Voter Guide

Michigan's Constitution already provides established ways for citizens and elected officials to propose constitutional amendments. Those processes require public debate and ultimately allow Michigan voters to decide whether proposed amendments should be adopted. After reviewing Proposal 1, our coalition believes those existing tools remain the best way to consider constitutional changes. For those reasons, we recommend voting No on Proposal 1.

As explained earlier in this guide, Michigan's Constitution already provides multiple ways to make constitutional changes. Citizens can propose constitutional amendments through the initiative process, and the Legislature can place proposed amendments on the ballot with a two-thirds vote of both chambers. In either case, Michigan voters have the final say. Our coalition believes these existing processes allow constitutional issues to be considered individually, giving voters the opportunity to evaluate each proposed amendment on its own merits rather than as part of a broader constitutional revision.

A constitutional convention allows elected delegates to consider broad revisions to Michigan's Constitution. Our coalition believes that the state's existing amendment process provides a more focused and predictable approach. Rather than reopening multiple sections of the Constitution at once, individual amendments can be debated publicly and presented to voters one proposal at a time. In our view, this makes it easier for voters to understand each proposed change and evaluate it independently.

As explained earlier, a constitutional convention has broad authority to consider constitutional revisions. This kind of broad authority can create unnecessary uncertainty because multiple constitutional issues could be considered during a single convention. While any proposed changes would still require voter approval, we believe beginning such an expansive process is unnecessary given Michigan's existing amendment procedures.

Coalition members have also identified several practical concerns that influenced our recommendation.

• Cost: Holding a constitutional convention would require a significant public investment to conduct delegate elections, organize the convention, and administer the overall process. Our coalition believes those public resources are better spent addressing issues through Michigan's existing constitutional amendment process.

• Delegate Elections: Because delegates would be elected in a separate statewide election, many voters may have limited familiarity with the candidates seeking to represent them. Our coalition believes this could make it more difficult for voters to evaluate delegate qualifications than it is to evaluate individual constitutional amendments that appear directly on the ballot.

• Influence of Special Interests and Political Lobbying: Delegate campaigns could attract substantial spending from special interest groups and organizations seeking to influence constitutional debates. Because delegate elections would create an entirely new statewide campaign, our coalition believes there is greater opportunity for political lobbying, independent expenditures, and well-funded outside organizations to shape who is elected and which constitutional changes receive attention.

• Michigan Data Centers and Other Emerging Policy Issues: Michigan is already debating important policy questions involving Michigan data centers, including energy demand, water use, environmental permitting, and infrastructure planning. In July 2026, Governor Gretchen Whitmer announced the Michigan Affordable and Responsible Growth Action Plan, which builds on existing state laws by requiring data center companies to pay the full costs of their development, protect Michigan's natural resources, comply with environmental permitting requirements, safeguard water resources, and prevent energy costs from being shifted onto Michigan residents. The plan also highlights Michigan's existing environmental oversight under the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act (NREPA), including regulation of water withdrawals, wetlands, wastewater discharges, and air quality. (Source: Governor Gretchen Whitmer, "Gov. Whitmer Launches Michigan Affordable and Responsible Growth Action Plan," July 15, 2026)

• The Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE) has also identified large commercial water users—including data centers—as an emerging area for water conservation planning. EGLE notes that expanding data center development may increase statewide water demand and emphasizes the importance of water-efficient cooling technologies and long-term resource planning. (Source: Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy, "Innovation in Water Conservation Best Practices," 2025)

• Our coalition believes that issues involving data center environmental impact, data center water use, and other significant public policy questions deserve careful public debate through Michigan's existing legislative and constitutional amendment processes. Rather than opening the door to a broad constitutional convention where numerous unrelated constitutional questions could be considered simultaneously, we believe Michigan voters are better served by evaluating important constitutional changes one proposal at a time.

• Uncertainty: Ultimately, our coalition believes Michigan benefits from a constitutional amendment process that considers constitutional changes individually rather than through a convention with broad authority to revisit multiple sections of the Constitution at once.