LANSING, Mich. (WZMQ) – Michigan’s 1st congressional district covers the entire Upper Peninsula and most of northern Michigan, making it one of the largest U.S. House districts east of the Mississippi River. Republican Jack Bergman, who has held the seat since 2017, is seeking another term. Justin Michal, a Grayling native and Army veteran, is challenging Bergman in the Republican primary. Michigan’s primary is August 4, with early in-person voting beginning this weekend.
Q: Tell me a little about yourself: where you’re from and what made you decide to run for office.
For those who don’t know me, I’m Justin Michal. I’m running for Michigan’s 1st congressional district, U.S. House of Representatives, as a Republican, challenging incumbent Jack Bergman in the Republican primary on August 4th. I’m from Grayling, Michigan, and very proud of that. My mom and I both graduated from Grayling High School, so that’s something near and dear to her heart and means a lot to me as well. Being from the district, some opportunities weren’t there for me to grow up with, so when I graduated high school I left the district and joined the United States Army. I deployed overseas for 14 and a half months. After that I got into academia, I was fortunate enough to earn an MBA, and I’m finishing my Ph.D. in conflict analysis and resolution, which I think would be beneficial to anyone seeking office and trying to represent people, especially with how dysfunctional Congress currently is. I ran because I felt people weren’t being heard, my voice wasn’t being heard, and I waited for people around me to step up and make an impact, and when they didn’t, I decided to jump in and make it happen myself. So here we are, 517 consecutive days on the campaign trail.
Q: This seat has been held by Jack Bergman for five terms now. What’s your message to voters about why you’re the stronger choice in this primary?
I respect the congressman for his nearly 60 years of service to our country, but as with many things in life, the only thing constant is change, and I believe a new wave of Republican leadership needs to step up and take over. There’s no disrespect to him, but it’s time for change. We need someone actively present in our district, someone willing to show up in communities that often feel unheard, and be the voice for people who feel unrepresented. That’s what we’re trying to do, we’re out there every day having difficult conversations with people who are hurting or struggling. It’s not always about getting the softball questions; it’s about being able to answer the difficult questions in hopes of finding some resolve. There are bright, brilliant people in this district that I hope to work with to solve some of the significant issues we’re facing, not just in our district but in this country.
Q: How would you work with lawmakers across the aisle to bring resources and benefits home to Michigan?
I’m the only candidate in this race who has participated on both sides of the aisle. I went to 11 Democrat-controlled forums, where I spoke with Democrats and championed Republican values in rooms that weren’t necessarily friendly, and at the same time I welcomed everyone to the table. My first two meetings when I started this race were with the 1st Congressional District Republicans, then the 1st Congressional District Democrats. When I spoke to the Democrats, I told them I’m not here to earn your support, but I am here to welcome open dialogue, and you’ll always have a seat at the table. I don’t think either party has all the answers. This is a country and a district made up of Republicans, Democrats, and independents, and what we should be putting our efforts and attention into is what’s best for Americans. That doesn’t mean you have to be blue or red or white, you can get together, have discussions that matter, be respectful, and work together to resolve the issues we’re facing.
Q: Housing: What federal role do you see in addressing housing access and affordability in northern Michigan and the U.P.?
The cost of housing is tough, and I say this knowing it sometimes upsets people, but greed is driving a lot of the higher costs. We always want affordability when we’re buying, but not when we’re selling, especially if we own the asset, most people’s largest asset is their home or property. I often challenge people: what legislation would you want me to push in Congress? If I introduced a bill saying you can only sell your home for $100,000, no matter how many acres or whether it’s on the water, that would never get support, I’d be voted out of office, because people have more money invested than that. So greed is a factor: people want the best deal when buying, but they don’t want to give up any profit when selling, and that’s driven up home prices in some areas.
