so as we might imagine conservative Republicans would be apt to be the people most bitter about that. Consequently, they’re going to vote against everything that comes up.
As for comparisons with the 19th Century, it’s worth remembering that the new Constitution of 1850 (replacing Michigan’s original 1835 Constitution), allowed biennial sessions for the first time. That meant lawmakers didn’t have to assemble every year — they could gather at the beginning of every odd-numbered year, get their business done, and adjourn sine die in late spring for the balance of the year and all of the succeeding even-numbered year. Of course, they could reconvene in special sessions if need be, and they sometimes did. By contrast, the 1835 charter had required lawmakers to meet every year whether they wanted to or not.
Did that make any difference in the number of unanimous votes? It’s hard to discern, but it”s obvious that, regardless of the frequency of the meetings, 19th century lawmakers were able to bury their differences far more often than they can now.
*****************************************************************
What Words Best Describe today’s Michigan Republican Party?
Question 2): The Michigan Republican Party just cancelled its scheduled December 27 meeting that was ostensibly to decide the fate of embattled party chair Kristina Karamo. What’s next? Who knows? It’s the latest hitch in the tortured journey of the dysfunctional Michigan GOP. Karamo inherited a considerable debt when she became chair last February, which is not unusual for a party after an election, especially if it suffered defeat. But Karamo has only increased the debt during her 10-month stint. Her latest strategy to save herself is to use the vacated Weiser-Secchia state party headquarters in Lansing to leverage a financial bailout. But the building appears to be legally protected from being used as collateral for a debt.
Therefore, it’s not a surprise that one of the most popular political parlor games in the state capital these days is to pick an adjective that best describes the Michigan Republican Party. So, what is it?
Answer 2): How about “in a shambles?” For Michigan Republicans at the state level, it’s pretty much total chaos. It’s also unprecedented and historic. At no other time has the modern-day Michigan Republican Party seen an internal civil war to oust the sitting party chair and her unrelenting counterattack to survive.
If Karamo does eventually get the boot, what is next? Who succeeds her? Will he or she be any better? And how can anyone, talented or not, hope to be able to clean up the mess the party now finds itself in? Who could possibly satisfy the demands of so many splinter groups within the party, not to mention the chunk of those loyal to Donald Trump?
Karamo was installed into the chair’s position last February by grassroots activists who took power away from the more traditional party power-brokers. Now these grassroots activists are fighting each other, with many original supporters of Karamo turning against her.
However, Democrats should eschew getting too jubilant or overconfident about their opponent’s distress. It’s still possible they could be in for a shock next year. Minus an active party apparatus to help them, Republican candidates are finding their own ways to run. Just because the state party apparatus is not helping does not necessarily translate into losses, depending on the quality of the candidates and their ability to build their own “silos” to take them to victory. And if polling numbers remain as bleak for President Joe Biden as they are right now, or if Michigan voters decide they don’t like a lot of what Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and Democrat legislators enacted into law this past year, they might decide Republicans are the only logical alternative. It’s happened before — in 1938, 1946 and 1966, for example, or 1994 and 2010.
****************************************************
Leanne says
Let us talk about what the MIGOP has accomplished under Karamo’s tutelage:
(A) unprecedented inroads into minority communities – Vice-Chair Bernadette Smith set up the historic meeting between the Mayor of Hamtramck and Michael Flynn that was attended by Arab-American leaders;
(B) Vice-Chair Rola Makki has recruited many Muslim-Americans in Dearborn to the GOP fold following the outrage against the Biden administration over its mishandling the Gaza crisis;
(C) better relations with blacks in Metro Detroit – Karamo was the first black MIGOP chair and many have gravitated toward the GOP due to Kristina’s leadership.
Most grass-roots delegates are happy that the Ron Weiser era is over and that Karamo’s election was a positive step toward cleansing the party of the pernicious influence of big-money donors. many of Karamo’s problems in leadership can be traced to financial issues she inherited in MIGOP and the fact the GOP insiders wanted her out in the worst way.
