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.
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.
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
2025 · Michigan: $575.4B · Rank #14 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $23.94T · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Michigan Real GDP history
Period
Michigan
Compare
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
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
California
$3.43T
—
#2
Texas
$2.33T
—
#3
New York
$1.89T
—
#4
Florida
$1.38T
—
#5
Illinois
$948.03B
—
#6
Pennsylvania
$815.87B
—
#7
Ohio
$738.49B
—
#8
Georgia
$719.74B
—
#9
Washington
$715.88B
—
#10
New Jersey
$688.76B
—
#11
North Carolina
$682.83B
—
#12
Massachusetts
$640.79B
—
#13
Virginia
$631.98B
—
#14
Michigan · your comparison
$575.4B
—
#15
Colorado
$452.78B
—
#16
Arizona
$451.49B
—
#17
Tennessee
$447.66B
—
#18
Maryland
$437.37B
—
#19
Indiana
$422.47B
—
#20
Minnesota
$392.31B
—
#21
Wisconsin
$363.84B
—
#22
Missouri
$362.46B
—
#23
Connecticut
$297.35B
—
#24
South Carolina
$287.16B
—
#25
Oregon
$264.75B
—
#26
Louisiana
$263.89B
—
#27
Alabama
$259.46B
—
#28
Utah
$243.04B
—
#29
Kentucky
$239.51B
—
#30
Oklahoma
$216.31B
—
#31
Nevada
$210.1B
—
#32
Iowa
$204.86B
—
#33
Kansas
$178.51B
—
#34
Nebraska
$156.61B
—
#35
Arkansas
$147.93B
—
#36
Mississippi
$123.37B
—
#37
New Mexico
$122.58B
—
#38
Idaho
$103.62B
—
#39
New Hampshire
$99.06B
—
#40
Hawaii
$93.38B
—
#41
Delaware
$89.92B
—
#42
West Virginia
$84.94B
—
#43
Maine
$77.23B
—
#44
Rhode Island
$67.25B
—
#45
North Dakota
$65.27B
—
#46
Montana
$61.08B
—
#47
South Dakota
$59.87B
—
#48
Alaska
$56.34B
—
#49
Wyoming
$40.16B
—
#50
Vermont
$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.
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
2025 · Michigan: $6.02B · Rank #15 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $255.93B · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Michigan Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting · output history
Period
Michigan
Compare
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
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
California
$50.67B
—
#2
Texas
$16.95B
—
#3
Iowa
$14.1B
—
#4
Nebraska
$10.6B
—
#5
Illinois
$9.52B
—
#6
Florida
$8.33B
—
#7
Washington
$8.05B
—
#8
Minnesota
$8.01B
—
#9
Indiana
$7.13B
—
#10
South Dakota
$7.08B
—
#11
Kansas
$7.02B
—
#12
Ohio
$7B
—
#13
Wisconsin
$6.58B
—
#14
Oregon
$6.18B
—
#15
Michigan · your comparison
$6.02B
—
#16
Missouri
$5.71B
—
#17
North Carolina
$5.55B
—
#18
Idaho
$5.41B
—
#19
Pennsylvania
$4.97B
—
#20
North Dakota
$4.71B
—
#21
Georgia
$4.53B
—
#22
Oklahoma
$4.26B
—
#23
Arkansas
$4.13B
—
#24
Kentucky
$3.75B
—
#25
New York
$3.55B
—
#26
Alabama
$3.29B
—
#27
Mississippi
$2.99B
—
#28
Colorado
$2.98B
—
#29
Arizona
$2.85B
—
#30
Montana
$2.49B
—
#31
Louisiana
$2.42B
—
#32
Virginia
$2.37B
—
#33
Tennessee
$2.01B
—
#34
New Mexico
$1.7B
—
#35
South Carolina
$1.63B
—
#36
Utah
$1.59B
—
#37
Maryland
$1.31B
—
#38
New Jersey
$1.27B
—
#39
Maine
$1.2B
—
#40
Wyoming
$888.5M
—
#41
Massachusetts
$869.6M
—
#42
Delaware
$741.1M
—
#43
West Virginia
$561.8M
—
#44
Hawaii
$553.9M
—
#45
Nevada
$551.2M
—
#46
Vermont
$536.1M
—
#47
Alaska
$488.1M
—
#48
Connecticut
$341.8M
—
#49
New Hampshire
$320.1M
—
#50
Rhode 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.
