context_text:
The motion prevailed.
Senator Webber’s statement is as follows:
Over the past several weeks, the majority in this chamber has spent countless hours in committee and on the floor debating issues that, quite frankly, we as state legislators have no control over; but today, we have a real opportunity to do something meaningful, something we do have control over. The only reason these bills are before us today is because I called for immediate action in committee. These bipartisan bills would expand Medicaid coverage to group prenatal care for expecting mothers, support that would make a real difference for families in communities across our state. I’m glad we’re finally taking them up and I’m proud to support these bills. I urge my colleagues to join me in voting “yes.”
Senator Hauck’s statement is as follows:
I rise in support of these bills, but also to share my disappointment. These bipartisan bills are a concrete way that we can help low-income Michiganders receive prenatal services, but they should have become law a long time ago. After being passed by the chamber last year, they were the victim of the House Democrats’ dysfunction at the end of 2024. Now, we’re halfway through 2025 and they’re just now receiving another vote in the Senate. Why? Because for weeks Democrats used the Health Policy Committee to hold press conference disguised as committee hearings to bash Donald Trump. It wasn’t dissimilar to the entire session day Democrats spent last week giving floor speeches about the President instead of finalizing a budget for schools.
Mr. President, we cannot control what happens in Washington, D.C., but these bills are an example of what we can do for the people of Michigan. Democrats just need to take a break from their Trump derangement syndrome to realize it—
I ask for a “yes” vote.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 415, entitled
A bill to amend 1939 PA 280, entitled “The social welfare act,” (MCL 400.1 to 400.119b) by adding section 109t.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


chamber: senate

result: passed

context_text:
Klinefelt
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: Moss
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
Senator Singh moved that the Senate return to consideration of the following bill:
Senate Bill No. 304
The motion prevailed.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 304, entitled
A bill to amend 1899 LA 437, entitled “An act to vacate the Township of Holmes and Village of Mackinac in Mackinac County, State of Michigan, and to Incorporate the City of Mackinac Island in said Mackinac County,” by amending section 1 of chapter IX and section 1 of chapter XVI; and to provide for a referendum .
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, 2/3 of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Third Reading of Bills
Senator Singh moved that the Senate proceed to consideration of the following bills:
House Bill No. 4003
House Bill No. 4046
Senate Bill No. 349
Senate Bill No. 350
The motion prevailed.
The following bill was read a third time:
House Bill No. 4003, entitled
A bill to amend 2001 PA 142, entitled “Michigan memorial highway act,” (MCL 250.1001 to 250.2092) by adding section 1073b.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: Moss
Senator Singh moved that the bill be given immediate effect.
The motion prevailed, 2/3 of the members serving voting therefor.
Pursuant to Joint Rule 20, the full title of the act shall be inserted to read as follows:
“An act to consolidate prior acts naming certain Michigan highways; to provide for the naming of certain highways; to prescribe certain duties of the state transportation department; and to repeal acts and parts of acts and certain resolutions,”
The Senate agreed to the full title.
The following bill was read a third time:
House Bill No. 4046, entitled
A bill to amend 2001 PA 142, entitled “Michigan memorial highway act,” (MCL 250.1001 to 250.2092) by adding section 11d.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: Moss
Senator Singh moved that the bill be given immediate effect.
The motion prevailed, 2/3 of the members serving voting therefor.
Pursuant to Joint Rule 20, the full title of the act shall be inserted to read as follows:
“An act to consolidate prior acts naming certain Michigan highways; to provide for the naming of certain highways; to prescribe certain duties of the state transportation department; and to repeal acts and parts of acts and certain resolutions,”
The Senate agreed to the full title.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 349, entitled
A bill to amend 1976 PA 451, entitled “The revised school code,” by amending section 1279g (MCL 380.1279g), as amended by 2016 PA 170.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Chang
Nays—0
Excused—4
Geiss Johnson McBroom Victory
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: Moss
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 350, entitled
A bill to amend 1979 PA 94, entitled “The state school aid act of 1979,” by amending section 104b (MCL 388.1704b), as amended by 2018 PA 265.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Third Reading of Bills
Senator Singh moved that the Senate proceed to consideration of the following bills:
House Bill No. 4403
House Bill No. 4047
House Bill No. 4048
Senate Bill No. 435
The motion prevailed.
The following bill was read a third time:
House Bill No. 4403, entitled
A bill to amend 1998 PA 58, entitled “Michigan liquor control code of 1998,” by amending sections 105 and 603 (MCL 436.1105 and 436.1603), as amended by 2022 PA 226.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Geiss Lauwers McBroom Victory
Johnson
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: Moss
Pursuant to Joint Rule 20, the full title of the act shall be inserted to read as follows:
“An act to create a commission for the control of the alcoholic beverage traffic within this state, and to prescribe its powers, duties, and limitations; to provide for powers and duties for certain state departments and agencies; to impose certain taxes for certain purposes; to provide for the control of the alcoholic liquor traffic within this state and to provide for the power to establish state liquor stores; to prohibit the use of certain devices for the dispensing of alcoholic vapor; to provide for the care and treatment of alcoholics; to provide for the incorporation of farmer cooperative wineries and the granting of certain rights and privileges to those cooperatives; to provide for the licensing and taxation of activities regulated under this act and the disposition of the money received under this act; to prescribe liability for retail licensees under certain circumstances and to require security for that liability; to provide procedures, defenses, and remedies regarding violations of this act; to provide for the enforcement and to prescribe penalties for violations of this act; to provide for allocation of certain funds for certain purposes; to provide for the confiscation and disposition of property seized under this act; to provide referenda under certain circumstances; and to repeal acts and parts of acts,”
The Senate agreed to the full title.
The following bill was read a third time:
House Bill No. 4047, entitled
A bill to impose civil liability and prescribe criminal penalties for the nonconsensual creation or dissemination of deep fake sexual images; and to provide for remedies.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Geiss Lauwers McBroom Victory
Johnson
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: Moss
Senator Singh moved that the bill be given immediate effect.
The motion prevailed, 2/3 of the members serving voting therefor.
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
The following bill was read a third time:
House Bill No. 4048, entitled
A bill to amend 1927 PA 175, entitled “The code of criminal procedure,” by amending section 17b of chapter XVII (MCL 777.17b), as added by 2002 PA 28.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: Moss
Senator Singh moved that the bill be given immediate effect.
The motion prevailed, 2/3 of the members serving voting therefor.
Pursuant to Joint Rule 20, the full title of the act shall be inserted to read as follows:
“An act to revise, consolidate, and codify the laws relating to criminal procedure and to define the jurisdiction, powers, and duties of courts, judges, and other officers of the court under the provisions of this act; to provide laws relative to the rights of persons accused of criminal offenses and ordinance violations; to provide for the arrest of persons charged with or suspected of criminal offenses and ordinance violations; to provide for bail of persons arrested for or accused of criminal offenses and ordinance violations; to provide for the examination of persons accused of criminal offenses; to regulate the procedure relative to grand juries, indictments, informations , and proceedings before trial; to provide for trials of persons complained of or indicted for criminal offenses and ordinance violations and to provide for the procedure in those trials; to provide for judgments and sentences of persons convicted of criminal offenses and ordinance violations; to establish a sentencing commission and to prescribe its powers and duties; to provide for procedure relating to new trials and appeals in criminal and ordinance violation cases; to provide a uniform system of probation throughout this state and the appointment of probation officers; to prescribe the powers, duties, and compensation of probation officers; to provide penalties for the violation of the duties of probation officers; to provide for procedure governing proceedings to prevent crime and proceedings for the discovery of crime; to provide for fees of officers, witnesses, and others in criminal and ordinance violation cases; to set forth miscellaneous provisions as to criminal procedure in certain cases; to provide penalties for the violation of certain provisions of this act; and to repeal all acts and parts of acts inconsistent with or contravening any of the provisions of this act,”
The Senate agreed to the full title.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 435, entitled
A bill to amend 1967 PA 281, entitled “Income tax act of 1967,” by amending section 527a (MCL 206.527a), as amended by 2022 PA 266.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
The House of Representatives has passed the bill, ordered that it be given immediate effect and pursuant to Joint Rule 20, inserted the full title.
The Senate agreed to the full title.
The bill was referred to the Secretary for enrollment printing and presentation to the Governor.
Third Reading of Bills
Senator Singh moved that the Senate proceed to consideration of the following bill:
Senate Bill No. 360
The motion prevailed.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 360, entitled
A bill to amend 2004 PA 452, entitled “Identity theft protection act,” by amending sections 3, 12, and 12b (MCL 445.63, 445.72, and 445.72b), section 3 as amended by 2010 PA 318 and sections 12 and 12b as amended by 2010 PA 315, and by adding sections 11a, 11b, 20, 20a, 20b, and 20c; and to repeal acts and parts of acts.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Bumstead Hoitenga Nesbitt Webber
Daley Huizenga Runestad
Excused—3
Johnson McBroom Outman
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: Moss
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 361, entitled
A bill to amend 2005 PA 244, entitled “Deferred presentment service transactions act,” by amending section 22 (MCL 487.2142).
