COMMUNITY MEETING: DATA CENTERS

I will be attending the Washington Township Planning Commission meeting regarding the proposed data center development to speak and hear directly from residents about the project and its potential impacts on the community.

Date & Time: Thursday, March 12th, 6:30 PM
Location: Washington Township Municipal Building
Address: 57900 Van Dyke Ave, Washington Township

Over the past several months, I have heard from many residents who are concerned about what a hyperscale data center could mean for Washington Township, including the potential impacts on electricity demand, water usage, infrastructure, and the long-term character of the community.

More than 1,000 residents live within one mile of the proposed site. These are families who live here, raise their children here, and build their lives here. Their voices must be considered as the Township evaluates how developments of this scale should be regulated.

I encourage residents who are interested in this issue to attend the meeting and participate in the planning process. Thoughtful community input is an important part of responsible local planning.

Attorney General v. Election Integrity Advocates

Last week, my Oversight Subcommittee on the Weaponization of State Government held a pivotal hearing with testimony from former Attorney General candidate Matt DePerno. Mr. DePerno detailed his efforts in 2020, including filing lawsuits challenging election results in Antrim County and advocating for forensic audits of voting systems amid suspected irregularities. He described how actions by Attorney General Dana Nessel’s office—such as public comments, investigative decisions, and the pursuit of charges—appeared to be politically motivated, damaging his career and reputation. In 2021, DePerno, former state Rep. Daire Rendon, and attorney Stefanie Lambert Junttila allegedly conspired to obtain voting tabulators from counties like Barry, Missaukee, and Roscommon, taking them to hotel rooms for unauthorized testing outside official chain of custody. Prosecutors claim seals were broken and data accessed without approval, leading to felony charges including undue possession of a voting machine and conspiracy to gain unauthorized computer access. DePerno pleaded not guilty, arguing his actions were legitimate investigations into election vulnerabilities with local cooperation, but accused Nessel of targeting him as her 2022 electoral rival.

During the hearing, I asked DePerno what reforms he would recommend to prevent future attorneys general from engaging in lawfare against innocent Michigan residents. He emphasized the need for legislative oversight on appropriations, noting that the body should investigate what Nessel is spending on this case and why Muskegon prosecutors have submitted few invoices. DePerno suggested this lack of transparency indicates they don’t want scrutiny, and highlighted how the case feels like a vindictive vendetta based on the facts he knows. He urged the committee to examine funding for the Attorney General’s office, as lawmakers control the purse strings, and determine if resources are being misused here instead of in other state priorities. This testimony raises serious concerns about prosecutorial independence, especially when Nessel’s office initiated the probe against her direct opponent, creating an inherent conflict even after appointing a special prosecutor.

The discussion also explored broader implications, such as how Michigan law prohibits prosecuting attorneys from having interests in cases they handle, yet Nessel’s involvement in investigating her rival underscores potential biases. DePerno’s case exemplifies a pattern where state power is allegedly wielded for political gain, eroding public trust and God-given rights. As Vice Chair, I am committed to exposing these abuses, ensuring the government serves the people rather than targeting them for exercising their rights to question election integrity. This isn’t just about one individual, but about protecting all Michiganders from overreach that stifles free speech and civic engagement.

Ultimately, hearings like this are crucial for driving reforms, such as enhanced oversight on AG spending, stricter conflict-of-interest rules, and measures to prevent partisan prosecutions. I will continue pushing for legislation that restores accountability and limits bureaucratic weaponization. Michiganders deserve a system where justice is blind, not biased, and your input is vital—reach out if you have experiences or ideas to share in this fight.

Vote Record Update

Since my first day in office, I have upheld my promise to regularly share to the public every single vote I have made with an explanation for each one. This is something done by only 8 of 110 Representatives in Michigan. Accountability can only be achieved when there is transparency. Here are my most recent votes and reasons from last week:

HB 5450 – Food Law Amendments

PASSED: 63–43 – Voted: YES

This bill amends section 3113 of the Food Law (2000 PA 92) to update provisions related to food safety and regulations.

I voted YES because this reform strengthens food safety standards without imposing excessive burdens on Michigan’s agricultural and food industries. Government should ensure public health through practical measures that protect consumers while allowing businesses to thrive. By refining these rules, the bill promotes efficiency and accountability in the food supply chain, aligning with Hamiltonian principles of supporting domestic production and economic stability to benefit hardworking families across our state.

HB 5451 – Food Law Updates and Additions

PASSED: 96–10 – Voted: YES

This bill amends section 6135 of the Food Law (2000 PA 92), as amended by 2012 PA 178, and adds sections 2130 and 6115a to enhance food handling and safety protocols.

