The writer covered state and regional politics for The Macomb Daily for nearly 30 years. He's a regular contributor to Deadline Detroit and blogs at Politically Speaking.
By Chad Selweski
A widely reported national report concluded in 2015 that Michigan stood as the worst state in the nation based on government accountability and transparency.
What was the response to this black mark in the Republican-controlled Michigan Legislature? Rather than trying to fix the mess, GOP lawmakers have engaged in retrograde tactics designed to make our state government and the election process more secretive.
The latest example is legislation introduced in the state Senate less than 48 hours after Election Day, Nov. 6, that would make “dark money” spent by nonprofit groups to benefit candidates harder to trace. Already, cash spent by these supposed charity groups is largely granted an anonymous status, but the new legislation would take the pre-emptive step of blocking any new state rules or regulations to expose the names of the big-bucks donors involved in this façade.
The new bill, sponsored by incoming Republican Senate Majority Leader Sen. Mike Shirkey, R-Clarklake, would prevent public agencies in Michigan from requiring nonprofits disclose their donors and supporters. That ban applies to the incoming Democratic Secretary of State-elect, Jocelyn Benson, who is about to become Michigan’s chief elections officer.
In the days since the intense 2018 midterm elections emerged as the the costliest in Michiugan histoiry, with more than $291 million poured into various campaigns – and which saw the Republicans lose a wide array of state elections – the GOP seems especially concerned that back-door donors to political campaigns shouldn’t have their privacy violated.
Shirkey asserts making donations public that are funneled into a nonprofit, rather than to a candidate’s committee, may discourage such future contributions.
Privacy claim
“Even the threat of it has a chilling effect,” Shirkey said of nonprofit campaign contributions. “So, putting (a disclosure ban) into statute will put a punctuation point on it and make it clear.”
Obviously, it should be noted that people of modest means, among the working class and retirees, have their small candidate contributions made public for all the world to see in campaign finance reports.
According to Bridge Magazine, campaign finance specialists said the Shirkey bill could make broad reforms to the archaic Michigan campaign finance system “a herculean task” for years to come.
“It appears to be a preemptive move to ensure that nonprofits will not have to disclose where their money is coming from for many years, at minimum,” said Craig Mauger, executive director of the nonpartisan Michigan Campaign Finance Network (MCFN), a watchdog group that tracks money in state politics.
MCFN research found that, powered by anonymous donors, nonprofit organizations spent at least $3.1 million this year trying to shape the makeup of Michigan’s 38-member state Senate. When the final numbers are reported, that cash amount may grow substantially.
Without a doubt, every voter should know who is mailing or broadcasting nasty attack ads, which often do not relate to issues facing the state but rather fit into the category of hardball campaign tactics pitting one party against the other. In recent months, the majority of spending in key Michigan Senate campaigns came from just four organizations that had a partisan focus.
Those four nonprofit groups shelled out an estimated $1.8 million in the weeks before the November election for negative TV ads criticizing Democratic candidates, according to public disclosures and an analysis of TV ad-tracking data from Kantar Media/CMAG.
One of the main targets of this approach, with so-called “charities” making wild claims against a candidate, was Democratic state Rep. Henry Yanez of Macomb County, who was running for the 10th District state Senate seat. Yanez was up against a political unknown, Republican Mike MacDonald, but when the state GOP and the pro-GOP nonprofits stepped in with big bucks, the race turned.
Using their tax-free status, nonpartisan groups engaged in advertising campaigns that went way beyond charitable support for the poor or the hungry.
‘Horrible’ attack ads work
MCFN tracked an estimated $337,000 in TV ad spending by two of the nonprofit groups, Michigan Citizens for Fiscal Responsibility and A Public Voice, in the 10th Senate District. Another nonprofit group, called Michigan Citizens for Energizing Michigan’s Economy, ran an estimated $250,000 in positive ads about Yanez’s career.
In response, Yanez later said, “I hear all of the time from people that they hate negative ads, they’re horrible. They can’t wait until they stop. But they seem to work.”
To consider where the network of these dark money ads lead, consider this: GOP gubernatorial candidate Bill Schuette launched a failed attempt to link Democratic Gov.-elect Gretchen Whitmer to fellow Democrat and former governor Jennifer Granholm. In the 10th Senate District campaign, Yanez was somehow linked to Michigan’s economic woes of 2005-10.
Never mind that Yanez was a first responder, a veteran Sterling Heights firefighter and paramedic, during those years of 10-percent-plus Michigan unemployment. Yanez did not take office in the state House until 2013, well into Republican Gov. Rick Snyder’s first term.
What’s more, the attacks against Yanez engaged in silliness. At one paint, ads claimed that “Yanez was a political appointee of Jennifer Granholm whose failed policies nearly wrecked our state.” That appointee status for Yanez consisted of a PR-minded fire safety committee created by Granholm. The group never met.
To be clear, highly partisan political strategists are using the IRS tax code – and legal, anonymous political donations – to perpetuate Michigan’s dark money campaign follies.
It’s important to note that Michigan’s loose election rules, with a wide-open invitation to dark money campaigning, was a major factor in the state’s worst-in-the-nation grade in 2015. That 50-state report was produced by the Center for Public Integrity (CPI) and broke open the good old boys network that still exists.
I was the author of the highly detailed report to CPI on Michigan’s legislative, executive and judicial branches of government, though I played no role in the comparisons and grading of the 50 states. Still, the result was that Michigan received a grade of “F” in 10 of 13 categories, an F overall, and the worst score in the nation, 51 out of a possible 100, based on a wide range of metrics in government openness and accountability. Many states didn’t fare much better.
More dysfunction
After that hard-hitting 2015 report, numerous state officials across the country snapped to attention with proposed legislation or regulations to cure their state’s woeful status. But in Michigan, the response was nearly 180 degrees in the other direction.
First, lawmakers doubled the campaign contribution limits to candidates for state and local offices—mostly a benefit to Big Business and Big Labor. Second, the state tied into new federal procedures for campaigning via a two-bill package, signed into law by Snyder, that allows a flood of dark money -- cash that is not tied to any donors -- for election campaigns.
Under that law, Democratic and Republican officials and candidates can get chummy with so-called SuperPacs and nearly rig the system so they benefit from unlimited, anonymous campaign donations from corporations, labor unions or wealthy individuals.
Overall, what we have here is politically motivated nonprofits who operate financially on the same level as the humanitarian charities such as the Red Cross or Salvation Army.
The IRS tax code says that nonprofit groups can engage in activities that benefit the “social welfare” of their communities. Initially, that definition included nonpartisan voter registrations and get-out-the vote efforts. But now that provision has provided a gaping loophole for wealthy donors to help get their favorite candidate elected -- on an anonymous basis.
No state should tolerate these antiquated attempts at partisan cronyism. With Michigan tagged by a tainted reputation, the Sharkey bill inexplicably attempts to make shady nonprofits immune from political restrictions.
Michigan's Legislature looks as though it's pursuing a good-government grade lower than an “F” -- if it exists.