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Bumstead Hoitenga Nesbitt Webber
Daley Huizenga Runestad
Excused—3
Johnson McBroom Outman
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: Moss
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 362, entitled
A bill to amend 1931 PA 328, entitled “The Michigan penal code,” by amending section 159g (MCL 750.159g), as amended by 2022 PA 174.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Bumstead Hoitenga Nesbitt Webber
Daley Huizenga Runestad
Excused—3
Johnson McBroom Outman
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: Moss
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 363, entitled
A bill to amend 1846 RS 1, entitled “Of the statutes,” by amending section 9 (MCL 8.9), as added by 2015 PA 250.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Bumstead Hoitenga Nesbitt Webber
Daley Huizenga Runestad
Excused—3
Johnson McBroom Outman
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: Moss
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 364, entitled
A bill to amend 1927 PA 175, entitled “The code of criminal procedure,” by amending section 10c of chapter II (MCL 762.10c), as amended by 2013 PA 215.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Johnson McBroom Outman
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: Moss
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
Senator Singh moved that the Senate proceed to consideration of the following bill:
Senate Bill No. 246
The motion prevailed.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 246, entitled
A bill to amend 1994 PA 451, entitled “Natural resources and environmental protection act,” by amending sections 11102, 11103, 11104, 11108, 11109, 11110, 11125, 11132, 11512, 11514b, 11525a, 62501, and 62509 (MCL 324.11102, 324.11103, 324.11104, 324.11108, 324.11109, 324.11110, 324.11125, 324.11132, 324.11512, 324.11514b, 324.11525a, 324.62501, and 324.62509), sections 11102 and 11125 as amended by 2010 PA 357, section 11104 as amended and section 11132 as added by 2018 PA 688, section 11108 as amended by 2013 PA 73, section 11109 as added by 2018 PA 689, section 11110 as amended by 1995 PA 61, sections 11512 and 11514b as amended by 2022 PA 245, section 11525a as amended by 2023 PA 140, section 62501 as amended by 1998 PA 467, and section 62509 as amended by 2004 PA 325, and by adding sections 11122, 62508b, and 62509d; and to repeal acts and parts of acts.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Not long after, we were stunned to learn that radioactive waste from the Manhattan Project was being shipped into Wayne Disposal in Van Buren Township. Imagine the outrage of families, workers, and local leaders who were suddenly told that waste from the dawn of the nuclear age would be buried just minutes from their homes, from their schools, and from their workplaces. Communities organized, and leaders across every level of government stood together. Thanks to that strength, our local communities filed a lawsuit and were able to block additional shipments and protect the 1.8 million residents of Wayne County, but only after winning their court case. Let’s be clear: it should not take outrage, lawsuits, and court rulings every time to keep Michigan from becoming America’s dumping ground. That’s not sustainable, that’s not safe, and that’s not justice.
This legislation today makes sure that Michigan can stand on its own two feet and say with one voice, We will not be your dumping ground. My bills will finally raise tipping fees because right now, we are one of the cheapest places in the country to dump garbage and hazardous waste. That is unacceptable for a state that holds 90 percent of the nation’s fresh water. This legislation will also ban new hazardous waste wells, where toxic materials are injected into the earth and left to sit beneath the bedrock—beneath our communities, our farmland, and our water. They will require EGLE to put real limits on hazardous waste disposal, and develop a comprehensive statewide plan, including a five-year moratorium planning period so we can stop any new facilities from getting approved or from expanding, while we get ahead of these problems instead of reacting after the fact. Because right now, even after all this pushback, Wayne Disposal is asking for a massive expansion, and unless the Republicans in the State House join us, they will likely get it, which would send more toxic waste flowing into our state. That is unacceptable. However, our bills today would stop them from expanding.
This is what government at its best looks like: stepping in, protecting people, and standing up for the common good. We have a choice. Do we allow Michigan to be a dumping ground for the nation’s toxic waste? Or do we rise to the responsibility that we have to protect our people, our land, and our water? Let’s do the right thing. Join me in protecting our state by voting “yes” on these bills, because Michigan is done being the nation’s dumping ground. Thank you to our local leaders for standing shoulder to shoulder with us in this fight. Thank you to my colleagues who’ve been working on this for a long time, including the other Senator from Downriver. Let’s get it done.
Senator Irwin’s statement is as follows:
I rise to encourage my colleagues to support this legislation, and to respond to the comments that were just made from the Senator from the 16th District. You know, there was a breathless claim about what a large tax increase this would represent, and I just want to point out that there’s a certain aspect of mathematics that when you get incredibly small numbers, you can multiply them by big numbers and still end up with a relatively small number. That’s how decimals and fractions work. And here in Michigan, we have bizarrely low tipping fees. Our tipping fees are 32 cents a ton, when the states around us average over $5 a ton. Wisconsin, our neighbor, has a $13 per ton fee; ours is just over 30 cents. When you’re talking about increasing that by X percent, the final amount this proposes increasing it to is actually pretty small. It amounts to something like $5 a year per resident. So while the House Republicans are talking about increasing gas taxes, which is going to be a significant impact on Michigan pocketbooks, we’re talking about a trash fee that is infinitesimally tiny and has a tiny, tiny impact on people’s budgets, but has a big impact on making Michigan a magnet for trash from all over the region.
I just want to point out to my colleagues, this is something that has been lingering, festering in Michigan for a long, long, long time. I worked on this issue back in 2006—back when I was a local government official—when we were pointing out that Michigan has such abnormally low tipping fees that we’re a magnet for out-of-state trash. We were talking in 2006 about what we can do to stop out-of-state trash. The governor at that time was saying, We ought to increase tipping fees. The governor after that—Governor Snyder—when I was in the State House proposed the same thing, proposed increasing tipping fees in the same way over 10 years ago. Every time it gets proposed—it gets proposed by Democratic governors, it gets proposed by Republican governors, and it gets proposed by every sensible person who looks at this issue, but we continue to fail to do it, continue to leave Michigan open as a dumping ground for our neighbors. And the sort of, you know, political games that we heard just a second ago being played are exactly why we’re stuck in this spot as the region’s cesspool.
Let’s stop trying to play political games and just do the right thing for once. Our fee is incredibly tiny. Senator Camilleri is trying to do something to protect our environment, to protect future generations, and to raise this fee that governors of both parties—for decades—have been saying is far too low. I wanted to rise to say that here in the body today. Thank you, Mr. President.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 247, entitled
A bill to amend 1994 PA 451, entitled “Natural resources and environmental protection act,” by amending section 62506a (MCL 324.62506a), as added by 1996 PA 168.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Third Reading of Bills
Senator Singh moved that the Senate proceed to consideration of the following bills:
Senate Bill No. 394
Senate Bill No. 395
Senate Bill No. 396
Senate Bill No. 398
The motion prevailed.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 394, entitled
A bill to establish the ownership of and conveyance rights associated with subsurface pore space.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
I am not against green energy in itself, but I am against government mandates, especially when they make energy more costly and unreliable for Michigan residents. These mandates are based on an ideology that carbon dioxide is inherently bad. When I ask some supporters of this legislation the basic question, “What should our target level of carbon be?” I don’t get any answers. As far as I can tell, the goal is to reduce carbon in our atmosphere as much as possible. What would happen if we actually went all the way, and successfully rid carbon from our planet’s atmosphere? Well, to start, the earth’s temperature would drop to an uninhabitable level, plant life would die, and we would run out of oxygen. The point being, carbon is essential to life.
If we really want to get serious about addressing greenhouse gases, we should maybe be addressing what amounts to half of the greenhouse effect. Dihydrogen monoxide. This substance causes many thousands to die annually, it is the cause of many natural disasters, and in the winter it causes many traffic accidents. Perhaps we should create a factory-sized dehumidifier and get this substance out of our atmosphere. Of course, this is commonly known as water, and we should get it out of the air? Well obviously, I’m joking here, but I exaggerate to illustrate a point that we need to accept that there is a natural order of things we cannot control. We need carbon dioxide to live. That does not mean we should eliminate all regulations. It was not that long ago when many of our urban centers suffered from unchecked hydro-carbon emissions, leading to severely unhealthy air pollution. I definitely think regulations controlling pollutions serve a common good, but we seem to be going too far on regulating carbon emissions in general.
