Panel weighs limits and disclosures for private and foreign funding of election administration

Representative Brock introduced House Bill 51‑98 as a companion to the earlier measures, saying it "deals with the election administration process" and seeks to limit foreign or private funds used to support the administration of elections. Brock defined "foreign national" broadly to include non‑U.S. citizens, foreign governments, political parties and entities organized or domiciled abroad.

Jason Snead of Honest Elections Project ACTION testified in support and described a national ecosystem of privately funded election programs. He cited the Center for Tech and Civic Life (CTCL), which distributed grants after the 2020 election, and said CTCL and related efforts have prompted a number of states to ban private election financing. Snead told the committee some election offices were offered grants that equaled their annual taxpayer budgets and that "the risk of undue influence from those programs is clear." He also said organizations tied to large foreign donations feed into the same funding pipeline and that HB 51‑98's requirement for certifications filed with the secretary of state would aid enforcement.

Representative Wooden asked whether there is concrete evidence of foreign funding affecting Michigan election administration; Brock said he had no specific Michigan example to cite at the hearing but that the bill establishes penalties for knowing violations and follows measures passed in other states. Committee members discussed constitutional and policy constraints: Snead noted Proposition 2 (2022) includes private‑financing provisions and that the Michigan constitutional framework complicates an outright ban on some forms of private funding, so HB 51‑98 focuses on disclosures and certifications to enforce existing prohibitions.

No committee vote on the bill occurred at the hearing; the committee accepted testimony and moved on.