Bridge Listens: The state of democracy, transparency in Michigan

Bridge Michigan readers identified the state of democracy as a top election concern
Voting rule changes, election administration, how money influences politics and political polarization among the issues at play
We break down the issues, and what the research says about solutions

Michigan has been at the epicenter of heated national debates over election policies and how the democratic process works, particularly since President Donald Trump’s attempts to overturn his 2020 loss.

There are no signs of that changing, and Bridge Michigan readers believe the stakes are high.

About 15% of readers identified the future of democracy as a top priority in Bridge Listens, our informal survey of Michigan’s most pressing election-year issues.

More still expressed concerns about related issues like government transparency, election administration and integrity, money in politics and increased political polarization.

Here’s what some of our readers had to say:

“Democracy – it is the bedrock of our shared values, controlled authorities and due processes. Without it we don’t have a system by which to consider all the other issues.” — Marita, Alma
“Polarized politics is what is really bad for democracy.” — John, Spring Lake
“Citizens United and other measures have undermined democracy. Lawmakers are accountable to their donors, not to those who vote for them. It affects every other issue.” — Nancy, Wyoming

Below, you’ll find facts, figures and leading research on the state of democracy in Michigan, including the political divide, election integrity, money in politics and more. We also asked Michigan’s leading gubernatorial candidates to weigh in. See what they had to say here.

Voting rules

Michigan has made it easier to vote and expanded options in recent years as a result of voter-approved ballot measures and related laws passed while Democrats briefly controlled both chambers of the Legislature.

Related:

Since 2024, Michigan has allowed at least nine days of early, in-person voting statewide and has bolstered the state’s absentee voting program, which allows any registered voter to vote by mail.

As of April 2026, 47 states offer some form of early in-person voting to all voters, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Michigan is one of 29 states that offers no-excuse absentee voting, and an additional eight states conduct elections entirely by mail.

Trump has railed against mail-in voting and issued an executive order to try and stop it, but the matter is tied up in court. Most experts say it’s unlikely to be implemented this year.

Double voting is a felony under both state and federal law, and election officials use the Qualified Voter File to determine whether voters who have already cast an absentee ballot try to vote a second time.

Michigan generally requires a driver’s license or other valid photo ID to register to vote or cast ballots. But in both cases, citizens without ID can sign an affidavit instead. Lying on an affidavit constitutes perjury, a crime punishable by up to 15 years in prison in Michigan.

In 2020, 0.2% of Michigan voters used the affidavit option to cast a ballot without ID.

In all, 36 states require some form of ID to vote, and public opinion surveys consistently show high support for such laws.

A group has submitted petition signatures for a potential November ballot proposal that would tighten Michigan voter ID rules and require proof of citizenship to register to vote in future contests. Trump has pushed similar rules at the federal level, but the SAVE Act has stalled in the US Senate.

What the research says

General election voting data suggests Michigan residents are embracing expanded voting options. In November 2024, nearly 60% of voters had cast their ballots before the sun rose on Election Day, according to state data.

Listen up

Join Bridge reporters for a free, online discussion about the state of democracy in Michigan on Wednesday, July 29 at 7 p.m. Register here.

Lauren Gibbons and Simon Schuster will also discuss their reporting on

All Talk with Kevin Dietz on WJR Detroit, tentatively scheduled for Tuesday, July 28, at 10:18 a.m.

Though voters of all age groups took advantage of absentee and early in-person voting, those options have been especially popular among older voters: nearly 1 in 3 early voters and more than half of absentee voters were aged 60 or older in the 2024 general election.

Supporters of efforts to tighten voter ID laws at the state and federal levels say common-sense restrictions could prevent fraud. Critics argue the measures would put up barriers to voting, but it isn’t clear whether they reduce overall turnout in elections.

Evidence of non-citizens voting in Michigan’s elections is very rare, but election integrity activists point to documented instances when it occurred as proof the system needs to be shored up.

Last year, Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson’s office flagged 15 suspected noncitizens out of 5.7 million voters in the 2024 election.

Money in politics

Political spending continues to shatter records at the state and federal levels as wealthy donors, political action committees, dark money organizations and other outside groups pour money into competitive races — often overshadowing candidate campaigns.

That’s evident in Michigan’s US Senate race, where outside groups have already spent more than $60 million — far more than the $28 million in combined spending by the campaigns of remaining candidates Abdul El-Sayed, Haley Stevens and Mike Rogers.

Much of that came from so-called “super PACs” that can raise unlimited funds and accept corporate contributions for independent expenditures.

In the 2024 cycle, Michigan’s US Senate face-off between now-Sen. Elissa Slotkin and Mike Rogers was the fifth most-expensive race in the country.