The bottom line is that I support this legislation before us today because it’s a step toward improving our energy policy. This should be an easy win. However, the recent energy reforms passed by Michigan Democrats prohibited carbon capture as counting towards clean energy when it’s used to support oil production. As one can see, I have mixed feelings about this bill. On one hand, the support itself makes practical sense. On the other hand, looking at the bill in the context of our current energy policies in Michigan, the benefits become more convoluted. The mandates approved recently in Michigan are unworkable. To conclude, I support this bill based on its own merits. That being said, I look forward to seeing our unsustainable energy policies repealed next term.
Senator Albert’s second statement is as follows:
I wanted to respond to a couple of questions that my colleague from the 15th District mentioned.
The first one was a question of, Why are we—I presume he means us on the politically right side of the spectrum—why are we opposed to renewable resources? I didn’t want to speak for everybody, but I think, by and large, we’re not opposed to renewable resources. I disagree with the premise. I know, I specifically, personally, am not opposed to renewable resources for clean energy. What I’m opposed to is the government mandates of it, and mandating a technology on a scale that it’s not ready for. That’s what the problem is, because in fact, that impacts real people in a negative way. It makes the energy that they need, to survive and to live, too expensive. So I guess that’s the answer to that question.
The next one was about carbon capture being expensive, Why would we want to support a policy that’s going to increase costs? Again, I disagree with the premise. It is the Democrats’ energy bill that was passed last term that mandated if we’re going to allow gas generation of electric energy, it’s going to have to have at least 80 percent of carbon capture. We didn’t put that mandate in, you guys did. So it’s your mandate that you guys passed last term, that is causing this additional cost to come in. The question of this bill is whether or not we should allow the permitting at the state level or not, not whether or not we should mandate carbon capture. So, for both of those questions, I disagree with the premise, and I feel like we’re on strong ground to be a “yes” on this.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 395, entitled
A bill to amend 1929 PA 16, entitled “An act to regulate the business of carrying or transporting, buying, selling, or dealing in crude oil or petroleum or its products, or certain substances consisting primarily of carbon dioxide through pipe lines; to authorize the use of public highways and the condemnation of private property; to regulate the purchase and storage of crude oil or petroleum or certain substances consisting primarily of carbon dioxide; to provide for the control and regulation of all corporations, associations, and persons engaged in such business, by the Michigan public service commission; to define the powers and duties of the commission in relation thereto; and to prescribe penalties,” by amending section 1 (MCL 483.1), as amended by 2014 PA 85.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
16. Amend page 24, line 5, after “ any ” by inserting “ surface or other ”.
17. Amend page 24, line 5, after “ the ” by striking out “ division ” and inserting “ department. ”.
18. Amend page 24, line 6, after “ the ” by striking out “ division ” and inserting “ department ”.
19. Amend page 24, line 9, after “ under ” by inserting “ state rules and ”.
20. Amend page 24, line 12, after “ under ” by inserting “ state rules and ”.
21. Amend page 24, line 13, after “ other ” by inserting “ state rules and ”.
22. Amend page 24, line 15, after “ (c) ” by striking out “ Project ” and inserting “ Location-specific ”.
23. Amend page 24, line 16, after “ reservoir, ” by striking out “ and ”.
24. Amend page 24, line 17, after “ emplaced ” by striking out the balance of the subdivision and inserting a comma and “ and the carbon sequestration project and carbon dioxide stream will not contaminate groundwater or pose a risk to human health or the environment. ”.
The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
It disturbs me that we might not adopt these amendments. I’m encouraging everybody, regardless of how you feel about climate change, to vote “yes” on these amendments.
The first amendment would allow EGLE to have the authority to deny a permit if it will pose a risk to groundwater, drinking water, public health, and the environment. That seems pretty simple, and in a community like mine that has a lot of pore space, I think, and that may receive a lot of carbon, I can tell you that we have a lot of well issues already in groundwater. Issues from other things that have been put into our ground or taken out so my community would really appreciate your “yes” vote. It wouldn’t allow sequestration or unitization of ecologically sensitive areas or in local parks or natural areas. It would require setbacks from surface water, local parks, and residences for sequestration for pipelines.
The second amendment would allow liability to transfer to the state 50 years after the last injection. The current draft includes a loophole that allows the division director to transfer liability sooner. The state taking on liability for industrial, privately-led activity is extreme and this is just putting a few more guardrails on that extreme change.
The third amendment means that in the case of drinking water, alternative drinking water would be provided within 24 hours because this could poison somebody’s drinking water, and right now there are no provisions for them to have safe drinking water.
Fourth: it increases the per-ton fee to $1.20. We’re already quibbling about dumping fees in Michigan. Let’s do it right this time.
Amendment No. 5: ensure that we are not using carbon sequestration fees or royalties generated from state pore space to destroy forests or fund ineffective carbon credit programs.
Again, I urge a “yes” vote.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 398, entitled
A bill to amend 1978 PA 368, entitled “Public health code,” by amending sections 6230 and 6234 (MCL 333.6230 and 333.6234), as added by 2012 PA 501.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


result: adopted

context_text:
Whereas, Despite these critical supports, food banks across Michigan have reported an 18 percent increase
in demand over the past year, reflecting the persistent challenges families face in accessing enough nutritious
food; and
Whereas, Hunger Action Month is a time to raise awareness, inspire action, and recognize the tireless
efforts of food banks, volunteers, programs, and advocates working to end hunger in Michigan; now,
therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate, That the members of this legislative body recognize September 2025 as
Hunger Action Month.
The question being on the adoption of the resolution,
Senator Singh requested the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered, 1/5 of the members present voting therefor.
The resolution was adopted, a majority of the members voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
The motion prevailed.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 501, entitled
A bill to amend 1978 PA 368, entitled “Public health code,” by amending sections 16335, 17801, and
17821 (MCL 333.16335, 333.17801, and 333.17821), as amended by 2009 PA 55, and by adding
sections 17820a and 17820b.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
Senator Santana offered the following substitute:
Substitute (S-1).
The substitute was adopted, a majority of the members serving voting therefor.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
In The Chair: Moss
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
The following bill was read a third time:
House Bill No. 4101, entitled
A bill to amend 1978 PA 368, entitled “Public health code,” (MCL 333.1101 to 333.25211) by adding
section 16187a.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
Senator Santana offered the following substitute:
Substitute (S-2).
The substitute was adopted, a majority of the members serving voting therefor.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Senator Singh moved that the Senate proceed to consideration of the following bill:
Senate Bill No. 204
The motion prevailed.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 204, entitled
A bill to amend 1976 PA 451, entitled “The revised school code,” (MCL 380.1 to 380.1852) by adding section 1258.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
Senator Chang offered the following substitute:
Substitute (S-5).
The substitute was adopted, a majority of the members serving voting therefor.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Senator Singh moved that the rules be suspended and that the following bill, now on the order of Third Reading of Bills, be placed on its immediate passage:
Senate Bill No. 533
The motion prevailed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor.
Third Reading of Bills
Senator Singh moved that the Senate proceed to consideration of the following bill:
Senate Bill No. 533
The motion prevailed.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 533, entitled
A bill to amend 1954 PA 116, entitled “Michigan election law,” (MCL 168.1 to 168.992) by adding section 931c.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
The motion prevailed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor.
Third Reading of Bills
Senator Singh moved that the Senate proceed to consideration of the following bills:
Senate Bill No. 413
Senate Bill No. 293
Senate Bill No. 294
The motion prevailed.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 413, entitled
A bill to amend 1978 PA 368, entitled “Public health code,” by amending sections 18221, 18223, 18233, and 18237 (MCL 333.18221, 333.18223, 333.18233, and 333.18237), section 18221 as amended by 2006 PA 395, section 18223 as amended by 2018 PA 24, section 18233 as amended by 1994 PA 234, and section 18237 as amended by 1998 PA 496.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Cherry
Nays—0
Excused—4
Bumstead Damoose Hauck Runestad
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: Moss
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 293, entitled
A bill to amend 1931 PA 328, entitled “The Michigan penal code,” by amending section 50 (MCL 750.50), as amended by 2019 PA 135.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Nays—4
Albert Bellino Lindsey McBroom
Excused—4
Bumstead Damoose Hauck Runestad
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: Moss
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 294, entitled
A bill to amend 1931 PA 328, entitled “The Michigan penal code,” by amending section 50b (MCL 750.50b), as amended by 2018 PA 452.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Administrative Rules (5 members) (see MCL 24.235)
Legislative Council (6 members and 3 alternates) (see MCL 4.1103)
Legislative Retirement Board of Trustees (2 members) (see MCL 38.1026)
Library of Michigan Board of Trustees (2 members) (see MCL 397.14)
Michigan Commission on Uniform State Laws (2 members) (see MCL 4.1301)
Michigan Council on Future Mobility (2 members) (see MCL 257.665)
Michigan Law Revision Commission (2 members) (see MCL 4.1401)
Senate Fiscal Agency Board of Governors (5 members) (see MCL 4.1501).
