Question 1): A proposed constitutional amendment to overhaul the way Michigan’s university boards are selected failed in the state House of Representatives this past week. However, there is much more to this story than that, and it is likely to be with us for the next few weeks, or even months.
On a 52-54 vote, the House did not reach the two-thirds majority (74 votes) needed to pass HJR U, which would have asked voters on the August 4 statewide primary ballot to change the state Constitution so members of the University of Michigan Board of Regents, Michigan State University Board of Trustees, and Wayne State University Board of Governors are appointed rather than elected. Even if it had cleared the House, the Senate would have had to come up with 26 votes for the proposal to advance to the ballot.
HJR U and its Senate counterpart SJR I were introduced on May 28 and also included an important provision aimed at reducing the impact of partisanship on the nomination process for candidates for Michigan Attorney General and Secretary of State by putting the decision in the hands of Michigan voters. However, that provision was stripped out of HJR U by House Speaker Matt Hall (R-Richland Twp) because many majority House Republicans oppose any nomination-by-primary unless the law is changed to “close” the primary, meaning that all voters would have to be registered by party affiliation. That would prevent Democrats and independents from “raiding” a GOP primary and influencing the results. However, such a statutory change has proven to be historically unpopular with Michigan voters. They want “open” primaries.
Hall’s revised resolution, without anything pertaining to A.G. or SoS, drew the support of only one House Democrat. All but six Republican House members also voted for it.
HJR U that failed Wednesday would have discharged all sitting members of the boards at the three universities, allowing Gov. Gretchen Whitmer to appoint half of a new board on Dec. 31, and allowing the next governor to appoint the other half on Jan. 1. The boards would have needed to include four Republicans, four Democrats, and a ninth member drawn from a list submitted by the universities’ alumni associations. No more than five members of a board could belong to the same political party, and they would all be term-limited. The substitute, Hall said, would have explicitly applied the Open Meetings Act and Freedom of Information Act to university boards. Board members would be appointed to staggered eight-year terms, with the advice and consent of the Senate, which is not required currently.
But all this doesn’t mean the proposal is dead. It could be resurrected by the Legislature anytime up to Sept. 4 to go on the Nov. 3 general election ballot. In the meantime, there is another effort spearheaded by former Michigan Democratic Party Chairman Lon Johnson and Jason Cabel Roe, a former executive director of the state GOP, to put the A.G./SoS nomination reform on the ballot all by itself. A resolution to accomplish that may be introduced as early as this coming week.
Critics of Michigan’s current system of selecting university board members include Whitmer as well as former governors John Engler (Republican) and James Blanchard (Democrat). Other critics argue that changing the way boards are selected would create a more diverse membership. For example, most of the MSU trustees are from the Lansing area. At the University of Michigan, six of eight regents are attorneys. Geographically, all 24 members serving at the three universities reside in just six of Michigan’s 83 counties.
Michigan is the only state that chooses members of its three major university governing boards in statewide general elections. Three other states do it by districts within the particular state.
Michigan’s other 12 public universities, which are already appointed by the governor — as are almost all other such systems throughout the country — run with less turmoil and dysfunction than the state’s three major research universities.
The big question is, how likely is it that the Legislature will pass a proposed constitutional amendment for the statewide Nov. 3 ballot that allows the governor to appoint all university board members? For that matter, could such a proposal include changes to how major political parties nominate their Secretary of State and Attorney General choices? Or could the two reforms be split, with each going on the ballot separately?
Answer 1): Anything is possible, but even if one or both proposals make it to the ballot, how likely is it that they will be approved by the voters? Yes, a strong argument can be made that the current system is broken and badly needs reform. However, the two major parties don’t want to give up power, and changing the way Secretary of State, Attorney General and education board candidates are put into office would drastically reduce the power of the two parties. Plus, the conservative right (Rescue Michigan) and progressive left (People’s Coalition) have united (for once!) in strenuous opposition to anything that would take the vote away from the electorate and give it to an appointing authority. In such a climate, anything that would require a two-thirds vote in both chambers to reach the ballot is an exceptionally high bar in a polarized Legislature.
