• yourjizzx cum
  • Interviews

    Greg Francisco is the Founder and Former Executive Director of the Michigan Medical Marijuana Association.

    Greg: I had started smoking marijuana as an undergraduate here at Michigan State, which was very typical of my peers at the time. That's how it happened. Naive about marijuana from high school at that time, and you came here, and you learned about it.

    . Dave: Was that the 1980's?

    Greg: It was the 1970s, the mid 70s. Um, and so it was very novel. It was the very end of the Vietnam war, I was just young enough to avoid the draft, but I had that hanging over my head through high school and stuff. Anyway, marijuana was not in the high school, it was very much a college thing, but the point of this is, unlike my peers, I did not stop when I left college. I found marijuana a pleasant to use, you know therapeutically it helped me. So, I continued to use it.
    I went into the coast guard, served successfully in the coast guard, graduated from Michigan State University, began a family, was working, in a community teaching. I was volunteering in my community. I was doing everything Americans are supposed to do to contribute to the community. I'm a small town guy, and this is how you do it. The one thing was that I continued to smoke marijuana. Inevitably I got caught, and so I ended up pleading guilty to attempted use of marijuana, paying a $50 fine, big whoop, but I lost my teaching certificate. I was told I wasn't moral enough to be the cub master anymore. I couldn't volunteer at my church anymore except under direct supervision. I couldn't be trusted to go over to old ladies houses to rake their lawns unless there was an adult there to supervise me. I was basically humiliated --

    Dave: Right

    Greg: --I went through the whole contrition route, um, you know, started basically from the bottom. I worked at a factory, got an entry level job a as a social worker, you know worked in some positions with responsibility. I went to graduate school, got my degree in counseling and started my life over. I basically rehabilitated myself, the one thing is-

    Dave: Where did you go?

    Greg: --Um, I went to Western, to Western Michigan University...The thing is, after two years I started secretly smoking marijuana again, but I kept it again very hush-hush. I was ashamed. So, I was working, now I'm working as an elementary school counselor. In the year 2000 then, I had this dirty little secret, and I saw in the paper an article that this guy was going to try to pass a citizens initiative the PRA, the Personal Responsibility Amendment, and it was going to do four things: it was going to legalize an ounce or less for adults, it was going to allow people to cultivate hemp, it was going to legalize medical marijuana so people had medical marijuana, they could use it, and it was going to change the forfeiture law, so the police when they arrested someone on a drug crime, that money would go into funds for education, domestic abuse, gambling and alcohol addictions, but would not go to the police, and there were reasons for that. And, so they were going to have a kick-off rally for it just outside Kalamazoo, and come to this.
    So, I thought, It's January, it's dark nobody will recognize me, I hope, so I snuck in there. I felt so guilty. But, it was like an epiphany. It was a life-changing experience to be at this event, because the MC got up and began talking and he said, "anyone whose been arrested for marijuana, stand up", and it was like one of those things from Alcoholics Anonymous, and I'm like, "I guess I'll stand up" and like half the people stand up, and they look just like me. I mean they're just normal, ordinary people, and it was like this epiphany. And, I heard for the first time "your not, there's nothing wrong with you", and I realized it's not me that's wrong it was the society. I was really angry at the way...the whole point of this, I felt I had done everything that I'd been told to be a responsible citizen, and still my government treated me like a criminal, and I thought that was wrong. So I got involved in the PRA. That was in 2000, that was really the first resurrection of the whole marijuana reform movement in Michigan, in 15 years, January 2000. The organizers name was Greg Schmidt, S-C-H-M-I-D-T. He and his family have done several ballot initiatives. There libertarians, so they've done term limits and they were involved with Headley, the Headley amendment which has to do with taxation. They're libertarian, and obviously Republican, whatever, so he was underwriting this. So we were like a band of busy beavers. There were probably 50 of us active in the state, and that's not many in the entire state, out there pounding the pavement to get signatures. We got to the end of it, and we only got half of the signatures that we needed, and a lot of people were really burned out. It came out that Greg Schmidt who had done this knew that we weren't going to do it, but he had his own political reasons--