The question being on the adoption of the resolution,
Senator Lauwers requested the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered, 1/5 of the members present voting therefor.
The resolution was adopted, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


result: unknown

context_text:
Winnie Brinks
Senate Majority Leader
The standing committee appointments were approved, a majority of the members serving voting therefor.
The communication was referred to the Secretary for record.
Assistant President Pro Tempore
The President pro tempore, Senator Jeremy Moss, announced that the next order of business was the election of an Assistant President pro tempore of the Senate.
Senator Brinks nominated Senator Cherry as an Assistant President pro tempore of the Senate.
Senator Singh seconded the nomination.
Senator Nesbitt nominated Senator Bellino as an Assistant President pro tempore of the Senate.
Senator Lauwers seconded the nomination.
The question being on the election of Senator Cherry as an Assistant President pro tempore of the Senate,
The election was approved, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Senate Bill No. 579
Senate Bill No. 273
The motion prevailed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor.
Third Reading of Bills
Senator Singh moved that the Senate proceed to consideration of the following bill:
House Bill No. 4524
The motion prevailed.
The following bill was read a third time:
House Bill No. 4524, entitled
A bill to amend 1945 PA 200, entitled “An act to define a marketable record title to an interest in land; to require the filing of notices of claim of interest in such land in certain cases within a definite period of time and to require the recording thereof; to make invalid and of no force or effect all claims with respect to the land affected thereby where no such notices of claim of interest are filed within the required period; to provide for certain penalties for filing slanderous notices of claim of interest, and to provide certain exceptions to the applicability and operation thereof,” by amending the title and sections 1, 1a, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 8 (MCL 565.101, 565.101a, 565.102, 565.103, 565.104, 565.105, 565.106, and 565.108), sections 1 and 3 as amended by 2024 PA 20, section 1a as added and section 6 as amended by 1997 PA 154, sections 2 and 5 as amended by 2018 PA 572, and section 4 as amended by 2022 PA 235, and by adding section 5a.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Senator Singh moved that the bill be given immediate effect.
The motion prevailed, 2/3 of the members serving voting therefor.
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 418, entitled
A bill to amend 1982 PA 250, entitled “Child abuse and neglect prevention act,” by amending the title and sections 2, 3, 4, 9, 10, and 12 (MCL 722.602, 722.603, 722.604, 722.609, 722.610, and 722.612), section 2 as amended by 2018 PA 60 and section 4 as amended by 2005 PA 82.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
Senator Webber offered the following substitute:
Substitute (S-2).
The substitute was adopted, a majority of the members serving voting therefor.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: Moss
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
Senator Webber asked and was granted unanimous consent to make a statement and moved that the statement be printed in the Journal.
The motion prevailed.
Senator Webber’s statement is as follows:
This substitute would restore statutory oversight of the Children’s Trust Fund to the office of the Auditor General. I ask for your “yes” vote on this substitute to restore proper oversight, accountability, and transparency.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 419, entitled
A bill to amend 1982 PA 249, entitled “An act to establish the state children’s trust fund in the department of treasury; and to provide certain powers and duties of the department of treasury with respect to the trust fund,” by amending section 1 (MCL 21.171), as amended by 2014 PA 306.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Chang Irwin Outman Wojno
Nays—0
Excused—1
Johnson
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: Moss
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 420, entitled
A bill to amend 1976 PA 267, entitled “Open meetings act,” by amending section 3a (MCL 15.263a), as amended by 2023 PA 214.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Bumstead Huizenga Outman Webber
Damoose Lauwers
Excused—1
Johnson
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: Moss
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 421, entitled
A bill to amend 1949 PA 300, entitled “Michigan vehicle code,” by amending section 811j (MCL 257.811j), as amended by 2006 PA 562.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Senate Bill No. 542
The motion prevailed.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 109, entitled
A bill to amend 1976 PA 390, entitled “Emergency management act,” by amending the title and sections 18 and 19 (MCL 30.418 and 30.419), the title as amended by 2006 PA 267, section 18 as amended by 2018 PA 263, and section 19 as amended by 2018 PA 264, and by adding sections 18a and 18b.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
Senator Theis offered the following amendment:
1. Amend page 4, line 16, by striking out all of subsection (7) and inserting:
“ (7) The legislature shall establish procedures governing grant applications, award determinations, eligible expenditures, and program administration that are related to the hazard mitigation fund. ”.
The amendment was not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
The motion prevailed.
Senator Theis’ statement is as follows:
I agree with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle that we absolutely need more money in our disaster relief fund and that these monies ought to be available to assist communities in times of crisis, but placing large sums of money—of individual taxpayers’ dollars—into a fund that’s overseen by one person with rulemaking and grant distribution left entirely to their discretion is irresponsible and opens the door to waste, fraud, and abuse. We’ve seen this time and time again, particularly in the disaster space, from questionable contractors and unchecked payouts. While I have significant respect for our men and women who serve and protect us in the Michigan State Police force, it is extremely troubling that this legislation delegates the entire grant application and selection process to a department director whose own staff recently issued a vote of no confidence. Even if he were the most honorable public servant, any law enforcement officer would tell you that their expertise lies in law enforcement, not with disaster response, and specifically not with analyzing the dollars needed by communities following a disaster. It is irresponsible for us to centralize this much unchecked authority in one office without the proper oversight or professional background to ensure funds are spent wisely and effectively. For these reasons, I encourage my colleagues to join me in voting “no.”
Senator Theis asked and was granted unanimous consent to make a statement and moved that the statement be printed in the Journal.
The motion prevailed.
Senator Theis’ statement is as follows:
I’m speaking to my amendment. What this does is take away from one single individual who would have significant power with receiving money, deciding how the money is going to be spent, setting up the rules for all of that. It brings the power back into the Legislature to set up the guidelines for the grants, and then still allows the money to flow within the bill the way it’s set up. I ask for a “yes” vote on my amendment.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 382, entitled
A bill to create a financial aid program for certain residents of this state who attend certain postsecondary educational institutions in this state; to provide for the administration of the financial aid program; to provide for the promulgation of rules; and to provide for the powers and duties of certain state officers and entities.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Senators Albert and Theis, under their constitutional right of protest (Art. 4, Sec. 18), protested against the passage of Senate Bill No. 382 and moved that the statements they made during the discussion of the bill be printed as their reasons for voting “no.”
The motion prevailed.
Senator Albert’s statement is as follows:
I have kids. I want college to be affordable. But we can’t keep going back to Michigan taxpayers to pay for these types of programs. It’s easy to make promises like those outlined in the Michigan Achievement Scholarship. It’s much harder to actually pay for them. The cost of this scholarship program is rising as more students become eligible, and the costs are expected to be approaching $600 million a year in only two fiscal years from now. That is more than twice as much as we pay in the current fiscal year. Simply put, this is a program we can’t afford. Thank you, and I urge a “no” vote.
Senator Theis’ statement is as follows:
While I strongly support access to education and ensuring Michigan’s workforce is trained for the next generation, employers need help—that’s true—I can’t support this specific piece of legislation. If we’re going to spend taxpayers’ hard-earned dollars, I believe there should be a clear, specific purpose of where the taxpayer funds are going. Well-trained workforce is valuable; however, this bill does not distinguish between degrees that serve the needs of our economy and those that exist only in academia. Every day I hear from constituents struggling to make ends meet and put their own children through college. I truly believe that Michiganders do not want their hard-earned dollars funding degrees in areas that in the end will not contribute to our workforce. Although I appreciate the bill’s transparency measures, tracking degree completion, and outcomes, this is a more appropriate arena for a pilot program, not a costly unaffordable statewide expansion. Human nature shows us that people value what they work hard to achieve. When it’s given away for free, that value diminishes. Without adding additional safeguards such as clawing back funds if a student quits, this program risks waste, something we’ve seen over and over again in programs like this.
Lastly, when government writes the check, costs go up. Few things are more costly to the taxpayer than something the government gives away for free. This legislation sets the stage for driving up the price for higher education, making it unaffordable for anyone not on government assistance. Ultimately, this is a blueprint for turning grades 13 and 14 into a publicly funded entitlement regardless of whether the education serves a functional role in society. For these reasons, I encourage my colleagues to join me in voting “no.”