If anything can be validly said negatively about Kristina is that she lacked experience in running the difficult job of state party chairman. She had only about 4 years of grassroots activism and made it as chair largely as a compromise candidate among MAGA activists. Lena Epstein or Malinda Pego would have made a better GOP chairperson.
Kristina is a God-fearing loyal minion of the MAGA movement and will be remembered as such long after she relinquishes her chairmanship.
Royal says
Excellent perspective.
If you have something to sell, it sells itself. The amount of $$ required to run a campaign is inversely proportional to the sanity of the plank. All this $$ candidates in both parties require is an indication of how much they require the voters to buy into what we used to call. “a pig in a Polk”. Pardons asked from all affected Polk contents. Candidates know that after a few runs, they get to keep the major part of their contributions. I haven’t really heard of any winner to replace Karamo yet. You say Glaser is the one?
Mark M Koroi says
It is funny that some mention J.D. Glaser – he is from West Michigan – but would be highly qualified to be MI Republican chair.
Another potential successor to Karamo that has been discussed in Oakland GOP chair Vance Patrick.
David L Richards says
I would add to Bill’s analysis that even if the Republicans were in control of the house and a bill had the support of all of the Democrats, there are enough Republican mavericks that far fewer unanimous votes would still occur than has been the case in the past. Look at the second question Bill discusses. The Republican Party in Michigan is so chaotic that when an article runs in a newspaper about the problems with Karamo at the helm of the Republican Party in Michigan, the Democrats commenting on the article want her kept on the job. That chaos would, to some degree, be reflected in house votes. I do think Bill is correct that Republican candidates may successfully work around the lack of party support, although to the extent having a working state party organization is valuable, lack of one will be a hurdle to overcome.
Leanne says
Many GOP insiders have used political action committees and candidate committees as donor recipients to circumvent the MAGA-fanatic control of the MIGOP.
The Dems have gargantuan problems as exemplified by the pillorying of Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib by other Dems such as Elissa Slotkin and the reports that former state Dem chair Lon Johnson may be organizing with AIPAC to see Tlaib face a primary challenger.
Slotkin’s lead has declined in polling vis-a-vis Republican candidates Rogers and Craig.
At a Christmas party for the 13th Congressional District Democrats attended by Rep. Sri Thanedar, a Democrat committeewwoman is hospitalized after being repeatedly punched in the face.
Yes, the GOP and Dems both have infighting in Michigan.
Cheryl L. Krapf-Haddock says
Bill;
Directly, I feel, as well as others you well know, we’re very divided and we’re losing some great people who could effectively run for office.
It’s not experience per se’ however but we need some “house cleaning” for the deep division with great people who could run for office as well as our voters. Just an opinion but not mine alone. 🙁
John C Stewart says
Please allow me to add to this discussion that the editorial page of today’s Detroit News, Nolan Finlay has a column entitled “2024 will be a bad year for the GOP.” Secondly, a former Michigan Supreme Court Justice nominated by the Republican Party, and elected by the Republican party has openly stated “the only sane person to be the next chair of the Michigan Republican Party is Scott Greenlee” Moderately-conservative is the only way to WIN for the MIGOP in the future .
Leanne says
Scott Greenlee is now managing the Peter Meijer senatorial campaign.
That would likely make him the enemy of just about all MAGA adherents.
J.D. Glaser would make a competent MIGOP chair.
Perry Wilson says
What about Billy Putman as a replacement chairman for MIGOP?
If the MIGOP State Committee removes Karamo, there will be a free-for-all in seeking a successor.
GOP insiders can avoid Karamo by donating to PACs of their choice – but the Michigan Dems have bigger problems in the schism over the Gaza-Israel crisis.
