LANSING (AP) - The Michigan House backed a proposed constitutional amendment on Wednesday that would require two-thirds majority votes for bills to pass during lame duck sessions of the Legislature, if voters ultimately approve of the change.
The resolution sponsored by Republican House Speaker Jason Wentworth aims to end hyperpartisanship attached to lame duck sessions and to build trust with constituents by increasing transparency.
Trust in elected officials has long been an issue in Michigan. In 2015, Michigan ranked dead last in The Center of Public Integrity's investigation into state transparency and accountability.
Lame duck sessions, which occur during even-numbered years after November elections, have been criticized for allowing legislators from the party in power to push through often-contentious legislation before their terms end. Republicans have controlled the Legislature since 2011 and currently hold majorities of 22-16 in the Senate and 58-52 in the House.
In 2018, as Republican Gov. Rick Snyder's second term was ending and before Democrat Gretchen Whitmer assumed office, the Legislature passed bills to delay a minimum wage increase and loosen up paid sick leave requirements.
Rep. Terry Sabo, D-Muskegon, said before the vote Wednesday that lame duck sessions have historically posed problems over transparency and trust, no matter which party had control.
"A two-thirds vote in lame duck to pass any bills eliminates partisan bills," he said. "It promotes proper bill vetting and I can tell you, I've seen over the years some pretty terrible lame duck activity."
The House passed the resolution in a 102-7 vote, forwarding it to the Senate for consideration. If the Senate backs it, too, the proposed amendment would be decided by voters in a referendum.
- Posted February 25, 2021
- Tweet This | Share on Facebook
State House approves change to lame duck sessions
headlines Macomb
headlines National
- The Supreme Court is a liberal body—when it comes to legal writing
- Penn Law prof gets half-pay suspension for ‘discriminatory and disparaging statements’
- Insurance coverage for preventive care at risk unless Supreme Court acts, cert petition says
- Client convicted for murdering Tiananmen Square ‘hero’ lawyer who refused to continue representation
- Man gets prison time for attorney-fraud scheme that targeted some BigLaw firms
- Taft’s revenue ranking ‘will move up substantially’ after planned merger, law firm says