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 383, entitled
A bill to create a financial aid program for certain residents of this state who attend certain occupational training programs in this state; to provide for the administration of the financial aid program; to provide for the promulgation of rules; and to provide for the powers and duties of certain state officers and entities.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Bellino Hoitenga Nesbitt Victory
Daley Lauwers Runestad
Excused—1
Johnson
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: Moss
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 540, entitled
A bill to create a Michigan National Guard child care assistance program to provide child care assistance to certain Michigan National Guard members; to provide for the powers and duties of certain state governmental officers and entities; and to authorize the promulgation of rules.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Bellino Hauck Runestad Theis
Bumstead Hoitenga
Excused—1
Johnson
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: Moss
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 541, entitled
A bill to create the Michigan National Guard member benefit fund; and to provide for the administration of and distributions from the fund.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Bellino Hauck Runestad Theis
Bumstead Hoitenga
Excused—1
Johnson
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: Moss
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 542, entitled
A bill to amend 2014 PA 259, entitled “Michigan national guard tuition assistance act,” by amending sections 3 and 4 (MCL 32.433 and 32.434), as amended by 2023 PA 33.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Senate Bill No. 575
Senate Bill No. 576
Senate Bill No. 577
Senate Bill No. 578
Senate Bill No. 579
Senate Bill No. 273
The motion prevailed.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 574, entitled
A bill to amend 2000 PA 489, entitled “Michigan trust fund act,” by amending section 7 (MCL 12.257), as amended by 2024 PA 188.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Daley Lauwers Outman Webber
Damoose
Excused—1
Johnson
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: Moss
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 575, entitled
A bill to amend 2001 PA 34, entitled “Revised municipal finance act,” by amending sections 303 and 319 (MCL 141.2303 and 141.2319), section 303 as amended by 2011 PA 5 and section 319 as amended by 2002 PA 541.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Daley Lauwers Outman Webber
Damoose
Excused—1
Johnson
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: Moss
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 576, entitled
A bill to amend 1984 PA 431, entitled “The management and budget act,” (MCL 18.1101 to 18.1594) by adding section 475.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Daley Lauwers Outman Webber
Damoose
Excused—1
Johnson
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: Moss
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 577, entitled
A bill to amend 1976 PA 399, entitled “Safe drinking water act,” by amending section 9 (MCL 325.1009), as amended by 2021 PA 107.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Daley Lauwers Outman Webber
Damoose
Excused—1
Johnson
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: Moss
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 578, entitled
A bill to amend 1951 PA 51, entitled “An act to provide for the classification of all public roads, streets, and highways in this state, and for the revision of that classification and for additions to and deletions from each classification; to set up and establish the Michigan transportation fund; to provide for the deposits in the Michigan transportation fund of specific taxes on motor vehicles and motor vehicle fuels; to provide for the allocation of funds from the Michigan transportation fund and the use and administration of the fund for transportation purposes; to promote safe and efficient travel for motor vehicle drivers, bicyclists, pedestrians, and other legal users of roads, streets, and highways; to set up and establish the truck safety fund; to provide for the allocation of funds from the truck safety fund and administration of the fund for truck safety purposes; to set up and establish the Michigan truck safety commission; to establish certain standards for road contracts for certain businesses; to provide for the continuing review of transportation needs within the state; to authorize the state transportation commission, counties, cities, and villages to borrow money, issue bonds, and make pledges of funds for transportation purposes; to authorize counties to advance funds for the payment of deficiencies necessary for the payment of bonds issued under this act; to provide for the limitations, payment, retirement, and security of the bonds and pledges; to provide for appropriations and tax levies by counties and townships for county roads; to authorize contributions by townships for county roads; to provide for the establishment and administration of the state trunk line fund, local bridge fund, comprehensive transportation fund, and certain other funds; to provide for the deposits in the state trunk line fund, critical bridge fund, comprehensive transportation fund, and certain other funds of money raised by specific taxes and fees; to provide for definitions of public transportation functions and criteria; to define the purposes for which Michigan transportation funds may be allocated; to provide for Michigan transportation fund grants; to provide for review and approval of transportation programs; to provide for submission of annual legislative requests and reports; to provide for the establishment and functions of certain advisory entities; to provide for conditions for grants; to provide for the issuance of bonds and notes for transportation purposes; to provide for the powers and duties of certain state and local agencies and officials; to provide for the making of loans for transportation purposes by the state transportation department and for the receipt and repayment by local units and agencies of those loans from certain specified sources; to investigate and study the tolling of roads, streets, highways, or bridges; and to repeal acts and parts of acts,” by amending sections 10a and 11g (MCL 247.660a and 247.661g), section 10a as amended by 1992 PA 137 and section 11g as added by 2016 PA 246.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


motion_text: The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Daley Lauwers Outman Webber
Damoose
Excused—1
Johnson
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: Moss
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 273, entitled
A bill to amend 1994 PA 451, entitled “Natural resources and environmental protection act,” by amending section 8715 (MCL 324.8715), as amended by 2021 PA 123.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Senator Lauwers moved that Senator Daley be excused from the balance of today’s session.
The motion prevailed.
Senator Singh moved that the Senate proceed to consideration of the following bills:
Senate Bill No. 563
Senate Bill No. 565
Senate Bill No. 566
The motion prevailed.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 563, entitled
A bill to amend 1945 PA 327, entitled “Aeronautics code of the state of Michigan,” by amending section 77 (MCL 259.77), as amended by 1996 PA 370.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Bumstead Huizenga Nesbitt Victory
Damoose Lauwers Outman Webber
Excused—2
Daley Johnson
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: Moss
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 565, entitled
A bill to amend 2000 PA 489, entitled “Michigan trust fund act,” by amending section 3a (MCL 12.253a), as added by 2023 PA 174.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Bumstead Huizenga Nesbitt Victory
Damoose Lauwers Outman Webber
Excused—2
Daley Johnson
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: Moss
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 566, entitled
A bill to amend 1969 PA 317, entitled “Worker’s disability compensation act of 1969,” by amending sections 625 and 835 (MCL 418.625 and 418.835), section 625 as amended by 2012 PA 83 and section 835 as amended by 2011 PA 266.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Senator Singh moved that the rules be suspended and that the following bill, now on the order of Third Reading of Bills, be placed on its immediate passage:
House Bill No. 4161
The motion prevailed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor.
Third Reading of Bills
Senator Singh moved that the Senate proceed to consideration of the following bill:
House Bill No. 4161
The motion prevailed.
The following bill was read a third time:
House Bill No. 4161, entitled
A bill to make interim general appropriations for various state departments and agencies, the legislative branch, the judicial branch, and certain other purposes, for the period of October 1, 2025 to October 8, 2025; to provide for certain conditions on appropriations; to provide for the expenditure of the appropriations; to provide for the disposition of fees and other income received by various state departments and agencies, the legislative branch, and the judicial branch; and to declare the effect of this act.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Senator Singh moved that the rules be suspended and that the following bill, now on the order of Third Reading of Bills, be placed on its immediate passage:
House Bill No. 4706
The motion prevailed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor.
Third Reading of Bills
Senator Singh moved that the Senate proceed to consideration of the following bill:
House Bill No. 4706
The motion prevailed.
The following bill was read a third time:
House Bill No. 4706, entitled
A bill to make, supplement, adjust, and consolidate appropriations for various state departments and agencies, the judicial branch, and the legislative branch for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2026; to provide for certain conditions on appropriations; and to provide for the expenditure of the appropriations.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


motion_text: The substitute was not concurred in, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
2022 PA 144, section 101 as amended by 2025 PA 5, section 104b as amended by 2018 PA 265, section 111
as amended by 1997 PA 93, section 161a as amended by 2006 PA 342, section 210 as amended and section
210d as added by 2015 PA 85, sections 210b, 285, and 286 as amended by 2021 PA 86, section 212 as
amended by 2016 PA 249, and section 284 as amended by 2017 PA 108, and by adding sections 12e, 18d,
22r, 22s, 31c, 32y, 35e, 61v, 97n, 99mm, 164k, 164l, 201i, 217f, 236e, 236s, and 241h; and to repeal acts
and parts of acts.
Darrin Camilleri Ann Bollin
Sarah E. Anthony Tim Kelly
Jon Bumstead Carol Glanville
Conferees for the Senate Conferees for the House
The question being on the adoption of the conference report,
The first conference report was adopted, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Sec. 1105. Section 1201 of article 13 of 2024 PA 121 is repealed.
Third: That the House and Senate agree to the title of the bill to read as follows:
A bill to make, supplement, adjust, and consolidate appropriations for various state departments and
agencies, the judicial branch, and the legislative branch for the fiscal years ending September 30, 2025 and
September 30, 2026; to provide for certain conditions on appropriations; to provide for the expenditure of
the appropriations; and to repeal acts and parts of acts.
Ann Bollin Sarah Anthony
Matt Maddock Sean McCann
Alabas Farhat Jon Bumstead
Conferees for the House Conferees for the Senate
The question being on the adoption of the conference report,
The first conference report was adopted, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
The motion prevailed, 2/3 of the members serving voting therefor.
Third Reading of Bills
Senator Singh moved that the Senate proceed to consideration of the following bill:
House Bill No. 4392
The motion prevailed.