    Dave: Do you remember what the number was, the number of signatures

    Greg: Um, we had about 200,000 and we needed 300,000. We got 175,000-200,000. So Craig Schmidt, you know, people were burned out. Some people had blamed Craig Schmidt, that he had done this for his own political whatever, but there was this core group of us who said, you know, "lets do this again", you know, "we learned something here", and you know Greg used us, but he taught us a lot. We were enthused.
    So at that time, again, there was a group of us, there were about 18 of us, plus or minus, that met at Cubby's Restaurant out at Jolly Rd, and this again being February 2001 and we said, you know, "we're going to do this, we're going to do another PRA, but this time we're going to have to write it ourselves because we don't have anybody to pay for it." Initiatives are expensive, they cost at least $1,000,000 a piece to do and collectively we didn't have a fraction of that, but were just going to do it.
    All of these little cannabis groups had sprung up all over the place, and we just decided that we were going to come together and become Michigan NORML, um, cannabis activist communities are our own worst enemy, constantly bickering, fighting, It's really like herding cats. By our very nature, we are independent thinkers, and we are educated, and we have strong opinions.
    So we got started on getting this initiative going again and BANG September 11th, and there is a national crisis. And asking someone to sign a petition to legalize marijuana when the national trade center is falling down. It was over I mean PRA was over, I mean was to, I mean no one signed, it wasn't that we were done, that was it, it was that no-one signed jack shit at that point.

    Dave: Right

    Greg: and try to ask them we got more important things. PRA 2 is now over, so now we are like what do we do next. We are not going to do it a third time, because it is expensive, and again a lot of people are burned out. Umm. So then we turned our heads and said lets do city initiatives. Let's start working city by city. Um City initiatives works just like state initiatives, but they are much smaller. They are much more local and much easier and we start targeting. I don't remember the order that we did, but we did five cities in Michigan as a group, as Michigan NORML. Different coalitions came together so it was not just Michigan NORML. Umm but that Michigan NORML is always part of them, we did Detroit, Flint, Ann Arbor, Ferndale and Traverse city five cities and this was between 2002 and 2006. They all basically said the same, the different groups did, they basically legalized Protective medical marijuana, and so the people that provided it, the people that used it, the Doctors that recommended it within certain limits um, and so we did five of them. OK, Now, we started to get the attention of some of the national groups, and I mean, like it wasn't like five and one election it was one here, a few months later another hone, ok.

    David: Slower progress:

    Greg: Meanwhile policy project, who is working, they underwrite most of these ballot initiatives, around the country. They started feeling us out back and forth, back and forth. Then basically in 2006, very end of 2006 and early 2007 the said we would like to do a ballot initiative in Michigan. We think you guys are ready, you proved your organizational, we think the state is ready. They don't do anything unless they have a 60% poll ok. Um they have done this in other states Montana and Maine, were two previous states, and so it was basically take the laws from Montana and Maine, and actually Maine and then Montana and fine-tune them for Michigan. So basically the Law was written. So they would put it out to focus groups and test it, if it didn't get 60% it came back. We pushed it as far as we could. They gave us this basic law, we had suggestions, but they in the end would final what our Michigan law would look like. So this is the Washington Lobby group. But their rational, rather right or wrong is they are putting up the money, it's their's and they are going to pay for it ok, well you know.

    Dave: So are these people from Michigan NORML?

    Greg: No this is Marijuana Policy Project, I am not going to go off on that tangent. But there is a huge feud between those two national organizations.

    David: Right

    Greg: There is no love lost there what so ever. So MPP said they would come in and this, this all right.... So we went through all this focus group stuff and back and forth and fine tuning, and he suggested who could recommend medical marijuana. You know, and I said I think licensed professional counselors should be added to Doctors, and Nurses. We polled all that, and of course the reason I wanted that was, I am a licensed professional counselor you know. We couldn't get the 60% it went out, it didn't matter that we had a local state connection that really wanted that, it was not of that, it was did it pass the 60% threshold or not. Ok. Point is in January of 2007 they did inform that they were going to go ahead and do the initiative. In the state they gave us a couple of stipulations, one was that Michigan NORML basically had to dead in the water. And all activities in the state of Michigan had to go dead, they became the Alpha dog. And all they wanted, they didn't want anything out there to confuse the voters, they didn't want, they didn't want everything medical marijuana.