State-level races, including the governor’s race and competitive state legislative races, can also get pricey. The Brennan Center for Justice reports Michigan’s 2026 gubernatorial election is on track to break campaign finance records.

A potential general election ballot proposal aims to ban state-level political spending by Michigan monopoly utilities and large government contractors. Businesses that could be affected have argued the proposal would effectively serve to limit their employees’ freedom of speech.

The group’s petition drive was fueled in part by dark money donations, a Bridge analysis found.

What the research says

Michigan’s status as a politically competitive swing state has meant outsized national interest in both presidential elections and midterms, where the outcome of federal House and Senate races could determine majority control of Congress.

Research has consistently shown national political spending is concentrated on politically significant races, and political candidates benefit from funders well outside their state or district boundaries.

A 2024 study by Ohio State University and Duke University researchers explored whether money can buy control of Congress, finding that the spending “can have a substantial effect on electoral outcomes,” but that the data suggest those effects are declining nationally.

The researchers found eliminating spending appears to help more Democratic candidates in House elections and more Republican candidates in Senate elections.

Experts tracking money in politics have said outside political funding and its sources raises questions about whose interests public officials will prioritize in office.

Another reason Michigan elections have gotten more expensive: redistricting.

An independent process designed to combat gerrymandering resulted in more competitive state legislative and congressional maps. And that resulted in more outside spending flowing in, both to candidates attempting to hold seats and to challengers hoping to flip them.

Government transparency

Michigan has long been considered one of the worst states in the nation for government transparency.

Michigan is one of two states that fully exempt the governor’s office and Legislature from the Freedom of Information Act, which allows members of the public to request and review internal government communication and documents. A proposal set for Massachusetts’ fall ballot would leave Michigan as the only state in the country with the dual exemptions.

FOIA does apply to state departments, schools and local government agencies across Michigan, but critics argue the process is riddled with loopholes and often results in high costs and long delays.

Transparency advocates have pushed for change, but the efforts continue to falter in the Michigan Legislature. Last November, Republican House Speaker Matt Hall — who personally supported FOIA expansion as recently as 2024 — slammed the door on the latest version of the legislation, telling reporters, “we’re just not going to” do it.

Lawmakers have adopted other transparency measures in recent years, including additional financial disclosure requirements aimed at exposing possible conflicts of interest and laws requiring lawmakers to submit any legislative spending requests at least 45 days before final budget votes.

The financial disclosure requirement has run into roadblocks due to technology issues and loopholes in the law, which obscures assets held by a lawmaker’s spouse and doesn’t require lawmakers to report lobbyist-paid travel.

This month, the Legislature approved a plan to ban lawmakers from becoming lobbyists immediately after leaving office. Gov. Gretchen Whitmer is currently reviewing the bills, which Hall has championed as a way to close Lansing’s “revolving door.”

What the research says

FOIA laws at the federal and state level are considered vital tools to prevent corruption by allowing the public to see internal government documents and communications, including how lobbyists are interacting with state policymakers and how tax dollars are spent.

Outside observers have found Michigan lacking on several fronts. An oft-cited 2015 report card by the Center for Public Integrity ranked Michigan dead last for systems to prevent corruption.

A 2025 statewide Michigan Press Association survey found that Michigan voters widely support expanding the FOIA law.

Proposal 1, approved by more than two-thirds of voters in 2022 altered legislative term limits and required greater financial disclosure for public officials and those running for elected office.

But critics say the personal financial disclosure rules lawmakers subsequently adopted do not live up to the proposal’s promise to voters, which was to expose their elected officials’ potential conflicts of interest. Attempts to toughen the rules have fallen flat.

New advance disclosure rules for earmarks reformed a system that lawmakers had used to add billions of spending to state budgets, often at the last-minute without time for public review and little information about who supported the grants or who would benefit.

The process was scrutinized more heavily in recent years amid a series of scandals: two past earmarks have led to criminal charges for misuse of state funds, and others have come after the eventual recipient of the cash donated prolifically to lawmakers.

Election integrity

Michigan officials have made myriad changes to the state’s election administration process in recent years, including initiatives to try to shore up public trust in the system.

Among those changes: a more stringent tracking system allowing voters to monitor their ballot, ballot drop box requirements for voters wishing to hand deliver their ballot, security updates and additional poll worker protections.

As of January 2026, Michigan is one of 15 states that requires ballot drop boxes. Another 14 states allow drop boxes and 11 states prohibit the drop boxes outright. All but three states have a similar absentee ballot tracking system to Michigan’s.

High tensions around election administration have flared up periodically in Michigan since 2020, when Trump falsely alleged widespread voter fraud in the state. A Republican-led investigation found no evidence.

