Michigan lawmakers consider bills to deter ‘foreign influence'
Lawmakers in Michigan's state House are considering bills that would ban certain partnerships with certain foreign entities deemed to pose threats to national security and also ban such entities from purchasing land in Michigan.
Namely, the bills would target citizens and representatives of China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela, and Syria as Rep. Bill Schuette (R-Midland) told lawmakers on the state House Government Operations Committee Thursday, saying such nations actively try to gain influence and control through infiltrating state economies and institutions.
'I can tell you these countries, they don't play fair. They use every single lever of power, be that economic, cultural or coercive, to jeopardize our nation's strength,' Schuette said, pointing at some recent examples in Michigan.
One area of particular concern to the committee was the 2023 incident where five Chinese nationals who were also students at the University of Michigan photographed training facilities at Camp Grayling, a National Guard training facility in northern Michigan. There have been other instances of Chinese nationals taking photos of military bases in restricted areas throughout the U.S. and others who were also students through the University of Michigan. The university has since ended a partnership with Shanghai Jiao Tong University which permitted academic exchanges, with U of M President Santa J. Ono citing 'national security' as the reason for the separation.
Part of the legislation being proposed includes prohibitions on foreign entities and non-citizens from purchasing farmland or property within 20 miles of a military base or key facilities like a water treatment facility, telecommunication facility or transportation facility.
Agriculture is one of Michigan's top industries and not only do Michigan residents depend on its preservation, but so does the rest of the country that benefits from its domestic food production, bill sponsor Rep. Gina Johnsen (R-Lake Odessa) told the committee Thursday.
'This bill is a critical step in safeguarding Michigan's agricultural lands from foreign foreign entities that may not have the best interests of our state, our farmers or our national security…There is growing concern about foreign ownership of ag land, particularly by entities from countries that may pose economic or security threats to the United States,' Johnsen said. 'This bill is not about creating unnecessary barriers or fostering anti foreign sentiment. It is about protecting Michigan's resources and ensuring that our agricultural lands remain in the hands of those who are invested in the well being of Michigan and the nation.'
The ACLU of Michigan particularly opposes the land-related bills, House Bills 4233 and 4234, as the organization's Legislative Director Kyle Zawacki said the bills threaten civil liberties and economic fairness, inviting prejudice on the basis of a person's national origin or perceived foreign origin.
The bills conflate a person with a government, Zawacki said, noting that not every resident of a country agrees with the actions of their leaders.
'Penalizing people simply because of their nationality contradicts fundamental American values of fairness and non discrimination,' Zawacki said. 'Singling out individuals based on the actions of a foreign government is not only unjust, but also risks exacerbating xenophobia and anti-immigrant sentiment. Protecting national security and upholding constitutional rights are not mutually exclusive goals.'
Other bills lawmakers are reviewing include ones related to education and economic endeavors.
House Bill 4238 would limit public schools from entering into agreements with foreign countries of concern or accepting grants from such countries if such interactions promote agendas that are 'detrimental to the security of the United States or its residents'.
The bill aims to keep 'anti-America' agendas out of schools and universities, bill sponsor Rep. Nancy Jenkins-Arno (R-Rollin Township) told the committee.
'House Bill 4238 is a straightforward common sense measure to make sure we keep countries of concern out of our educational system,' Jenkins-Arno said. 'One of the core functions of government is protecting citizens. The most valuable of our citizens is our kids.'
