Michigan Senate Bill SB0101

Michigan 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/26/25
• Refer: 2/26/25
• Report Pass: 2/26/25
• Report Pass: 3/5/25
• Refer: 3/5/25

Caption

Public employees and officers: ethics; definition of gift; modify. Amends secs. 3 & 4 of 1978 PA 472 (MCL 4.413 & 4.414) & adds sec. 8a.

Impact

The amendments proposed by SB 101 are intended to better regulate the influence of money in politics by establishing clearer definitions of what constitutes an expenditure and a gift. For example, the bill raises the threshold for what qualifies as a gift, from previously unspecified amounts to a clear $25 limit, which adjusts for inflation. This change may lead to improved compliance and reporting among lobbyists and public officials, ensuring that any substantial gifts are properly documented and disclosed according to the new standards.

Summary

Senate Bill 101 aims to amend the existing Michigan law governing political activities by making significant adjustments to the definitions and regulations surrounding gifts and lobbying. The bill updates sections 3 and 4 of 1978 PA 472, which is primarily focused on the regulation of lobbyists and the ethical conduct of public officials. A key change is the introduction of section 8a, which provides a detailed framework for determining the fair market value of any item or service received by lobbyists and public officials, thereby increasing transparency and accountability in political transactions.

Contention

Despite the intent of enhancing ethical standards, SB 101 has generated discussion among lawmakers and advocacy groups regarding the implications of these changes. Critics argue that the raised monetary threshold for gifts might still allow for substantial influence over public officials without adequate transparency. Furthermore, the responsibilities placed on lobbyists to document the fair market value of gifts and expenditures could be seen as burdensome, yet necessary for maintaining integrity in political dealings. The regulation of the reporting process may become a point of contention as it calls into question the balance between necessary oversight and potential over-regulation.