Michigan · individual fact

Michigan real gross domestic product

Michigan’s inflation-adjusted economic output, annual growth, industry structure, and employment context.

Real GDP$575.4B2025 · #14 of 50 · highest first
Annual real GDP growth2.2%2025 · #20 of 50 · highest first
Current-dollar GDP$733.89B2025 · #14 of 50 · highest first

Michigan over time

Explore Michigan readings, major events and reviewed actions on the same date scale. Michigan officeholders appear in separate lanes. National event evidence describes national context; it does not measure a Michigan effect.

Major events & context · A curated selection, including uncertain effects. Milestone dates do not establish that an event caused a Michigan change.

Enacted / issuedDid not proceedPending / in progressStatus unclear

Colors show the latest recorded status. Passing one chamber is not enactment. A number groups actions with the same date, body and status.

Real GDP Michigan · source units
MichiganPublished U.S. benchmark

Move across the chart to inspect the nearest observation. Click or tap to keep a reading selected, or focus the chart and use the arrow keys. Hover over or focus a marker to explore; click or tap to pin. Press Escape to clear.

Real GDP2025: $575.4B$0$13.38T$26.76TMichigan, 2014: $479.53BMichigan, 2015: $490.62BMichigan, 2016: $500.16BMichigan, 2017: $505.1BMichigan, 2018: $516.81BMichigan, 2019: $520.99BMichigan, 2020: $502.17BMichigan, 2021: $527.85BMichigan, 2022: $540.83BMichigan, 2023: $555.89BMichigan, 2024: $563.09BMichigan, 2025: $575.4B201420192025
✦ Major events & context · 30National context · Hurricanes Katrina and Rita · 2005-08-29Katrina and RitaNational context · Great Financial Crisis and Great Recession · 2008-09-15Great Financial CrisisNational context · Federal Reserve moves rates close to zero · 2008-12-16Fed near-zero ratesNational context · American Recovery and Reinvestment Act · 2009-02-17Recovery ActNational context · Japan disaster disrupts U.S. auto production · 2011-05-17Japan / auto supplyNational context · Midwest drought reduces farm output · 2012-09-27Drought / farm outputNational context · Automatic federal spending cuts begin · 2013-03-01Federal spending cutsNational context · 2013 federal government shutdown · 2013-10-012013 shutdownNational context · Oil-price decline cuts drilling investment · 2015-02-24Oil investment downturnNational context · Hurricanes Harvey and Irma disrupt activity · 2017-08-25Harvey and IrmaNational context · 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act · 2017-12-222017 tax lawNational context · U.S.–China tariff escalation · 2018-07-06U.S.–China tariffsNational context · 2018–19 federal government shutdown · 2018-12-222018–19 shutdownNational context · Federal Reserve begins 2019 rate cuts · 2019-07-312019 Fed rate cutsNational context · COVID-19 pandemic · 2020-03-11COVID-19 pandemicNational context · Emergency rate cuts and asset purchases · 2020-03-15Fed emergency supportNational context · CARES Act pandemic relief · 2020-03-27CARES Act reliefMichigan · Edenville and Sanford dam failures flood Midland area · 2020-05-19Edenville and Sanford dam failures flood Midland areaNational context · American Rescue Plan · 2021-03-11American Rescue PlanNational context · Reopening recovery meets supply bottlenecks · 2021-07-09Reopening / shortagesNational context · Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act · 2021-11-15Infrastructure lawNational context · Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine · 2022-02-24Russia invades UkraineNational context · Federal Reserve begins 2022 rate increases · 2022-03-16Fed rate increasesNational context · Semiconductor and energy investment incentives · 2022-08-16CHIPS / energy incentivesNational context · Banking stress and credit conditions · 2023-03-22Banking / credit stressNational context · Federal Reserve begins 2024 rate cuts · 2024-09-182024 Fed rate cutsNational context · Broad U.S. tariffs and volatile trade flows · 2025-04-02Tariffs / trade timingNational context · 2025 tax and spending reconciliation law · 2025-07-042025 tax / spending lawNational context · 2025 shutdown reduces federal services · 2025-10-012025 shutdownNational context · Iran conflict and Strait of Hormuz disruption · 2026-02-28Iran / Hormuz disruption● Michigan Legislature · 0No reviewed actions match these filters.● U.S. Congress · Michigan delegation · 2◆ Governor · 0No reviewed actions match these filters.■ Michigan agencies · 0No reviewed actions match these filters.2005-08-012026-07-31

2 of 2 reviewed Michigan actions match · 2 date markers shown. 30 major events shown separately.

