Granholm promises ‘additive’ jobs as EVs transition shrinks head counts at automakers

Ex-governor has a rosy outlook, but EV transition means fewer Michigan auto jobs

By Therese Boudreaux | July 7, 2023

U.S. Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm argued that replacing gas-powered vehicles with electric vehicles will strengthen the automotive job market, despite recent layoff announcements by three major auto companies.

Granholm told attendees at a Detroit Free Press breakfast event in June that electric vehicle “jobs of the future and the jobs of the present will be extremely fulsome.”

At the same time, the former Michigan governor said, “There are fewer assembly jobs, clearly, for an EV.” But Granholm is confident that “if we are smart about getting this full battery supply chain, those are jobs that are additive jobs.”

Granholm said Michigan will gain jobs once a cluster of battery manufacturing plants develops.

Manufacturers in Michigan have announced plans for new investments in electric vehicle manufacturing while also cutting thousands of jobs.

In June 2022, Ford Motor Co. promised that a $3.7 billion investment would create 6,200 new hourly jobs in Michigan, Ohio and Missouri. Two months later, Ford cut 3,000 salaried jobs —many in Michigan— to compete more aggressively with Tesla in the electric vehicle market.

Layoff notices have followed soon after nearly every promise government officials have made that the transition to EVs will lead to job growth.

Electric vehicle production, like other green energy initiatives, struggles to compete against traditional technologies without massive government subsidies. But relying on government subsidies is not a cost-effective strategy for achieving job growth.

In April, Stellantis announced it is cutting 30,000 jobs because of the EV transition. In May, General Motors also announced a plan to cut hundreds of jobs as it shifts production from internal combustion engines to electric motors.

Companies that received economic development incentives “experienced employment growth that was 3.7% slower than nonincentivized establishments,” according to a 2019 study in the peer-reviewed journal Urban Affairs Review.

“When we examine the overall effectiveness of state incentive grants on firm-level performance,” the study concluded, “we find little evidence that they generate new jobs or other direct economic benefits to the states that employ them.”

A 2020 study by the Mackinac Center found similar results after analyzing nine different types of Michigan incentive programs and more than 7,300 deals. Of the nine programs examined, only three led to job creation. Each job created through the three successful programs cost the state an average of $593,913 per year. Granholm spearheaded one of those programs during her time as Michigan governor.

Government-subsidized battery plants have not caused meaningful job growth in Michigan. As the state’s auto industry transitions from gas to electric, Michigan residents have instead struggled to keep their jobs.

Therese Boudreaux is a Michigan Capitol Confidential intern.

Michigan Capitol Confidential is the news source produced by the Mackinac Center for Public Policy. Michigan Capitol Confidential reports with a free-market news perspective.

Loser-takes-all: National Popular Vote would create dubious first in Michigan elections

Under House Bill 4156, a candidate could lose Michigan and win all of its electoral votes.

By James David Dickson | July 6, 2023

House Bill 4156, the National Popular Vote bill, could create a first-of-its-kind system in Michigan presidential votes: loser takes all.

The U.S. Constitution gives states the right to choose how they award electoral votes. In 48 states, including Michigan, the presidential candidate who earns the most votes in the state wins. This is “winner-take-all.”

In two states, Maine and Nebraska, electoral votes are granted by congressional district. The winner in each district wins an electoral vote, and the winner of the statewide tally gets another electoral vote. In all 50 states, it matters who wins the statewide vote tally.

That wouldn’t be true under National Popular Vote. Never has a state granted every electoral vote to the candidate who does not receive the most votes from citizens. But that’s entirely possible under the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.

When states that hold 270 or more electoral votes join the compact, it will go live. The compact pledges those electoral votes to the candidate who win the popular vote nationally, as determined by participating secretaries of state — and regardless of the results in each particular state.

Under National Popular Vote, a candidate could lose Michigan and win all of its electoral votes.

Read it for yourself: House Bill 4156 of 2023

I’ve used this hypothetical before: The year is 2028. President Ron DeSantis not only wins the electoral votes, but the nationwide vote tally.

His opponent, former Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, wins her home state. But it doesn’t matter. The votes of people in Florida and Texas would override the will of Michiganders.

All because Michigan Democrats back in 2023 used two-seat majorities in the House and Senate to seek radical change, thinking it would benefit the blue team. Michigan lawmakers should heed the proverbial wisdom: Beware the traps you set for others. Chances are, you’ll fall in yourself.

After Minnesota signed on in May, the National Popular Vote compact has 205 votes. If Michigan joins, it would have 220 out of 270. Democrats are seeking radical change in how America chooses its president. Has anyone asked what you, Michigan voter and taxpayer, think about this?

Disenfranchisement is ugly whenever it happens. When presidents were chosen in 2000 and 2016 who lost the popular vote, people felt wronged by the system. But they weren’t disenfranchised. The Electoral College system is constitutional and long predates us. Changing it requires going the long, hard way. An interstate compact is a shortcut that’s unlikely to survive legal scrutiny.

National Popular Vote is an end run around the Electoral College, and its authors admit this. Tucked inside the House Fiscal Agency analysis of House Bill 4156, as passed by the House Elections Committee, is the real truth:

The agreement would terminate if the Electoral College were abolished.

Someday, when National Popular Vote is litigated at the U.S. Supreme Court, a justice will ask, “Why didn’t you just amend the Constitution?”

And the answer will not be a good one. National Popular Vote overlays a faithful elector system on top of the Electoral College as a placeholder. Except the electors would be faithful to the interstate pact, not to the will of Michiganders. If and when the Electoral College is abolished, the scheme would serve no practical value, and it would dissolve.

But even a post-Electoral College system, based on the nationwide popular vote, would not carry the dangers of House Bill 4156. Nobody could lose a state but win all of its votes under that system. Loser-takes-all is unique to National Popular Vote.

If you like your vote deciding who wins Michigan, you like the current system.

If you want the Michigan vote tally downgraded to a tie-breaker, in the hope that Democrats might win an election or two, National Popular Vote is the plan for you.

James David Dickson is managing editor of Michigan Capitol Confidential. Email him at dickson@mackinac.org.