DETROIT, MI — In a time of upheaval for both politics and media, state-level think tanks sit at a peculiar nexus of influence: they both shape the news and report it.
And few are more influential on either score than the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, a “free market” think tank based in Midland, MI, that is one of the largest of its kind in the nation. Along with an affiliated legal arm, the Mackinac (pronounced MAK-in-aw) Center uses its considerable resources to wage an aggressive and often successful campaign on behalf of smaller government and against measures that it sees as limiting personal freedoms or private markets. Often, that means targeting teachers’ unions and other labor groups, who engage in their own counter-attacks against the center.
Since its founding in 1987, Mackinac has also become a major player in the state’s media ecosystem. Mackinac has a two-part media strategy. The first, more traditional flank involves putting out a steady stream of reports designed to move the state’s news agenda, and making its analysts readily available to journalists. For example, the center’s recent release of “report cards” on Michigan elementary and middle schools drew wide coverage, some of which made little mention of the center’s philosophical outlook. Bill Shea, a reporter and editor with Crain’s Detroit Business (and past CJR contributor), described Mackinac as a professional and responsive organization, and “a serious player in the state conversation. It’s hard not to use them” as a source, he said.
And Mackinac is generally well-regarded at what are still the state’s most prominent outlets for analysis and opinion—the editorial sections of the Detroit newspapers. Ingrid Jacques, deputy editorial page editor of The Detroit News, told me that “personally, I have used Mackinac Center experts—especially on education and labor policy—quite a bit in my reporting for editorials. I find them to be extremely well-informed and helpful.” Stephen Henderson, editorial page editor of the Detroit Free Press, said his own views on the center were “mixed”—he is most critical of Mackinac’s agenda on the “right-to-work” debate and charter schools. But “they seem to want to raise the intellectual stakes in every discussion,” Henderson said, adding, “generally, they’re a plus on the policy debate landscape.”
The second, more novel part of Mackinac’s strategy is to make its own media. The center publishes the polished Michigan Capitol Confidential news site—CapCon for short. (This should not be confused with Mackinac’s blog, which offers updates on its policy priorities, or IMPACT Magazine, a colorful bimonthly delivered in print to members, with features like “Michigan’s Craziest Laws.”)
The three-year-old CapCon is the most journalistically ambitious of Mackinac’s media operations; its four-member staff includes three former reporters for traditional outlets. On its “About” page, the site pledges to “fill [the] void” of dwindling state coverage with “balanced, substantive reporting, aided by insightful analysis, hard data and legal expertise.” But the same page makes clear that CapCon shares a perspective with the think tank:
Michigan Capitol Confidential is the news source for Michigan residents who want an alternative to “bigger government” remedies in policy debates. CapCon reports on the public officials who seek to limit government, those who do not, and those whose votes are at odds with what they say.
For CapCon editor Manny Lopez, who did turns as both the auto and opinion page editor at The Detroit News, part of the appeal of working for the site is that it is “not trying to be everything to everyone.” CapCon was developed, Lopez said, because Mackinac’s white papers were “hard to digest,” and the think tank “saw the need to create a news outlet.”
Lopez says plainly that he is “conservative,” and has found CapCon a good fit. But the site is not partisan, he said. Among its stories are “hundreds of pieces on Republicans who are doing bad things for good government”—meaning, Republicans who support policies that, from a free-market point-of-view, are problematic. For example, a recent CapCon series profiled the 28 Republicans in the Michigan House who voted for “Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion.”

Did you get any water out of that rock? Or are you just pretending that there may be some if you squeeze hard enough? *smh*
#1 Posted by Dan A., CJR on Tue 16 Jul 2013 at 09:58 AM
Nice article by Ms. Clark. We are proud of the work we do at Michigan Capitol Confidential and go to great lengths to make sure all sides of the story have the opportunity to comment. In regard to the teacher of the year story where CapCon requested salary information for all teachers in the district, it is implied that we misrepresented Mr. Abud’s comments, a change from an original complaint made on a blog that we misquoted him. We were happy to get Mr. Abud’s response to our questions, but at 1,167 words, we had to choose accordingly, and we did. His comments are reported accurately in our story. We congratulate Mr. Abud for his accomplishment and think he should be rewarded beyond the rigid salary structure he is forced into by the union. The day after our story ran, Mr. Abud sent an email to our reporter thanking him for including his comments in the story. Mr. Abud also inquired about attending an event or conference hosted by the Mackinac Center and volunteered to give a presentation to Mackinac Center staff, an offer that we welcome.
#2 Posted by Manny Lopez, CJR on Tue 16 Jul 2013 at 03:12 PM
The Mackinac Center is famous in the state for distorting budget numbers and presenting false information to the public to further their own anti-worker agenda.
Talk to Mitch Bean, former director of the House Fiscal Agency. He can tell you all about it.
#3 Posted by CC, CJR on Wed 17 Jul 2013 at 07:45 AM
I ran into some Mackinac work here:
http://www.cjr.org/the_observatory/electric_vehicles_versus_gas_p.php#comment-66349
Was not impressed.
PS. your American Prospect link is borked:
http://prospect.org/article/outmatched
#4 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Wed 17 Jul 2013 at 01:59 PM
Speaking of borked links here's a funny story:
http://www.mackinac.org/18062
"In the Detroit Free Press, Stephen Henderson expresses concern that right-to-work states are doing worse than forced unionism states in a number of social trends."