The following bill was read a third time:
House Bill No. 4392, entitled
A bill to make, supplement, and adjust appropriations for certain capital outlay projects and the department
of natural resources for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2025; to provide for expenditure of the
appropriations; and to prescribe certain conditions for the appropriations.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


result: failed

context_text:
The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.
Senator Lindsey offered the following amendments:
1. Amend page 15, line 15, by striking out all of subdivisions (ff) and (gg).
2. Amend page 26, line 12, by removing section 36 from the bill.
3. Amend page 29, line 10, after “calculated” by striking out the balance of the subsection and inserting
“as if section 168(k) and section 199 of the internal revenue code were not in effect.”.
4. Amend page 37, line 29, after “code” by striking out the balance of the page through “(c)” on line 21
of page 38 and inserting a period.
The question being on the adoption of the amendments,
Senator Lauwers requested the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered, 1/5 of the members present voting therefor.
The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
4. Amend page 38, line 12, after “168(k),” by striking out “174, and 179” and inserting “and 174”.
The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.
Senator Nesbitt offered the following amendments:
1. Amend page 15, line 15, after “2024” by inserting “and before January 1, 2028”.
2. Amend page 27, line 14, after “2024” by inserting “and before January 1, 2028”.
3. Amend page 29, line 12, after “2025” by inserting “and after December 31, 2027”.
4. Amend page 29, line 15, after “2024” by inserting “and before January 1, 2028”.
5. Amend page 38, line 7, after “2024” by inserting “and before January 1, 2028”.
The question being on the adoption of the amendments,
Senator Lauwers requested the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered, 1/5 of the members present voting therefor.
The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Nays—19
Anthony Chang Klinefelt Santana
Bayer Cherry McCann Shink
Brinks Geiss McMorrow Singh
Camilleri Hertel Moss Wojno
Cavanagh Irwin Polehanki
Excused—1
Outman
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: Cherry
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
The following bill was read a third time:
House Bill No. 4968, entitled
A bill to amend 2018 PA 175, entitled “Insurance provider assessment act,” by amending sections 7, 11,
and 17 (MCL 550.1757, 550.1761, and 550.1767).
The question being on the passage of the bill,
Senator Lindsey offered the following amendment:
1. Amend page 3, line 19, after “year.” by striking out the balance of the subsection and inserting “If a
tax structure is approved as described in this subsection, the tax structure does not apply 1 year after
the tax structure is approved.”.
The amendment was not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
The Senate was called to order by the Assistant President pro tempore, Senator Cherry.
Senator Singh moved that the Senate return to consideration of the following bill:
House Bill No. 4951
The motion prevailed.
The following bill was read a third time:
House Bill No. 4951, entitled
A bill to provide for the imposition and collection of excise taxes on certain sales of marihuana; to provide
for the establishment of procedures for the collection, administration, and enforcement of those taxes; to
provide for the disposition of the taxes; to provide for the promulgation of rules; to create the comprehensive
road funding fund; and to prescribe the powers and duties of certain state governmental officers and entities.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
The bill was referred to the Secretary for enrollment printing and presentation to the Governor.
Senate Bill No. 273, entitled
A bill to amend 1994 PA 451, entitled “Natural resources and environmental protection act,” by amending
section 8715 (MCL 324.8715), as amended by 2021 PA 123.
The House of Representatives has substituted (H-2) the bill.
The House of Representatives has passed the bill as substituted (H-2), ordered that it be given immediate
effect and pursuant to Joint Rule 20, inserted the full title.
Pending the order that, under rule 3.202, the bill be laid over one day,
Senator Singh moved that the rule be suspended.
The motion prevailed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor.
The question being on concurring in the substitute made to the bill by the House,
The substitute was concurred in, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
The bill was referred to the Secretary for enrollment printing and presentation to the Governor.
Senate Bill No. 577, entitled
A bill to amend 1976 PA 399, entitled “Safe drinking water act,” by amending section 9 (MCL 325.1009),
as amended by 2021 PA 107.
The House of Representatives has substituted (H-1) the bill.
The House of Representatives has passed the bill as substituted (H-1), ordered that it be given immediate
effect and pursuant to Joint Rule 20, inserted the full title.
Pending the order that, under rule 3.202, the bill be laid over one day,
Senator Singh moved that the rule be suspended.
The motion prevailed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor.
The question being on concurring in the substitute made to the bill by the House,
The substitute was concurred in, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
annual legislative requests and reports; to provide for the establishment and functions of certain advisory
entities; to provide for conditions for grants; to provide for the issuance of bonds and notes for transportation
purposes; to provide for the powers and duties of certain state and local agencies and officials; to provide for
the making of loans for transportation purposes by the state transportation department and for the receipt and
repayment by local units and agencies of those loans from certain specified sources; to investigate and study
the tolling of roads, streets, highways, or bridges; and to repeal acts and parts of acts,” by amending
section 11g (MCL 247.661g), as added by 2016 PA 246, and by adding section 13c.
Pending the order that, under rule 3.202, the bill be laid over one day,
Senator Singh moved that the rule be suspended.
The motion prevailed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor.
The question being on concurring in the substitute made to the bill by the House,
The substitute was concurred in, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
to regulate the discharge of certain substances into the environment; to regulate the use of certain lands,
waters, and other natural resources of the state; to protect the people’s right to hunt and fish; to prescribe the
powers and duties of certain state and local agencies and officials; to provide for certain charges, fees,
assessments, and donations; to provide certain appropriations; to prescribe penalties and provide remedies;
and to repeal acts and parts of acts,” by amending sections 3104, 3110, 3118, 3120, 4104, 11153, 30104,
30109, 32312, and 32513 (MCL 324.3104, 324.3110, 324.3118, 324.3120, 324.4104, 324.11153, 324.30104,
324.30109, 324.32312, and 324.32513), as amended by 2021 PA 91.
Pending the order that, under rule 3.202, the bill be laid over one day,
Senator Singh moved that the rule be suspended.
The motion prevailed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor.
The question being on concurring in the substitute made to the bill by the House,
The substitute was concurred in, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
By unanimous consent the Senate returned to the order of
Third Reading of Bills
Senator Singh moved that the Senate proceed to consideration of the following bill:
House Bill No. 4180
The motion prevailed.
The following bill was read a third time:
House Bill No. 4180, entitled
A bill to amend 1933 PA 167, entitled “General sales tax act,” by amending sections 6a and 25
(MCL 205.56a and 205.75), section 6a as amended by 2015 PA 264 and section 25 as amended by
2023 PA 20, and by adding section 4gg.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Senator Nesbitt’s statement is as follows:
A billion dollars a year. Every year, a billion dollars that motorists are paying at the pump are going to
other uses than fixing our roads, our bridges, and our infrastructure that has been crumbling. It’s about time
we take that promise—to make sure every dime that hardworking taxpayers pay at the pump actually goes
to fixing our roads. I ask for a “yes” vote on these bills.
The following bill was read a third time:
House Bill No. 4181, entitled
A bill to amend 2004 PA 175, entitled “Streamlined sales and use tax revenue equalization act,” by
amending sections 3 and 5 (MCL 205.173 and 205.175), section 3 as amended by 2015 PA 177 and section 5
as amended by 2022 PA 24.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
“An act to impose taxes and create credits and refundable credits to modify and equalize the impact of
changes made to the general sales tax act and use tax act necessary to bring those taxes into compliance with
the streamlined sales tax agreement so this state may participate in the streamlined sales tax system and
governing board; to prescribe certain powers and duties of certain state departments; and to provide for the
disbursement of certain proceeds,”
The Senate agreed to the full title.
The following bill was read a third time:
House Bill No. 4182, entitled
A bill to amend 1937 PA 94, entitled “Use tax act,” by amending section 21 (MCL 205.111), as amended
by 2023 PA 175, and by adding section 4gg.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
The motion prevailed, 2/3 of the members serving voting therefor.
Pursuant to Joint Rule 20, the full title of the act shall be inserted to read as follows:
“An act to provide for the levy, assessment, and collection of a specific excise tax on the storage, use, or
consumption in this state of tangible personal property and certain services; to appropriate the proceeds of
that tax; to prescribe penalties; and to make appropriations,”
The Senate agreed to the full title.
The following bill was read a third time:
House Bill No. 4183, entitled
A bill to amend 2000 PA 403, entitled “Motor fuel tax act,” by amending section 8 (MCL 207.1008), as
amended by 2015 PA 176.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
House Bill No. 4962
The motion prevailed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor.