    David: Right, Right.

    Greg: And they gave us the talking points, and it had to be those talking points, and it had to be those talking points we stick with, we couldn't use NORML, we couldn't use the pot leaf in any way shape or form. If any of us were caught displaying the pot leaf or anything they threw us out of the campaign and that would be it, no Mercy what so ever. And there was a lot of Angry back and forth.

    David: Is that because they want you to look like a serious...

    Greg: The want to control the message, and the pot leaf would turn people off.

    David: Right.

    Greg: So they wanted very much to control the message. So we said ok we would agree to do that um, and Basically all Michigan NORML went dead, the whole community activist community went dead, um. and that was where I really started to divert from the mainstream. I thought that was a bad mistake, but anyways I went along with it. Um. At that time they ran the campaign we knew, Oh they also did a in 2007 the signature gathering so they wouldn't be competing with any other ballot issues out there, alright. Because actually the election wasn't until 2008, but we essentially knew in January 2007 what it was going to look like, and we knew it was going to win. Alright?

    David: right

    Greg: Because we had the 60%, so we knew the slant on them was our solution. So we followed their playbook we all went dead. We never as a community have ever recovered. Only now are people starting to organize again, and we never ever regain that cohesiveness we once had. Am I going on too much?

    David: No, No.

    Greg: ok, so we never ever regained or got that cohesiveness back again, and I think MPP really destroyed that by saying no, but I understand what the said, they wanted it to be their message, um. One of he big arguments right now is the dispensaries why isn't it included in the law. One is we couldn't come up with a way to get it, any way of wording it that would get the 60%, another is that we didn't want to give any target for federal challenge. If we set up a distribution system, that was one bridge to far. That was another reason it was not in there, ahh, but mostly it was we wanted the discussion to be about medical marijuana and not on how it was to be distributed because that was an argument. Medical marijuana yes or no, ok.

    David: Right.

    Greg: So I know I am going on and on, so anyway we went ahead and ran the thing, did what they said, obviously it passed. At that point leading up to that as I said I had thought this was a big mistake losing our cohesiveness, losing our momentum. I started talking to activists in other states. Um I had developed a national reputation. For a large part of that decade 200o I had a personal goal to write 2 letters a day and send them all over the country, all over the world essentially. So I have been published all over country and a few all over the world. And so I am known nationally for that.

    David: Just gathering support for the issue?

    Greg: Just writing letters to the editors. So I subscribed to a clipping service so I just look and I find articles that have to do with medical marijuana. A lot of the you know, will be some big bust so I'll write and I'll say you know all the pot growers I'll thank you for this because your artificial price support keeps pot worth more per ounce than solid gold. You know we all thank you, you know all these people we will replace, they always are. Stuff like that, you know? Any ways. The point is I had the creditability to call these people up. The country. What they told me is once this passes, there will be a period of euphoria and everybody will be milling about smartly and nobody will have an Idea of what to do next. They said and that's when your opponents are going to catch you and they're going to really ram some nasty rules down your throat. You need to be ready.
    Winning the election is just one step. So I started talking to people in the community. A lot of them I would say "what do we do after this passes, what happens?", and they would look at me and "ahh, ahh, party!". "What about after the party what do we do?" "Well, ahh we all live happily ever after" "Wrong!" So, nobody listened, so we end up starting a few of us starting the Michigan medical marijuana association, and I'd say nobody would listen. And that was really the importance of that because Michigan NORML and the other groups had all gone dead and really didn't have a vision for what came after. So we started the Michigan Medical Marijuana Association, and for the first year we were pretty much the top dog. Umm, my goal in life was never to be king turd of pot mountain, I never wanted that. But I was really afraid of what would happen during that implementation period...
    The two big criticisms, and we are really fighting, and talking points was that the big criticisms is that this law is vague and contradictory and they can't understand it. The fact is if anybody reads this law it is very clear and very common sense, and there's really only two groups that are having a hard time understanding it. They find it contradictory. The first are public officials because they have it in their mind how this should work. They might not like marijuana so they, and they say we don't like it, but if it's going to be there we are going to have rules and follow it. So they have ideas of what it should look like already. Then they read the law and it doesn't say that and they well it's contradictory because this is what it should say. So it's contradictory. No it's not its just that no matter how many times they read it they can't get it to say what they want it to say.

