Lawsuit Challenges Michigan’s Pork-Barrel Spending in State Budget

A libertarian think tank sues to block state budget pork-barrel projects, citing constitutional violations and costs.
Lawsuit says state budget earmarks for specific local projects are unconstitutional

Legal Challenge Against State Budget Allocations

A recent lawsuit filed by a libertarian-leaning think tank aims to halt the allocation of funds for certain projects within the state budget, potentially setting a precedent for future budgetary processes.

The Mackinac Center has initiated the legal action, asserting that the 2024-25 state budget includes unauthorized funds for ballpark projects in Lansing and Utica. According to the lawsuit, this action contravenes the Michigan Constitution, which mandates that spending on “local or private purposes” must receive approval from a two-thirds supermajority in both legislative houses. The existing budget did not meet this requirement.

Patrick Wright, the Legal Director at the Mackinac Center, highlighted a legislative loophole being exploited to bypass constitutional stipulations. “They would say, like, in a city of a certain size with a range of maybe a thousand people, in a county of a certain size which has a range of maybe 5,000 people, what they’re really trying to do is to pinpoint only one recipient,” he explained in a video presentation. “That pinpointing violates the constitution.”

The failure to achieve the supermajority vote threshold has provided a basis for the current legal proceedings. Wright also suggests that these constitutional breaches could lead to billions in additional taxpayer costs.

Jeff Guilfoyle, a budget expert from Public Sector Consultants, noted that this legal challenge, along with a closely divided government, might influence future state budget formulations. “If we’re going to be in a state now where we don’t get two-thirds votes for the appropriations bills, then people are going to have to look at these appropriations where you need a super-majority for stuff to get enacted,” he stated to Michigan Public Radio.

The responsibility now lies with a Michigan Court of Claims judge to determine the validity of the Mackinac Center’s claims. Regardless of the outcome, there is potential for the decision to be contested.

The topic of earmark reform has gained traction in the Legislature this year. Under new transparency rules, the Michigan House mandates that earmark requests be made public before budgetary votes occur.


Read More Michigan News

Share the Post:

Subscribe

Related Posts