House Bill 6018 would substantially revise Michigan election law to change how certain statewide offices and university board seats are nominated and elected, but only if a related constitutional amendment is adopted. The bill creates a new system, beginning January 1, 2027, under which the offices of secretary of state and attorney general would be nominated through a general primary election rather than solely by party convention, while lieutenant governor would continue to be nominated at party conventions. It also adds detailed rules for nominating petitions, withdrawal deadlines, vacancy filling, write-in procedures, and ballot printing for those offices.
The bill also updates election-law provisions governing the state board of education, the University of Michigan Board of Regents, the Michigan State University Board of Trustees, and the Wayne State University Board of Governors. It revises nomination, vacancy, election, certification, recount, recall, and ballot-order provisions for those offices, largely to modernize terminology and align them with the bill’s broader changes. In addition, it transfers certain ballot-statement responsibilities to the director of elections and repeals two existing sections of the election law.
If enacted and the required constitutional resolution also takes effect, HB6018 would amend numerous sections of the Michigan Election Law and repeal sections 282 and 286. Its main legal effect would be to create a primary-election nomination process for secretary of state and attorney general, while preserving convention nomination for lieutenant governor, and to impose new petition and ballot administration rules for those offices. It would also alter statutory procedures for the state’s elected university and education boards, affecting candidates, political parties, county election officials, the secretary of state, and the board of state canvassers.
The available record shows no committee transcript or recorded votes, so there is no documented floor or committee debate to gauge sentiment directly. Based on the bill text, the measure appears to be a structural election-law overhaul rather than a partisan policy program, and its tone is administrative and procedural. The absence of recorded opposition or support in the provided materials means sentiment cannot be reliably characterized beyond noting that the bill is detailed and reform-oriented.
The most likely point of contention is the shift from party convention nomination to a primary-election process for secretary of state and attorney general, which changes how parties select nominees and may affect party control over those nominations. Another potential issue is that the bill is contingent on a separate constitutional amendment, making its implementation dependent on voter or legislative approval of that companion measure. Additional friction could arise over the new petition-signature requirements, withdrawal restrictions, and the administrative burden placed on election officials to reprint ballots or manage vacancy procedures.