Michigan Votes Forum

Introduced in the House on February 8, 2005, to require local election clerks to place a voter who has missed five consecutive elections, including at least two November general elections, on an inactive voter list. A voter on the list could still vote using a provisional ballot, which requires additional identity verification procedures. Also, to require the Secretary of State to search the Qualified Voter File every six months and remove any dead people or non-citizens. To also require the Department of Corrections to send the Secretary of State a list of imprisoned felons every month, and require the Secretary of State to remove these felons from the QVF, and notify local election clerks of this. Local clerks would then be required to remove the felons from local voter rolls. Finally, to require the Secretary of State to send every voter listed on the QVF a form asking whether the voter wants to be placed on a list of those who want an absentee ballot in each future election. If a voter does not respond, or the letter is returned as undeliverable, the person would be placed on an inactive voter list. Local election clerks would then be given the list of voters who want to be on a permanent absentee ballot list

The vote was 70 in favor, 31 opposed and 7 not voting

(House Roll Call 125 at House Journal 22)

Click here to view bill details.

Rep. Cushingberry, having reserved the right to explain his nay vote, made the following statement: "Mr. Speaker and members of the House: I voted no because a simple clarifying amendment that would allow local clerks the ability to mail requests for absentee ballots would make more sense. By establishing this system under the current regime in the Secretary of State's office with their partisan usage of the various enforcement powers, lack of sound judgment with their unequal distribution of federal grant funds, and failure to reach consensus with significant local voting officials leaves me no choice but to vote no on this amendment. Clearly, local clerks are the best persons to send applications, keep lists, cleanup the problems with the various lists, and maintain contact with the people who ultimately are their charges, the residents of their local communities. How disingenuous this amendment and bill are in conveying a message that we are acting to correct problems - we are creating greater problems by assigning the function to 'Big Sister', who loses paperwork and blames others, picks scraps with local officials and tries to hide her hand, and has failed to do anything in this area except try to increase her own fiefdom through further partisan featherbedding and then white mail to increase appropriations. That's why I voted no on this amendment - it is bad precedent and there is no result that can come from this amendment but negative."

Rep. Cushingberry, having reserved the right to explain his protest against the passage of the bill, made the following statement: "Mr. Speaker and members of the House: This bill is not the bill that it purports to be. With the amendments it totally makes the wrong turn from local control. The bill offered by the Representative in the 1st district is the wiser course. As former Speaker of the United States House of Representatives Tip O'Neil once stated; 'all politics are local' and we are creating a statewide monster with the inaction of this bill. We should be giving the real tools and money to the locals not usurping them and creating further big government nightmares. This bill should simply allow anyone to apply and receive a absentee ballot, allow all local clerks to mail applications to their constituents, and give the local clerks the ability to check their communities lists thoroughly. This would be logical - but I guess I shouldn't expect logic or good sense."

Rep. Waters, having reserved the right to explain her protest against the passage of the bill, made the following statement: "Mr. Speaker and members of the House: I voted no on HB 4228 upon its final passage because it is bad public policy. This bill takes power from local clerks and gives to the Lansing based Secretary of State. Local clerks have an excellent reputation for keeping voter records for their municipality. It robs governmental units of their local control. HB 4228 also is a Headlee mandate by requiring the Director of Corrections (DOC) to provide a monthly felon list to Secretary of State."

Rep. Tobocman, having reserved the right to explain his protest against the passage of the bill, made the following statement: "Mr. Speaker and members of the House: I voted no on HB 4228 on final passage because it is bad public policy. The media's exposure of less than 150 inaccurate votes among the millions of eligible voters is not reason for such drastic changes that will have a negative impact. Hundreds of thousands of voters have come to expect an absentee voter application in the mail and today's legislation will deprive them of that privilege. It will undoubtedly cause thousands of seniors to no longer vote. Additionally, I am concerned that the requirement to remove felons who are locked in prison from the voting rolls (when they are already ineligible to vote), will disenfranchise former prisoners when they are let out. The bill does not prescribe a formal or systematic process to add these legitimate voters back to the rolls upon their release. The bill raises Headlee concerns by placing an unfunded requirement on the Director of the Department of Corrections. Rather than concentrating on how to make voting more difficult, America needs to be focusing on how to expand participation. Rather than placing new encumbrances on the voting process, especially for our seniors, we should be working on strategies (like no reason absentee voting, mail-in voting, and internet voting) that expand participation in our democratic system. Indeed, isn't that, in part, what our soldiers are allegedly fighting and dying for in the Middle East."

Rep. Bieda, having reserved the right to explain his protest against the passage of the bill, made the following statement: "Mr. Speaker and members of the House: I voted 'no' on House Bill 4228 because certain amendments adopted minutes before the vote on final passage takes from local clerks and transfers it to the Michigan Secretary of State. We did not have the advantage of even knowing that the Michigan Secretary of State has the capability to take on this job, notwithstanding the concern that this would rob governmental units of their local control. The two communities that I represent, Warren and Sterling Heights, have had an excellent record in this regard, and I do not see HB 4228 as amended moments before final passage as offering any improvements. Thus, I voted 'no' on HB 4228."