Michigan · 2025: $575.4B · Rank #14 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $23.94T

Total value added produced in the state in millions of chained 2017 dollars. Annual estimates; the downloaded BEA snapshot is retained with a source hash. Revisions can change historical values and ranks. Annual observations use December 31; monthly observations use the first of the month. Lines connect consecutive readings and do not supply values between them. Missing observations break the lines.

View observations and export data
Michigan Real GDP · source units
PeriodMichiganRankU.S. benchmark
2025$575.4B#14 of 50$23.94T
2024$563.09B#14 of 50$23.39T
2023$555.89B#14 of 50$22.72T
2022$540.83B#14 of 50$22.08T
2021$527.85B#14 of 50$21.56T
2020$502.17B#14 of 50$20.28T
2019$520.99B#14 of 50$20.72T
2018$516.81B#14 of 50$20.19T
2017$505.1B#14 of 50$19.61T
2016$500.16B#13 of 50$19.14T
2015$490.62B#13 of 50$18.8T
2014$479.53B#13 of 50$18.26T
How major events are selected

The timeline combines the corresponding national fact’s reviewed event catalog, labeled National context, with individually reviewed state milestones. State events use primary sources and distinguish signing, effective and filing dates. Each milestone keeps its source-check date, geographical limits and evidence limits. This curated selection is not a complete history.

Date ranges affect events and actions. Action type, status and official-name search affect government records only. Events remain separate from action counts. An event after the latest observation extends context without creating a new reading.

Michigan · state comparison

Michigan output and growth

Annual real GDP removes price changes. Annual growth compares annual levels; it is separate from an annualized quarterly growth rate.

Michigan · 2025$575.4B
Michigan rank#14among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$23.94TSame measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Real GDP

Total value added produced in the state in millions of chained 2017 dollars.

Annual estimates; the downloaded BEA snapshot is retained with a source hash. Revisions can change historical values and ranks.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Michigan
Real GDP history in Michigan$-3.04T$12.21T$27.46T20142025
2025 · Michigan: $575.4B · Rank #14 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $23.94T · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Michigan Real GDP history
PeriodMichiganCompare
2014$479.53B
2015$490.62B
2016$500.16B
2017$505.1B
2018$516.81B
2019$520.99B
2020$502.17B
2021$527.85B
2022$540.83B
2023$555.89B
2024$563.09B
2025$575.4B

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Michigan stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Michigan has a dark outline.

Lower value · $38.06BHigher value · $3.43TStriped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Michigan · $575.4B2025 · Rank #14 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Michigan with every state · 50 ranked
Real GDP · 2025 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1California$3.43T—
#2Texas$2.33T—
#3New York$1.89T—
#4Florida$1.38T—
#5Illinois$948.03B—
#6Pennsylvania$815.87B—
#7Ohio$738.49B—
#8Georgia$719.74B—
#9Washington$715.88B—
#10New Jersey$688.76B—
#11North Carolina$682.83B—
#12Massachusetts$640.79B—
#13Virginia$631.98B—
#14Michigan · your comparison$575.4B—
#15Colorado$452.78B—
#16Arizona$451.49B—
#17Tennessee$447.66B—
#18Maryland$437.37B—
#19Indiana$422.47B—
#20Minnesota$392.31B—
#21Wisconsin$363.84B—
#22Missouri$362.46B—
#23Connecticut$297.35B—
#24South Carolina$287.16B—
#25Oregon$264.75B—
#26Louisiana$263.89B—
#27Alabama$259.46B—
#28Utah$243.04B—
#29Kentucky$239.51B—
#30Oklahoma$216.31B—
#31Nevada$210.1B—
#32Iowa$204.86B—
#33Kansas$178.51B—
#34Nebraska$156.61B—
#35Arkansas$147.93B—
#36Mississippi$123.37B—
#37New Mexico$122.58B—
#38Idaho$103.62B—
#39New Hampshire$99.06B—
#40Hawaii$93.38B—
#41Delaware$89.92B—
#42West Virginia$84.94B—
#43Maine$77.23B—
#44Rhode Island$67.25B—
#45North Dakota$65.27B—
#46Montana$61.08B—
#47South Dakota$59.87B—
#48Alaska$56.34B—
#49Wyoming$40.16B—
#50Vermont$38.06B—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Michigan · state comparison

What makes up Michigan GDP?