There are other contributing factors too, large conglomerates coming in and purchasing homes because they can afford to. That’s an issue. Michigan actually just passed a bill, sponsored by Karl Bohnak, that will limit the ability of large corporations to come in and purchase homes, which I think is a step in the right direction. But we also have to make housing affordable for people to buy, which starts with people having the money to do so. When median home prices are $300,000, $400,000, or $500,000 in parts of our district, it’s very difficult for first-time buyers to save enough for a down payment or meet the income threshold to qualify for a mortgage. We have a serious problem in our economy with wages, and we’re in a situation where we need to focus on creating employment that can sustain people’s ability to live, and right now we’re falling short of that. When it comes to legislation, I believe limited government is the best form of government, let the free market decide how this happens, but at the same time we need educated people who understand these thresholds to work on legislation, if we’re going to pass legislation, that makes sense for people actually trying to buy homes and live in the communities we have here in northern Michigan and the U.P.
Q: Healthcare: Given rural hospital and labor-and-delivery closures and rising costs, what’s your approach to healthcare at the federal level?
This is one of those hot-topic positions where I come from maybe a different perspective. When the Affordable Care Act passed, it didn’t incentivize medical facilities to reduce the cost of healthcare, if anything it increased it. When the federal government is on the hook to pay by law, it makes it less appealing for providers to lower their costs. We’ve seen closures and consolidations, and I think that will continue, especially with the federal government currently spending $1.7 trillion a year on this, soon to be $2 trillion, with about an 8% raise annually projected. That compounds over time. When you look at our job sector, most new jobs coming into the market are in healthcare, because that’s where the money is, that, or defense contracting. When the government is spending that kind of money, there’s no incentive to lower the cost of healthcare, and we have to address that.
We’ve been waiting years for a better plan, and personally I don’t think either side has it, it’s like putting a Band-Aid on something that’s bleeding out profusely, and we need to fix it. I don’t think one party is going to have the answer. We have to come together and resolve it in a way that makes sense both for the corporations spending billions to build healthcare facilities and for the people who have to use the healthcare system. I’d love to tell you I have all the answers, but I don’t. What I can do is get the shareholders and stakeholders together and ask: what’s the plan, how is this going to work, how do we make it affordable? That’s going to require a lot of difficult conversations. There are a lot of people making money in this system who don’t want to relinquish that power, and wherever there’s power, there’s abuse of power, and we’re going to have to overcome that through open, transparent, honest dialogue. If people don’t want to engage in that, it’s going to keep getting worse before it gets better.
Q: Data centers: What role, if any, should the federal government play in regulating data center development?
When you go into communities and talk to them, some are for it and some are against it, and people ask what my legislative perspective is. I want to give communities the autonomy to make the choice for themselves. I’m not here to sell data centers to our communities by telling them these will bring high-paying jobs and they’re going to love it. What I hope to do is give them the information they need to make the best decision for them, and support them, whatever that decision is. I don’t want to be the influential voice in that decision, I want to be a support element. Leadership starts with giving people the autonomy to make their own decision, while helping guide them through the process. A lot of communities, especially in the U.P., aren’t prepared for data center development, they don’t understand the zoning or how predatory those companies can be, and they need to get up to speed quickly. Many can’t afford to fight, or can’t afford what’s required for a fair shot at negotiating when these companies come in to buy land and start building. We need to make sure our communities are informed and that we take care of them, and that’s something I can help with.
Q: Mining: What’s your stance on mining in the U.P., including the proposed project near the Porcupine Mountains?
If you’ve ever been to Ontonagon County, you’ll realize there isn’t much industry left there. People have a stigma about mining being terrible, but think about how many old mine shafts are already in that region, closed down, and you still see beautiful mountains, it’s not destroyed, and it doesn’t take away from what future generations can appreciate. I think that’s a bad stigma, based on a lot of bad information people get. Are there environmental impacts? Absolutely, there are. The process needs to be transparent, giving people the information to be objective about certain factors and decide for themselves whether something is good or not. When you don’t inform the public or hold transparent meetings, that’s when you start to get pushback.