John C Stewart says
Does MAGA= 91 CRIMINAL FELONY INDICTMENTS ? Chris Christie, Jonathan Karl-ABC, and Nolan Finley believe that will dissipate the support of DJT. Please read Nolan Finley today – media market of SE Michigan-5 Million people
80% of the problem of the MIGOP is the glaring NEED for a POSITIVE PLATFORM—Education-Economic Development -Energy & Infrastructure
Gov Whitmer is very subject to critique of her administrative effectiveness . Raging, assaulting grumpy old males are not of any public value
Strive for INTELLECTUAL HONESTY
10x25mm says
The polarization of the Michigan House is a direct result of the crooked MICRC redistricting. The remaining Republican members: 1) have districts which do not require or reward bipartisanship, and 2) the remaining Republican members fully understand how the MICRC was a tool designed to neuter the Republicans.
The Michigan House Democrats also made it very clear that Republicans would not be allowed to have any substantive influence on their agenda.
So why would the Republicans endorse the Democrat agenda with any votes?
Royal says
With-respect-to Q #1: Kudos to the few Repub standing stones, displaying the last act of defiance by slowing down the Dem onslaught. ‘Nuff said for futile efforts
wrt Q #2: I don’t know . . . maybe a 90 pound weakling trying to stand up to the beach bullies after they steal his babe?
The MIGOP was broken long before Karamo ever thought to run for chair. This is an indication the $$ elite has been bolting from the party for a long time. Poor Kristina (who I believe means well, like most do-gooders) is just the latest lost quest of lost causes.
Since Michigan ostensibly requires a balanced budget, I can see where appeasing compromise is a little more necessary for state office; although I have no idea why the legislature ever gave the line item veto to the governor, and gave up the senate super majority requirement. Those are a few appeasements too far in my book.
But the federal offices need to be populated by the hardest of the hard noses; which currently are, by the Dems! Oh, that we could find more standing stones in the MIGOP to send to DC. If only Snyder really was one tough nerd . . .
Royal says
er, poke, not Polk
Robert Nelson says
Correction Bill- the Millard Fillmore administration began in July 1850 so tracking the Michigan Legislature in March doesn’t add up!
Tom Boven says
Many of the comments reflect for my moderate view the Einstein observation that repeating the same actions usually results in the same outcome. Get real and let the fringe occupy its fringe podium. Return the Majority to the middle.
Our political system has been hijacked by the fringe and that spectrum needs to be voted to their reprehensible position. The system will be cleansed when the larger middle decides they are sick of the fringe antics.
Tim Sullivan says
Interesting article, Bill. It does look like Michigan politics will be interesting and somewhat entertaining in 2024, something that politics should be. Many of the comments are spot on.
QUESTION 1: Politics everywhere is becoming more rigid (which I think is a more accurate term than extremist). And the abuse and misuse of the terms “moderate” and “centrist” also needs to stop. They don’t exist anymore. A more accurate term would be less rigid as the priorities of both parties are wildly dissimilar and both seek to appease and reward their base and donors. As a result, our political parties have adopted ideologies that have more of a religious fervor towards them. This is why when legislators from the different parties talk about issues, it seems that not only are they not on the same page, but they are reading different hymnals or catechisms. In this environment, dissent or deviation from them is treated as a form of political heresy or apostasy resulting in a form of political shunning or excommunication for the “sinner”. And forgiveness is very hard to obtain. This, of course, makes compromise difficult at best, and causes way too many legislators to fear being primaried more than they do God because politics is trying to become religion. Being primaried can end political – and post political – careers, and just reinforces the rigidity of politics.
But this only explains some of it. Way back in the day of IMP, you would annually rank the members of the legislature with the most liberal (or leftist if you prefer) score being 100 and the most conservative (or rightist) being zero. And the votes for your rankings went deep into the political weeds and machinations of Lansing, sometimes using some obscure procedural votes in those rankings because killing or modifying bills in committee or otherwise sidelining legislation can be a very effective means of killing or changing it. (Hey, civics and government teachers in both middle and high school, pay attention to things like this as it is part of the sausage making of legislation). As I am not subscribed to MIRS, I do not know if their ranking followed your system or not. Now it’s been a few years, but as I recall, the most “conservative” Democrat might have a score in the low to mid 80s while the most “liberal” Republican might score in the low 20s. Much of this reflected who ran the legislature. Republican leadership caused more Republican leaning votes and Democrats scoring lower “liberal” rankings while Democratic leadership would cause more “liberal” rankings among Republicans. There would be exceptions with the late Fred Dillingham scoring much closer to the Democrats than his GOP colleagues.
