#FactsMatter, the Citizens Research Council of Michigan podcast

Guy sits down with Eric Lupher, Citizens Research Council president, in the first episode of a series of podcasts exploring the Council’s series of papers on Michigan’s upcoming ballot question asking voters whether to hold a constitutional convention.

The Research Council takes no position on whether to call a constitutional convention.

They start by digging into the first released paper, General Revision of the Michigan Constitution, which describes the process for convening a convention, examines the history of past votes on the question, discusses the possibility of a wholesale revision of the constitution, describes the nature and purpose of a constitution, and outlines the elements of the current 1963 Michigan Constitution.

They touch on the heavy use of the amendment process, which has nibbled at the edges of constitutional change, and what could happen if voters approve Proposal 2026-01, convening a constitutional convention, which has not happened since 1961.

Guy asks Eric for the most compelling reasons for voters to vote “yes” or vote “no.” Listen in for the answers here.

With March Madness just around the corner, Guy sits down with Karley Abramson to talk about her recent report: Policy Options to Hedge the Worsening Human Costs of Online Sports Betting. Karley is the Research Council’s lead research associate for health policy.

After six years of legal online gaming and sports betting in Michigan, Guy and Karley take a step back to examine how Michigan can do a better job of preventing problem gaming.

As the paper notes: "Approximately 22 percent of all Americans have at least one sports betting account, including almost half of all men age 18 to 49."

Problem gambling behaviors have increased due to ubiquitous sports betting apps, leading to financial harm, health issues, and safety concerns.

Policymakers have options to mitigate the harm caused by gambling addiction while also respecting people’s rights to engage with sports betting as an entertainment product.

Guy chats with the Research Council’s Detroit office director Doug Ortiz and Citizens Research Council President Eric Lupher about the Detroit February revenue estimating conference (REC) and what it portends for Mayor Sheffield’s first executive budget. Detroit’s fiscal year begins on July 1, 2026.

Detroit, like many cities, counties, and townships in Michigan, is looking at relatively flat revenue growth as it begins to craft its budget for the fiscal year beginning in July.

The small increase in revenue estimates was largely due to higher wagering/casino tax revenue than in the September 2025 REC. Annual growth in wagering taxes has been volatile in recent fiscal years and is expected to plateau in the forecast period with no real growth.

Annual revenue growth in the forecast from FY2026 to FY2030 is expected to be flat-to-modest. Property and income tax revenues lead forecasted annual growth, but when adjusted for inflation, income tax revenues had virtually no real growth

It is a good sign that there is talk of some level of tax reform coming from Lansing. Detroit and many local governments throughout Michigan will be watching.

Just two weeks after digesting the details of Governor Whitmer’s final Executive Budget proposal, one thing is certain: it’s going to be a very interesting watch as Michigan policymakers tackle and negotiate the fiscal year 2027 budget. Senior Research Council staff Craig Thiel and Bob Schneider chat with Guy Gordon, walking through some of the most consequential pressure points as lawmakers craft a budget that will pass both chambers and be signed by the Governor.

Multiple federal and state policy changes over the past year have set the stage for General Fund revenue that is expected to be down by more than $1.2 billion from the May 2025 forecast, an 8.3 percent decrease. Additionally, state budget writers will need to address federal cost shifts that place greater burdens on states for Medicaid and food assistance programs.

The key challenge for budget writers during FY2027 budget deliberations will be addressing deficits rather than allocating surpluses, as has been the case for several consecutive years. Any new investment proposals that increase the budget will require additional dollar-for-dollar reductions to offset their impact.

To quote Schneider: “It's going to be a really interesting budget cycle. In an election year, you're usually always done by July 1st, but I'm not so sure that's going to happen this year.”

Eric Paul Dennis, research associate for infrastructure at the Citizens Research Council, joins Guy Gordon for the first podcast of 2026. Earlier this week, Dennis’ research brief, How the 2025 Transportation Funding Package Accidentally Cut Road Funding in FY2026, contrasted the promise of new funding in the current fiscal year with the reality.

Guy and Eric pick up where their conversation left off in late 2025 — at the start of fiscal year (FY) 2026 — when the Michigan Legislature passed and Governor Whitmer signed Michigan’s 2025 transportation funding package, billed as delivering more than $1 billion in new road funding for FY 2026.

But the reality is that Michigan road agencies have seen a more than 15 percent decrease in state funding distributions in the months following the adoption of the package.

