Oct. 24, 2025 | This Week in Government | Poll: Voters Split on State Economy Being ‘On the Right Track,’ Shift in Politics Running Economic Opinion

Political affiliation underlines some of the key beliefs about the state’s economy, according to a poll released Tuesday by the Detroit Regional Chamber.

Richard Czuba, founder of the Glengariff Group that conducted the poll, told reporters that while the economy used to dictate how a voter feels about the party in power, this trend is reversing, seeing an increase in how a voter views the party influencing how they feel about economic outcomes.

Czuba said this trend began during the COVID-19 pandemic and has followed “extreme polarization” after.

Around 36.6% of Republicans, holding the power in federal government, say the economy is on the right track, a significant increase from13.2% from last year. Strong Republicans and independents are majorly driving up the increase on the state being on the right track as well from May polls.

However, in general, all Michigan voters are split on economic direction with 42.4% saying it’s on the right track and 42.8% saying it’s on the wrong track.

“There are warning signs throughout this poll that don’t bode well for business or Michigan’s economic outlook or competitiveness,” Detroit Regional Chamber President and Chief Executive Officer Sandy K. Baruah said in a statement. “Voters’ concerns appear to be catching up with the realities that Michigan is at a disproportionate economic risk due to much of what is occurring in the global economy, as many Michiganders’ livelihoods are tied to the automotive and manufacturing industry and trade with Canada. Michiganders are clearly becoming increasingly unsettled – across all political affiliations.”

Overall, more than 75% of Michigan voters also indicate they are doing better or the same economically than last year when strong Democrats were much more likely to say this at 41.4%.

Down the line, Michiganders are feeling growing pressure in worsening inflation at 43.1% of voters seeing the economy weaken at a growing margin of 58.7% and 38.2%

Rising costs is also a concern for voters, with 63.4% saying they spend more on groceries, 68.1% paying more for utilities, 60.4% paying more for car and home insurance, and 50% of young people paying more for their rent or mortgage. Around 30% of voters have delayed purchases this year.

With this contradiction of being on the right track but paying for more, Baruah said this could be due to inflation being moderate over the last year instead of increasing.

Czuba said this could chalk up to these partisan differences driving assessments of the economy.

“Voters are telling us they’re paying more,” Czuba said. “They’re paying more on a lot of things, and yet it’s not impacting their views on how they’re doing if you are from the right side of the aisle, so this is very much politics.”

Only 52% of voters say good jobs are available, down 8.1% from May, being the lowest percentage in the past five surveys and down from a peak in just January. Another 77.8% of respondents said they know someone looking for work andhaving a hard time finding a job.

While only 17.5% of households are worried about losing their current jobs, 31.3% of voters in the automotive industry are concerned about losing their jobs.

This disconnect comes from uncertainty from fluctuating trade policies like tariffs, according to the poll. Around 51.3% of voters opposed tariffs while 40.8% were in support.

The opposition has grown in automotive households slightly since May by around 4%, but 60.3% of all voters in the survey said the tariffs will hurt the automotive industry.

The poll also characterized thoughts on artificial intelligence in the workplace. Around 62.5% say they are closely following the conversations, but those who do and do not use AI in their professional lives are relatively split with more of a preference toward not using it.

About 40% of voters do not think AI will have an impact on the state’s economy, but 61% think AI will translate to fewer jobs for Michigan.

“I kind of compare this to the internet when it first emerged as available,” Czuba said. “It was younger people using it. It was people learning to incorporate it into their workplaces. We’re seeing a similar pattern here with artificial intelligence. It seems those who lag in using it are going to fall behind. It’s that simple. It’s going to become a key part of our everyday lives, our everyday work lives, and you either figure out how to embrace it or use it or you fall behind.”

The Senate on Tuesday passed legislation that would place increased transparency measures for budget earmarks into statute, but House Speaker Matt Hall quickly opposed the plan and demanded changes in line with a House-passed transparency proposal.

A substitute version of SB 596, which would require that legislative earmarks must be submitted at least 10 days prior to a vote in both legislative chambers, passed 31-5.

The legislation defines earmarks, or what is called a “legislatively directed spending item.” It also provides exemptions for items including disaster response funds, while requiring information on bill sponsors, recipients of funds and the purpose of the dollars.

