WHY CAN’T CONGRESS OPERATE LIKE THE MICHIGAN LEGISLATURE?
It’s difficult to give the Michigan Legislature credit for mastering the art of lawmaking.
After all, the six public acts Gov. Gretchen Whitmer has signed into law so far this year is the fewest number of signed bills at this point in any year since 1940, the last year in which the Michigan legislature didn’t meet at all in regular session. And the July 1 “deadline” for passing a FY 2025-26 K-12 school aid bill came and went with no action.
But wait! Gov. Whitmer said this past Thursday that nothing will happen on the budget until she and the Legislature can agree on a plan to, once and for all, Fix the Damn Roads. So stay tuned. At least the solons in Lansing are operating in a systematic fashion that the news media should be able to understand.
This session, Congress passed President Donald Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), 940 pages in length, a reconciliation package that combined tax cuts, budget cuts, and policy changes all in one massive document.
Back in 2021, Congress passed President Joe Biden ‘s Consolidated Appropriations Act after the Covid pandemic. It was was a record 5,593 pages in length. When Congress took up the 906-page Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) IN 2009, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said, “We have to pass the bill so you can find out what’s in it.”
It has been decades since Congress operated under “regular order,” where the House and Senate Appropriations Committees and its subcommittees, led by what was called the “College of Cardinals,” reviewed individual departmental budgets and held hearings and mark up sessions on amendments. Today, too often Congress passes continuing resolutions carrying over the current fiscal year budget to the next.
The last time Congress enacted a federal balanced budget was during President Bill Clinton’s administration when, ironically, there was no one-party Trifecta following the 1994 elections.
In Michigan, the state Constitution requires the legislature to enact bills that address a single subject or single object (Article IV, Section 24). Michigan’s own 13-member Congressional delegation is comprised of seven members (3 Democrats/4 Republicans) who previously served in the Michigan legislature and are familiar with the single subject restriction. The other six members in the delegation (3 Democrats/3 Republicans) did not serve in the Michigan legislature prior to being elected to Congress.
Congress is not going to reform itself. There is, however, an alternative route to pursue, although the process to be followed shows us how hard it will be to repair the broken Congress.
Article V of the U.S. Constitution provides that if 2/3 of the states (34 states), through their state legislatures, petition Congress to call a constitutional convention, one shall be convened.
Each state’s petition to Congress should address the same proposed constitutional changes to Article I. In addition, the petition to Congress should provide that each state legislative chamber in that state, after a convention has been called by Congress, would appoint delegates equal to the number of members of Congress from that state. In Nebraska, which has three Congressional districts, the unicameral legislature would appoint six convention delegates to a constitutional convention.
The single subject, single object requirement ought to be non-controversial, but would be consequential to the legislative process. Other reforms — such as the inclusion of a “change of purpose” clause and a “five day layover before being passed in the other legislative chamber” — could also be included.
Following the new Constitutional Convention, the proposed amendment amending Article I would be proposed to the states for ratification. It takes three-fourths of the states (38) to ratify a proposed amendment before it could take effect. Ratification is usually done by passing a resolution in both legislative chambers.Retired attorney Bob LaBrant, one of Michigan’s top constitutional scholars, points out that there is an alternative way to ratify a proposed amendment, which is by skirting the state legislature and holding ratification conventions in each state. It sounds strange, but it can be done. The only time this has ever been used was to ratify the 21st Amendment in 1933. That repealed the 1919 Prohibition Amendment.
*******************************************************
As a former Michigan Senate staffer and chamber of commerce executive who worked 40 years in Lansing with six different Governors (3 Dems, 3 Rs) and legislative leaders and lawmakers from both political parties in good years and bad:: I strongly urge Michiganders to never judge the success or failure of a legislative session by the number of bills signed into law! Quality matters. Over my career in Lansing I often observed relatively brief bills signed into law that were written with brevity & clarity and were good public policy. I also observed many lengthy bills or multi-bill packages signed into law that were full of poorly written foolishness.
Constitutional Convention in Michigan ?! No thank you.
The idea of a US Constitutional Convention frightens the hell out of me. A Michigan Constitutional Convention, maybe.
We had addressed the state convention possibility at the 2010 Michigan State GOP Convention in Lansing.
I was a delegate and we held a vote on whether or not to support a state constitutional convention in Michigan.
I was stunned when the results came back at 96% against.
