• Proposal 2 to get ‘money out of politics’ is slated to appear on Michigan’s Nov. 3 general election ballot
• Opponents claim the proposal doesn’t live up to its name because it wouldn’t fully stop ‘dark money’ or union spending
• Organizers say the proposal ‘was never designed to fix every single part of our campaign finance system’ but would improve it

---

LANSING — A Michigan ballot proposal to restrict political giving by large-scale utilities and state contractors is facing scrutiny over whether it will actually get “money out of politics,” as its name suggests.

The initiative by Michiganders for Money Out of Politics, also known as Mop Up Michigan, is slated to appear on the Nov. 3 ballot. 

If approved by voters, Proposal 2 would prohibit direct or indirect contributions to Michigan politicians by DTE Energy, Consumers Energy and companies with more than $250,000 in state government contracts, along with immediate family members and other people with close connections. 

But opponents contend the law would not stop political spending by out-of-state groups, dark money nonprofits and a major source of political giving in Michigan: unions. 

Here are the facts. 

‘Money in politics’

As drafted, the proposal would prohibit monopoly utilities and large state contractors, whether based in Michigan or outside the state, from donating to Michigan candidates or elected officials. 

“If you are an out-of-state corporation that has that contract with the state of Michigan, then no, you can’t give,” said Christy McGillivray, co-chair of Michiganders for Money Out of Politics. 

State law already prohibits corporations from directly contributing to Michigan candidates. But under the proposal, that ban would extend to officials at impacted companies, along with other people who have “substantial” ownership interests or serve on a board of directors. 

Company officials and immediate family members also could not donate to entities that are affiliated with elected officials or candidates and pay for their travel, meals, conference fees or other expenses. 

But what about out-of-state donors that aren’t contractors? 

They would not be impacted by the proposal, as critics are quick to point out. 

“Mop Up Michigan’s approach won’t eliminate money in politics — it will simply shift influence away from Michigan companies and toward wealthy national donors and special interests,” said Katie Carey, a spokesperson for both CMS Energy and Consumers Energy.

What about dark money?

The proposal would not directly prohibit dark money spending through 501(c)(4) nonprofit organizations, which do not have to disclose their donors, making the money difficult to trace. 

It “was never designed to fix every single part of our campaign finance system,” McBrearty said. 

But the proposal does seek to end the “dark” nature of some of that spending by shining a light on donors. It would require groups to disclose their donors if they run so-called issue advertisements within 100 days of a general election or 30 days before a primary.

That means any outside group that makes even tangential reference to a candidate or ballot issue in an ad — even if they don’t explicitly say “vote for” or “vote against” — would have to report donors and expenses to the state.

At least 11 other states require donor transparency for issue ads that have evaded disclosure rules in other parts of the country, but Michigan would be the first political battleground to do so. 

It’s an attempt to close “loopholes” in Michigan’s campaign finance system, McBrearty previously told Bridge. 

“There will need to be more reforms after we pass this ballot initiative,” he added this month. “But this ballot initiative — we designed to take out the biggest chunk that we can, and to do the most to help working people in Michigan have a level playing field and get their voices heard again in Lansing.”

Ballot campaign donations

Opponents like Consumers Energy contend it’s “hypocritical” for Mop Up Michigan organizers to say they want to get money out of politics “while accepting out-of-state dark money from their supporters.” 

Mop Up Michigan has received millions of dollars in contributions from dark money groups known for spending on left-leaning political causes. 

State filings include $5.4 million in donations from All Hands on Deck Network Inc. of Massachusetts and $1.4 million from the Sixteen Thirty Fund, a liberal clearinghouse based in Washington, DC.

McGillivray, co-chair of the ballot committee, defended the group’s fundraising, arguing it shouldn’t be penalized for “operating under the exact same rules everyone else is.”

As for unions…

Another issue opponents have with the initiative is that it does nothing to curtail the spending powers of unions, which have historically been big supporters of Democratic causes in Michigan.

“This egregious proposal appears to silence the voices of job providers and limit free speech for some while giving others, like labor unions, a free pass,” the Michigan Chamber of Commerce previously said. 

The word “union” is not included in the petition language, and Mop Up Michigan’s website states that “unions and individual union members will not be impacted by the policy changes in the petition.”

Asked about that language, McBrearty clarified that some individual union members could theoretically be impacted by the petition if “any union becomes a government contractor.” 

“There’s no need to name labor unions explicitly,” McBrearty added. “Just like you won’t find DTE or Blue Cross Blue Shield or Consumers’ names specifically in here—this was written to target a behavior which is pay-to-play politics, drowning out the voices of regular folks across the state.”

Like corporations, unions are prohibited from directly giving to candidates in Michigan. But they can spend through political action committees and make independent expenditures, neither of which would generally be prohibited unless a union is a state contractor.

According to July campaign finance statements filed with the Department of State, a PAC associated with the United Auto Workers — Michigan’s largest union — spent nearly $800,000 between April 21 and July 20, 2026.

The PAC has spent more than $1 million so far this year, including $24,000 in campaign contributions to state Sen. Chedrick Greene, D-Saginaw, who was elected in a May special election that could have changed control of the Michigan Senate if he’d lost.

The bottom line 

The Mop Up Michigan proposal generally would not prohibit political spending by out-of-state interests — unless those groups had a contract with the state government worth $250,000 or more. Same with unions. 

It would not ban dark money spending outright but would require donor disclosure for groups that run so-called issue ads in the run-up to Michigan elections. 

Voters will get the chance to weigh in during the Nov. 3 general election.

Republish This Story

Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under our Republication Guidelines. Questions? Email republishing@bridgemi.com