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
2025 · Michigan: 5,946,187 · Rank #11 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 218,324,700 · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Michigan Total employment · jobs history
Period
Michigan
Compare
2014
5,412,843
2015
5,502,549
2016
5,577,215
2017
5,632,983
2018
5,718,214
2019
5,717,022
2020
5,393,245
2021
5,608,244
2022
5,810,773
2023
5,877,978
2024
5,938,169
2025
5,946,187
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
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
California
25,407,891
—
#2
Texas
20,639,097
—
#3
Florida
15,174,955
—
#4
New York
13,498,360
—
#5
Illinois
8,197,037
—
#6
Pennsylvania
8,150,272
—
#7
Ohio
7,394,537
—
#8
Georgia
7,184,433
—
#9
North Carolina
6,864,520
—
#10
New Jersey
6,095,348
—
#11
Michigan · your comparison
5,946,187
—
#12
Virginia
5,789,397
—
#13
Massachusetts
5,020,627
—
#14
Washington
4,879,224
—
#15
Tennessee
4,633,711
—
#16
Arizona
4,455,141
—
#17
Colorado
4,231,488
—
#18
Indiana
4,213,622
—
#19
Maryland
4,009,451
—
#20
Missouri
3,998,549
—
#21
Minnesota
3,914,167
—
#22
Wisconsin
3,855,203
—
#23
South Carolina
3,245,739
—
#24
Alabama
2,966,686
—
#25
Louisiana
2,831,737
—
#26
Kentucky
2,718,290
—
#27
Oregon
2,671,758
—
#28
Oklahoma
2,466,719
—
#29
Utah
2,458,247
—
#30
Connecticut
2,424,541
—
#31
Nevada
2,163,825
—
#32
Iowa
2,122,389
—
#33
Kansas
2,007,083
—
#34
Arkansas
1,811,561
—
#35
Mississippi
1,713,294
—
#36
Nebraska
1,410,465
—
#37
Idaho
1,238,642
—
#38
New Mexico
1,183,906
—
#39
New Hampshire
942,254
—
#40
Hawaii
925,451
—
#41
West Virginia
910,570
—
#42
Maine
898,379
—
#43
Montana
761,061
—
#44
Rhode Island
690,505
—
#45
Delaware
678,218
—
#46
South Dakota
665,420
—
#47
North Dakota
605,276
—
#48
Alaska
472,008
—
#49
Wyoming
451,906
—
#50
Vermont
439,349
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Explore current officeholders and explicitly reviewed historical executive officials, labeled at the time of their actions. Timeline dates, action type, status and search also filter this list. Read any record’s summary, latest recorded status and official evidence below, or open it beside the timeline.
2 of 2 reviewed Michigan actions · newest first
Jul 21, 2026 · H.R.9818 · Women’s Business Centers Improvement Act of 2026 · IntroducedU.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…
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑Apr 9, 2026 · H.R.8238 · RESTART Communities Act of 2026 · IntroducedU.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…
Records come from published fact relationships or reviewed topic records with official supporting evidence and verified Michigan officeholder attribution. Historical executive officials require evidence tied to the action date and are excluded from incumbent proposals. Inclusion follows an explicit topic review, a related state fact, or the action’s title and supporting evidence. Explicit topic reviews take priority; repeated actions use the most recent explicit review for this topic. Duplicate actions attached to several facts appear once. This topic match is not a new finding that an action caused a result, and the reviewed collection is selective. Collection reviewed Oct 6, 2026.
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
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
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
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
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
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 proposalView proposals from Rep. Haley M. StevensU.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…
U.S. representative for Michigan, District 3 · D–MI
1 proposalView proposals from Rep. Hillary J. ScholtenU.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…
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.
Sources & methods
Every section retains its primary sources, units, reporting periods and comparison limits. Maps, graphs and tables use the same observation and cohort. All 50 states are listed; D.C. and territories are excluded. Missing and suppressed values remain unavailable and never become zero.
#1 is the highest measured value. Equal source values share a rank and leave gaps (1, 2, 2, 4). Ranks use source precision and are descriptive, not a score of the state. Survey uncertainty and reporting coverage can limit comparisons. Published U.S. benchmarks are used where available; a state average is not substituted.
Michigan snapshots and fiscal sources keep their own dates and accounting scope. National events and federal distribution explainers describe national context. Actions and statements are filtered to Michigan, retain their reviewed evidence, and do not establish that a policy caused a measured change.
Retained state source collections assembled October 5, 2026. Original review and source dates remain visible. Refreshing this page does not refresh an official data release.