I voted YES because it introduces necessary updates to food regulations that safeguard public health without overreaching into private enterprise. Michigan’s food sector is vital to our economy, and this bill ensures clear guidelines that prevent risks while fostering innovation. This approach upholds limited government by focusing on essential protections, reflecting an America First commitment to bolstering local industries and community well-being.

HB 5364 – Revised School Code Amendments

PASSED: 56–50 – Voted: YES

This bill amends section 1278 of the Revised School Code (1976 PA 451), as amended by 2016 PA 170, to adjust educational requirements.

I voted YES because it refines school standards to better prepare Michigan students for success, emphasizing practical education that aligns with family values and economic needs. Government should facilitate quality learning without unnecessary mandates, and this change promotes flexibility for local districts. By prioritizing effective education, the bill supports post-liberal goals of building strong communities through empowered families and self-reliant individuals.

HB 5467 – Michigan Election Law Amendments

PASSED: 60–46 – Voted: YES

This bill amends sections 165, 169, 195, 198, 255, 260, 352, and 357 of the Michigan Election Law (1954 PA 116) to update election procedures and timelines.

I voted YES because it modernizes election processes to ensure integrity and accessibility, protecting the democratic rights of Michiganders without expanding bureaucracy. Clear rules prevent confusion and fraud, fostering trust in our institutions. This reform aligns with Hamiltonian ideals of robust governance that serves the people, putting America First by safeguarding fair elections for all citizens.

HB 5468 – Michigan Election Law Revisions and Addition

PASSED: 103–3 – Voted: YES

This bill amends sections 303, 386, 544c, and 590h of the Michigan Election Law (1954 PA 116), and adds section 544g to refine ballot and petition requirements.

I voted YES because it provides targeted improvements to election administration, enhancing transparency and efficiency without imposing new burdens. Michigan voters deserve a system that is secure and straightforward, and this bill achieves that by addressing key gaps. Upholding limited government principles, it promotes civic participation while preventing abuse, reflecting a commitment to post-liberal common good through reliable democratic processes.

HB 4572 – Appropriations for Military and Veterans Affairs FY 2026

PASSED: 65–41 – Voted: YES

This bill makes appropriations for the Department of Military and Veterans Affairs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2026, and provides for the expenditure of those funds.

I voted YES because supporting our military and veterans is essential to national strength and honoring those who serve. This funding ensures Michigan’s readiness and care for heroes, without wasteful spending. By directing resources responsibly, the bill upholds fiscal prudence and America First priorities, bolstering domestic security and community resilience for families across the state.

HB 5162 – Public Health Code Amendments

PASSED: 99–7 – Voted: YES

This bill amends section 7204 of the Public Health Code (1978 PA 368) to update provisions related to controlled substances schedules. It shortens the timeframe for the administrator to hold a board meeting after receiving notice of a federal designation, rescheduling, or deletion of a controlled substance from up to 91 days to no more than 30 days. If deciding not to similarly schedule the substance, the administrator must publish reasons within no more than 30 days after the decision.

I voted YES because this measure ensures Michigan’s drug regulations remain current and effective in protecting public health without unnecessary expansions of government control. By refining classifications and accelerating administrative responses to federal changes, it promotes responsible oversight that safeguards communities from abuse while respecting individual freedoms. It streamlines processes to prevent gaps in enforcement that could endanger Michiganders, fostering a system where state actions are swift and accountable, benefiting families who rely on clear, efficient laws to combat substance issues in our communities.

HB 5380 – Insurance Code Amendments

PASSED: 104–2 – Voted: YES

This bill amends section 4665 of the Insurance Code of 1956 (1956 PA 218) to update provisions related to captive insurers. It specifies that a sponsor must be an authorized insurer, an insurance holding company controlling such an insurer and subject to registration, a reinsurer, or a person approved by the director in their discretion, with the approval based on consistency with the chapter’s purposes. The director evaluates proposed sponsors by considering their type and structure, financial operations experience, stability and strength, business reputation, and other relevant factors. A risk retention group cannot serve as a sponsor or participant. Business written by the sponsored captive for each protected cell must meet at least one of: (a) fronting by an authorized insurance company that is a wholly owned subsidiary; (b) reinsurance by a reinsurer authorized or approved by this state; or (c) security by a U.S. trust fund for policyholders and claimants, funded by an irrevocable letter of credit or acceptable asset, not less than reserves for losses, allocated loss adjustment expenses, incurred but not reported losses, and unearned premiums. The commissioner may require increased trust funding, and trusts must be approved by the commissioner in form and terms.

I voted YES because it provides targeted refinements to insurance regulations, enhancing market stability without imposing new mandates on taxpayers or businesses. Michigan’s economy thrives when government facilitates fair practices rather than hindering them, and this bill prevents potential abuses while fostering competition. It supports a resilient financial framework that protects families and promotes self-sufficiency. By clarifying sponsor qualifications and evaluation criteria, it ensures only reputable entities participate, reducing risks for policyholders and upholding trust in the system. This approach avoids overreach, directing resources to bolster key economic sectors that contribute to community vitality and long-term stability for our residents.

