The Michigan State Constitutional Convention Clearinghouse

Information related to Michigan's Nov. 2026 convention call referendum

Michigan's Convention Call History

Year Number Percentage Threshold Passed? Text Vote Method Off Cycle?
Yes (Y) No (N) All Votes Y/(Y+N) N/(Y+N) Y/(All Votes)
1835 N.R., N.R., N.R., N.R., N.R., N.R., N.R., N.R., N.R., N.R.,
1849 33,851 25,759 N.R., 56.79% 43.21% N.R., Y Vague N.R., Y
1866 79,505 28,623 N.R. 73.53% 26.47% N.R. Y Vague Prop. N
1882 20,937 35,123 N.R. 37.35% 62.65% N.R. N Vague N.R. N
1890 31,905 68,441 N.R. 31.79% 68.21% N.R. N Vague N.R. Y
1892 135,379 162,913 468,637 45.38% 54.62% N.R. N Vague Election Y
1898 162,163 127,147 421,164 56.05% 43.95% 38.50% N Vague Election N
1904 165,123 120,018 524,721 57.91% 42.09% 31.47% N Vague Election Y
1906* 196,780 127,189 323,969 57.91% 42.09% 57.91% Y Vague Election N
1926* 119,491 285,252 630,752 29.52% 70.48% 18.94% N Election Election N
1942# 408,188 468,506 1,226,774 46.56% 53.44% 33.27% N Election Election N
1948# 285,252 799,198 2,113,122 51.70% 48.30% 13.50% N Election Election Y
1958# 821,282 608,365 2,303,622 57.45% 42.55% 35.65% N Election Election N
1961 596,433 573,012 N.R. 51.00% 49% N.R. Y Prop. Prop. N
1978 640,286 2,112,549 N.R. 23.26% 76.74% N.R. N Prop. Prop. N
1994 777,779 2,008,070 N.R. 27.92% 72.08% N.R. N Prop. Prop. N
2010 983,019 983,019 N.R. 33.40% 66.60% N.R. N Prop. Prop. N

 

Notes:

  • Bold marks the type of majority denominator that was implemented: either a majority voting on the question or at the election.
  • In 1835, there was no convention call referendum.
  • Only from 1892 through 1958 was a majority larger than a majority of the voters voting on the referendum used to determine the type of majority.  required for approval. A widely used phrase to describe the larger majority is "a majority of the voters voting at the election."  But, in fact, a proxy, such as the number of people voting for governor at an election, may have been used to calculate this majority.
* Was a special election in April so the percentage voting on the referendum approximately equaled the percentage voting at the election.
# Total voting at the election was based on the vote for governor
^ Total voting at the election was based on the vote for any statewide office

Michigan Convention History

1835 1849-1850 1866-1868 1906-1908 1961-1963
Call Referendum
Date N.R. 11/6/1849 11/6/1866 4/2/1906 4/3/1961
Yes # N.R. 33,851 79,505 196,780 596,433
No # N.R. 25,759 28,623 127,189 573,012
Yes % N.R. 56.8% 73.5% 60.7% 51.0%
No % N.R. 43.2% 26.5% 39.3% 49.0%
Call Approved? N.R. Yes Yes Yes Yes
Delegate Election
Primary Election Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable 7/25/1961
General Election 4/4/1835 5/6/1850 4/1/1867 9/24/1907 9/22/1961
# of Delegates 91 100 100 96 144
Convention Session
Date Convened 5/11/1835 6/3/1850 5/15/1867 10/22/1907 10/3/1961
Date Adjourned 6/24/1835 8/15/1850 8/22/1867 3/3/1908 8/1/1962
Duration (days) 45 74 100 134 303
Ratification Referendum
Date 10/4/185 11/5/1850 4/1/1867 11/3/1908 4/1/1963
Yes # 6,752 36,169 71,733 244,705 810,860
No # 1,374 9,433 110,582 130,783 803,436
Yes % 83.1% 79.3% 39.3% 65.2% 50.2%
No % 16.9% 20.7% 60.7% 34.8% 49.8%
Ratified? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

2010 Pro & Con Campaign

The best summary of the pro & con campaign was published by Ballotpedia.

The "No" Coalition was named "Citizens Protecting Michigan's Constitution." It consisted of dozens of groups, including unions and business groups.

The "Yes" Coalition was named "Yes on Proposal One." It consisted primarily of individuals. It was co-chaired by Tom George and Dennis Lennox and supported by Governor Jennifer Granholm.

News Media Editorial Support

  1. The Detroit Free Press, "Find ways to repair dysfunctional Legislature," September 30, 2010
  2. Detroit Free Press, "State Constitution needs change now," October 29, 2010
  3. The Jackson Citizen Patriot, "Endorsement: Yes on Proposal 1," October 15, 2010
  4. Midland Daily News, "Our view: Need for constitutional convention clear, but ...," August 26, 2010
  5. The Oakland Press, "Editorial: Revised constitution could help Michigan," October 11, 2010
  6. The Blade, "Yes to 'Con-Con'," October 2, 2010
  7. The Saginaw Valley Journal, "Endorsement: Vote Yes On Michigan’s Proposal 1," October 19, 2010
  8. The Bay City Times, "Endorsement: Proposal 1: Time is right for a Constitutional Convention in Michigan," October 31, 2010
  9. Record Eagle,"'Yes' on both Michigan proposals," October 26, 2010]

News Media Editorial Opposition

  1. The Holland Sentinel, "OUR VIEW — A constitutional convention won’t cure what ails Michigan," September 20, 2010
  2. The Detroit News, "Editorial: Mich. voters should avoid the disruption of a constitutional convention," September 26, 2010
  3. The Daily Telegram, "Our View: Vote 'no' on state's two ballot proposals," October 21, 2010
  4. Livingston Daily, "Recapping our endorsements for Tuesday's vote," October 31, 2010

2010 Poll Results

Note the decline in the "yes" vote after the "No" Coalition advertising campaign kicked in. 

Date of Poll Pollster In favor Opposed Undecided Number polled
August 9-10, 2010 Glengariff Group Inc. 46% 32% 26% 600
August 21-23, 2010 EPIC-MRA 35% 43% 24% 600
Oct. 20-25, 2010 EPIC-MRA 31% 57% 12% 600