Legislature: other; legislative approval for rules created by state departments; require. Amends sec. 37, art. IV of the state constitution.
Summary
Senate Joint Resolution B proposes a constitutional amendment to Michigan’s 1963 Constitution that would require legislative approval before certain administrative rules or regulations can take effect. Specifically, any rule or regulation with an estimated compliance cost of $1 million or more over five years after implementation would need approval by a majority of the elected and serving members in each house of the Legislature, acting by concurrent resolution. The resolution would be submitted to voters at the next general election.
The measure also preserves and clarifies a related legislative oversight tool: the Legislature could authorize a joint committee to suspend administrative rules adopted after the last regular legislative session, with any suspension lasting only until the end of the next regular session. In practical terms, the resolution would add a constitutional check on agency rulemaking for higher-cost regulations and strengthen direct legislative control over the regulatory process.
Impact
If adopted, the resolution would amend Article IV, Section 37 of the Michigan Constitution and change how certain administrative rules become effective. It would not repeal existing statutes directly, but it would alter the legal authority of state agencies by making high-cost rules contingent on legislative approval and by reaffirming the Legislature’s ability to suspend rules through a joint committee mechanism. The affected parties would include state administrative agencies, regulated businesses, and individuals subject to agency rules, especially where compliance costs exceed the $1 million threshold.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and caption, the resolution appears to reflect a generally skeptical or cautious view of administrative rulemaking, emphasizing legislative oversight and control over agency regulations. No committee transcripts or recorded votes are provided, so there is no documented debate or formal vote history to indicate broader support or opposition. The available context suggests the proposal was framed as a government-structure and accountability measure rather than a policy change in a specific substantive area.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely the balance of power between the Legislature and administrative agencies. Supporters would favor requiring elected lawmakers to approve expensive regulations, arguing that major compliance costs should not be imposed without direct legislative consent. Opponents would likely argue that the proposal could slow or politicize rulemaking, reduce agency flexibility, and create uncertainty for implementing regulations. The $1 million compliance-cost trigger and the joint committee suspension authority are the most likely focal points of debate, because they determine which rules are covered and how much control the Legislature would have over them.
Legislature: other; enactment of appropriation bills by a certain date; require. Amends sec. 31, art. IV, sec. 18, art V, & sec. 17, art. IX of the state constitution.
Legislature: committees; constitutional amendment to create a bipartisan, bicameral oversight committee to review departmental or agency audits and reports provided by the auditor general; create. Amends sec. 53, art. IV & adds sec. 55 to art. IV of the state constitution.
JOINT RESOLUTION TO APPROVE AND PUBLISH AND SUBMIT TO THE ELECTORS A PROPOSITION OF AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION -- OF THE LEGISLATIVE POWER (Proposes a state constitutional amendment that no department or other entity created by the state would have poser to incur debt in excess of $ 50,000, without express approval from the legislature and voters.)
JOINT RESOLUTION TO APPROVE AND PUBLISH AND SUBMIT TO THE ELECTORS A PROPOSITION OF AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION -- OF THE LEGISLATIVE POWER (Proposes a state constitutional amendment that no department or other entity created by the state would have poser to incur debt in excess of $ 50,000, without express approval from the legislature and voters.)
States findings of the Legislature and approves all temporary and pending rules submitted to the Legislature for review during the 2025 legislative session, with exceptions.
A resolution to direct the Clerk of the House of Representatives to only present to the Governor enrolled House bills finally passed by both houses of the One Hundred Third Legislature.
Relating to nonsubstantive additions to, revisions of, and corrections in enacted codes, to the nonsubstantive codification or disposition of various laws omitted from enacted codes, and to conforming codifications enacted by the 88th Legislature to other Acts of that legislature.