Is It Possible? Potential for Bipartisan Agreement on Election Resolution
- 11 hours ago
- 3 min read
So far, Voters Not Politicians the sole spoiler
Tuesday’s Michigan House Election Integrity Committee heard testimony about an election reform that just might have bipartisan support.
Michigan Rep. Joseph Aragona (R-District 60) offered a formal statement in support of House Joint Resolution W of 2026 (HJRW). Aragona sponsored the bill along with thirteen other House Republicans.
Introduced earlier this month, the joint resolution would amend Article IV, Section 6, part (1)(e) of the Michigan Constitution to extend how long a member of the Michigan Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission must wait before running for partisan office.
For five years after the date of appointment, a commissioner is ineligible to hold a partisan elective office at the state, county, city, village, or township level in Michigan.
The bill would replace “five years after the date of appointment” with “until December 30 of the year following the next decennial census” formulation.
The bill is designed to prevent commissioners from becoming eligible to run for office while the maps they helped draw are still in effect. The concern is not theoretical. Two sitting commissioners — one Republican and one holding an Independent slot on the Commission but now identifying as a Democrat — are running for the very legislature whose districts the Commission drew.
Republican Commissioner Rhonda Lange is running in the GOP primary for Michigan's 34th State Senate District against incumbent Sen. Roger Hauck. Anthony Eid, a politically unaffiliated commission seat-holder, running for Michigan's open 9th House District.
Lange told Michigan Advance, “If you look at the district I’m running in, I did not draw that district.” She explained, “Actually, I voted no on the maps. . . . My own personal maps looked nothing like the Senate district. Whether it was serving on the commission or running, I held myself to the highest standards.”
Reason for Hope
Following Aragona’s testimony, Michigan Rep. Mai Xiong (D-District 13) told the committee: “I think this is a very valid concern.”
Committee Minority Vice Chair Michigan Rep. Stephen Wooden (D-District 81) similarly acknowledged the bill’s positive intent, saying: “Certainly appreciate the rationale behind it [JHRW], the intent that the voters had when they approved this proposal [Proposition 2 of 2018], that people who are running for office shouldn’t be drawing the lines that they’re running in.”
Aragona, responding to questions from Democrats on the committee, appeared open to amending the resolution.
In a written statement to MFEI News & Commentary, Election Committee Chair Michigan Rep. Rachelle Smit (R-District 43) said: "As of now, there have been no moves to amend this resolution. However, a substitute could be offered before the committee meets again. Additionally, amendments can be offered before the resolution is brought up for a vote on the Floor. "
Smit went on to write: "I think the questions were productive and seemed to lean on the side of support. . . . It seems like this bill has the potential for bipartisan support.
The Lone Holdout
While the comments leaned positive and the questions clarifying, Voters Not Politicians (VNP) offered the sole public comment against the resolution."
MFEI News & Commentary reached out to the organization for comment, but it did not respond as of publication time.
After the hearing, Rep. Aragona also contacted VNP, which responded by forwarding its formal statement to the Election Integrity Committee.
It appears VNP’s position is the language of Proposition should not be changed . . . even when subsequent circumstances develop to reveal areas in need of amendment.
Michigan voters may recall, Voters Not Politicians, was the driving force behind Proposal 2's passage, collecting the required number of signatures to qualify the measure for the ballot.
But the grassroots image obscured a campaign substantially bankrolled from outside Michigan: VNP's ballot committee raised $16.60 million, including $6.02 million from the Sixteen Thirty Fund and $5.11 million from the Action Now Initiative, two of the largest dark-money vehicles in progressive politics.
Michigan got taken for a ride, meaning voters approved a measure billed as taking power away from insiders when they had no idea who was paying for the campaign that got it passed. The measure carried 61% of the vote on November 6, 2018, winning in 67 of the state's 83 counties.
As Rep. Smit pointed out in her statement: whether there is truly bi-partisan support for Joint House Resolution W will be revealed as soon as she calls for the vote.