Mining is really important economically, it’s one of the highest revenue sources in the world, alongside oil and other sectors. We have really valuable resources in the ground in the U.P. that can push and drive the economy in a great direction, something that’s been lacking for nearly 60 years. It’s something we need to focus on and something I would support, but the community has to stand behind it. I want to stand behind the people and their choices. A lot of times loud voices push falsehoods or negative perspectives that people latch onto because of the emotional pull, but facts need to drive the decision, and there are already plenty of regulations around mining. It would be very difficult for companies to move in and start destroying the Porcupine Mountains or that territory, the government is going to heavily regulate that, as it should. This isn’t just about mining, ecotourism is huge in the U.P. too. We need to support industry: if the mine opens in Ontonagon, that’s 700 jobs, and while I wouldn’t call them high-paying, they’re decent-paying jobs that could boost the economy in that county. We have to look at the long-term gain, and sometimes emotions get in the way of that, which is unfortunate.
Q: Defense: Would you support renewed investment in K.I. Sawyer Air Force Base, and how would you work with U.P. Republicans on a project like this?
Any time we can support our defenses in the United States, I think it should be a priority. It would obviously bring a lot of jobs and people back to the region, but when you bring more people, you’re still going to have a housing crisis, people are going to need places to live, so it’s a bit of a catch-22. If it makes financial sense at the federal level to do this without continuously kicking the can down the road with deficit spending, then it’s something I’d support, but we need to look at what we’re doing at the federal level and make sure we’re not perpetuating cycles that push the military-industrial complex further just to sustain jobs. Any support we can get for the U.P. to bring jobs here, absolutely, we should pursue that, but at what cost is one of the factors we need to look at. I’m not against it, I’m not for it, I need to see the numbers, see how it impacts things positively and negatively, and make sure that’s what the people want. If it’s supported by the people, let’s do it; if not, we move on.
Q: Energy: Where do you stand on keeping natural gas plants running versus expanding renewable energy in the U.P.?
Energy is a significant problem in the U.P. If some of the subsidies don’t get passed or go through, it’s going to significantly hinder our ability to afford power, I’ve heard estimates of costs rising up to three times, which would be devastating not only for residents but for businesses that operate on large amounts of power. There’s been a lot of pushback in communities on solar farms and wind farms, and I understand their concerns. You give them the autonomy to make those decisions, which is sometimes difficult as a Republican, because we believe if you own land you should be able to use it how you want. There’s an abundance of land in the U.P., since it’s very rural, so when you’re looking at renewable power from that land, it’s a difficult calculation. I question how effective solar panels are somewhere that has good weather for three months out of the year and then gets 350 inches of snow, like in Calumet, seasonal depression is a real thing up here, and the sun’s only out for a few hours before it gets dark again. So we have to figure out a power source that’s reliable, I don’t necessarily know if it’s renewable, but we need something reliable, and we have to look at regulations to make sure people get the energy they need, because the more energy that comes here, the more businesses will come here too. We really need to focus on power in the U.P., and I hope the legislation gets passed and put on the docket so we can continue to have, and expand, reliable power here.
Q: Give me your elevator pitch: what do you want Democrats, Republicans, and independents to know about you and your campaign?
I genuinely care about people. I’ve been out here on the campaign trail logging over 100,000 miles, working 18-hour days to earn people’s respect and their vote, and I want people to know that will continue consistently. I really care about this district and want us to prosper and have a good life, and that’s going to require a lot of time, effort, and energy, which is what I’ve been showing every day and want to continue to show.
Q: Is there anything we haven’t covered that you want to make sure is included?
One thing is, when you’re looking at voting for a candidate, do your research, take the time to understand the body of work they’ve put in. Are they showing up, or just telling you they’re going to show up? Are they impressed by their own mailers, flyers, and TV and radio commercials, or by a body of hard work? You get to decide. We’ve been doing things the same way over and over, expecting a different outcome, and that’s not happening, nothing’s changing. If you’re happy with the status quo, I’m not your candidate. But if you’re ready for change, and want someone to show up in your community and have the dialogue and discussion required to move us forward, I hope you’ll consider me.
You can read more about Justin Michal on his website: justinmichalforcongress.com
Michal is facing incumbent Congressman Jack Bergman and Matthew DenOtter in the Republican primary. Democrats on the ballot are Callie Barr, Kyle Blomquist, and Wayne Stiles.
WZMQ is working on collecting interviews with all primary candidates; the full voter guide is in progress.