    David: Right.

    Greg: And the other group that has a real hard time with it, well says we can't understand it is law enforcement. Law enforcement has a vested financial interest in maintaining status Quo. Ah, Through forfeiture and then through funding because the more arrests that they get, even if they are thrown out, they get funding, so they get, so it's the group that has the vested interest that is maintaining the status quo that we can't understand it. But everybody else can understand it, everybody else can understand it! Um the whole dispensary thing um, can really, I think they are pushing a little to far, the business people, Umm I think they are pushing to far because, because the law does not say dispensary yes, it doesn't say no. People are saying well if it is not prohibited then it is allowed. Well I am not sure that I would want to go to court on that.

    David: Right.

    Greg: That's my legal theory, um, but it does allow patient-to-patient transfers. But our intent was that those be casual patient-to-patient transfers, not for profit. But what the dispensaries are doing is hiring patients as a part.

    David: Right.

    Greg: And then well saying this is a patient-to-patient transfer.

    David: I mean, it is very strange because it doesn't give a whole lot of details about where the product should come from.

    Greg: Well we did it on purpose because we wanted to avoid, to avoid any federal conflict. So and we didn't want there to be any arguments about where it would come from, and we just wanted it to be yes or no.

    David: Obviously a federal provider didn't work before. (referencing 1970's legislation)

    Greg: No we tried it, that wasn't going to work so, um but we also in doing it this caregiver system, I am really, the five patient per caregiver that's cast in stone I don't ever see that ever being repelled. The reason that we did that.

    David: Seems to be working?

    Greg: Yeah, that was to, there's not enough, there's just not enough people who know care givers. It's just real hard for people to find caregivers so um, people are setting up referral services. Um we also wanted to have it real disbursed all the productions, instead of having a few big farms, we've got lots of lots of little ones every where. And that makes it hard to arrest them all it makes harder targets, there's not one big... You know to target. That I think is cast in stone, so the real political where it is going to go special interest, the lobbing. We have these three current or three groups in the state, really two currents, one is for patients and small care givers, keeping it small keeping it cottage industry, keeping the focus on patients, and then we have this business approach, that the business is the solution to everything. So we need to regulate so that we know exactly what the rules are, we need tax, so that the state can get the tax money. Those are the two currents that are going on. Umm.. Lets see.. So where is it going to go is.. I...I don't think this is ever going to get repealed. Umm. The Michigan right to Farm act is also going to be a real interesting, I hope it becomes interesting, I can't get a lot of interest from anyone else ok. Michigan has a, the strongest right to farm act of any of the fifty states. And So I mean it's it's, bullet proof alright and, and what it says is that local units of government can not pass a conditions of operation, that are more stringent than state law. And specifically what are called generally accepted agricultural management practices. So this is what allows people to put in these hog hotels where they have five acres of concrete and they put five thousand pigs on it and the neighbors all get pissed off and yell and scream and nothing they can do about it. The right to farm acts says as long as following the generally accepted management practices that are determined by the state, and the state says a thousand hogs per acre and that's what they got, that's the way it is and that's the way the government, ok.

    David: Right.

    Greg: It also, the way it is written is broad that if I grow tomatoes in my backyard, I have a vegetable garden in my back yard and I put up a veggie stand in the front yard with a tin can I can't be zoned out. The local zoning people can't come by and say the neighbors don't like, that is a commercial use. Agricultural uses are sacred in this state.

