Great Debates coalition offers unique venues for gubernatorial visions

Memo to: Virg Bernero, Mike Bouchard, Mike Cox, Andy Dillon, Tom George, Pete Hoekstra and Rick Snyder.

You’re all running for governor. So far, you’ve all qualified for the Aug. 3 primary ballot, and are competing for your party’s nomination to face off in November’s election.

And no doubt you’re all discovering — perhaps to your dismay — that Michigan is a mighty big place, with nearly 10 million residents living in astonishingly varied communities.

Talking with these folks is tough, especially when so many are battered by the economy, angry, scared, and sick and tired of politics. That’s why I’ve tried to pay close attention to the various candidate debates going on. They provide a platform for each of you to make your own best argument why you should be elected.

Various groups have sponsored the debates, each offering its own slant on the issues of the day. But one was unique. One of a series of “Great Debates” organized by The Center for Michigan, it was between Tom, Pete and Rick – three of the five Republicans. (Full disclosure: I’m the founder and president of the Center, a non-partisan, non-profit “think and do tank.”

What made this May 25 debate especially different was who was behind it: An astonishingly wide range of 21 interest groups, from the Michigan Education Association on through the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Business Leaders for Michigan and the Grand Rapids Chamber of Commerce.

Each of these sponsoring groups differs – sometimes very widely – on the answers to the questions of the day. But all agreed those questions should be addressed by the candidates. Happily, the debate, moderated by Nolan Finley, editor of the Detroit News’ editorial page, and Peter Luke, Lansing correspondent for Booth Newspapers, was both spirited and civil.

George, a state senator and practicing physician, blamed the state’s financial hole on the escalating costs of health care. Hoekstra, a congressman from Holland, pointed to a failure of leadership in Lansing. And Snyder, a venture capitalist new to the elective area, offered a detailed, 10-point plan to turn Michigan around.

Unfortunately, it’s too bad the other GOP candidates in the race — Mike Bouchard and Mike Cox – chose not to participate. Had they done so, viewers all over the state would have had the chance to see them and evaluate their claims to be ready to lead.

Voters may legitimately wonder why they didn’t show up. By the way, you can still see the May 25 debate and other debates at www.thecenterformichigan.net/blog/the-great-debates.

I came away impressed at the candor and insight displayed by Tom, Pete and Rick. They’re all good men, all fed up with the mess in Lansing. All have their own particular recipes for cleaning it up, as do the men who weren‘t there.

So here’s a challenge for all the candidates:

Focus on this as the campaign continues: The profound changes going on in our state and the consequent changes in the basic functions, structure and cost of our governmental apparatus, from state to local to educational. What’s clear is that Michigan will come out of this “great recession” a smaller state in terms of people. We will be a poorer state – from fifth or sixth in median income nationally to 35th.

And our economic base will rely far less on the auto industry than on a diversified cluster of activity, from tourism to agriculture to high-tech startup firms. Unfortunately, we still have a state government largely built for the world of the 1950’s and 1960’s. Now, half a century later, it’s time to re-think that model.

So, candidates, tell us this:

What would you do?

What’s your vision for the best future for our state? What’s your action plan to get us there? What fundamental changes do you advocate in the way we govern ourselves? Some states – Indiana, for example – have proposed eliminating townships altogether. A Republican candidate for governor in Wisconsin has proposed eliminating county government. Many experts have called for fewer school districts – Michigan has 533, not counting charter schools. Others have advocated regional collaboration and service sharing.

This is a time in which we desperately need vision — and one of the glaring defects in the gubernatorial campaign so far is the lack of one, plus the lack of a concrete plan to get there. For example, there is nothing wrong with going after public employee fringe benefit costs or the skyrocketing costs of Medicaid.

But that’s not enough; what‘s needed is an overall, big-picture framework for this discussion.

Here’s hoping that future debates will flesh these things out. By the way, there is a new “road map” of sorts: The Center for Michigan’s new report, “10,000 Voices to Transform Our State.” The results of 585 community conversations involving more than 10,000 Michigan citizens, it offers a common-ground vision for our state’s best future and an action plan to get there. It’s on our website, and you might want to have a look when you get a moment.

Incidentally, the Great Debate between the Democrats among you – Virg and Andy – will take place July 15th. It will be followed by a third gubernatorial debate this fall among the two primary winners.

We’ll be looking forward to those exchanges, too.

Editor’s Note: Former newspaper publisher and University of Michigan Regent Phil Power is a longtime observer of Michigan politics and economics and a former chairman of the Michigan chapter of the Nature Conservancy. He is also the founder and president of The Center for Michigan, a bipartisan centrist think-and-do tank which is sponsoring Michigan’s Defining Moment, a public engagement outreach campaign for citizens. The opinions expressed here are Power’s own and do not represent the official views of The Center. He welcomes your comments at ppower@thecenterformichigan.net.