Which they are.
http://www.epi.org/publication/right-to-work-michigan-economy/
More in a sec (two link minimum)
#5 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Wed 17 Jul 2013 at 02:34 PM
And this is something you can go into the numbers to support or you can look at the two part stories within the states themselves.
1) The experience of workers and families in job insecure states:
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-10-11/new-south-battles-old-poverty-as-right-to-work-promises-fade.html
2) The people who are drafting these bills:
http://www.salon.com/2012/12/11/michigans_right_to_work_bill_cribs_alec/
and who pays the 'bills' for those bills.
#6 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Wed 17 Jul 2013 at 02:40 PM
So I was interested in looking at the numbers because I noticed the weasely way this author was making his argument.
"The Census Bureau's American Community Survey has the most up to date information on poverty rates. Using the one-year estimates for 2004 through 2011 — the earliest available on the Census Bureau’s poverty data page — shows very similar increases between right-to-work and forced unionism states. When accounting for the size of each state, the average right-to-work state's poverty rate increased by 20.1 percent while the average forced unionism state’s poverty rate increased by 23.4 percent.
Thus, it is not true that, at least over this period, right-to-work states have a higher growth in poverty rates."
But where are the numbers? Where's the poverty base line between states? What percentage of these figures are created because of Republican governors breaking unions or supermajority requirements breaking tax revenue forcing public sector employment liquidation?
I decided to look at his numbers, but the only link he's got to his data isn't. It's to the original article he was critiquing.
So I decided to look at two neighboring states using his claimed data source, Kansas (rtw) and Colorado (not RTW)
http://www.census.gov/acs/www/
(Unfortunately, the table data is spontaneously generated by javascript, not by information in the URI. There is a poverty section)
Colorado poverty% - 13.5
Kansas poverty% - 13.8
Colorado poverty children under 18 % - 17.9
Kansas poverty children under 18 % - 18.8
A percentage difference? Why is that?
Here's a possible reason:
Colorado employed female poverty % - 7.7
Kansas employed female poverty % - 9.1
Right to work is anti-women. It's cheap labor conservatism. You can talk about 'rates' in any old cherry picked time frame, but the reality is right to work hurts working people, especially women and children.
And from what I've seen from Mackinac, cheap labor conservatism is what they are selling.
#7 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Wed 17 Jul 2013 at 03:16 PM
And if you want to get into their donors..
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/03/michigan-snyder-mackinac-center
"Last week, Michigan's Republican Governor Rick Snyder signed into law a fiercely contested bill giving unelected "emergency financial managers" unprecedented power to shred union contracts, privatize city services, and consolidate or dissolve local governments, all in the name of saving struggling cities and school districts. Dubbed "financial martial law" by one approving state GOP lawmaker and "disaster capitalism" by critics, Snyder and his bill have become a target for Wisconsin-like protests. Several thousand demonstrators marched on the Michigan Capitol in the days before Snyder signed the bill. But gone unmentioned is a little-known Michigan think tank that for years has been pushing for the most controversial provisions in Snyder's bill—and that's bankrolled by some of the same right-wing millionaires and billionaires that backed Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker and his anti-union legislation.
Since 2005, the Mackinac Center for Public Policy has urged reforms to Michigan law giving more power and protection to emergency financial managers, state-appointed officials who parachute into ailing cities or school districts and employ drastic measures to fix budgets on the brink of collapse. In January, the free-market-loving center published four recommendations, including granting emergency managers the power to override elected officials (such as a mayor or school board member) and toss out union contracts. All four ended up in Snyder's legislation."
'small, decentralized, government'. Don't believe the hype.
"a review of tax records shows that the group's funders include the charitable foundations of the nation's largest corporations and a host of wealthy conservative and libertarian benefactors. Between 2002 and 2009, the Mackinac Center's donors included the Charles G. Koch Foundation ($69,151), founded by the chairman and CEO of Koch Industries, who, with his brother, David, is a major backer of conservative causes; the Dick and Betsy DeVos Foundation ($80,000), the charity tied to the son of the co-founder of Amway, the multibillion-dollar direct marketing company; the Edgar and Elsa Prince Foundation, established by the parents of Blackwater founder Erik Prince, who serves as the foundation's vice president ($195,000); and the Walton Family Foundation ($100,000), established by Wal-Mart founder Sam Walton and his wife, Helen."
Useful context, I think.
#8 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Wed 17 Jul 2013 at 03:25 PM
I appreciate and concur with the recognition given to the Mackinac Center as one of the most influential think tanks. The Center is blatantly and intentionally transparent relative to its agenda, charter and intent. It is therefore intriguing to read some of the alternative thinking comments posted here, which arguably give legitimacy to your article that, yes, the Center is a player and is being followed by both friend and foe. By the way, does the Columbia Journalism Review make public its list of donors? If so, where might one find this list?
Thank you.
#9 Posted by Steve J, CJR on Mon 22 Jul 2013 at 01:13 PM
The google is your friend, friend.
http://www.cjr.org/about_us/masthead.php#MajorFunders
http://www.cjr.org/the_kicker/cjrs_new_board_of_overseers.php
#10 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Mon 22 Jul 2013 at 03:44 PM