    David: Right, it's a huge part of our economy.

    Greg: Exactly, and the right to farm act protects them so, my argument is, if the right to farm act protects me for growing tomatoes in my backyard, they certainly protect me for growing pot in a closet inside, which is more valuable and more intensively cultivated. It certainly protects that. So as long as I am within that umm.. The GAMP. Which is generally accepted agricultural management practices all these local ordinances are.. Are. They are not enforceable. And so I can grow up to 60 plants, because 5 times 12, and then I can grow 12 more for myself, 72, and I have to have it in a closed, locked facility. Those are the only two GAMPs. That's it, so all these local units of government are passing these laws saying, trying to crack down on cultivators, or limiting care givers to two patients, or saying, in Kalamazoo township they just said you can't do it in a residential you have to do it in a, you have to only grow it in a commercial.

    David: Are they enforceable?

    Greg: I don't' think they are enforceable at all. There is a push here in Michigan, Um.. Pass a bill. Senator Jones who is Eaton county/Grand ledge has been pushing the senate bill 19 and this supposedly.

    David: I wanted to ask you about that, it is on my list.

    Greg: And this supposedly outlaws marijuana bars and is a crack down on intoxicated driving, but if you actually read the bill nowhere does it use the word intoxicated or drive. OK, I mean it's not in there, ok what is this you know.

    David: I have it, you are right. Yeah

    Greg: It's, it's just not in there. Umm, and then it also puts all thee responsibility on the business owner and not the, the behavior, not the person exhibiting the behavior. So senate bill 19 did pass thee um. Senate committee of the... The 2 district committee it was report off to the committee, we are waiting for a co-sponsor in the house, there was a rumor they had found one, then not's, I think not. Umm... I don't know if it will pass or not but it doesn't fully address the intoxicated driver. And so we pointed it out to them, or they pointed out to them that, since Michigan medical marijuana act passed. There's been no great increase in uh. Drugged driving stuff. We need to put the responsibility on people not on businesses. There is ways of regulating you're just driving it underground. We want to regulate it, also um...

    David: So you would say he has a good goal in mind, maybe not ..

    Greg: Good, maybe his goals are, you know, public safety, but he comes at it with an anti-marijuana bias. I come in at it with a pro marijuana bias. If I was going to write it he might not like what I came up with. And also the senate bill 19 discourages responsible parenting because a lot of people are saying well I want a place where I can go consume my medicine, not in front of my children, and now this forces me home again.

    David: That is interesting

    Greg: So, so he also has another bill, umm. This is talking about a losing battle, but I am going to fight it anyway, but umm. Umm, That outlaws this k-12, the fake marijuana. Umm. Umm. And so it was outlawed here in Michigan, and first of all fake marijuana has been around for 30 to 40 years. I mean I interpret it as...there was a high times magazine in the 70's you could get that stuff from.

    David: Right

    Greg: All right, it has been around forever, so he wants to make this illegal, this k-12 or k-2 or whatever it is. You know the worst road you come down the pike, whatever, something. Anyway the point is..

    David: Illegal for everyone, the patient or otherwise?

    Greg: Yeah. He just wants to outlaw it, right.

    David: Right.

    Greg: The thing is this is the equivalent of bathtub Gin. I have never in my life have I ever talked to anybody that said, "man I want to get me some of that fake marijuana. I want to, I just got to get me some of that fake marijuana, can you get me some fake marijuana". No they want the real thing.

    David: Right.

    Greg: But they can't get the real thing, so people are then forced to take inferior substitutes and that's what this k-12 is. The same thing happened with the alcohol prohibition people couldn't get alcohol, so suddenly all these idiots, started making stills out of car radiators, so you get lead poisoning so they are putting anti-freeze in it. OK. They are putting, spiking it with methyl alcohol which is wood alcohol.

    David: Right.

    Greg: or Isopropyl alcohol. And so people are going blind..

    David: They were drinking that?