It was obvious that most Republican delegates recognized the dangers inherent in such a convention.
I understand the concern, but the supermajority required is a massive check to potential overreach.
I like the forward-thinking approach of utilizing an Article V convention to resolve strategic issues that have cropped up in congress like barnacles on an old schooner.
You’re on the right track, Oliver!
The issue here is not the omnibus bills, per se. It is the complete lack of discipline in the federal legislative process.
American politicians bask in the glory of “bringing home the bacon”. The huge omnibus bills allow federal legislators to hide the pork from critics of big spending during the legislative process, but take credit back on the home front when the $ 1.7 million worth of holograms of dead comedians are unveiled at the National Comedy Center.
“Attempting to impose on Congress a balanced budget requirement, found in most state constitutions, will only mobilize opposition to convening a convention.”
The U.S. Congress will only give up the omnibus charade when they are forced to balance the federal budgets. A budget balance requirement is the only functional form of discipline, short of giving the President the Michigan Governor’s Article V, §19 power to line item veto and Article V, §20 power to impound funds. The U.S. President has been specifically denied these powers since the Impoundment Control Act passed in 1974
Federal budget discipline will only be restored after a severe financial crisis arises within the bond market. When the foreigners stop buying Treasuries and start clearing transactions in currencies other than the dollar, Congress will get its house in order. But a lot of people are going to be hurt.
Interesting article, Bill. But I agree with Mr. Stewart. No con-con in Michigan. Or the US.
This discussion ignores the easier route to adopting a Title-Object Clause federal constitutional amendment without any need for a constitutional convention.
A U.S. House member need only to introduce a bill on the floor and have it pass the House and Senate.
the proposed amendment would then be sent to each of the state legislatures for ratification.
If three-quarters of the state legislatures ratify within a deadline established in the bill, then – under Article V of the United States Constitution – the federal government is obligated to recognize that as a duly-enacted amendment to the United States Constitution.
Democratic U.S. Representative Martha Griffiths from Michigan in 1970 introduced the bill proposing the Equal Rights Amendment on the floor of the U.S. House, and it quickly passed the U.S. Senate and was presented to the respective legislatures of all 50 states, with the endorsement of Pres. Richard Nixon. It quickly passed a majority of state legislatures.
Due largely tot he efforts of one remarkable woman – Phyllis Schlafly – support for the ERA eroded nationally and ERA advocates never received the required amount of state legislature ratifications by the deadline in the bill. ERA thus went down to defeat.
The “Federal Constitutional Convention” idea as presented in this article is a red herring that would open the door to plenty of other unwanted noxious proposals – such as limiting provisions of the Bill of Rights.
Why would the Article V approach be uniquely vulnerable in your mind? You would still need to get the measures passed by 3/4 of state legislatures.
Many years ago, Bill Ballenger told me that when he was elected to the legislature he promptly read and studied the Michigan Constitution, which I admired greatly . Wonder how many current representatives have? My guess is not many.
I’m a moderate liberal, but I agree wholeheartedly with Mr. Studley that a national Con-Con is scarier than anything, But I would like to see a Michigan constitutional convention, What we used to call the “new” constitution is now 62 years old, and if we didn’t like what the delegates did, we the people could vote it down
Permit different observations:
Before term limits kicked in at end of 1998, I worked with legislators who actually read the bills and discussed language. The didn’t just rely on someone’s analysis. They focused more on what bills said when they read them – and spent more time learning what agencies did and who to trust – than of how many press releases they can issue (today). By time I retired end of 2012, legislators seemed more dependent on what they were told (by leaders, colleagues, or lobbyists) than by bill language or written analyses.
The single-object rule is not as limiting as some may think. Both germanely linked bills (constitutional – multiple acts needing to be amended to avoid conflicting statutes) AND those that are only connected politically to capture enough votes (a practice I question on constitutional basis under the single-object rule) are tiebarred. I don’t recall any successful challenge to the practice, but the latter group has accomplished as much at the state level as those megabills in Congress have done for national policy.
Congress shows no interest in reforming itself – Members have become to use to following ‘leadership” (whether congressional or President) to exercise any independent judgment.
Michigan ConCon: I supported that in the past. There are provisions that don’t work or are outdated, but I share the misgivings as to what a ConCon today would produce. Remember delegates would be elected from the same House and Senate districts that have produced the current dysfunction.