Choose an industry to compare Michigan’s output with every state. Nominal industry values can be added within a year.

Michigan · 2025$6.02B
Michigan rank#15among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$255.93BSame measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting · output

Industry value added, current dollars. The broad industries listed form an exhaustive partition of total GDP.

A large industry output rank can reflect the size of the state. Chained-dollar components should not be added.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Michigan
Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting · output history in Michigan$-40.84B$148.12B$337.08B20142025
2025 · Michigan: $6.02B · Rank #15 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $255.93B · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Michigan Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting · output history
PeriodMichiganCompare
2014$3.41B
2015$3.19B
2016$2.81B
2017$3.12B
2018$3.16B
2019$2.77B
2020$3.37B
2021$4.98B
2022$6.02B
2023$6.12B
2024$5.02B
2025$6.02B

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Michigan stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Michigan has a dark outline.

Lower value · $164.2MHigher value · $50.67BStriped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Michigan · $6.02B2025 · Rank #15 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Michigan with every state · 50 ranked
Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting · output · 2025 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1California$50.67B—
#2Texas$16.95B—
#3Iowa$14.1B—
#4Nebraska$10.6B—
#5Illinois$9.52B—
#6Florida$8.33B—
#7Washington$8.05B—
#8Minnesota$8.01B—
#9Indiana$7.13B—
#10South Dakota$7.08B—
#11Kansas$7.02B—
#12Ohio$7B—
#13Wisconsin$6.58B—
#14Oregon$6.18B—
#15Michigan · your comparison$6.02B—
#16Missouri$5.71B—
#17North Carolina$5.55B—
#18Idaho$5.41B—
#19Pennsylvania$4.97B—
#20North Dakota$4.71B—
#21Georgia$4.53B—
#22Oklahoma$4.26B—
#23Arkansas$4.13B—
#24Kentucky$3.75B—
#25New York$3.55B—
#26Alabama$3.29B—
#27Mississippi$2.99B—
#28Colorado$2.98B—
#29Arizona$2.85B—
#30Montana$2.49B—
#31Louisiana$2.42B—
#32Virginia$2.37B—
#33Tennessee$2.01B—
#34New Mexico$1.7B—
#35South Carolina$1.63B—
#36Utah$1.59B—
#37Maryland$1.31B—
#38New Jersey$1.27B—
#39Maine$1.2B—
#40Wyoming$888.5M—
#41Massachusetts$869.6M—
#42Delaware$741.1M—
#43West Virginia$561.8M—
#44Hawaii$553.9M—
#45Nevada$551.2M—
#46Vermont$536.1M—
#47Alaska$488.1M—
#48Connecticut$341.8M—
#49New Hampshire$320.1M—
#50Rhode Island$164.2M—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Michigan · state comparison

Does growth translate into more work?

BEA’s total employment counts jobs, including proprietors, rather than distinct people.

Michigan · 20255,946,187
Michigan rank#11among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark218,324,700Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Total employment · jobs

BEA annual total full-time and part-time employment, including proprietors. One person can hold multiple jobs.

Separate from residence-based civilian employment in BLS LAUS and from nonfarm payroll employment.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Michigan
Total employment · jobs history in Michigan-26,546,473111,858,973250,264,41820142025
2025 · Michigan: 5,946,187 · Rank #11 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 218,324,700 · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Michigan Total employment · jobs history
PeriodMichiganCompare
20145,412,843
20155,502,549
20165,577,215
20175,632,983
20185,718,214
20195,717,022
20205,393,245
20215,608,244
20225,810,773
20235,877,978
20245,938,169
20255,946,187

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Michigan stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Michigan has a dark outline.