Of the two reform proposals, the one to yank away the nomination process for A.G. and SoS from state conventions and give it to statewide primary voters actually has a lot more natural support in the general public than the one to scuttle elections for university board members and give it over to gubernatorial appointment. How so?
Let’s look at the way Michigan selects its judges. Michigan is one of 22 states that chooses its judges in either partisan or non-partisan elections.
Back in 1990, a statewide poll commissioned by the Inside Michigan Politics newsletter found that nearly four voters out of every five know “very little” or “nothing at all” about who is running for the judiciary in any given election. Results of any survey taken today wouldn’t be very different. However, the same 1990 survey also revealed that two-thirds of all voters demand that they continue to be able to elect judges, rather than allow them to be appointed by a governor. The same feeling seems to persist to this day and would undoubtedly apply to any attempt to disenfranchise voters in favor of appointment by politicians, whether it’s judges or university boards.
In other words, the A.G./SoS reform (allow more people to vote) polls well, while the university board member reform (take away peoples’ vote) doesn’t.
Let’s see what happens next, if anything.
*********************************************************
Thank you for this article. I support the party nominating convention process.
Some observations:
(I) I have served as a convention delegate in a number of elections over the years where I have been elevated as a precinct delegate to represent my U.S. Congressional District at convention caucuses and to cast ballots for those seeking my party’s nomination;
(2) those who have been elected by voters to represent their precinct and have been selected for elevation to the state convention usually are very, very qualified to do so as they not only have been vetted beforehand, but they are picked by voters and leaders within their own party;
(3) state convention delegates often have in-person, e-mail or postal mail contact with the candidates seeking their respective party’s nomination, so these delegates actually are well-educated on both the candidates and the issues to be considered at the convention;
(4) convention delegates often think independently and are usually not political hacks that a beholden to a certain candidate – they are usually issue-driven and discerning of who is best able to represent the party’s interests and the interests of their party constituents;
(5) state convention delegates are unpaid and not generally susceptible to being “bought off”.
Critics of the state convention nominating process are currently largely party professionals who did not see their “insider” candidates nominated. Examples were candidates Karen McDonald and Jordan Acker being rejected by delegates at the April 19, 2026 Democratic Party nominating convention at Huntington Place.
McDonald and Acker had been involved in controversy that surfaced in the media prior to that convention. McDonald had been reported to be under investigation by the Michigan Attorney Grievance Commission for alleged ethics issues; she lost by a 58%-42% margin. Mr. Acker, an incumbent U-M Board of Regent, was rejected by delegates after a Guardian report linked him to alleged lewd comments. Democratic party delegates prudently rejected these questionable candidates due to issues that could have snowballed to something much more serious at the time of the November general election. Republican delegates have done the same in prior conventions.
I, for example, am first and foremost a Right To Life advocate and believe in the sanctity of human life. I seek out those qualities in candidates for statewide office when I consider who to cast a nominating vote at my state convention. For others, the issue is the Second Amendment or Christian nationalism.
Would I prefer having an “appointments officer” in the Governor’s office decide who gets sit on a university board – or have an August primary to pick the GOP AG or SOS nominees – of course not!
“…………and f course it would be a huge slap to every delegate who labors in the shadows and is seeing his/her powers stripped even more.”
In FY 2025, University of Michigan reported $ 8.7 billion in Michigan Medical revenues and only $ 1.8 billion in net student tuition. U of M is not an educational institution, its is a health care provider with an appended school. MSU will probably go the same way, depending upon how their partnership with Henry Ford develops.
These institutions need corporate governance systems appropriate to large American corporations. Political models of governance are wholly inadequate and threaten the health care of millions of Michigan residents.
Examine the relationship between Wayne State University and the sprawling network of medical facilities near there. It constitutes one of the largest medical networks in the U.S.
WSU has had historic relationships with Detroit Medical Center, Harper Hospital and Kresge Eye Institute, among others. DMC currently has constituent teaching hospitals.
Further WSU operates its own clinics, such as the Campus Health Clinic, the Cass Clinic and the MALTA Clinic.