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
20 minutes ago
- The Hill
On gerrymandering, Democrats should fight fire with fire
If you want to understand how Congress became so polarized, look no further than Texas. Egged on by President Trump, Gov. Greg Abbot (R) and Republican leaders in the state are trying to engage in mid-decade redistricting, bucking the norm of waiting until the conclusion of the census every 10 years to redraw congressional maps to accommodate population changes. Both Democrats and Republicans have weaponized gerrymandering over the years. But only Texas Republicans have tried twice — in 2003 and now — to exercise the nuclear option of mid-decade redrawing of districts twice. I understand the motivations of these Republicans — and the desire of Democrats to take revenge. In 2012, I chaired the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, and we had a score to settle with Republicans for eliminating six Democratic seats in Texas in their 2003 mid-decade assault. We might have tried to persuade Democratic governors and legislators to strike earlier than the typical redrawing of maps after the 2010 census, but we decided not to retaliate against Republican rule-breaking with rule-breaking of our own. Instead, we waited for the regular process to take place ahead of the 2012 election. Once the decennial census concluded, we quickly realized that our best opportunity to pick up more seats was in Illinois, where the House delegation had eight Democrats and 11 Republicans. Gov. Pat Quinn and Democratic leaders in the statehouse became political Picassos, redrawing districts to create three more Democratic seats after the 2012 elections. That was not a one-off. Both parties have regularly engaged in designing their own abstract district art. Pennsylvania's old Seventh District — designed in 2011 to protect Republican incumbent Rep. Patrick Meehan — was famously called ' Goofy kicking Donald Duck ' for its bizarre resemblance to the Disney characters. In 2000, Arizona created a district that snaked oddly along the Colorado River so as to include the Hopi Reservation but not the surrounding Navajo Reservation, circumventing longstanding tensions between the two tribes. In 2022, a plan favored by Democrats in New York extended my former Third Congressional District across several bridges and the Long Island Sound, into the Bronx. But that gerrymandering plan backfired, as a state judge struck it down. The result of this map madness is that the moderate, competitive districts have shriveled, while the number of highly partisan districts has skyrocketed. When I first entered Congress in 2001, there were 29 districts with a partisan voting index within a range of four points, reliably swinging between a two-point Republican or Democratic advantage, depending on national trends. In other words, they were toss-ups, and the incumbents needed crossover voters to win reelection. Bipartisanship wasn't a fuzzy goal — it was an urgent strategic imperative. Today, the number of those districts is just 16. Most of the other districts have been drawn to be more red or blue. That means that many House members don't lay awake at night fretting about being defeated in the general election by someone in the other party. Instead, they lay awake thinking about being defeated by a fringe, extreme candidate in their next primary. The political gravity of Congress has shifted. Our system forces legislators to the ideological extremes, when most Americans fall closer to the center. That's without even accounting for the trend of partisan residential sorting, as Americans increasingly live with ideologically likeminded neighbors. We've divided ourselves into Fox News and MSNBC districts, where contradicting views are rarely found on any given block. Of course, some states have attempted redistricting reforms. California and Arizona adopted independent commissions. New York has a bipartisan redistricting commission that places guardrails on just how much Democrats can gerrymander. And that's part of the problem Democrats face: Republicans in Texas and elsewhere play to win by breaking the rules, while in Democratic controlled states, leaders often play to protect the rules, even when it costs them. Over the years, many have argued that Democrats need to fight fire with fire. Instead, Democrats have historically focused on writing a fair fire code even as arson consumes American bipartisanship. But this new Texas mid-decade redistricting push seems to have finally changed the Democratic mindset. Govs. Gavin Newsom of California, Kathy Hochul of New York and JB Pritzker of Illinois are teasing mutual assured gerrymandering destruction by threatening mid-decade redistricting in their own states if Texas Republicans go through with their plan. Each of these efforts faces an uphill legal climb, however, given that voters in two of those three states outlawed such practices. Democrats have realized that patiently waiting until the next redistricting cycle is not an option. Congressional majorities aren't won on a moral high ground but on the streets. Only when Republican members of Congress from New York, California and Illinois see their seats turn blue will national GOP leaders recognize that, in gerrymandering, 'an eye for an eye' makes the whole political system blind. And so to restore bipartisanship in the long run, Democrats may need to play by Texas Republican rules.