Trump repeated some of his election claims in a recent prime-time speech, ordering the FBI to reopen an investigation into what he called a “pay, play and cheat” scheme in Muskegon in 2020.

Trump allies have pointed to the Muskegon voter registration case and other incidents as evidence of voter corruption, while election officials say scrutiny and investigations have shown a system that mostly works.

Republicans have also urged the state to clean up voter rolls, which have consistently shown more registered voters than voting-age residents. The state has attributed that mismatch to federal rules that prescribe a multi-year process for removing inactive voters.

The Trump administration recently announced it would send election monitors to Detroit, Lansing and East Lansing for the Aug. 4 primary. The DOJ has also threatened election officials with prosecution if noncitizens are on the voter rolls, though a federal court rejected the agency’s effort to force state officials to hand over the sensitive data.

What the research says

Multiple investigations and independent audits examining 2020 election proceedings have found no evidence of election fraud in Michigan, though claims to the contrary persist.

The Muskegon incident referenced by Trump, in which City Clerk Ann Meisch notified authorities that several hundred voter registration applications from a single firm had irregularities, was investigated by both state and federal authorities and resulted in no charges. Authorities say it did not involve any actual ballots or votes.

Though some critics of ballot drop boxes argue the option opens the possibility of tampering, election experts say the boxes are simply another way for voters to get their ballots back to clerks safely.

Provided security safeguards are in place to ensure only election officials can access the boxes — which Michigan requires — drop boxes are “trusted ballot return options” that circumvent concerns about ballots getting mailed back in time for Election Day, the Bipartisan Policy Center writes.

New data from the University of Michigan’s Center for Local, State and Urban Policy’s 2026 survey of local officials found that 92% were “very confident about administering an accurate election in November” and that concerns about possible errors, malfunctions or inaccuracies remain low.

Researchers have found online harassment against election workers surged in 2020. In addition to federal protections, 39 states have state-specific policies specifically protecting poll workers and election officials. Twenty-four of those states, including Michigan, passed or updated those policies in the aftermath of the 2020 election.

Political polarization

Disagreements between opposing political parties are nothing new. But some fear the current state of affairs is hampering productivity, disrupting government function and even putting lives at risk.

Michigan has suffered the impacts of several federal government shutdowns in recent years, most notably last fall, when federal food assistance payments were temporarily paused and travel delays in Detroit.

State lawmakers in Michigan’s split Legislature have also struggled to get the last few budgets done on time. In 2025, lawmakers missed the constitutional Oct. 1 deadline to pass the budget, instead passing a stopgap spending bill while issues got hammered out.

This year, lawmakers blew through the state’s self-imposed July 1 deadline, but reached a deal a few days later. Whitmer signed that budget Tuesday.

Legislative productivity plummeted last year, in part due to political divisions in Lansing. But even in years where one party or the other held commanding majorities, many of the biggest reforms have sparked partisan disagreements.

Elected officials also have safety concerns to contend with. Whitmer notably was subject of a kidnapping plot, and many state and federal lawmakers and candidates have faced harassment or threats during their time in office.

Late last year, Whitmer signed legislation expanding the power of the Legislature’s sergeants-at-arms to investigate threats and alleged crimes outside the Michigan Capitol at the direction of elected officials, as well as provide security.

What the research says

Michigan residents’ political views can shape their perception of the state’s economic outlook and other key issues, surveys have found.

A 2025 statewide poll commissioned by the Detroit Regional Chamber found that while Democrats and independents believed the economy was weakening and that a recession was possible after Trump took office, Republicans who supported him believed the economy was surging, “despite little fundamental change in key economic indicators such as the unemployment rate, interest rates, and GDP growth.”

Most research indicates that US residents are concerned about political polarization and are tired of it. According to the Listen First Project, more than 80% of Americans are “exhausted” by political divisions and believe it’s a threat to the country’s future.

Some research suggests that generalizations about political opponents contribute to overall political polarization.

Even where perceived polarization is greater than actual polarization between political views, people still tend to remember generic statements that lead to more polarized judgments, a 2024 study by University of Michigan Professor of Psychology Susan A. Gelman and collaborators at Columbia and Stony Brook University found.

Researchers noted that more nuanced political statements might not be enough to combat the generalities that amplify perceptions of polarization, “since people tend to remember that information as generic anyway.”

A fall 2023 survey from the Brennan Center for Justice found 43% of state legislators have experienced threats, with 38% saying the amount of abuse has increased since they first took office.

About 38% of state lawmakers nationally believed threats and abuse toward them was increasing, according to the survey. Another 38%, meanwhile, believed levels had stayed the same. 51% of respondents reported that threats they faced were no more or less serious than before.