This discrepancy between a promised funding increase and a realized funding decrease is largely due to differences in formal state accounting and the timing of funding distributions to road agencies. Additional delays and uncertainties are imposed by statutory details and bureaucratic complexities related to new funding sources provided by the 2025 transportation funding package.

Road agencies will see funding increases beginning in April 2026 (the second half of the fiscal year). However, the increases in the final six months of FY2026 are likely to be smaller than the decreases seen in the first six months. Although the official state budget may reflect an over $1 billion increase in road funding in FY2026, road agencies may receive less funding than in FY2025.

The promised FY2026 funding increase will likely be distributed to agencies in FY2027, with some disbursed in the final months of FY2026. However, the exact timing and amount of this funding remain unclear.

In this episode of the Facts Matter podcast, host Guy Gordon and infrastructure specialist Eric Paul Dennis discuss the recent road funding package passed in Michigan. While the potential for increased funding, if the estimated revenue is achieved, could lead to significant improvements in road conditions, uncertainty about revenue estimates can hinder long-term planning for road agencies. Only 30% of the new road funding revenues are guaranteed.

Guy and Eric explore the implications of the new funding sources, including a marijuana wholesale tax and earmarks for corporate income tax, and the uncertainties surrounding revenue guarantees. These uncertainties are already posing challenges to at least one major local road agency in planning and executing projects. Local road agencies may also face challenges in accessing new funds due to complex criteria, and the distribution of funds may favor certain local agencies over others.

5:18 - graph of Corporate Income Tax revenue FY2012-FY2024

10:52 - graph of State Revenue Sharing, inflation adjusted to road building inflation

13:40 – graph of change in State Revenue Sharing to cities and villages

Their conversation highlights the potential for increased funding while also addressing the complexities and inefficiencies in the current funding system. Ultimately, they call for a comprehensive review of the funding process to ensure that it meets the needs of all communities in Michigan.

"We need to think about this differently."

Guy sits down with Karley Abramson, research associate for health policy, to talk about the seriously high level of poor health among Michiganders, a level showing increasing signs of further deterioration.

Citizens Research Council just released exhaustive research, authored by Abramson, that drills down to root causes of why Michiganders suffer from worse health outcomes than residents in similar, neighboring states and even across the U.S. The paper, Social Determinants of Health: Pathways to a Healthier Michigan, clearly translates what Social Determinants of Health (SDOH) mean for Michiganders and how they directly affect the state’s economy and our collective ability to prosper.

Interconnectedness – All Policy is Health Policy

This report unpacks SDOH by focusing on the evidence-based fundamental resources that are necessary for individual health: Financial Resources; Health Care; Food and Nutrition; Safety; and Social Support.

Abramson explains that all the evidence and data point to two broad themes: the interconnectedness of the social determinants of health and the centrality of financial resources in the story of Michigan residents’ lagging health outcomes.

“In every area of public policy, there is a nexus to health and well-being,” the report notes. “The centrality of financial resources – education, employment, and income – is the story of Michigan’s lagging health outcomes.”

A Research Council Podcast Roundtable: Michigan’s 2025 Budget Breakdown

In a first-ever roundtable edition of the #FactsMatter podcast, Guy Gordon recaps recent budget conversations and even more recent updates from the finally passed and long-overdue Michigan budget with the Research Council’s Eric Lupher, president; Craig Thiel, research director; Bob Schneider, senior state affairs associate; and research associates Karley Abramson, health policy; and Eric Paul Dennis, infrastructure.

First up — roads. Guy chats with Eric Paul Dennis on how nearly $2 billion in new funding should bump Michigan to about 15th in the nation for road spending, but the complicated Act 51 formula still means many local roads won’t see major improvements. Transparency at the pump is better — but how those dollars are spent? Still murky.

Karley Abramson explained how healthcare saw one of the biggest surprises: the Rx Kids program jumped from a $16 million pilot to $270 million statewide, offering direct cash assistance to new mothers. A rare bipartisan investment in babies and brain development.

Craig Thiel explained how schools also got good news — universal free breakfast and lunch continue for all K–12 students, and funding for at-risk kids rose 25%, with hopes of boosting early literacy.

Eric Lupher and Bob Schneider took on taxes in the budget, and how lawmakers avoided a $670 million hit by decoupling from the federal “One Big Beautiful Bill Act.” Businesses aren’t thrilled, but it keeps the state budget stable.

And transparency? Mixed. The state promised more, but much of the final deal was done behind closed doors — without final revenue estimates to guide spending.