    Greg: They were destroying their stomachs. Umm... Severe muscle seizures. All these horrible things all from drinking bathtub Gin. You don't hear about bathtub Gin because people can get real alcohol. The bathtub Gin went away, so the same thing. Legalize, control, regulate, marijuana we won't have any problem with fake marijuana. It will just go away. Let the market deal with it. Isn't that what the republicans say: Let the market deal with it.

    David: Yeah.

    Greg: And I am not a big, you know... So...

    David: So, for the record you are pro regulation?

    Greg: Absolutely.

    David: You think it is valid? Now that we have this law passed it's important that we know where ...

    Greg I think it is important. I drive on the roads like everybody else . Umm.. You know I want to live in an orderly society.

    David: Sure.

    Greg: I mean as I said that is how I got into this in the beginning, Uhh. Is I am just an ordinary law abiding citizen. I want to look normal to the society and I was offended by this policy. Yeah regulation is absolutely the way to go. Umm.. I think it would do away with a lot of problems. And you know like alcohol we would still problems, it won't make everything go away, but it would vastly diminish them. And make them much more manageable.

    David: Right.

    Greg: So But that's ok, you know... Umm...

    David: Something I thought was strange was the Michigan Medical Marijuana act, they used an H instead if a J?

    Greg: Right.

    David: Do you think there is any significance?

    Greg: Yeah. at the end of the alcohol prohibition, umm. They had all these unemployed G men sitting around. Now what are we going to do we have to put them to work, it's a depression. We can't just lay these guys off you know. So Harry Anslinger who was the head of the department of narcotics and stuff. He said "well hey you know there's this horrible drug out there, you know marijuana, and we really have to put all our forces on that. It's being used by Mexicans and being used by black jazz singers, and their using it to corrupt the morals of women and white women specifically, and it will cause black men to become so enflamed, or whatever, um, that they will actually step on a white mans shadow". And that was testimony that was given before the U.S. house representatives, that marijuana would so enfold a black man that they would so dare to step on a shadow of a white man.

    David: (laugh)

    Greg: You know, ahh.. Yeah.. Just crazy stuff, and then the one problem that he had with this, selling this boogey man drug is that everybody knew what cannabis was. Cannabis was common, umm.. Most farms grew a little patch of it out in the garden.

    David: Sure.

    Greg: It was used for clothing, Sears and Roebuck sold all kinds of cannabis preparation goods, one for teething babies, umm.. Between the years of 1850-1900 cannabis was even number one number two or number three in the most common ingredient in the patent medicines of the time. They were all opium, alcohol and cannabis. Albright from the 1850's to 1900's, it was very well known. So he had to come up with another name than cannabis, so he said marijuana. Nobody ever heard of marijuana. Nobody knew what the hell it was, you know. So it was scary, it was like oh my God, so he sold this horrible drug, marijuana. Well he spelled it the way it sounded, with an H. Right? So it is actually a, a, a slang term, it means Mary Jane, that's where the J is "MARYWANNA" ok?

    David: Yeah.

    Greg: And that's where it comes from. It was just a boogie man name. They came up with.

    David: Huh.

    Greg: So that's why the H is and later it was the correct name of the J. Spelled correctly.

    David: Interesting.

    Greg: A lot of people were paranoid, in our community, by convince it's all a ploy, to get us all to register. And then they are going to say, nope, nope, the spelling is wrong we are going to put you all into prison.

    David: (Laugh) So I've got one more question.

    Greg: That's fine.

    David: So some people talk about this as, just as in an attempt to get drugs to people who are using it for recreational purposes.

    Greg: Sure.

    David: Have you ever met people, with phony Medical Marijuana cards...

    Greg: Well of course you know, I mean is this a stalking horse for full legalization, of course it is. You know, we do want to get, we are sincere, we want to get the sick and dyeing off the battlefield. I mean there are the legitimately sick people, and lets get them aside and then we can deal with this. Of course this is about general use and legalization now. Are there some people who are scamming, it's my firm belief that all use is for medicinal. If it helps people to relax, to enjoy, that's medicinal, that's the very definition of medicinal. There are the certain number of people that it becomes problematic, that their use becomes compulsive, um, on the actual physical addiction scale it rates with chocolate and coffee which are both..