Hall, R-Richland Township, rejected the Senate plan out of hand following the vote, telling reporters that the House will not pass any more Senate bills unless the Senate passes the House transparency plan, called the Hall Ethics, Accountability and Transparency plan.

“Ten days’ disclosure is a joke,” Hall said. “It’s fake HEAT. It’ll never pass the House. Never pass the House. These guys are a joke, really, the Democrats.”

Hall said the 10-day period should be 90 days, giving the public, lawmakers and media more time to review proposed earmarks.

“Ten days is very weak,” Hall said. “They need to do HEAT, a reasonable version of HEAT, not fake HEAT.”

Sen. Jeremy Moss, D-Bloomfield Township, said Democrats took the first steps to disclose grant sponsors for earmarks after taking the majority in the Senate.

“We added transparency marks. Today, we are codifying it into law and expanding upon it,” Moss said.

Moss said for further transparency, Hall and House Republicans should take up the Senate bills to expand the Freedom of Information Act to include the Legislature and governor’s office, which the speaker has said do not go far enough and has declined to bring up for a vote.

“We passed these here on the very first day of voting in this chamber, and there they have sat in the House ever since,” Moss said. “And of course, because it wasn’t his bills, he’s pooh-poohed the bills altogether. It’s absolutely ridiculous.”

When asked about expanding FOIA, Hall told reporters: “Nobody cares about FOIA.”

The speaker said people care about the level of government spending, and making the HEAT plan permanent was part of the budget agreement.

An S-2 floor substitute was adopted for SB 596 prior to the vote, which sets a requirement that an earmark must be submitted at least 10 days prior to being voted on in both legislative chambers. The legislative chambers would also be able to require, by rule, that earmarks be submitted at an earlier date.

Additionally, earmarks would have to be posted online at least 10 days prior to any votes. Information posted online for each request would have to include the sponsor and cosponsors, the recipient of the request, a summary of the purpose of the earmark request and a description of the item.

Sen. Kevin Daley, R-Lum; Sen. Jeff Irwin, D-Ann Arbor; Sen. Dan Lauwers, R-Brockway; Sen. Jonathan Lindsey, R-Coldwater; and Sen. Lana Theis, R-Brighton all voted no on SB 596.

Sen. Jim Runestad, R-White Lake, unsuccessfully offered a floor amendment requiring a 60-day period for earmarks to be made public prior to a vote. He said his amendment “would prove that we take oversight seriously and that we’re not just paying it lip service.”

Lindsey said he had two reasons he opposed the bill. First, he said there are “too many gaps” in the process that could be exploited. He suggested setting up a process through joint legislative rules, which he said would have more teeth.

“I don’t believe that this law is actually tight enough to accomplish what it says it’s going to, but more importantly, on a structural level, I think it’s going to fail down the road,” Lindsey said. “We need more transparency, but this isn’t the way to do it.”

Concerns by Theis included the proposed ban on for-profit groups from obtaining earmarks. She also supported the failed Runestad amendment.

“I would like to ask that we put this back to the drawing board,” Theis said. “This is a fantastic idea. We absolutely should have more transparency, but to the extent that we’re limiting it in such a way, I have major concerns.”

Rep. Tom Kunse, R-Clare, sponsor of HB 4420, agreed with Hall that there needs to be more than 10 days for earmark requests to be publicly available.

“Ten days simply doesn’t give the public enough time to meaningfully review where their money is going,” Kunse said in a statement. “Having a set date is key to ensuring there are no surprises and that the process remains consistent year after year. … Michiganders deserve a process that’s predictable, open, and accountable.”

Michigan must increase its maximum penalties for citations issued by the Michigan Occupational Safety and Health Administration or it could lose jurisdiction of oversight to the federal government, senators were told Thursday.

The Senate Labor Committee took up two bills for testimony only that would align MIOSHA with the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration regarding maximum penalties.

Michigan is one of six states that have not yet adopted the federal OSHA maximum penalties, which were set in 2016.

“Since then, Michigan has received audit findings and a warning that failure to update our statute to match federal amounts may result in U.S. OSHA taking over jurisdiction in Michigan,” MIOSHA Director Bart Pickelman said.

The penalties would be aligned with federal OSHA under SB 49 and SB 50.