In short, Michigan’s 2025 budget may be remembered for potholes and pot — big fixes on roads and kids, but still a few bumps ahead when it comes to accountability.

Guy Gordon and Bob Schneider, Citizens Research Council’s senior research associate for state affairs, look at what is in the final state budget, signed into law this week by Governor Whitmer, from both the 30,000 foot level and the nitty gritty level, digging into some of the elements that didn’t receive much attention.

Calling it the Michigan ‘Potholes and Pot’ budget, Guy and Bob discuss how the budget finally tries to start addressing how Michigan funds roads by removing the confusing sales tax on gasoline, so those dollars now go directly where they belong: fixing roads.

But that change also cuts off money that used to flow to schools and local governments.

Backfilling the School Aid Fund

Schools were mostly held harmless, but because some of their funding was shifted to universities, K–12 districts end up about $400 million short.

No Backfill for Cities, Villages and Townships

Local governments weren’t so lucky — they’re losing around $93 million, which could mean tighter budgets for public safety and local services.

This equals a 5–10% reduction, depending on the community.

Impact varies: Townships may be more affected since revenue sharing can be a large portion of their budget.

Some public safety grants (~$42M) were added, but they’re targeted and don’t offset the broader cuts.

Budget Gimmicks and Sustainability

The good news? No budget gimmicks this year. It’s considered honest and sustainable, with no major short-term gimmicks like early payments or delayed obligations, even as COVID-era one-time funds fade away. Michigan budgeted one-time funds carefully.

While some lawmakers claim the budget is smaller, it’s actually slightly larger once you count all spending — around $84 billion total.

On the process side, there was real progress: lawmakers made earmark requests public and transparent. But the process was still rushed, and there was a big miss — the state skipped the usual public revenue estimate, leaving a major transparency gap.

In short: Michigan’s budget is cleaner, more sustainable and fixes old problems than in past years. But leaves a few new ones to deal with in coming years. The budget solves long-standing issues around fuel taxes and revenue use. Schools were protected, but took a secondary hit from a university funding shift.

The budget is sustainable, transparent, and returns to normal size relative to the state’s economy.

Karley Abramson, health policy associate for the Research Council, speaks with Guy about her most recent paper, Upcoming Changes to the Affordable Care Act (ACA) Tax Credits Will Also Disrupt Michigan’s Health Care System, which details how the One Big Beautiful Bill Act would likely result in about 200,000 fewer Michiganders having health care, including about 100,000 who will become uninsured because Congress did not renew or extend the Enhanced Premium Tax Credit (EPTC). The other half are expected to become uninsured due to new administrative requirements that may create barriers to people qualifying for EPTC.

Data indicates that about 8 million fewer Americans will have health care over the next decade.

“Our research found that of the 530,000 Michiganders who purchase health care through the ACA, more than 350,000 are covered by a tax credit-supported plan,” said Abramson. “As a result of the tax credit enhancement under the 2021 American Rescue Plan 2021, expanding both the size of the credit and who is eligible, premiums for plans sold on the Marketplace have been much cheaper for many enrollees compared to 2020 and earlier.”

Since the introduction of the Enhanced Premium Tax Credit, nationwide coverage through the Affordable Care Act marketplace has doubled.

Abramson also addressed how the end of these tax credits goes far beyond the financial hardship they impose on Michiganders who directly use them.

“This would lead to worse health outcomes for people across Michigan. More uninsured people mean health care costs will go up for everyone, in the form of higher health insurance premiums paid by individuals and employers,” she said.

More uninsured people mean health care costs will go up for everyone in the form of higher health insurance premiums, the paper notes. Michigan hospitals will likely see increased rates of uncompensated care, which will worsen hospitals’ financial burdens and potentially lead to reduced services and even closure. Much in the same way that the OBBBA Medicaid cuts are expected to impact Michigan, people not buying private insurance through the Marketplace will likely have cascading effects across the state.

“Combined with cuts to Medicaid — which already threaten to strip health care from hundreds of thousands of Michiganders — health care in our state faces a dire downward spiral that will put people’s health, safety and well-being at risk.

The paper also addresses solutions, with the most immediate being for policymakers to renew the EPTC before the end of this year.

“We also believe that state legislators in Lansing can create a Michigan-specific tax credit to assist those purchasing insurance through the marketplace or provide incentives for preventative care and vaccinations,” said Abramson.

“Doing nothing will have serious long-term ramifications for Michigan families, Michigan businesses and Michigan’s economy.”