LANSING, MI – Does Michigan need a new state constitution? Michigan schoolchildren who grew up, as I did, in the 1960’s, were told they should be proud of their new constitution, which voters ratified in 1963. The one it replaced was from 1908, adopted at the dawn of the automobile age and before women could vote.
Don’t look now, but what we thought of as the “new” constitution has now been around longer than the last one was, and in three years, Michigan voters will be asked if they want to call a new constitutional convention.
That referendum, by the way, is one of the few sure things in politics. Nobody knows who the President will be in 2026, nor who else will be running, but we do know Michigan voters will be asked if they want a constitutional convention. That’s because the current constitution requires one every 16 years.
The last three times this happened, the voters overwhelmingly said no, by almost three to one in 1994, and two to one in 2010. But evidence and grumbling that the old one no longer works seem to be increasing. One indication: The U.S. Constitution has been amended only 27 times since it was adopted in 1787, and the first ten of those came jointly as the Bill of Rights.
However, Michigan’s constitution already has been amended 39 times, and drives are under way for more amendments.
Does the state need a do-ever? If voters were to say yes on Nov. 3, 2026, here’s what would happen: Special primary and general elections would be held in 2017 to elect delegates to what the media are sure to call the “Con-Con.”
They would then write a document — it took two years to do so last time — and argue over and vote on the various sections. When they were finished, it would be submitted to a vote of the people.
If a majority voted for the new constitution, it would take effect. If not, it would be dead, and the old one would stay in effect, at least until voters are again asked in 2042.
As of now, my impression is that Democrats and liberals are largely afraid of calling a constitutional convention, because they fear Republican delegates might try to forbid things like abortion or severely limit transgender rights. Traditionally, Republicans have been more likely to vote in off-year elections than Democrats.
That was the case in 1961. Then as now, Democrats controlled all the top state offices in Michigan. But two-thirds of the elected Con-Con delegates were Republicans. “But it sort of worked out,” the late Jack Faxon, the youngest delegate to that convention told me a few years ago. “There were really three parties of about equal strength – the moderate Republicans, led by George Romney, the old right-wing Republicans, and we Democrats.”
On many issues, he said, the Democrats allied with the moderate Republicans. In the end, the Democrats were unhappy about one thing in the new Michigan Constitution; it did not require legislative and congressional districts to be the same size, in terms of population. Perhaps as a result, the voters barely ratified the document, which passed by a mere 7,000 votes in April 1963.
But less than a year later, the U.S. Supreme Court took care of the problem in a case called Wesberry v. Sanders, ruling that congressional districts in any state had to have roughly the same population. Another 1964 case, Reynolds v. Sims, did the same for state legislative districts.
Constitutional conventions have been few and far between. Even then, in the 19th century, two proposed new constitutions were voted down. The main reason the voters chose to have a new convention and ratified a new constitution in 1960 was that the drive was led by the dynamic and charismatic George Romney, who used it as a springboard to get elected governor.
The 1963 constitution did make a lot of improvements over the previous document, partly by getting rid of elections for obscure state officials, streamlining the legal system and lengthening terms for the governor and other state officials to four years, instead of two.
But after many years of covering government in Michigan, I believe it needs improving. For example, the state currently forbids judges to be reelected after they turn 70. That no longer makes sense; the age should be increased, or perhaps eliminated entirely.
Two other thoughts: Michigan currently has an elected state board of education whose only real power is to hire a state superintendent of schools, who in turn doesn’t have much real power. Now, the governor is trying to start a new state department of education, but the state board is complaining that’s their job.
That’s a situation that badly needs fixing. Finally, there’s a new legislative trick designed to prevent voters from using a referendum to repeal laws they don’t like: Bills that contain any appropriations, even a dollar, can’t be subject to a vote.
The Republicans began doing that in recent years, and were bitterly denounced by Democrats, including Gov. Gretchen Whitmer. But when Democrats got power this year, they promptly repealed Right-to-Work, and stuck in a token appropriation.
The governor, who said she’d never sign such a bill, promptly did. This outrageous practice ought to be forbidden.
There are certainly more issues that ought to be addressed, but that’s a start. I’ll be back with more … if and when anyone launches a serious drive for a constitutional convention.
-30-
(A version of this column appeared in the Toledo Blade)
***
