Difference between revisions of "Michigan Taxation Amendment, Proposal 5 (2012)"

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 16: Line 16:
{{Short outcome
{{Short outcome
| title = Michigan Proposal 5
| title = Michigan Proposal 5
| yes = 1,409,850
| yes = 1,410,944
| yespct = 31
| yespct = 31
| no = 3,102,217
| no = 3,105,649
| nopct = 69
| nopct = 69
| image = {{Defeated}}
| image = {{Defeated}}
Line 25: Line 25:
[[Category:Defeated, general, 2012]]
[[Category:Defeated, general, 2012]]
:''These results are from the [http://www.mlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2012/11/2012_michigan_election_results.html#2 MLive.com] with 5099 of 5099 precincts reporting. This results section will be updated daily until the final results have been certified in about three weeks.''
:''Official results from the [http://miboecfr.nictusa.com/election/results/12GEN/90000005.html Michigan Secretary of State].''
==Text of measure==
==Text of measure==

Revision as of 12:55, 2 January 2013

Taxation Amendment
Flag of Michigan.png
Click here for the latest news on U.S. ballot measures
Quick stats
Type:Constitutional amendment
Constitution:Michigan Constitution
Referred by:Citizens
Topic:Taxes on the ballot

The Michigan Taxation Amendment was on the November 6, 2012, statewide ballot in Michigan as an initiated constitutional amendment, where it was defeated. If enacted this measure would have required that increases in state taxes must be approved by either a 2/3 majority in the Legislature or by a statewide vote. The measure was sponsored by Michigan Alliance for Prosperity.[1]

Election results

See also: 2012 ballot measure election results
Michigan Proposal 5
Defeatedd No3,105,64969%
Yes 1,410,944 31%
Official results from the Michigan Secretary of State.

Text of measure

The official ballot text read as follows:[2]



This proposal would:

Require a 2/3 majority vote of the State House and the State Senate, or a statewide vote of the people at a November election, in order for the State of Michigan to impose new or additional taxes on taxpayers or expand the base of taxation or increasing the rate of taxation.

This section shall in no way be construed to limit or modify tax limitations otherwise created in this Constitution.

Should this proposal be approved?
YES __
NO ____



  • In a guest column for MLive.com, Lana Theis argued in favor of the measure saying, "This [Proposal 5] gives lawmakers and special interest groups the chance to make their case to the taxpayers who ultimately foot the bill on the necessity of the tax increase over some other type of solution or reform."[4]

Campaign contributions

In Michigan campaign finance information related to ballot measures is organized by ballot question committees. The following data was obtained from the state Campaign Finance Committee:

Committee info:

Committee Amount raised Amount spent
Michigan Alliance for Prosperity $1,886,000.00 $1,852,961.84[5]
Total $1,886,000.00 $1,852,961.84




  • In a press release published in September 2012, Gov. Snyder said, "What's does this proposal mean for you and me? It means that special interest groups and even a small group of lawmakers could stop our ability to make the necessary policy changes we need in Michigan. It means that it would be more difficult for us to pay for our schools, fix our roads, or make sure that our law enforcement officers have the tools they need to protect us. Also, it will be viewed as negatively by bond ratings agencies which could raise our interest costs and make us look less attractive to job creators."[7]

Path to the ballot

See also: Michigan signature requirements

In order to place the measure on the November 2012 ballot supporters were required to collect a minimum of 322,609 valid signatures by July 9, 2012.

Following a stalemate vote in the Board of State Canvassers, the measure was taken to the Michigan Supreme Court where it was certified for the ballot.[8]

See also

Suggest a link

External links