    David: Really?

    Greg: Yeah you can get addicted to that and the withdrawal, the physical withdrawal symptoms are irritability, and restlessness, and a couple days, a couple nights of difficult sleep, but you know, I mean they are real but not overwhelming. Ok. Anyway, umm.. But all use is medicinal you know. And even those people who use, the use has become problematic or umm.. Compulsive there is still, there is an underlying, something they are trying to treat, and so, and those people do need something, some sort of assistance. Umm...

    David: Maybe Psychiatric help or...

    Greg: Well Yeah, some kind of, deal with that underlying issue that is going on, that's needing that compulsive use.

    David: Sure.

    Greg: Umm. I am not in favor of abuse of marijuana. I am not in favor of driving under the influence, I have to drive on these roads too. I'd much rather share the road with a stoned driver than a drunk driver. But I want both of them to stay home.

    Dave: Certainly...well, thanks so much for coming to talk to me

    Greg: Yeah

    Home
    Agriculture
    Policy Briefs
    Current Issues
    National Context
    Interviews
    Blog
    Most Popular Posts
    Timeline
    Commerce & Regulation
    Policy Briefs
    Current Issues
    National Context
    Interviews
    Blog
    Most Popular Posts
    Timeline
    Criminal Justice
    Policy Briefs
    Current Issues
    National Context
    Interviews
    Blog
    Most Popular Posts
    In The Courts
    Timeline
    Employment
    Policy Briefs
    Current Issues
    National Context
    Interviews
    Blog
    Most Popular Posts
    Timeline
    Great Lakes & Recreation
    Policy Briefs
    Current Issues
    National Context
    Interviews
    Blog
    Most Popular Posts
    Timeline
    Energy and Environment
    Policy Briefs
    Current Issues
    National Context
    Interviews
    Blog
    Most Popular Posts
    Timeline
    Health Care
    Policy Briefs
    Current Issues
    National Context
    Interviews
    Blog
    Most Popular Posts
    Timeline
    K-12 Education
    Policy Briefs
    Current Issues
    National Context
    Interviews
    Blog
    Most Popular Posts
    Timeline
    Morality and Family
    Policy Briefs
    Current Issues
    National Context
    Interviews
    Blog
    Most Popular Posts
    Timeline
    Political Reform
    Policy Briefs
    Current Issues
    National Context
    Interviews
    Blog
    Most Popular Posts
    Timeline
    Social Services & Seniors
    Policy Briefs
    Current Issues
    National Context
    Interviews
    Blog
    Most Popular Posts
    Timeline
    State Budget
    Policy Briefs
    Current Issues
    National Context
    Interviews
    Blog
    Most Popular Posts
    Timeline
    Taxes
    Policy Briefs
    Current Issues
    National Context
    Interviews
    Blog
    Most Popular Posts
    Timeline
    Transportation
    Policy Briefs
    Current Issues
    National Context
    Interviews
    Blog
    Most Popular Posts
    Timeline
    Urban Affairs
    Policy Briefs
    Current Issues
    National Context
    Interviews
    Blog
    Most Popular Posts
    Timeline

    About Us

    The Michigan Policy Network is a student-led public education and research program to report and organize news and information about the political process surrounding Michigan state policy issues. It is run out of the Department of Political Science at Michigan State University, with participation by students from the College of Social Science, the College of Communication, and James Madison College. 

    Read more about us...

    Sponsors

    Michigan State University    Department of Political Science 
     College of Communication Arts & Sciences    James Madison College
     College of Social Science    University Outreach and Engagement

     

    The thoughts, opinions, and positions represented herein are solely those of the participating students and in no way represent an official position or policy recommendation of Michigan State University.

    Our sponsors...

    Meet your Policy Fellow: Leah Brynaert

    Leah Brynaert is Health Care Fellow & Correspondent for the Michigan Policy Network. She is a first-year student in Lyman Briggs College at MSU.