Whitmer budget leans on tax hikes and spending while families fall behind and seniors face foreclosure risk

Governor Gretchen Whitmer’s latest budget proposal relies on higher taxes, increased fees, tapping the state’s rainy day fund, and significant new spending, raising concerns about affordability for families and housing stability for seniors already under financial pressure.

Across Michigan, households are struggling to keep up with rising costs for housing, utilities, food, and insurance. Seniors on fixed incomes face even greater risk as higher property taxes and assessments make it harder to stay in their homes. A budget that leans on tax increases adds strain instead of relief.

Balancing a budget through tax hikes and one time funding sources does not reflect how Michigan residents manage their finances. Families cut expenses when costs rise. Seniors have little flexibility at all. State government should be held to the same standard of restraint.

Michigan has shown that another approach is possible. Last year, lawmakers identified waste across the state budget, eliminated thousands of inactive positions, reduced duplicative programs, and tightened oversight. Those changes freed up funding for roads and schools without expanding overall spending.

The core issue remains affordability. Higher taxes and fees reduce disposable income and raise the risk that seniors fall behind on property tax payments, a path that can end in foreclosure. For residents living on pensions or Social Security, even small increases can have serious consequences.

While there are elements of the budget that acknowledge affordability concerns, including discussions around property tax relief, those efforts are undermined when new taxes and spending increases offset any gains. Giving with one hand while taking with the other does not solve the problem.

State spending has grown sharply over the past several years, with some departments expanding significantly. Last year marked a rare moment when overall spending declined, showing that restraint is possible when it is prioritized.

Michigan’s budget should focus on keeping families afloat and seniors in their homes, not increasing the risk of financial hardship. The question is whether state leadership will choose spending discipline and affordability, or continue shifting the burden onto the people least able to absorb it.