Lower value · 439,349Higher value · 25,407,891Striped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Michigan · 5,946,1872025 · Rank #11 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Michigan with every state · 50 ranked
Total employment · jobs · 2025 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1California25,407,891—
#2Texas20,639,097—
#3Florida15,174,955—
#4New York13,498,360—
#5Illinois8,197,037—
#6Pennsylvania8,150,272—
#7Ohio7,394,537—
#8Georgia7,184,433—
#9North Carolina6,864,520—
#10New Jersey6,095,348—
#11Michigan · your comparison5,946,187—
#12Virginia5,789,397—
#13Massachusetts5,020,627—
#14Washington4,879,224—
#15Tennessee4,633,711—
#16Arizona4,455,141—
#17Colorado4,231,488—
#18Indiana4,213,622—
#19Maryland4,009,451—
#20Missouri3,998,549—
#21Minnesota3,914,167—
#22Wisconsin3,855,203—
#23South Carolina3,245,739—
#24Alabama2,966,686—
#25Louisiana2,831,737—
#26Kentucky2,718,290—
#27Oregon2,671,758—
#28Oklahoma2,466,719—
#29Utah2,458,247—
#30Connecticut2,424,541—
#31Nevada2,163,825—
#32Iowa2,122,389—
#33Kansas2,007,083—
#34Arkansas1,811,561—
#35Mississippi1,713,294—
#36Nebraska1,410,465—
#37Idaho1,238,642—
#38New Mexico1,183,906—
#39New Hampshire942,254—
#40Hawaii925,451—
#41West Virginia910,570—
#42Maine898,379—
#43Montana761,061—
#44Rhode Island690,505—
#45Delaware678,218—
#46South Dakota665,420—
#47North Dakota605,276—
#48Alaska472,008—
#49Wyoming451,906—
#50Vermont439,349—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

What candidates are saying

Explore statements about GDP, economic growth and production from FactVote’s Michigan candidate profiles. Compare candidates within each recorded race, with each person’s matching statements kept together. These are candidate and campaign statements, not verified outcomes.

6 statements from 4 candidates

2026 Michigan Governor of Michigan — General Election

1 candidate with matching statements · 1 statement

Anthony Hudson

1 statement

Libertarian · Governor of Michigan · MI

Economic growth & production context

Reducing the gas tax and prioritizing small business growth will drive economic development in Michigan. A lower tax burden will make Michigan more competitive and allow local businesses to thrive.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Policies

Candidate campaign source

Reducing the gas tax and prioritizing small business growth will drive economic development in Michigan. A lower tax burden will make Michigan more competitive and allow local businesses to thrive.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 18, 2026

Anthony Hudson — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗

2026 Michigan U.S. House — District 2 — General Election

1 candidate with matching statements · 2 statements

John Moolenaar

2 statements

Republican Party · U.S. House District 2 · MI

Economic growth & production context

America’s economic strength depends on a government that lives within its means, just like the families and small businesses it serves. In Washington, important steps have been taken to rein in wasteful spending, improve accountability, and strengthen oversight of federal dollars, but there is still…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Federal spending and deficits

Candidate campaign source

America’s economic strength depends on a government that lives within its means, just like the families and small businesses it serves. In Washington, important steps have been taken to rein in wasteful spending, improve accountability, and strengthen oversight of federal dollars, but there is still more work ahead to secure our nation’s fiscal future.As the only Michigan member serving on the House Appropriations Committee, I have consistently worked to reduce federal spending and ensure taxpayer dollars are spent responsibly. I supported the Rescissions Act, which saved taxpayers $9 billion by eliminating unnecessary spending. I support a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution to help restore long-term fiscal discipline and prevent Washington from spending beyond its means.Michigan families know what it means to budget responsibly and plan for the long term. Those same values should guide federal decision-making, ensuring taxpayer dollars are used wisely and efficiently while supporting policies that grow the economy and create opportunity.I will continue supporting efforts to reduce deficits, eliminate waste, promote responsible spending, and strengthen long-term economic growth. By building on the progress already made, we can put our country on a stronger fiscal path for the next generation.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

John Moolenaar — candidate-owned primary source 11 ↗
View 1 more statement from John Moolenaar
Economic growth & production context

When I ran for office, I made a commitment to secure the border, cut wasteful Washington spending, rebuild our military, grow our economy and defend the dignity and value of every human life.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Border security, spending, defense, the economy, and abortion

Candidate campaign source

When I ran for office, I made a commitment to secure the border, cut wasteful Washington spending, rebuild our military, grow our economy and defend the dignity and value of every human life.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

John Moolenaar — candidate-owned primary source 1 ↗

2026 Michigan U.S. House — District 4 — General Election

1 candidate with matching statements · 1 statement

Sean McCann

1 statement

Democratic Party · U.S. House District 4 · MI

Economic growth & production context

Congress needs to pass the Farm Bill Reauthorization to support farmers and rural communities through investment in infrastructure, workforce training, economic development, and conservation.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Sean’s Plan for Michigan

