The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact took another step toward reality last week when the Minnesota Legislature approved an omnibus election bill. With Gov. Tim Walz’s signature, Minnesota would pledge its 10 electoral votes to the interstate compact.

Right now, the compact has 195 of the 270 electoral votes needed to take effect. If Minnesota joins on, it will have 205 out of 270. If Michigan joins on, it will have 220 out of 270.

Read it for yourself: Minnesota HF 1830 of 2023

When the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact has enough states to reach 270 electoral votes — enough electoral votes to elect the president — states in the compact will vote as a bloc. Even if a candidate wins the vote tally in a National Popular Vote state, its electoral votes will be awarded to the winner of the so-called national popular vote.

Just one problem: There is no such thing as a “national popular vote.”

According to House Bill 4156, the Michigan version of the bill, the secretaries of state will in National Popular Vote states will decide who won the “popular vote.” Based on this non-certified result, a bloc of at least 270 electoral votes will be granted to the winner.

The bill reads, in part:

The chief election official of each member state shall determine the number of votes for each presidential slate in each state of the United States and in the District of Columbia in which votes have been cast in a statewide popular election and shall add such votes together to produce a “national popular vote total” for each presidential slate.

The chief election official of each member state shall designate the presidential slate with the largest national popular vote total as the “national popular vote winner.”

Read it for yourself: House Bill 4156

National Popular Vote would water down the Michigan vote in presidential races. Under the current system, whoever wins Michigan wins its 15 electoral votes. That means each voter’s vote counts for one out of 7 million residents who are voters. 

Under National Popular Vote, the state vote tally would be reduced to a tiebreaker. Only in the event of a nationwide tie would the Michigan vote tally decide who gets Michigan’s electoral votes.

There is no federal authority for determining a “popular vote” in the United States, and creating one would require an amendment to the Constitution. Thus the interstate compact would leave this vital determination up to a cohort of state secretaries. 

The Mackinac Center opposes the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. 

The Michigan Senate approved a bill Wednesday that would empower the administrative state to craft regulations that exceed federal guidelines.

Senate Bill 14 was introduced by Sen. Sean McCann, D-Kalamazoo, on Jan. 17. It was referred to the Senate Energy and Environment Committee McCann chairs.

Four months later to the day of its introduction, the bill passed 20-18 in the full Senate, in a party-line vote.

Read it for yourself: Senate Bill 14, as passed by the Michigan Senate

In 2018, Gov. Rick Snyder signed Public Act 602. It prohibits state regulators “from adopting or promulgating a rule more stringent than the applicable federally mandated standards,” per the Senate Fiscal Agency analysis of the McCann bill.

Senate Bill 14 would repeal that ban, allowing Michigan regulators to make rules exceeding federal standards.

The vote for Senate Bill 14 went 20-18 down party lines. 

“Some people believe that this prohibition make it difficult for the state to adequately protect its environment and respond to public health emergencies, and so it has been suggested that the prohibiton be deleted,” reads the Senate Fiscal Agency explainer.

The Mackinac Center is not among those people. For more than a decade before Snyder signed “no more stringent” into law, the Mackinac Center had advocated for the policy. 

As former Mackinac Center staffer Russ Harding wrote in 2005:

...a “no-more-stringent” law would prohibit the DEQ [State environmental department] from exceeding a particular federal regulation unilaterally, although it would still allow the Legislature and the governor to pass a tougher regulation if the DEQ presented a compelling case for it. The principle of federalism would be retained; better yet, it would be exercised by elected officials, who are directly accountable to the people of Michigan.

Jason Hayes, the Mackinac Center’s director of energy and environmental policy, offered written testimony against Senate Bill 14 at the committee’s April 13 meeting. Written testimony on the bill split as evenly as the vote itself, with five writing in support, four opposed, and one neutral.

Hayes noed that Public Act 602 of 2018 still allows state regulators to act where federal regulators have not. They just need to demonstrate a “clear and convincing need” to do so.

Hayes wrote that Senate Bill 14 “would represent a regressive step backward for the state of Michigan,” and would “impose an additional layer of expensive and duplicative regulatory pressures on businesses with no real environmental benefits.”

To be enacted into law, the bill would need to pass the House in identical form, then be signed by Gov. Gretchen Whitmer. After passage in the Senate, the bill was referred to the House Natural Resources, Environment, Tourism and Outdoor Recreation Committee.