HB 5381 – Insurance Code Updates

PASSED: 104–2 – Voted: YES

This bill amends section 4601 of the Insurance Code of 1956 (1956 PA 218) to revise definitions and provisions for captive insurance entities, establishing criteria for ownership, control, insurance risks, and operational requirements across various types of captive insurers.

I voted YES because it modernizes outdated insurance rules to align with current practices, ensuring efficiency and accountability without broadening state powers. By clarifying terms, the bill helps prevent fraud and supports a market-driven system that benefits consumers. This pragmatic approach upholds limited government while bolstering industries, focusing on practical solutions for Michigan families. The refined definitions provide clear guidelines for captive insurers, reducing ambiguity that could lead to exploitation and promoting a fair marketplace where businesses can operate responsibly. This reform strengthens economic resilience, protecting Michiganders from uncertainties and fostering an environment where family-centered enterprises can thrive without excessive regulatory interference.

HB 5382 – Insurance Code Revisions

PASSED: 104–2 – Voted: YES

This bill amends section 4731 of the Insurance Code of 1956 (1956 PA 218) to modify provisions related to Special Purpose Financial Captives (SPFCs). The bill addresses material changes to an SPFC’s plan of operation, financial reporting requirements, record-keeping, and penalties for non-compliance. Key changes include clarifying that certain securitization activities and counterparty substitutions are not material changes, updating filing deadlines and accounting standards for statements of operations, and specifying penalties for failure to file reports or respond to inquiries. The bill also preserves the authority of the corporation and securities commissioner under 1935 PA 13.

I voted YES because this measure introduces practical updates to financial oversight in insurance, ensuring accountability without excessive government intrusion. Michigan residents deserve a system that is secure and straightforward, and this bill achieves that by addressing key gaps. Upholding limited government principles, it promotes participation while preventing abuse. By shortening timelines for administrative actions and mandating audited statements, it enhances transparency, allowing for quicker responses to federal changes and better verification of financial health. This protects policyholders and claimants, prioritizing efficiency and fairness for families navigating complex insurance landscapes.

HB 5383 – Insurance Code Modifications

PASSED: 106–0 – Voted: YES

This bill amends section 4705 of the Insurance Code of 1956 (1956 PA 218) to update provisions on captive insurers’ operations. It allows captive insurance companies to apply for a limited certificate of authority to conduct insurance business in Michigan, excluding first-dollar workers’ compensation, long-term care, critical care, personal automobile, or homeowners insurance, or components thereof. Captive companies are restricted to insuring specific risks: pure captives for parent/affiliated entities, association captives for member organizations, industrial insured captives for group members, and special purpose captives primarily for parents with commissioner-approved exceptions. They cannot accept or cede reinsurance except as per Section 4641. To operate, companies must obtain a limited certificate, hold at least one annual board meeting in-state, maintain a principal place of business in Michigan, and designate a resident agent. Organizational documents must include details like incorporators (at least two Michigan residents), principal office, name, purposes (referencing this chapter), corporate powers, directors/managers, quorum (no fewer than one-third), capital stock (minimum $1.00 per share if applicable), and term of existence. Documents must be submitted to the Attorney General for examination and certification, with a fee per Section 240(2). Before issuance, the commissioner reviews financial records access, operation plans (including protected cell accounting), capitalization source, asset liquidity, incorporators’/organizers’ character, officers’/directors’ qualifications, loss prevention programs, and other factors. Certificates are issued if compliant, promoting state good, with fees paid; renewable annually if in good standing. Information is confidential per Section 4609. Application fee is $5,000 (reduced from $10,000), plus optional external examination costs or $2,700 internal. Foreign captives may re-domesticate without merger/reorganization beyond specified requirements.

I voted YES because this unanimous reform streamlines insurance regulations, reducing bureaucracy while maintaining essential safeguards for public trust. By easing administrative hurdles, it empowers businesses to operate efficiently, reflecting core values of limited government and individual enterprise. This bill ensures Michigan’s financial sector remains competitive and focused on serving families. The updated requirements for organizational documents and reviews provide a robust framework for accountability, preventing potential abuses while allowing for innovation in captive insurance. This strategy fosters economic growth, protecting taxpayers from wasteful processes and promoting a stable environment where communities can build self-sufficiency without undue state interference.

HB 5384 – Insurance Code Enhancements

PASSED: 104–2 – Voted: YES

This bill amends section 4667 of the Insurance Code of 1956 (1956 PA 218) to modify provisions related to sponsored captive insurance companies. Key changes include allowing various business entities to participate, permitting sponsors to participate, removing the requirement for participants to be shareholders or affiliates, and restricting participants to insuring their own risks or those of affiliates or controlled unaffiliated businesses, with exceptions approved by the commissioner or director.