If OSHA took over jurisdiction of the state’s program, Pickelman said about 600,000 public employees in Michigan would lose the protections that are currently provided under MIOSHA’s program. Federal OSHA does not cover public employees.

The state would also lose program administration in Lansing and legislative control as well as having state stakeholders being able to participate in policy development, Pickelman said.

Currently, MIOSHA’s maximum penalty for serious citations is $7,000, with a maximum penalty for willful or repeat citations being $70,000. This is compared to the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration maximum penalty of $16,550 and maximum penalty of $165,514 for willful or repeat citations.

“MIOSHA penalties are not designed to be punitive,” Pickelman said. “It’s very difficult to put the price on someone’s life.”

The size of an employer can determine potential reductions in penalties of up to 80%, Pickelman said. Employers can receive a penalty reduction of up to 30% for responding to investigations in good faith and a 10% penalty reduction is possible if an employer has not had any citations in the last three years.

“The average amount of penalty for serious citations for all employers, averaged together, is only $1,333, and for employers with 25 or less employees, the average is $637,” Pickelman said.

The bills would also shift all responsibilities for administering and enforcing the Michigan Occupational Safety and Health Act to the Department of Labor and Economic Opportunity.

Currently the act is enforced and administered by the Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs and the Department of Health and Human Services.

Committee members also took testimony only on legislation that would reduce the penalties for failure to report an accidental death on a family farm.

The existing maximum penalty of up to six months’ imprisonment and a $10,000 fine for not reporting an accidental death on a family farm within eight hours would be reduced under HB 4017 to a civil penalty or fine assessed against the employer.

Rep. Jerry Neyer, R-Shepherd, said the bill would give more leniency in filing a report and would allow for an 80% reduction in the penalty.

The practicalities of property taxes were discussed by a House committee on Tuesday, with lawmakers considering various legislation to amend current practices.

HB 4088, sponsored by Rep. Bradley Slagh, R-Zeeland, would make changes to the taxable value cap on homestead eligibility for credit.

“As property values have skyrocketed over the past five years, so have assessed values of homes,” Slagh told the House Finance Committee. “Although Proposal A is doing exactly what it’s supposed to in capping that taxable value increase, there’s no corresponding cap for the assessed value, as that’s required to be set at 50% of the true cash value of a home.”

Under current law, when the taxable value of a home is more than a certain amount, which is currently around $160,000, it makes a taxpayer ineligible to claim the credit. The Legislature set the taxable value limit at $135,000 in 2021 and indexed it to inflation. Slagh noted that Consumer Price Index does not take into full account the increases in the housing market.

The bill would increase the taxable value number to $195,000, which Slagh said was calculated by starting with $135,000 and increasing it based on the increase in the House Price Index since 2020. It would also index the taxable value phase out based on the House Price Index each year, instead of CPI.

Slagh said that he intentionally did not change the income phase out to ensure that credit continues to be available for older homeowners on limited incomes or first-time homeowners

“This bill is pro taxpayer, pro home ownership and just makes common sense,” he said.

It was reported unanimously by the committee.

HB 4041, sponsored by Rep. Tyrone Carter, D-Detroit, would change the General Property Tax Act to allow certain property owners to receive poverty exemptions from property taxes for three years without having to apply. Currently, local assessing units can grant poverty exemptions, but the property owner must apply every year. The bill also includes a requirement for an annual certification by the taxpayer that their circumstances have not changed from the previous year.

The exemption is available for people receiving Social Security, disability, retirement or supplemental as their source of income.

Alvin Horne, deputy CFO and assessor for the City of Detroit, testified in support of the bill.

He stressed the legislation would not make the exemption more widely available, it would simply make it easier for those who qualify for the exemption and for the local taxing unit.

No further action was taken on HB 4041 on Tuesday.

The committee also adopted an H-3 substitute for HB 4799, which specifies that a postmark date or the online submission date must be considered the date of receipt for property taxes.

John Globensky, city treasurer for Grand Rapids, testified in opposition to the bill.

“It doesn’t focus on best practice. I didn’t see any collaboration or communication with those of us that are actually doing this work that actually can show you how many items we get with no postmark,” he said.

He gave other examples of complications, such as when checks are dated versus when they are received.

“I’m not fully opposed to the idea of this type of change, but I think it needs to be reworded and rewritten, and I’d really like to be part of a collaborative process on how best practices are in the municipal environment,” he said.