With these complex commercial relationships, there are contracts that have been, and will in the future, need to be negotiated, and university officials that are well-versed in medico-legal complexities so that university interests are adequately protected.
As a state convention delegate, I had voted on the nominees to be on the GOP ballot statewide and to ensure qualified candidates make the ballot. I have had personal contact with WSU Board of Governors members on issues related to the relationship between the university and these medical providing entities.
This is why the state convention nominating system needs to be retained. It constitutes a level of political oversight that you will not have if it is transferred to the governor’s office or to primary election voters.
DMC and Harper are owned by Tenet Health Care, a for profit corporation entirely independent of WSU. Mike Duggan sold the 8 hospital system to Vanguard in 2010 and Tenet bought Vanguard in 2017.
In FY 2025, Wayne State University reported only $ 21 million in auxiliary enterprise revenues such as Kresge Eye Institute billings.. Their net tuition revenues were $ 267 million. Wayne State’s medical school is important, but the University is not a significant health care provider to Michigan residents.
FY 2025 the WSU budget allocated $86,206,200 for “Health Affairs”
“Academic Affairs” recd. a little over $225 million in expenditures in the same cycle – so it was still a significant part of university operations.
DMC and Harper have had longstanding relationships with the university as teaching hospitals – and DMC has eight hospitals which afford clinical rotations to WSU.
The WSU School of Medicine is one of the top medical research institutes in the U.S.
“FY 2025 the WSU budget allocated $86,206,200 for “Health Affairs””
WSU budget “Health Affairs” is a catchall category for Health Sciences Research receipts, mostly grants from NIH and other HHS research operations. It is not the provision of health care to Michigan residents.
Nice article, Bill.
The people want to elect their judges, AGs and SOS – a good thing. Now if we can just get the people to do some research or get detailed reporting from the newspapers and TV stations…….
As for the big three university boards (and the State Board of Education), letting the conventions select the nominees is a way for the truly committed and party loyalists to show they have some influence. In the BoE fight, the MEA (Democrats) usually beats the charter school crowd (Republicans) in the general election. Gov. Whitmer tried to circumvent the State Board with MI Leap, but that has not accomplished much of anything. Activity masquerading as accomplishment, except no one is watching it anymore. Now, if the truly committed can find a way to nominate people who will make it a priority to improve our pitiful test scores…..
It was fun watching former governor Blanchard wax indignant about the university boards. It would have been better had he named the Democrat board members on the big three university boards and state Board of Education who are the “troublemakers”, doofuses, and impediments to education and explained why they are that way. And then identify the interest groups among the truly committed who are responsible for them being nominated. The same could be said of former Governor Engler, though he is more likely to rail against those he does not like. I am not sure if this a “don’t hold your breath”, a “hold my beer”, or film at 11 moment. Time will tell, and TBR will be there to report it.
As for the “festivities” at the Democratic state convention, Jordan Acker was targeted for his support for Israel and cracking down on protesters at U of M. The last moment attack piece from “The Guardian” did not do him in as he was a dead man (politically) walking when the convention started. We need to remember that Acker’s home and place of business were targeted for vandalism long before the convention, and his fate was sealed long before “The Guardian” wrote its story. At least he put up a fight. What appalled me was his fellow Democrat, Paul Brown, effectively threw him under the bus. I did not know that they did not like each other. Brown had no opponent so coming to Acker’s defense would be effectively cost free for the vulture capitalist. Apparently, he felt that Acker was not worth the investment.
As for Karen McDonald, I always thought of her as a telegenic empty suit. She has mishandled the Danielle Stislicki case (Jessica Cooper had the case right) and has not shown much of a skill set to be an effective AG. Mr. Savit, on the other hand, has effectively legalized prostitution in Washtenaw County. An AG who only prosecutes or defends laws he personally likes is not a good thing, in general. It will be fun watching him on OTR with a full panel (and Mr. Skubick, that means Bill is on the panel) defend what he wants to do in the office. Dear God how I wish Tom Greene was still with us.