Third Reading of Bills
Senator Singh moved that the Senate proceed to consideration of the following bills:
Senate Bill No. 370
House Bill No. 4962
The motion prevailed.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 370, entitled
A bill to create a Tricare premium reimbursement program; and to provide for the powers and duties of certain state governmental officers and entities.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Cherry Johnson
Nays—0
Excused—3
Camilleri Moss Outman
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: Geiss
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
The following bill was read a third time:
House Bill No. 4962, entitled
A bill to create the Michigan National Guard member benefit fund; and to provide for the administration of and distributions from the fund.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
The question being on the passage of the bill,
Senator Runestad offered the following amendment:
1. Amend page 1, line 3, after “ item. ” by striking out the balance of the line through “ representatives ” on line 6 and inserting “ A legislator must submit a request for a legislatively directed spending item at least 60 days before the date that the appropriations bill containing the legislatively directed spending item is passed by that legislator’s chamber the first time ”.
The question being on the adoption of the amendment,
Senator Runestad withdrew the amendment.
Senator Runestad offered the following amendments:
1. Amend page 1, line 5, after “ least ” by striking out “ 10 ” and inserting “ 60 ”.
2. Amend page 1, line 7, by striking out “ both chambers of the legislature ” and inserting “ that legislator’s chamber the first time ”.
The question being on the adoption of the amendments,
Senator Lauwers requested the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered, 1/5 of the members present voting therefor.
The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Nays—18
Anthony Chang McCann Santana
Bayer Cherry McMorrow Shink
Brinks Geiss Moss Singh
Camilleri Irwin Polehanki Wojno
Cavanagh Klinefelt
Excused—1
Johnson
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: Geiss
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
I think it’s great that we have a bill now and we see a process developing to add more transparency to that. When I was elected in 2022, before I was sworn in, the first thing I started working on with Senator Runestad who had worked on it for many years was asking that we amend the rules of the Senate to require transparency in the budget process. That request fell on deaf ears. The newly-elected Democratic majority was not interested in changing those rules. Fast forward a few years, I remember being engaged with a lot of people who were interested in serving in the House in the next cycle, there was sort of a groundswell movement around this topic, and sure enough when Republicans won the majority in the House, Speaker Matt Hall, under his leadership, adopted a new rule in the House requiring budget transparency on these legislative spending items. The Senate resisted though. The body that’s putting this bill forward right now, that’s doing this, I believe, there’s a level of performative legislation going on here, resisted for the entirety of this year, coming to a resolution about a set of rules that we could all follow to have transparency in the budget. Now we’re going to vote on this.
What bill do we have in front of us? We’re going to now create a law that creates a framework around budget transparency on legislative-directed spending. Sounds great, until you read it, dig into the details, and consider some of the implications. I’ll just say two broad reasons I’m going to oppose this legislation. One, on a technical level when you go through it, there are just too many gaps, too many problems. We just saw an amendment attempted to make sure there’s a sufficient amount of time to review these and that was rejected. We just saw a largely party-line vote rejecting the idea that we have enough opportunity for people to review these items and actually see what they are before voting on it. There are also carveouts in there. There are spaces where people can still take advantage of the process.
The bigger problem I have with this is that I don’t think we should be doing this by amending a law in the first place. This body—the Senate of Michigan—and the House, we are governed by our own rules. The Senate is governed by a set of rules, the House is governed by a set of rules, and jointly we’re governed by a set of joint rules. Those rules are powerful, especially the joint rules. If we were to use the joint rules to create a process for budget transparency, that would be a very effective tool. It would be difficult to suspend those rules because it would take both chambers, and importantly, when we’re actually doing budget negotiations and passing those bills, it would provide an actual mechanism of recourse where we can object to the process. We could highlight if the rules are not being followed. If we do this legislatively instead, we’re going to end up with a law that tells the Legislature how we have to do budget transparency and I predict that if we pass this law this way, the Legislatures of the future will promptly ignore it, find ways around it, or simply challenge it by saying, We’re going to spend money the way we want to. It may be cloak-and-dagger, it may involve legislative-directed spending that doesn’t comply with this process, and if somebody doesn’t like it, they can take us to court. The history of litigation around this tells us that the courts are very cautious in getting involved in telling another branch of government—the Legislature—how they operate.
Just to summarize, I don’t believe 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. We need more transparency but this isn’t the way to do it. Let’s give the people what they actually want. Let’s go back to the drawing board and work on a real measure, ideally a set of joint rules.
Senator Theis’ statement is as follows:
I would like to reiterate some of the cautions I described in committee when this was being presented there. I have major concerns with prohibiting for-profit organizations. I’d like to see not-for-profit and for-profit be held to the same high standards for both. Historically the state has partnered with for-profit to much more success in certain areas than they have not-for-profit. This bill exempts the for-profit and I have major concerns with that. Another concern is the timeframe. It seems to me that there is a definitive desire not to be fully transparent if 60 days are not allowed. I don’t understand why we’re going to limit it to a timeframe when the public would then be unable to understand fully where the government money is going in advance of it being ordered.
I would like to ask we put this back to the drawing board. I reiterate my colleague’s comments. 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, and that would be the reason I’m going to be voting “no.”
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 330, entitled
A bill to amend 1961 PA 236, entitled “Revised judicature act of 1961,” by amending section 1307a (MCL 600.1307a), as amended by 2023 PA 308.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
Protest
Senator McBroom, under his constitutional right of protest (Art. 4, Sec. 18), protested against the passage of Senate Bill No. 330 and moved that the statement he made during the discussion of the bill be printed as his reasons for voting “no.”
The motion prevailed.
Senator McBroom’s statement is as follows:
I’ve served in the Legislature now for—almost finished 13 years, right? I keep telling people I have 14 months and, I think, 13 days left. This is not the first time that we have voted on exceptions to jury duty. The frustrating part to me on all of those votes continues to be that it ignores the provisions that are in the law that already allow for dismissal if the life of another person or the health of another person depends on you. You already have the ability to tell a judge that somebody else is dependent on your being there for them and to get an exemption from serving.
We keep on doing additional exemptions—on top of that, we’re just making it more illegal than it already is for the judge to force you to do jury duty. That’s why I have voted “no” on all these bills over the years—sponsored by Democrats or Republicans—and will continue to do so today.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 456, entitled
A bill to amend 2012 PA 176, entitled “Mozelle senior or vulnerable adult medical alert act,” by amending the title and section 5 (MCL 28.715).
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Chang Irwin Outman Wojno
Nays—0
Excused—1
Johnson
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: Geiss
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 276, entitled
A bill to amend 1994 PA 451, entitled “Natural resources and environmental protection act,” by amending sections 43520, 43521, 43522, 43523a, 43523b, 43524, 43525b, 43525c, 43527a, 43527b, 43528, 43528a, 43528b, 43529, 43531, 43532, 43532a, 43533, 43535, 43540a, 43540c, 43546, and 43553 (MCL 324.43520, 324.43521, 324.43522, 324.43523a, 324.43523b, 324.43524, 324.43525b, 324.43525c, 324.43527a, 324.43527b, 324.43528, 324.43528a, 324.43528b, 324.43529, 324.43531, 324.43532, 324.43532a, 324.43533, 324.43535, 324.43540a, 324.43540c, 324.43546, and 324.43553), section 43520 as amended by 2024 PA 96, section 43521 as amended by 2009 PA 69, section 43522 as amended by 1996 PA 585, section 43523a as amended by 2018 PA 3, sections 43523b, 43527a, and 43527b as added and sections 43524, 43528, 43528a, 43528b, 43529, 43531, 43535, and 43553 as amended by 2013 PA 108, section 43525b as amended by 2016 PA 462, section 43525c as amended by 2021 PA 6, section 43532 as amended by 2020 PA 271, section 43532a as amended by 2020 PA 270, section 43533 as amended by 2016 PA 463, section 43540a as amended by 2018 PA 237, section 43540c as added by 2005 PA 117, and section 43546 as amended by 2004 PA 587, and by adding section 503d.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
You’ve heard me talk about it. Apparently nobody else seems to care that somebody with a legal piece of property can suddenly be told by the DNR , You can’t have that anymore. Too bad for you. We’re taking it. No money for you, no recompense. And they’ve lost in court again and again, and yet they keep coming back. Most recently they spent taxpayer dollars to take their guys, put them undercover to sneak onto the game ranches under false pretenses, do a hunt so they could take the pigs and then get them tested to see whether or not they were really legit pigs or not. That’s what we’re paying for. We’re going to get more officers to do more of that really super-duper important work, apparently. And you know, the study they’re using for the genomic test? You probably don’t but we’ve looked at it. They’ve got some guy who sampled a couple hundred pigs, and supposedly now they have a genetic base to determine what’s a legal pig and what’s not. It’s complete bullocks, complete, unscientific drivel.