Another point is that each “faith” has different priorities. When they returned to power, the Democrats sought to reward their base and their donors with the large surplus from COVID relief and other sources. Reinterpreting a tax cut law to be a one-time thing and not permanent, CHECK. For organized labor, getting rid of “right to work”, CHECK. The MEA/MFT got most of everything they wanted except shuttering charter schools. Free school lunches for the rich, CHECK. Pickleball courts for well-off school districts, CHECK. Ending school and school district “report cards”, CHECK. Getting rid of the retiree pension income tax, we’ll see this April 15th.
The GOP would have preferred rebates, tax cuts and the like, but lacking power got nothing. Paybacks in politics can be harsh.
This polarization has led to a series of missed opportunities that would have been far more beneficial. What wasn’t done with the surplus money was an attempt to fix what passes for our mental health system in Michigan. Gretchen Whitmer was quite proud of the new hospital in Caro that replaced the old one, an idea that started in the Snyder administration. Except she wanted it closed and put closer to Detroit (Snyder chose to rebuild on the Caro site as we owned the land and making a right turn with utilities was a damned sight cheaper than building new someplace else. Once an accountant…). That did not happen. What did happen was a rare case of some bipartisanship. Caro was preserved, a nice new hospital was built, except it has about 20 fewer beds than the one it replaced. What was, and is needed, is about eight more Caros throughout Michigan with about three set up for children and adolescents. Hawthorne Center needs more help than a new building. Also, not charging the local community mental health authorities for hospitalizing their patients might make hospitalizing the sick more likely. Maybe if we did that, we might have fewer Ethan Crumbleys and Anthony McRaes. It would cost money that could not be used for tax cuts or pickleball courts, but there are times when you have to make choices.
We could have fixed our sewers so that storm runoff does not go in with sanitary sewers. Wouldn’t it be nice if Metro Beach could stay open during the summer without worrying about fecal matter and e-Coli from Oakland County contaminating the water. One can dream.
As for this current legislature, the only Democrat who has been even slightly out of step has been Representative Whitsett, and that has been mostly on her attempts to make the Democrats’ position on abortion less extreme as you pointed out in a past “Off The Record” show. It’s a good bet she will face a serious primary challenger, depending on who gets to redraw the Wayne County house seats, the MiCRC or a special master. (I opt for choice #2).
As for the Republicans, being in the minority also reinforces ideological purity. Arguing that you are the purest keeper of the flame serves best to promote yourself should you regain the majority.
QUESTION 2: Ah, the Michigan GOP. Its ongoing civil war has all the makings of a soup sandwich. Don’t worry, there’s lots of blame to go around.
First the establishment wing of the GOP. They lost the party. As noted in earlier Ballenger Reports, they forgot how to organize and forgot that politics requires some work. They expected Perry Johnson, the “Quality Guru” to be the nominee for governor. And if not him, they could live with James Craig. Both Johnson and Craig got establishment money, hired establishment consultants and both used establishment resources. What happened? For all that money and “expertise”, neither got enough valid signatures to be on the ballot. The populists/Trumpians who were unfunded or poorly funded, did get enough valid signatures. The populists/Trumpians also did the hard work of electing delegates to go to convention where their folks won the nominations for SOS and Attorney General over the establishment backed candidates. So what did the establishment wing do? They had a temper tantrum. If you won’t nominate our people and let us win without having to do the work, we’ll sit on our money for your races. And they did. Dixon – who bested Whitmer in both debates (more so in the first), was outspent 16:1. Karamo was outspent 20:1 and DePerno about the same. Given that, their vote tallies weren’t all that bad.
