A proposed initiated law to prohibit campaign contributions from certain regulated utilities and government contractors and apply campaign finance laws and regulations to additional types of political communications
Michigan publishes no official pro/con arguments or yes/no statements. Fiscal impact is from the nonpartisan Senate Fiscal Agency ballot proposal analysis (which also summarizes supporters' and opponents' views — not official arguments).
Initiated law (indirect initiative) sent to voters after the Legislature did not enact it.
A proposed initiated law to prohibit campaign contributions from certain regulated utilities and government contractors and apply campaign finance laws and regulations to additional types of political communications The proposal would: • • • Prohibit regulated electric and gas utilities, contractors with over $250,000 annually in government contracts, and people and organizations with substantial connections to these utilities/contractors from making direct or indirect campaign contributions to those who run for or hold offices that impact them. Expand laws regulating spending on political communications, including those requiring disclosing donor information, to apply to communications clearly identifying candidates or ballot questions, even if they do not expressly advocate voting for/against them. Expressly apply the law requiring disclosure of who paid for political communications to internet political communications. Should this proposal be adopted? [ ] Yes [ ] No BUREAU OF ELECTIONS RICHARD H. AUSTIN BUILDING 1ST FLOOR 430 W. ALLEGAN LANSING, MICHIGAN 48918 Michigan.gov/Elections 800-292-5973
Not published by the state
Not published by the state
Not published by the state
Department of Attorney General The proposal would have a minor negative fiscal impact on the Department of the Attorney General. The Department would incur costs when pursuing action against an MPSC-regulated utility that refused to pay its fines. Existing appropriations likely would be sufficient to cover a small number of actions; however, a high volume of these cases could require one or more additional full-time equivalent (FTE) authorizations. The average annual cost of an FTE is currently estimated at about $145,700. Courts: The proposal could have a minor negative fiscal impact on State district courts. The proposal would prescribe misdemeanor penalties for violations; misdemeanor violations are heard by district courts. Any impact would be determined by the volume of hearings required for violations alleged under the language of the proposal. Corrections and Fines: Adoption of the proposal would have negative and corresponding positive fiscal impacts on local government. New misdemeanor arrests and convictions under the proposal could increase resource demands on law enforcement, court systems, community supervision, and jails. Jail costs vary by local jurisdiction; however, it is unknown how many people would be prosecuted. Additionally, a fine up to $1,000 benefiting local libraries could be imposed. The proposal also would impose new civil fines on MPSC-regulated electric or gas utilities of up to 10 times the contribution amount. Revenue collected from civil fines is used to support local libraries and county law libraries. The amount of revenue for local libraries is indeterminate and would depend on the actual number of violations. Department of State: The proposal could have a negative fiscal impact on the Department of State, depending on the number of investigations into potential violations that it conducted. While these costs are already incurred by the Department for current investigations, additional cases undertaken due to the proposal's adoption could require one or more additional FTE authorizations. The average annual cost of an FTE is currently estimated at $145,700.
Not published by the state
Not published by the state
Both columns use the same layout. Text is quoted from the official state guide. Views expressed belong to the argument authors.