This is what this department is hanging its hat on to persecute people and steal their private property. When they finally get their butt handed to them for the last time in court, who’s going to have to pay for all of those damage lawsuits? We are. And yet we’re going to, right now, foist a huge fee or tax increase on sportsmen and women in this state to fund a department that won’t then use the dollars to do the thing they said they’re going to do, which is to enhance hunting opportunities, enhance fishing opportunities. Instead, they’re going to be running off chasing some coyote or fawn or farmer with some pigs. I can’t believe we’re doing this today. Giving money to this department that’s out there doing such a terrible job in this state, they have no faith, no confidence from sportsmen and women around this state. People are up to their ears in frustration with this department. They’re shouting about it, and we’re not listening. Instead, we’re going to give them more money? It’s unbelievable. It’s shameful.
That’s my “no” vote explanation, and I want it printed in the Journal with all the anger I have too.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 277, entitled
A bill to amend 1933 PA 167, entitled “General sales tax act,” by amending section 25 (MCL 205.75), as amended by 2023 PA 20.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
Senator Bumstead offered the following substitute:
Substitute (S-1).
The substitute was adopted, a majority of the members serving voting therefor.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Senate Bill No. 515, entitled
A bill to amend 1972 PA 348, entitled “An act to regulate relationships between landlords and tenants
relative to rental agreements for rental units; to regulate the payment, repayment, use and investment of
security deposits; to provide for commencement and termination inventories of rental units; to provide for
termination arrangements relative to rental units; to provide for legal remedies; and to provide penalties,”
(MCL 554.601 to 554.616) by adding section 1e.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
Senator Chang offered the following substitute:
Substitute (S-4).
The substitute was adopted, a majority of the members serving voting therefor.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 314, entitled
A bill to amend 1851 PA 156, entitled “An act to define the powers and duties of the county boards of
commissioners of the several counties, and to confer upon them certain local, administrative and legislative
powers; and to prescribe penalties for the violation of the provisions of this act,” by amending section 12a
(MCL 46.12a), as amended by 2017 PA 204.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
Senator Hoitenga offered the following substitute:
Substitute (S-1).
The substitute was not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Senator Singh moved that the Senate proceed to consideration of the following resolution:
Senate Resolution No. 81
The motion prevailed.
Senate Resolution No. 81.
A resolution urging the Congress and the President of the United States to permanently extend the
Affordable Care Act Enhanced Premium Tax Credit to help ensure that all individuals and families have
equitable access to healthcare.
(This resolution was reported by the Committee on Health Policy earlier today. See p. 1658.)
The question being on the adoption of the resolution,
Senator Singh requested the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered, 1/5 of the members present voting therefor.
The resolution was adopted, a majority of the members voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Senator Singh moved that the Senate proceed to consideration of the following bills:
Senate Bill No. 478
Senate Bill No. 595
The motion prevailed.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 478, entitled
A bill to authorize the state administrative board to transfer state-owned property in Livingston County
from the administrative jurisdiction of the department of corrections to the administrative jurisdiction of the
department of military and veterans affairs; and to provide for powers and duties of state agencies and
departments with regard to the property and the jurisdictional transfer.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Nays—0
Excused—3
Bumstead McBroom Runestad
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: Geiss
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 595, entitled
A bill to amend 2022 PA 81, entitled “Michigan-Indiana state line remonumentation act,” by amending
sections 7, 11, and 13 (MCL 54.317, 54.321, and 54.323); and to repeal acts and parts of acts.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
The bills were placed on the order of Third Reading of Bills.
By unanimous consent the Senate returned to the order of
Third Reading of Bills
Senator Singh moved that the Senate proceed to consideration of the following bills:
Senate Bill No. 133
Senate Bill No. 423
The motion prevailed.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 133, entitled
A bill to amend 1956 PA 218, entitled “The insurance code of 1956,” by amending section 1204c (MCL 500.1204c), as amended by 2017 PA 67.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
In The Chair: Geiss
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
Protest
Senator Runestad, under his constitutional right of protest (Art. 4, Sec. 18), protested against the passage of Senate Bill No. 133.
Senator Runestad’s statement is as follows:
I used to do financial services and insurance training for continuing education. I think the hours are important, and what this bill says is that four hours of active participation in an association counts toward the required 24 hours of continuing education, and that any activity undertaken by an insurance agent can count as one hour of continuing education—any activity. I wonder how many—like in the medical profession—they can join an association and work your way around your required courses with any activity.
To me, it seems preposterous. We’re saying that joining an association—and now you run around your required education, continuing education you’re required to take. What you need to be is a dues-paying member in good standing with the organization. The agent actively participates in the function. I mean, this is basically just saying, Join an association and then you don’t have to do at least four hours of your continuing education. The director of DIFS can just unilaterally determine that anything counts. Why have it at all? Why don’t we make all 24 hours—just join an association and pay the dues. I’m sure there’s somebody wanting to pay the dues for this, and I think that’s what’s behind this because all of the required courses are there for a reason. What this says is we’re—I believe a slippery slope—pay the dues, join an association—you don’t really have to do anything else—and you get the credit. I oppose this bill.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 423, entitled
A bill to amend 1893 PA 206, entitled “The general property tax act,” by amending sections 78g and 78q (MCL 211.78g and 211.78q), section 78g as amended by 2020 PA 256 and section 78q as amended by 2020 PA 33.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Resolved, That we urge the Republican majorities in Congress and President Trump to reopen the government, uphold health care access, and restore food access to people as soon as possible; and be it further
Resolved, That we call for an end to the deliberate obstruction of nutritional aid by the White House and Congressional Republicans, whose actions threaten the health, stability, and moral conscience of the nation; and be it further
Resolved, That copies of this resolution be transmitted to the President of the United States, the United States Secretary of Agriculture, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, the President Pro Tempore of the United States Senate, and the congressional delegation of Michigan.
The question being on the adoption of the concurrent resolution,
Senator Singh moved that Senator Klinefelt be excused from the balance of today’s session.
The motion prevailed.
Senator Nesbitt offered the following amendment:
1. Amend page 3, line 26 after “urge” by striking out “the Republican majorities in Congress and President Trump” and inserting “Michigan Senators Gary Peters and Elissa Slotkin and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer”
The question being on the adoption of the amendment,
Senator Lauwers requested the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered, 1/5 of the members present voting therefor.
The amendment was not adopted, a majority of the members not voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Bayer Cherry McMorrow Shink
Brinks Geiss Moss Singh
Camilleri Hertel Polehanki Wojno
Cavanagh Irwin
Excused—3
Johnson Klinefelt McBroom
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: Geiss
The question being on the adoption of the concurrent resolution,
Senator Singh requested the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered, 1/5 of the members present voting therefor.
The concurrent resolution was adopted, a majority of the members voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Johnson Klinefelt McBroom
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: Geiss
Senators Chang and Moss were named co-sponsors of the concurrent resolution.
Point of Order
Senator Lauwers raised the Point of Order that the concurrent resolution was not adopted because a majority of the members elected and serving did not vote “yea.”
The Assistant President pro tempore, Senator Geiss, ruled that pursuant to Mason’s , § 42-8, where there is no additional provision in the Constitution, statute, or rule, parliamentary law requires only a simple majority vote.
Senator Lauwers appealed the decision of the Chair.
The question being shall the decision of the Chair stand as the judgment of the Senate,
Senator Lauwers requested the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered, 1/5 of the members present voting therefor.
The decision of the Chair stood as the judgment of the Senate, a majority of the members voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
(This resolution was adopted on Wednesday, October 29, and a Point of Order was raised and postponed
for the day. See Senate Journal No. 99, p. 1672.)
Pending a ruling from the Chair,
Senator Lauwers withdrew his Point of Order.
Senator Lauwers moved that Senators Daley and Theis be excused from the balance of today’s session.
The motion prevailed.
Senator Singh moved to reconsider the vote by which the concurrent resolution was adopted.
The motion prevailed.
The question being on the adoption of the concurrent resolution,
Senator Singh requested the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered, 1/5 of the members present voting therefor.
The concurrent resolution was adopted, a majority of the members voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
Senator Singh moved that the Senate proceed to consideration of the following bill:
Senate Bill No. 182
The motion prevailed.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 182, entitled
A bill to make, supplement, and adjust appropriations for various state departments and agencies for the
fiscal year ending September 30, 2026; to provide for certain conditions on appropriations; and to provide
for the expenditure of the appropriations.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
Senator Singh moved that the previous question be ordered.
The motion prevailed.
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:


context_text:
House Bill No. 4420
The motion prevailed.
The following bill was read a third time:
House Bill No. 4420, entitled
A bill to amend 1984 PA 431, entitled “The management and budget act,” (MCL 18.1101 to 18.1594) by
adding section 364a.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
Senator Anthony offered the following substitute:
Substitute (S-4).
The substitute was adopted, a majority of the members serving voting therefor.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows: