Proposal 2, also known as the "money out of politics" proposal, has been approved by Michigan voters.
The proposal will amend the Michigan Campaign Finance Act of 1976 to restrict political campaign contributions by regulated utilities and government contractors whose contracts could be impacted by the candidate. It will also require further disclosures on certain kinds of political ads.
According to unofficial results from the New York Times, 81% of Michiganders voted yes for Proposal 2. The race was called Tuesday evening with only 15% of votes counted.
"The days of lawmakers representing their wealthy donors instead of their constituents are over," said Sean McBrearty, the co-founder of Michiganders for Money Out of Politics, the sponsors behind the ballot measure.
McBrearty spoke during a watch party in Detroit after the proposal passed Tuesday night.
The newly passed amendment will require groups to disclose their donors in political ads even if the ads do not advocate for a candidate. If an ad supports, opposes, or attacks a candidate, it will be considered a campaign ad regardless if it uses advocacy language.
"We will keep moving forward to hold monopoly utilities accountable, to make corporate polluters pay for what they've done, to rein in the power of health insurers, big tech billionaires, and anyone else who seeks to take away our power again," McBrearty said.
However, there is already a legal challenge against the measure. The Mackinac Center Legal Foundation filed a federal lawsuit on Tuesday, arguing the proposal violates First Amendment rights to free speech, saying it's a "alarming and far-reaching law."
"Under the guise of regulating campaign finance, Proposal 2 targets everyone who spends money speaking about public policy if they talk about an elected official at the wrong time or with the wrong words," reads the complaint in the lawsuit.
The Citizens for Research Council of Michigan said in a recently released analysis of Proposal 2, that it may be difficult for the proposal’s campaign contribution restrictions to survive legal challenges.
"The U.S. Supreme Court’s decisions over the last 50 years have viewed political spending as protected, First Amendment speech,” CRC said in a summary of its findings. “And require any restrictions on that speech to clear a very high bar to be considered constitutionally valid.”
If one part of the law, like the campaign contribution restrictions, was overturned by courts, the rest of the law would remain in effect as it has a severability clause.
The measure will not affect federal elections, meaning government contractors and utilities can still donate to presidential and congressional races.
John Sellek is a spokesperson for Protect MI Free Speech, the counter movement to Michiganders for Money Out of Politics.
"The so-called Money Out of Politics political operation does not take money out of politics," Sellek said in a statement to WCMU. "But instead allows out-of-state billionaires to freely spend to influence our public policy while innocent Michigan residents lose their right to free speech."
Sellek said MMOP betrayed its supporters by accepting millions in "dark money dollars" from out-of-state mystery donors.
MMOP has not denied these claims. According to Michigan Advance, Christy McGillivray, co-chair of the MMOP steering committee, said in August that “until our proposal passes and those rules change, we’re operating under the same laws as everyone else while working to reform them."
Despite efforts to thwart the new law, several organizations formed a coalition behind MMOP, including Michigan United Action, Michigan League of Conservation Voters, and Voters Not Politicians.
Melinda Billingsley, a spokesperson for Voters Not Politicians, praised the volunteer efforts that went into getting the proposal on the ballot.
"A thing every political establishment, every talking head said could not happen has been accomplished," Billingsley said. "And we did it with pure people power, pure grit, just pure Michigan energy in getting this done."