Newsweek
21 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Republican Met With Loud Boos, 'Shame' Chants at Town Hall
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Representative Doug LaMalfa, a California Republican, was met with boos and jeers at a town hall meeting on Monday over his support for President Donald Trump. It comes after a series of similar incidents, including one just over a week ago, in which Nebraska Republican Representative Mike Flood faced the public's wrath over several Trump administration policies. Newsweek has contacted LaMalfa's office for comment via email. Why It Matters Town halls have become tense and rowdy affairs for Republicans in recent months, as lawmakers face the scorn of voters over the Trump administration's policies, especially around cuts to Social Security, Medicaid and veterans' health care. Representative Doug LaMalfa speaks during a press conference on Capitol Hill in Washington on June 15, 2022. Representative Doug LaMalfa speaks during a press conference on Capitol Hill in Washington on June 15, 2022. Francis Chung/E&E News/POLITICO/AP What To Know LaMalfa faced backlash at the town hall in Chico, a college town 90 miles north of Sacramento, over Trump's economic policies and the administration's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein investigation. The roughly 650 attendees at the local Elks Lodge booed, jeered and cursed at LaMalfa, calling him a "liar," an "ahole." At one point, someone yelled, "F**** you!" when the moderator called on an audience member. The crowd also chanted "Shame! Shame! Shame!" at him. The crowd expressed particular anger over the Epstein case after a joint Justice Department and FBI memo last month indicated no further disclosures would be made. One attendee shouted: "You all left, the speaker of the House released you guys so you didn't have to deal with releasing the files," referencing House Speaker Mike Johnson's decision to send lawmakers on recess before voting on a resolution to release more information. LaMalfa acknowledged the criticism, saying: "It's interesting the Epstein situation was not an issue during the Biden administration," which drew more boos and jeers. He also called for "very clear transparency" on the investigation and expressed hope that additional information would be available when Congress reconvenes. "I think it's a bad look to have this information continue to be suppressed, but there's also people involved in the way those files at some level need to be redacted," he added. Frustration also focused on Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein's former girlfriend, who was recently moved to a minimum-security Texas prison. One attendee shouted: "She needs to still get her time and be held accountable," which LaMalfa acknowledged. Audience members pressed LaMalfa on broader accountability, asking: "Do you believe that elected officials who knowingly protect and enable criminal behavior, including insurrection, fraud and sexual abuse, should be removed from office?" LaMalfa replied: "Everybody should be held accountable whether you're elected or not if you've done an illegal activity," citing due process for Maxwell and participants in the Capitol riot on January 6, 2021. Attendees shouted: "You should be ashamed of yourself!" and "No!" in response to his answer. The town hall also focused on Trump's "One Big, Beautiful Bill." Attendees questioned cuts to Medicaid, Medicare and Obamacare, projected to total $1.1 trillion over the next decade. LaMalfa maintained there were "no cuts to the people themselves," prompting someone to shout, "You're lying!" He also faced criticism over Trump's tariffs, particularly their impact on farmers. One audience member asked: "If you're not here to announce your resignation, why aren't you here to apologize to the farmers of the North State because of your support for the Trump tariffs?" LaMalfa responded: "I'm not here to do either, thanks. Do you want to actually talk about something productive?" LaMalfa's town hall is just the latest in a series of heated meetings with constituents that have escalated since Trump took office. Some gatherings have ended with constituents forcibly removed, threatened with arrest or even tased—like at the April town hall held by Georgia Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, an action she defended. Weeks prior, National Republican Committee Chairman Michael Whatley advised GOP lawmakers to avoid in-person town halls or hold them virtually. As a result, several Republicans opted not to hold meetings, leaving space for Democrats—including Minnesota Governor Tim Walz and California Representative Ro Khanna—to appear at the events, sometimes even outside their home states. Democrats, however, have faced their own confrontations. At a California town hall in April, one frustrated voter told Representative Laura Friedman: "I don't believe that you have pushed hard enough. I don't believe that you have fought hard enough." Meanwhile, some Republicans, including Trump, have dismissed concerns about the trend. In a post on social media in March, he said the heckling was the work of "paid troublemakers." He also claimed that "Radical Left Democrats are paying a fortune to have people infiltrate the Town Halls of Republican Congressmen/women and Senators." Senator Jim Banks skipped a town hall organized by his constituents in Indiana in late March and sent doughnuts to the waiting crowd, which he accused of being Democrats. But polls have shown that voters are becoming increasingly disillusioned with the Trump administration, with the president's approval rating dropping to an all-time low in several recent surveys. And that extends to Republicans, with YouGov/Economist polling showing a sharp decline in Trump's support among members of his own party since January. Polling suggests it is a result of concerns about his handling of the economy. But polls have also shown that Republicans are not satisfied with how the administration has handled the Jeffrey Epstein case. In a YouGov/Economist poll from the beginning of August, 53 percent of Republicans said they believe the government is covering up evidence it has about Epstein. What People Are Saying President Donald Trump, on Truth Social in March: "Paid 'troublemakers' are attending Republican Town Hall Meetings. It is all part of the game for the Democrats, but just like our big LANDSLIDE ELECTION, it's not going to work for them!" What Happens Next Senior Republicans are likely to repeat earlier calls for lawmakers to stop conducting in-person town halls, especially if voter anger intensifies.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Scott Bessent floats rolling out export tax to more industries
US Treasury secretary Scott Bessent has raised the prospect of the White House rolling out the unprecedented revenue-sharing agreement it
