Script-free related records · Release 2026-07-28.3
Related roll calls
Follow collected relationships through the same typed, immutable public API used by the enhanced record.
← Back to the script-free parent record
Showing 2 related records on this page. A total was not computed.
Related record
Open script-free record →
Inspect published fields
- Chamber
- house
- Context text
- Cavitt Kuhn Rigas Wozniak
DeBoer Kunse Roth Zorn
DeBoyer
In The Chair: Pohutsky
The House agreed to the title of the bill.
Rep. Aiyash moved that the bill be given immediate effect.
The motion prevailed, 2/3 of the members serving voting therefor.
Rep. Aiyash moved that House Bill No. 6053 be placed on its immediate passage.
The motion prevailed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor.
House Bill No. 6053, entitled
A bill to amend 1969 PA 161, entitled “An act to regulate the filing of certain actions involving elections,” by amending section 1 (MCL 691.1031).
Was read a third time and passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, by yeas and nays, as follows:
- Excused
- Not recorded
- Motion text
- Was read a third time and passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, by yeas and nays, as follows:
- Nays
- 53
- Not voting
- Not recorded
- Result
- passed
- Vote date
- 2024-12-11
- Vote number
- 448
- Yeas
- 56
Related record
Open script-free record →
Inspect published fields
- Chamber
- senate
- Context text
- poll book matches the number of the ballot, because these ballots are no longer numbered.
Why? What is the problem? Where did we have the need for this? Because we didn’t have a committee
hearing on it, that I can remember, I’m not aware of what the need is. And so I voted “no” because it just
doesn’t seem like there was a big problem out in the countryside with this issue, and now we’ve potentially
created a problem of keeping our ballots straight, and making sure that the books line up and balance, and
unbalanced books are always a bad sign in an election and create additional havoc. That’s why I voted “no.”
The following bill was read a third time:
House Bill No. 6053, entitled
A bill to amend 1969 PA 161, entitled “An act to regulate the filing of certain actions involving elections,”
by amending section 1 (MCL 691.1031); 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:
- Excused
- 0
- Motion text
- The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:
- Nays
- 15
- Not voting
- 0
- Result
- passed
- Vote date
- 2024-12-20
- Vote number
- 727
- Yeas
- 23