What if it ended up like the Redistricting Commission where a bunch of ideologues garnered a majority of the voting body and essentially hijacked the Michigan Constitution.
We could have a death penalty, repeal of the Headlee Amendment, and outlawed abortion – and many I am sure would love to see some of these changes.
The Redistricting Commission appointment plan was a coup pulled off skillfully by Dem insiders.
The same can be done for a CON-CON delegate process.
In reviewing comments from Mr. Studley, Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Stewart and Leanne I respectfully agree with the “NO Storms “ regarding any US and/or Michigan Constitutional Convention. I feel it’s concerning and not justifiable.
We need to adopt progressive and socialist principles on a state constitutional level – and a Michigan Constitutional convention can help us achieve that dream.
We have not convened as a state since 1963 to amend our convention – we can achieve a lot.
Royal says
(Edit)Bill, I perceive you are attempting to steer clear of many a guard rail, speed bump, pothole and wash out, on this one. Con-cons as your readers meme this proposal is the fool’s gold of many a career pol to cement their stamp on their career’s history. May it never be.
Several areas glossed over or never brought up:
First of all, wrt constitutional conventions in general: When a convention is called, no matter how the agenda is intended to be focused, it never is. Once one is called, it becomes open season on . . . everything. Anything, and I mean anything, including installing Satan himself, becomes fair game.
Any topic can be brought up; any topic can be voted on and any topic can become law. Count me out.
Second of all, unlike Michigan, which has an imposed balanced budget proviso, the Federal government has no such restriction.
My memory is fading recently so I don’t remember specifics, but as I recall, a line-item veto was granted to Clinton at that time on basically a trial basis. Newt Gingrich promptly warned Slick Willy that if he tried to pull any shenanigans, he’d get one crack at it and one only, then he’d get no legislation through for the rest of his term. So, they played nice with each other, and a balanced budget and entitlement reform was the result.
This is totally unlike what happened with, Gov. Whitmer’s line-item veto where she promptly proceeded to screw every republican and republican district. Gee, and we wonder why Michigan politics is so rancid. She got one crack at it and republicans imposed the Gingrich doctrine and have demanded agreements up front to get any legislation passed. Of course, they still negotiate/compromise like ‘HW’ Bush, not like Reagan.
After Clinton, ‘W’ Bush was offered a balanced budget but when he demanded that the military budget be excluded (because he planned to knock the hell out of Iraq, the country that, “tried to kill my Daddy”), Gingrich promptly let the urge subside.
Interestingly, few noticed that at the time of Trump’s first inauguration, all but 2 states, fed up with Obama’s steamrolling, were on record as calling for a constitutional convention. I believe it will shortly be discovered that one thing that triggered Obama and the democrats to launch Russia, Russia, Russia was to preclude further talk of a constitutional convention. Can you imagine that crew in charge of direct mods to our constitution? Heaven forefends. States have widened the deficit to call one in more recent years.
Third of all, there are a myriad of ways politicians can twist, turn, misconstrue, circumvent and totally obfuscate, law. Case in point is the way we are now saddled with the runaway Federal Reserve. Since the states refused to ratify Woodrow Wilson’s beloved amendment to create the Federal Reserve (a private central bank), he promptly waited till just before Christmas break (December 22nd, 1913, as confirmed by Wikipedia) when about a third of all pols (House and Senate) booked it out of town. He let it out to his Democrat cronies to hang around for something big. Something like a lame duck episode that occurs here in our state. So, with approx. 1/3 of politicians (mostly republicans) not voting, the Federal Reserve Act was ratified in total circumvention of the Constitution. And the rest is history.
So, Bill, in short . . ., no, there is nothing new our legislature can teach our federal government about. What we learn in our various state legislatures, we end up bringing to our central government on steroids. I wish we’d stop doing that.
So the question in this Ballenger Report is: Can the Michigan Legislature teach us anything ? Answer: ABSOLUTELY YES. How to be Passive-Aggressive at someone else’s expense !
I fully endorse a Michigan Constitutional Convention.
Michigan needs to repeal the largely unwanted “Headlee Amendment” that had been spearheaded by right-wing elements in the state when it passed in 1978.
We need a “Living Wage Amendment” and other progressive principles embodied into our Michigan constitution.
By getting left-wing delegates appointed to the convention, we Michiganders can realize our dream of a Utopian society.