The real question is how do all these elected boards, the Governors at WSU, the Trustees at MSU and Regents at U of M, actually govern the universities they were elected to oversee. In the People’s Republic, the U of M is buying up a good chunk of the town and its environs such as the closed Concordia University with precious little dissent. Michigan Medicine is growing (or metastasizing) throughout the state. And the athletic department is so smoothly running that the U of M Business School should be using it as a template for corporate America.
In East Lansing, the Trustees’ behavior is just a wee bit strange. A majority of the Board wants to censor the Board and behaves like petty English departments arguing over who gets what office. At other times, it seems to range from The Gong Show to a raging dumpster fire of fuster cluck. Maybe it’s time for former Governor Blanchard to be the President and former Governor Engler the Chair of the Board of Trustees. They may very well be up to the challenge and they both bleed Spartan Green. Dear God how I wish Tom Greene was still with us. (Sorry, I’m repeating myself).
WSU has quieted a bit, but they too have acted much too similarly to MSU. It has not made any former Tartars (like my late father) proud. WSU some ongoing hospital relationships, but for the medical school to work well, they need to make sure their graduates find spots as residents and interns at the various hospitals, and having retired from the Disability Determination Services for more than 7 years, I am a little out of touch as to how well the system there works. WSU Med School would seem to be at the mercy of either Tenet (the DMC) or Henry Ford Health Systems (Henry Ford and the former Ascension Hospitals). If the relationship between them and WSU goes south, though there is always McLaren, Pontiac General and the Trinity Hospitals they could try. But the closest Trinity Hospital is St. Mary in Livonia. The closest McLaren Hospital is in Mt. Clemens (old Mt. Clemens General). And Pontiac General (the last independent hospital in Wayne, Oakland, Macomb, Washtenaw, Monroe, Lenawee, Livingston and Jackson Counties)* has its own laundry list of problems, but it would provide a most challenging opportunity for any resident or intern.
If things don’t change, maybe the best slogan for university boards, and State Board of Education, is re-elect no one.
Maybe the party activists and truly committed need to come up with a plan for governance and not ideology as a basis for nomination. Nah.
*An Ohio corporation, Pro Medica, owns the hospitals in Monroe and Lenawee counties and Henry Ford owns Allegiance (formerly Foote) Hospital in Jackson.
I agree with you Timothy K. Suillivan on these ISSUES. The public wants to vote on Attorney General and Sec. of State. Also, bring back Tom Greene & T. John Lesinski and of course: MILLIKEN/BRICKLEY..
T. John only to whip the judiciary back in shape.
You got it. Timothy Sullivan
“Whip the Judiciary Back in Shape “ forget about due process and equal protection of the Law .
These federalist are a cancer on the Bill of Rights and our constitution! Very Dubious !
As far as electing a college board or appointment.Really Who Cares . The institution are too big to fail ! Either way you’re going to get
Good ones and bad ones! Honestly Bill ,Can’t you choose a more important topic in 2026 or are you trying to decrease your Readership!
T. John was brought in during the last century to try and get the judges to actually work as many of them had rather lackadaisical work habits.
It would be a good topic for Bill to cover.
Somehow, my memory of Judge Lesinski is at odds with those of his fan club here. Were any of you around in 1974?
In high school. There was the issue of him liking Oldsmobile 98s, but sometime after that, he was asked to go in and try and work with I believe Detroit Recorders Court in an effort to improve their work habits. I seem to recall there may have been some conflict between he and Judge Geraldine Ford.
One thing that has not been mentioned in this discussion is the fact the donor class wants Attorney General and Secretary of State primaries in lieu of convention nomination as it will cause a much greater need in campaign funding that only the donor class can afford – thereby making it easier for them to control the nominating process.
In the Republican Attorney General nominating process, candidates Kevin Kijewski and Doug Lloyd spent only $95K and $88K respectively in their campaigns. It would have been exponentially more expensive for each if they had to face a primary election in August instead,
Eli Savit, also would have never likely to have beaten Karen McDonald in a primary election. He was outspent as it was by 10-1 before the 4/19/2026 Dem convention. The delegate nominating process gave Savit a chance that he capitalized on.
Interesting point.