Elections: other; certification that contributions for election administration are not from foreign nationals; require. Amends 1954 PA 116 (MCL 168.1 - 168.992) by adding sec. 645a.
Summary
HB 5198 would add a new section to Michigan election law requiring any non-governmental person or entity that enters into an agreement, membership, or program with a local governmental entity to provide funds, goods, or services for election administration to first file a certification with the secretary of state. The certification must state whether the person is knowingly receiving foreign donations, must be signed under penalty of perjury, and must be renewed annually and updated within five business days if new information changes the certification. The bill defines foreign donation, foreign national, election administration, governmental entity, and person for purposes of the section.
The bill also requires local governmental entities to submit quarterly reports listing providers of election-administration support, and directs the secretary of state to maintain and post certifications online and audit the reports. If a required certification is missing or inaccurate, the governmental entity may not enter into or continue the agreement, membership, or program. The bill further makes conflicting local laws or ordinances void and authorizes the secretary of state to adopt implementing rules.
Impact
HB 5198 would create a new compliance and disclosure regime in the Michigan Election Law for vendors, nonprofits, associations, and other private entities that support election administration for counties, cities, townships, villages, and similar municipal entities. It would add reporting duties for both private participants and local governments, expand secretary of state oversight, and impose a misdemeanor penalty for knowingly false or outdated certifications. The bill would also preempt conflicting local ordinances or policies and could affect the ability of local governments to contract with or participate in programs involving entities that cannot certify the absence of foreign donations.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests the bill was generally supported in the House committee process and on the floor. It was reported from committee twice with unanimous or near-unanimous votes, and it passed House third reading by a wide margin, including an immediate-effect roll call. No committee transcript excerpts were provided, so the record here shows broad legislative support rather than detailed debate. The overall sentiment appears to favor tighter transparency and foreign-influence safeguards in election administration.
Contention
The main point of contention implied by the bill text is the burden it places on private entities and local governments involved in election administration, especially the requirement to certify foreign-donation status under penalty of perjury and to update certifications quickly when circumstances change. Another likely issue is the breadth of the definition of election administration and the bill’s preemption of conflicting local rules, which could be viewed as limiting local discretion. The bill also raises enforcement concerns because a false certification can block participation in election-related programs and expose the filer to criminal penalties, which may be seen as necessary oversight by supporters but potentially onerous by critics.