Script-free record · Release 2026-07-28.3
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:
Core facts and links below come from the same immutable public release as the enhanced record page.
vote
Recorded floor vote
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:
- Vote date
- 2023-06-14
- Chamber
- senate
- Result
- passed
- Yeas
- 32
- Nays
- 6
- Excused
- 0
- Not voting
- 0
- Related measure
- measure-6014
- Related sitting
- sitting-603
Official totals and named choices remain separate evidence. A named choice supports that vote only and does not establish continuous presence.
Inspect all published fields
- Chamber
- senate
- Context text
- Senator Johnson, under her constitutional right of protest (Art. 4, Sec. 18), protested against the passage of Senate Bill Nos. 367, 370, and 373 and moved that the statement she made during the discussion of Senate Bill No. 367 be printed as her reasons for voting “no.” The motion prevailed. Senator Johnson’s statement is as follows: I’ll be voting “no” on these bills because I feel the legislation before this body today goes far beyond what’s required by Proposal 2, and on many fronts it weakens the integrity of Michigan’s elections. These bills would allow the Secretary of State to wield unprecedented power to set procedures for early voting without going through the formal rule-making process which would allow for public input and for oversight by the people’s elected representatives in the Legislature through the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules. Early voting and other changes made by Proposal 2 of 2022 is one of the most significant changes to Michigan’s elections in our history, yet the Secretary of State will be allowed to prescribe procedures and guidance without this important checks and balances that’s been in place in Michigan for decades. This bill precludes the public’s right to know and comment on new procedures and rules. It stops legislative input. This bill changes the time-honored system that the public and Legislature would know and have input. It takes away transparency and this simply is not right. These bills also weaken signature-matching requirements for absentee ballots and they put no rules in place at all for municipal IDs which will now be allowed to be used as ID for voting purposes. This strips away integrity for Michigan’s elections. Therefore, I will be opposing these bills which I feel go far beyond just implementing Proposal 2 but actually strip out many protections and transparency that are designed to keep our elections secure and fair. The following bill was read a third time: Senate Bill No. 374, entitled A bill to amend 1954 PA 116, entitled “Michigan election law,” by amending sections 658 and 661 (MCL 168.658 and 168.661), as amended by 2012 PA 270. 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
- Measure id
- measure-6014
- Motion text
- The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:
- Nays
- 6
- Not voting
- 0
- Result
- passed
- Sitting id
- sitting-603
- Vote date
- 2023-06-14
- Vote id
- vote-7146
- Vote number
- 368
- Yeas
- 32
Follow the evidence
Cite this record
Michigan Legislative Activity and Evidence Dataset, release 2026-07-28.3, “The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:,” /votes/vote-7146.
/api/v1/votes/vote-7146