Candidate campaign source

Congress needs to pass the Farm Bill Reauthorization to support farmers and rural communities through investment in infrastructure, workforce training, economic development, and conservation.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Sean McCann — candidate-owned primary source 3 ↗
Race groups · Page 1 of 2
How statements are selected

This section matches specific GDP, economic growth and production terms in retained, attributed source text from published Michigan candidate profiles. A profile heading or biography alone does not qualify. The Florida geography is fixed; saved state preferences cannot change these results. A mention can concern a community or group rather than Florida’s statewide measure.

Matching is automatic and does not establish a candidate’s stance, the accuracy of a claim, or an effect on the measured result. Results are grouped by recorded race, then by candidate name. Within each candidate, the matching issue mentions appear first. Only candidates with matching retained statements are shown; this is not a complete race roster. Repeated identical text for the same candidate is shown once. Coverage follows the existing state profiles and is not a complete record of all candidates or everything they have said. Review dates are not statement dates.

Michigan incumbents

What incumbents are proposing

Explore reviewed bills sponsored by current Michigan legislators and Michigan’s congressional delegation, plus retained proposals from Michigan’s governor and agencies. Each record keeps its latest recorded status and official evidence.

2 matching sponsorships or proposals · 2 Michigan incumbents. These filters apply only to this section.

Rep. Haley M. Stevens

U.S. representative for Michigan, District 11 · D–MI

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Haley M. Stevens
U.S. Congress · Michigan delegation · H.R.8238

RESTART Communities Act of 2026

Apr 9, 2026 · Introduced

Rep. Haley M. Stevens · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

The bill addresses postsecondary completion, adult education, tuition support, or career and technical education.

Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committees on Financial Services, and Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.

Why this record is included

The official record directly addresses postsecondary completion, adult education, tuition support, or career and technical education. It does not establish an effect on Michigan's displayed adult attainment estimate.

Retained Michigan evidence context: Adults with at least a high school diploma · Median household income. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

Economic Development Administration and Environmental Protection Agency revitalization coordination (a) In general The Secretary of Commerce, acting through the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Economic Development (in this Act referred to as the Assistant Secretary), and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (in this Act referred to as the Administrator) shall carry out interagency activities to promote the economic revitalization of eligible sites before, during, and after environmental…
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Hillary J. Scholten

U.S. representative for Michigan, District 3 · D–MI

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Hillary J. Scholten
U.S. Congress · Michigan delegation · H.R.9818

Women’s Business Centers Improvement Act of 2026

Jul 21, 2026 · Introduced

Rep. Hillary J. Scholten · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

The bill addresses postsecondary completion, adult education, tuition support, or career and technical education.

Referred to the House Committee on Small Business.

Why this record is included

The official record directly addresses postsecondary completion, adult education, tuition support, or career and technical education. It does not establish an effect on Michigan's displayed adult attainment estimate.

Retained Michigan evidence context: Adults with at least a high school diploma. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

Women’s Business Center Program (a) Definitions In this section: (1) Assistant Administrator The term Assistant Administrator means the Assistant Administrator of the Office of Women’s Business Ownership established under subsection (k). (2) Eligible entity The term eligible entity means— (A) an organization described in section 501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and exempt from taxation under section 501(a) of such Code; (B) a State, regional, or local economic development organization, if the…
Review official supporting evidence ↗
What sponsorship and proposal counts tell us

Only current Michigan officeholders retained in the reviewed collection qualify. Bills require a recorded primary sponsorship; cosponsors and signing officials are excluded from sponsorship counts. An official introducer recorded as acting by request is labeled “Introduced by request”; that procedural role does not establish personal policy endorsement. Governor and agency records qualify when recorded as proposed. A separately verified governor transmittal can also establish an original proposal whose latest status reflects its later outcome. Signing an enacted law alone does not establish a proposal. A record appearing under several facts is counted once per officeholder. A bill with multiple primary sponsors appears under each recorded sponsor.

Enacted bills, adopted resolutions and unsuccessful measures remain visible as proposal history. Passing one chamber is not enactment. These counts do not measure effectiveness or prove that an action changed a Michigan statistic. Collection reviewed Oct 6, 2026.