I voted YES because it introduces practical updates to financial oversight in insurance, ensuring accountability without excessive government intrusion. Michigan residents deserve a system that is secure and straightforward, and this bill achieves that by addressing key gaps. It prioritizes domestic economic health and protects hardworking families from potential risks. By broadening participant eligibility while maintaining risk limitations, it encourages responsible business practices, reducing barriers that could stifle innovation. This reform strengthens the marketplace, safeguarding vulnerable entities and promoting fair, transparent operations that benefit Michigan communities.

HB 5385 – Insurance Code Adjustments

PASSED: 104–2 – Voted: YES

This bill amends section 4603 of the Insurance Code of 1956 (1956 PA 218) to update and refine the requirements for captive insurance companies seeking a limited certificate of authority in Michigan, ensuring compliance, financial stability, and state oversight while restricting certain insurance types and reinsurance activities.

I voted YES because it provides focused improvements to insurance formation processes, fostering a business-friendly environment without compromising standards. Government should support entrepreneurship through clear, efficient rules, and this reform does so effectively. It puts Michigan by enhancing economic opportunities for communities and families. The detailed mandates for in-state presence and reviews ensure only sound operations proceed, preventing vulnerabilities that could harm policyholders. This balanced approach upholds limited government while promoting resilience, benefiting Michiganders through a dynamic system that prioritizes self-reliance and community strength.

HB 5386 – Insurance Code Amendments

PASSED: 104–2 – Voted: YES

This bill amends sections 4621 and 4625 of the Insurance Code of 1956 to modify reporting, fee, and regulatory requirements for captive insurance companies. Key changes include extending the deadline for annual renewal fees to 90 days after the fiscal year end (previously by March 1), updating fee calculations based on premium volumes, allowing exemptions for special purpose captives, and clarifying examination and confidentiality provisions for branch captives and risk retention groups.

I voted YES because this comprehensive update strengthens insurance frameworks while eliminating redundancies, promoting stability and growth without new taxes or mandates. By modernizing these provisions, the bill ensures fair practices that benefit consumers and businesses alike. The revised fee structures and timelines provide flexibility for companies, reducing administrative burdens that could hinder economic activity. This reform protects taxpayers, fosters transparency, and supports a lean regulatory environment where families can thrive amid secure financial systems.

HB 5232 – Military Leave and Re-Employment Protection Act Amendments

PASSED: 101–8 – Voted: YES

This bill amends section 3a of the Military Leave and Re-Employment Protection Act (1955 PA 133) to make paid leave mandatory for certain members of law enforcement agencies and fire departments who are called to active military service, replacing the previous optional provision for local units of government.

I voted YES because this reform ensures that our dedicated first responders in law enforcement and fire departments receive the support they deserve when called to military duty. Government should honor those who serve by providing stability for their families during absences, without placing undue burdens on local entities. By mandating paid leave, the bill promotes fairness and accountability, reducing hardships for these essential workers and upholding the principle of limited but effective intervention to protect Michigan’s communities.

HB 5233 – Paid Military Leave for Fire and Law Enforcement Act

PASSED: 101–8 – Voted: YES

This bill creates a new act to mandate paid military leave for members of fire departments or law enforcement agencies called to active duty, ensuring compensation during such service.

I voted YES because it provides essential protections for firefighters and law enforcement officers serving in the military, maintaining their financial security without expanding unnecessary government mandates. Michigan families rely on these heroes, and this bill prevents undue strain during deployments. By focusing on targeted support, it fosters responsibility and efficiency, benefiting communities that depend on stable public safety services.

HB 4790 – Public Health Code Amendments for Physician Continuing Education

PASSED: 100–9 – Voted: YES

This bill amends sections 17033 and 17533 of the Public Health Code (1978 PA 368) to require physicians to complete continuing education on menopause and related conditions.

I voted YES because it enhances healthcare standards by ensuring physicians stay informed on critical women’s health issues like menopause, improving patient care without overreaching regulations. Government should promote professional development that addresses real needs, and this targeted requirement supports better outcomes for Michigan families. By focusing on education, the bill upholds accountability while respecting provider autonomy.

HB 4791 – Public Health Code Addition for Menopause Awareness Program

PASSED: 100–9 – Voted: YES

This bill amends the Public Health Code (1978 PA 368) by adding section 9135 to establish a menopause transition awareness program within the Department of Health and Human Services, aimed at promoting public education and awareness.

I voted YES because it creates a focused program to raise awareness about menopause, empowering women and families with information without imposing broad mandates. Michigan residents deserve accessible health resources, and this initiative promotes prevention and well-being through education. By directing state efforts efficiently, the bill ensures transparency and supports community health without unnecessary expansion of government roles.