But the establishment wing did spend on the legislative races where the recipients were more align with their thinking. They also belatedly on the Supreme Court race. And what did their money get them? Zahra barely got re-elected and they lost both houses of the legislature. They spent little time or attention on the brand new MiCRC and got the same results as California did 10 years earlier, a heavily Democrat-leaning commission. This should not have been a surprise as Pro-Publica reported in 2011 and 2012 In California, Democrats’ Redistricting Strategy Paid Off — ProPublica that’s what happened in California. This nullified a good chunk of their spending. Way to go guys! This result comes from an intellectual atrophy in an establishment that thinks that money and amorphous slogans are all you need. And this results in treating the populist/Trumpian wing not as partners, but as a cross between the hired help and a glorified one-night stand where you forget the other person’s name. If they ever want power again, that has to change.
As for the populist/Trumpians, many decided that in victory they should settle some scores. What this does to any organization is to lead to dysfunction. For all of Karamo’s outreach, you have to have money to run a party. And treating those folks as badly as they treated you is no way to do that. They forgot that in victory, sometimes magnanimity is good, and not just as policy. In keeping with the civil war theme, the forces of the Union fought the Confederacy, and much of that was rather brutal and harsh with over 500,000 dead, about 3% of the national population. Think not just of the high casualty rates, but Sherman’s March to the Sea, the burning of Columbia, SC, the raids of Confederate “irregulars” into Kansas, and the treatment of POWs. Yet after the war, surrender terms given to the vanquished were more than generous. And were enforced. The Andrew Johnson administration wanted to charge Lee with treason. Grant said no as that would violate the terms of surrender. Grant won out on that. General Sherman’s terms were so generous, that he had to rescind them and replace them with terms similar to what Grant had given General Lee. Though his Confederate opponent, Joseph Johnston, did not forget that generosity and stood hatless in the rain during Sherman’s funeral only to succumb to pneumonia later.
Basically, when they say they want to bury the hatchet, it should not be in each other.
I would like to take this opportunity to wish all the TBR family and readers a Happy 2024, and close with Aaron’s Blessing: The LORD bless you and keep you! The LORD let his face shine upon you, and be gracious to you! The LORD look upon you kindly and give you peace!
Mark M Koroi says
Yeah, good points about the bitter infighting between the MAGA wing and the establishment Republicans.
In 2010, the Tea Party held about one-third of Michigan GOP convention delegates, but these outside activists quietly supported the establishment nominees to victory and a clean sweep of the 2010 state elections for Republicans ensued.
I can only imagine the difficulty that Mike Rogers or Peter Meijer would have if the obtained the U.S. Senate GOP nomination – neither is a fan of Trump. Would Trump give a primary endorsement to some outsider again – maybe Nikki Snyder?
Royal says
Kudos Sir Sullivan! A religio-historic tour de force! Your well aimed arrowed points will certainly remain and grow (fester?) in my heart, for one, for some time to come . . . grace’
Tim Sullivan says
Thanks, Royal!
Perry Wilson says
The Michigan Democratic Party has a bigger problem of infighting than the state GOP.
That problem is that Rashida Tlaib has come under severe criticism and attack by her own party leaders for her stance on the Israel-Gaza controversy. Tlaib is revered among Arab-Americans for her courageous stances against Israeli military aggression. Arab-Americans will not support a candidate who ardently embraces Israel. Sen. Sylvia Santana already found out what happens when you have a large Arabic constituency and take free travel junkets to Israel.
Black Democrats were allied with the Michigan GOP – at least in principle – about screaming about their victimization in the redistricting process. A federal court agreed. VNP’s “successes” have been neutralized in part. Harsh words from the federal court on ther perception of the abilities of that Commission to do anything right.
Black and Arab-American Democrats have been thrown under the bus by the Michigan Democratic insiders. What appeared to be easy victories for Michigan Dems in 2024 – such as the U.S. Senate race – are now going to be toss-up races.
Leanne says
The Commerce Township GOP State Commitee meeting with creative use of “proxies” will be challenged in the courts by Karamo and her lawyers.
Darlene Doetzel – a Karamo supporter – claimed that the “proxy” that cast her vote was not duly constituted.