The Michigan Municipal League and Michigan Townships Association also submitted cards in opposition to the bill (editor’s note: this story has been changed to correct the Michigan Townships Association’s position). The Detroit Regional Chamber and the Michigan Chamber support the bill.

The bill was reported 9-1, with Republicans voting in favor of the legislation, most Democrats abstaining and Rep. Veronica Paiz, D-Harper Woods, voting no.

Nearly three quarters of Michigan high school students are considered to be unprepared for college, according to data from the Michigan League for Public Policy.

Students who are told they are unprepared for college are less likely to attend university or any postsecondary training after graduating from high school, leading to lower income throughout their life, education experts say.

Scores on standardized tests like the ACT and SAT are used to measure college readiness.

For example, on the SAT students are considered “college and career ready” if they reach a 480 and above score in reading and writing and a 530 and above in math. The maximum score on each is 800 and a perfect overall score is 1600.

On the ACT a student must reach a benchmark score in various areas to indicate “college readiness” for each subject.

Scores are declining among K-12 students across the board, including in key indicator areas like third grade reading and eighth grade math, said Alexandra Stamm, an education policy analyst at the League for Public Policy, a nonpartisan research and advocacy organization.

“There’s a variety of reasons that people are pointing to, not only for what is causing these declines but also how we can fix it,” she said.

Educators cite the COVID-19 pandemic’s continuing legacy of adverse effects on scores across all grades because of the disruption and challenges of online learning, Stamm said.

Living in poverty and food insecurity are other factors that negatively impact the ability to learn. About 18% of K-12 students in Michigan live in poverty and around 50% are economically disadvantaged, she said.

Another possible reason for worsening scores is the curriculum and teaching methods used in the classroom, especially for early reading education, she said.

“When I went to school, it was ‘Hooked on Phonics’ and sound everything out,” she said. “The state did this change based on some research, and now the research is changing again to say maybe we should go back to this ‘Hooked on Phonics’ method.”

Decades-long underinvestment in Michigan’s education also plays a role, said Rachel Richards, the league’s fiscal policy and government relations director.

“There’s been a significant gap between what we know we need to put into the system in order to make sure that every kid has access to an adequate education and what we’ve historically put in there,” she said.

One-time investments won’t fix the problem. Continuous year-by-year investments and consistent policy are the only ways to see results, Richards said.

Standardized tests in high school are not an effective way to determine whether a student will ultimately complete university, said Robert LeFevre, the president of Michigan Independent Colleges and Universities.

“If you’re below every single benchmark, meaning you’re not career and college (ready) in any of the benchmarks and still go to college, 50% of those students will still complete,” LeFevre said. “So, at 50%, that’s a coin toss.”

Factors that can predict college success include students’ high school grade point average and attendance records. College students who are dedicated to their studies, show up to class, pay attention and go to office hours will be more likely to complete their degree, he said.

“The tests don’t accomplish, in my view, what they’re designed to accomplish and that is predicting college outcomes,” LeFevre said. “They are an effective barrier for many students because they’re told if their score is below this level, you’re not college material.”

He said the tests have significantly contributed to the decline in the percentage of Michigan students who go to college. In 2019, about 63% of graduating Michigan high schoolers went on to college while only 53% went to college in 2024.

Doug Pratt, the director of public affairs at the Michigan Education Association, said the tests can be predictive of college readiness and college success, but are also predictive of a student’s socioeconomic status.

The MEA is the state’s largest union of teachers and other school personnel.

“When you look at the numbers, the higher your family’s income, the higher your socioeconomic status, the higher the test scores,” Pratt said.

That’s because those students’ basic needs are met and they can afford prep courses and taking the test multiple times.

College and career readiness includes post-secondary training like trade programs or apprenticeships, he said.

“Those can look very different in terms of what readiness is,” said Pratt. “A college entrance exam, which is what the SAT is, can be misleading when you’re looking at the broad scope of college and career readiness.”

The tests are a snapshot in time – but what’s really important is if students are learning, being creative, socializing with others and learning to solve problems, he said.

“We’ve got to continue to make progress on funding for public education,” he said. “It’s not about test scores. It’s about well-rounded, well-educated, ready-to-learn problem solvers, who can succeed in life and can succeed in the workplace and can succeed in our democracy.”