December 4, 2016 rss
header twitter link facebook link home link
View Resource Guide and Job Postings

Eric Freedman

Eric Freedman


November 16, 2012

Now that the election is over, the Michigan Constitution is again sacrosanct, right? After all, voters overwhelmingly rejected five proposals to amend the sacred document that they or their parents or grandparents had narrowly voted to adopt 49 years ago.

Remember those solemn protestations that the Constitution is holy writ and shouldn’t be cluttered with things that the legislature should handle like energy policy and unionization of home health workers? Now that the election is over, let truth be told: Regardless of whether they supported or opposed individual proposals, most legislators, judges, citizens, political reporters and leaders of clandestinely funded groups with righteous-sounding names such as the “People Should Decide” and “Protecting Michigan Taxpayers” have never read the full Constitution.

I’ll bet $50 that an overwhelming majority of the 110 newly elected representatives—regardless of party—haven’t read all of it either. Perhaps they’ll take a few hours to do so before Jan. 1 when they solemnly assume office with an oath to defend it. Caveat: It runs almost 53 pages.

There’s a disturbing hypocrisy among anti-amenders who professed reverence for the unread document and argued that it must be left unchanged—although they actually meant not changed in ways they disagree with. Yet during the 2011–12 session, lawmakers on both sides of the partisan aisle introduced 75 joint resolutions to amend the Constitution. Some do address the fundamental structure of government—things that arguably belong in a foundational document like the Constitution—such as making the legislature part-time, establishing a redistricting commission, imposing residency requirements for legislative candidates and appointing Supreme Court justices.

But others? Enshrine in the Constitution: “the right of farmers and ranchers to employ technology and modern practices” from Rep. Kevin Daley (R-Lum)? “The right to hunt, trap and fish” from Rep. Bruce Rendon (R-Lake City)? Prohibit “illegal aliens from collecting public assistance” from Sen. Joe Hune (R-Hamburg)? Establish an “African-American university as a public university and provide for its financial support” from Rep. John Olumba (D-Detroit)?

My confession: I intended to graduate from the never-read-it majority when I started writing this column because I, too, was a constitutional slacker despite covering Michigan government, politics, courts and policy full-time and part-time since 1984. However, as a journalist, I already had some favorite provisions:

  • Article I, Section 5: Every person may freely speak, write, express and publish his views on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of such right; and no law shall be enacted to restrain or abridge the liberty of speech or of the press.
  • Article I, Section 19: In all prosecutions for libels the truth may be given in evidence to the jury; and, if it appears to the jury that the matter charged as libelous is true and was published with good motives and for justifiable ends, the accused shall be acquitted.
  • Article IX, Section 23. All financial records, accountings, audit reports and other reports of public moneys shall be public records and open to inspection. A statement of all revenues and expenditures of public moneys shall be published and distributed annually, as provided by law.

I didn’t meet my goal of getting all the way through to page 54 where the document ends with the names of Stephen S. Nisbet, president, and Fred I. Chase, secretary, of the constitutional convention.

Skimming through the parts I skipped, I discovered several provisions that are true attention killers. My eyes glazed over partway through the 352-word amendment that restricts human embryonic stem cell research. I wondered why we needed 1,454 words to enshrine the Michigan Conservation and Recreation Legacy Fund. The 1978 Headlee Amendment limiting tax increases also runs more than 1,400 mind-numbing words. The Korean service bonus bonds provision was a puzzler to me.

Article 2, Section 2 begins, “Amendments may be proposed to this constitution by petition of the registered electors of this state.” But whether you read the Constitution or not, the election results should give pause to those would ask voters in the future to amend it. And so should the bottom line: Rich Robinson of the Michigan Campaign Finance Network estimates that organized ballot committees spent about $145 million to pass or defeat the five proposed amendments, mostly by groups that haven’t disclosed—and aren’t required to disclose—their donors. And that figure excludes money spent by the parties.

“We’re in pretty rarified company with spending at this level,” Robinson says. “This is close to California scale.”

Eric Freedman, a Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter, is associate professor of Journalism and director of Capital News Service at Michigan State University. He and Dome columnist Stephen A. Jones are co-authors of the newly published Presidents and Black America: A Documentary History (Congressional Quarterly Press).

November 15, 2012 · Filed under Freedman Tags: , ,

7 responses so far ↓

  • 1 Grace // Dec 14, 2012 at 2:30 pm

    The voters were conned with that ‘must not touch the Constitution” message put out by the GOP. Apparently, their main reason for using that argument was so that they could change the law without let, or hindrance in lame duck, throw in an Appropriations line, and therefter prevent any ballot questions about any of the issued raised last November!

  • 2 // Mar 1, 2014 at 10:49 am

    I like him because he is so cocky! Always playing leading men who breaks the girls’ hearts. One other note I wanted to mention before I crawl back into my self-imposed hole.

  • 3 Hidemyass Pro // Mar 11, 2014 at 2:13 am

    IH February 4, 2014 at 2:54 am

  • 4 penny stocks // Mar 12, 2014 at 2:25 am

    621115 218842The the next time I just read a weblog, I actually hope that this doesnt disappoint me approximately brussels. Get real, Yes, it was my option to read, but I actually thought youd have some thing intriguing to say. All I hear is typically a couple of whining about something which you could fix when you werent too busy looking for attention. 837037

  • 5 qdFB0RTyZN qdFB0RTyZN // Mar 16, 2014 at 5:15 am

    The Slave of the Husband

    Searching for in advance to learning further from you afterward!…

  • 6 Nouveau maillot manchester united 2014 officiel // Mar 17, 2014 at 12:28 am

    Appreciate you sharing, great blog.Thanks Again. Cool.
    Nouveau maillot manchester united 2014 officiel

  • 7 otlqsndd // Mar 17, 2014 at 2:13 pm

    When i used the these products subsequent to seven day, them ripped through the back once again section while i make an attempt to take him or her ” up “.I actually have some other two otlqsndd, they are still inside excellent. I could rarely otherwise this could happen unfavorable high quality would happen at otlqsndd.





© 2007-2011 All rights reserved. Site design by Kimberly Hopkins, khopdesign, llc.