Michigan Legislature Kickoff
LANSING, Mich. — As the new year begins, state legislatures are back in session, including Michigan. Republicans currently have a 58 to 52 seat majority in the Michigan House, while Democrats have a 19 to 18 seat majority in the Michigan Senate, with one vacancy. This “divided government,” with the State House being held by Republicans and the State Senate held by Democrats, means that both parties will have to work together to pass any laws.
Democrats in the State House have expressed a commitment to “consensus-building.” Democratic Senate Majority Leader Winnie Brinks offered a partnership to Republican House Speaker Hall so they could pass a “productive legislative agenda” that “effectively serves the people of Michigan.”
On the other side, Senate Republican Leader Aric Nesbitt stated that the state government from the previous two years and its “radical far-left agenda” is over. Speaker Pro Tempore Rachelle Smith stated that “no legislative proposals will advance past our chamber unless it reflects the conservative values of Michiganders.”
Party Priorities
With the Michigan Legislature back in session, both parties are pushing their vision for Michigan.
Republican Priorities
According to House Majority Floor Leader Rep. Bryan Posthumus, Michigan Republicans intend to go after the “tipped wage issue and the earned sick time issues” which he claimed are going to be “plaguing our state.” House Bill 4001 would keep tipped wages below the state minimum wage, abandoning the plan to phase out subminimum wages. The bill would also reduce incoming increases to the state minimum wage. House Bill 4002 would exempt employers with less than 50 employees from abiding by new laws that require employers to provide paid sick leave. These priorities come after Republican members walked out of the House session on December 13, 2024 because bills concerning tipped wages and earned sick leave were not brought to a vote.
Democratic Priorities
Michigan Democrats have said their top priorities for 2025 include “protect[ing] the health and financial stability” of Michiganders. Their plan to do that is to create a “Prescription Drug Affordability Board,” which would be an “independent body designed to lower prescription drug costs and hold Big Pharma accountable.”
Other priorities for Michigan Democrats include renewing bipartisan efforts to improve government transparency in Michigan. Sen. Jeremy Moss (D-Southfield) and Sen. Ed McBroom (R-Waucedah Twp.) introduced Senate Bills 1 and 2 to expand the scope of the state’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to include the Michigan Legislature and governor. These bills will allow voters to know what their elected officials are doing in their taxpayer-funded positions.
“Michiganders deserve honest, ethical, and transparent representation in Lansing. For too long, however, the public has been blocked from accessing and understanding the inner workings of the Governor’s office and State Legislature. I have long fought to expand our state’s Freedom of Information Act, and today our Senate Democratic majority is placing government transparency among our top priorities,” Sen. Moss said.
Republicans Block Bills through Legal Review
Republicans in the State House have refused to send nine bills passed by both chambers during the last session, to Governor Whitmer, claiming the need for a “legal review.” During the 2024 session, both the state House and Senate which were both controlled by Democrats, passed a series of bills. After bills pass both chambers, they then need to be presented to the Governor. For reasons that are unclear, a number of bills that could positively impact Michiganders were not sent to the Governor’s desk for her to sign or veto, and Republican Speaker of the House Matt Hall started the 2025 session by choosing to not send nine bills to the Governor. The State Senate has since passed a resolution that authorizes Senate Majority Leader Brinks to take legal action in order to compel House Majority Leader Hall to send the remaining bills to the governor.
The bills not sent to Governor Whitmer for signature include:
House Bills 4665, 4666, and 4667: would allow corrections officers and some other law enforcement officers to participate in the Michigan State Police retirement system, which includes pension and another employer-sponsored retirement plan similar to a 401(k).
House Bill 6058: would lower out-of-pocket health insurance premium costs for public employees including public school employees, by requiring public employers to pay at least 80% of healthcare premiums.
House Bills 4900 & 4901: would keep certain public-assistance payments such as workers’ compensation and earned income tax credits from being garnished for debt collections.
25 senators voted for House Bills 4665-4667, with five Republicans joining all 20 Democrats in voting for the bill package. There were 13 votes against the bills, all of which were cast by Republicans. All 56 Democrats in the State House voted for the bill package. No Republicans in the State House voted for the bills because they had walked out of the session.
Democratic State Senator Sue Shink, who sponsored similar versions of House Bills 4665-4667 in the Senate, stated that improving retirement options could “strengthen recruitment and retention for corrections and other law enforcement officers.” While the president of the corrections officers union in Michigan stated that the package of bills would “greatly improve [their] ability to recruit people into the job,” one of the reasons given by Republican Senators who voted against the bill is that the proposal “unnecessarily adds risk to the state police retirement system” because it could “create[] more debt” and is underestimating the “future financial risks to current state troopers.”
House Bill 6058 passed the State Senate in a party line vote, with all 20 Democratic senators voting for the bill and all 18 Republican senators voting against the bill. As was the case with the House Bills 4665-4667 previously discussed, all 56 Democrats in the State House voted for HB 6058 with no Republicans voting for the bill because they had walked out of the session.
The sponsor of House Bill 6058, Rep. Mai Xiong (D) stated “high health care costs have long burdened Michigan’s public employees who provide invaluable services for our communities. My legislation gives them the breathing room they and their families need.” HB 6058 was supported by the Michigan Education Association who said that “public school employees – like most working families – continue to struggle with the rising cost of health care” and that the bill would fix a law that “that placed an artificially low cap on what school districts and other public employers can pay toward their employees’ health care.” All 18 Republican state senators voted against the bill, with one senator saying “there’s so many reasons … to oppose this bill.” While most, if not all, of the Republican senators lodged protests at the bill, the overarching theme was that the bill would “massively increase” costs.
House Bill 4900 passed the State Senate with 22 votes in favor of the bill and 16 votes against. Two Republicans joined all 20 Democrats in voting for the bill. House Bill 4901 passed the State Senate 21 to 17, with one Republican joining all 20 Democrats to vote in favor of the bill. All 56 Democrats in the State House voted for both bills. No Republicans in the State House voted for the bills because they had walked out of the session.
State Rep. Kara Hope (D), the sponsor of House Bill 4900, stated that the Earned Income Tax Credit is a publicly funded benefit meant to “buy kids’ winter boots and put food on the table” and should not be going straight into the hands of debt collectors. The sponsor for House Bill 4901, Rep. Brenda Carter, said the legislation “will help families get back on their feet, so that they are not forever disadvantaged by a financial setback.” The Christian Coalition and Community Economic Development Association of Michigan support at least one of the bills, according to Democratic sponsors. Republican Senators lodged protests against House Bills 4900 and 4901. A group of senators claimed the bills “swing the pendulum too far in the wrong direction” and that the bills go “too far in protecting assets without requiring debt repayment” despite recognizing the intent of the bills to “safeguard families’ basic needs during financial hardship.”