Expanded section
←Older revision
Revision as of 22:56, 13 November 2013
(4 intermediate revisions by one user not shown)
Line 4:
Line 4:
==Controversies==
==Controversies==
−
−
===Support of Privatized Prisons===
===Involvement in Michigan's 2012 "Right-to-Work" Bill===
===Involvement in Michigan's 2012 "Right-to-Work" Bill===
Line 18:
Line 16:
In 2005, the Center published a paper arguing an emergency financial manager with extremely broad powers should take control of the finances of Detroit, long plagued by budgetary problems. The Center advocated four major policy changes. The policies advocated by the Center included that the manager should "replace and take on the powers of the governing body", have the power to alter the charter of a municipality or district, and be immune from litigation. Binding arbitration for union contracts after failed re-negotiation would also be abolished, allowing the manager the power to opt out of the use of union labor at the end of a union's contract <ref>Mackinac Center for Public Policy, [http://www.mackinac.org/7451], Mackinac Center for Public Policy website, accessed September 28 2011.</ref>. All four of these changes were proposed in controversial legislation introduced by newly elected governor Rick Snyder in 2011.
In 2005, the Center published a paper arguing an emergency financial manager with extremely broad powers should take control of the finances of Detroit, long plagued by budgetary problems. The Center advocated four major policy changes. The policies advocated by the Center included that the manager should "replace and take on the powers of the governing body", have the power to alter the charter of a municipality or district, and be immune from litigation. Binding arbitration for union contracts after failed re-negotiation would also be abolished, allowing the manager the power to opt out of the use of union labor at the end of a union's contract <ref>Mackinac Center for Public Policy, [http://www.mackinac.org/7451], Mackinac Center for Public Policy website, accessed September 28 2011.</ref>. All four of these changes were proposed in controversial legislation introduced by newly elected governor Rick Snyder in 2011.
−
==Emergency Manager Laws===
+
=
==Emergency Manager Laws===
===Opposition to Environmental Protections===
===Opposition to Environmental Protections===
+
According to Progresse Michigan, Mackinac has received generous funding from the Charles G. Koch Foundation in support of efforts to oppose environmental protection policies. The foundation gave $79,151 between 2005 and 2009. During this period of time, Mackinac and Jack McHugh released reports supporting the "No-More-Stringent" law in Michigan, which prohibited the Department of Environmental Quality from adopting any regulation more stringent than the federal government. Opposition to environmental regulation would be beneficial to Koch Industries various interests and the corporation is a known repeat offender of EPA regulations.<ref>Kathleen Story, [http://www.examiner.com/article/billionaire-koch-brothers-oppose-environmental-regulation Billionaire Koch brothers oppose environmental regulation], ''examiner.com'', Jan 2, 2013</ref>
===Climate Change Denial and Opposition to Renewable Energy===
===Climate Change Denial and Opposition to Renewable Energy===
Line 26:
Line 25:
Mackinac has also called research on anthropogenic global warming a "pseudoscience," citing well-known [[climate change deniers]] [[Patrick J. Michaels]] and [[Robert C. Balling]] as evidence that the science behind global warming is falsified.<ref>Daniel Hager, Mackinac Center for Public Policy, [http://www.mackinac.org/12195 Climate Distortion 101], organizational publication, February 25, 2010.</ref> Mackinac has also advocated that Michigan lower its [[renewable portfolio standards]] (RPS) requirements to zero, citing [[Solyndra]] as an example of the unreliability of renewable energy. The Michigan RPS is 10 percent by 2015.<ref>Daniel Hager, Mackinac Center for Public Policy, [http://www.mackinac.org/15689 Michigan Should Lower its Renewable Portfolio Standard Requirements to Zero], organizational publication, September 9, 2011.</ref> On wind power, Mackinac's senior environmental policy analyst [[Russ Harding]] has stated, "It is a given that households will pay for wind power through higher energy bills," and "Michigan legislators should repeal the renewable energy standard."<ref>Russ Harding, Mackinac Center for Public Policy, [http://www.mackinac.org/15655 Townships Blow Off Residents Over Wind Farms], organizational publication, September 1, 2011.</ref>
Mackinac has also called research on anthropogenic global warming a "pseudoscience," citing well-known [[climate change deniers]] [[Patrick J. Michaels]] and [[Robert C. Balling]] as evidence that the science behind global warming is falsified.<ref>Daniel Hager, Mackinac Center for Public Policy, [http://www.mackinac.org/12195 Climate Distortion 101], organizational publication, February 25, 2010.</ref> Mackinac has also advocated that Michigan lower its [[renewable portfolio standards]] (RPS) requirements to zero, citing [[Solyndra]] as an example of the unreliability of renewable energy. The Michigan RPS is 10 percent by 2015.<ref>Daniel Hager, Mackinac Center for Public Policy, [http://www.mackinac.org/15689 Michigan Should Lower its Renewable Portfolio Standard Requirements to Zero], organizational publication, September 9, 2011.</ref> On wind power, Mackinac's senior environmental policy analyst [[Russ Harding]] has stated, "It is a given that households will pay for wind power through higher energy bills," and "Michigan legislators should repeal the renewable energy standard."<ref>Russ Harding, Mackinac Center for Public Policy, [http://www.mackinac.org/15655 Townships Blow Off Residents Over Wind Farms], organizational publication, September 1, 2011.</ref>
−
===Privatizing Education===
+
===Support of Privatization===
+
====Privatizing Prisons====
+
Mackinac has been an ardent supporter of privatization of the correctional systems. According to Progress Michigan, the organization has released a series reports advocating privatization for the state with extensive "evidence" showing how the move towards private prisons would improve the finical state of Michigan. These various reports state that privatization would alleviate problems such as overcrowding and improve overall quality of prisons. The reports fail to mention any possible downsides and work to push an agenda for funders who support private prisons.<ref>Lawrence W. Reed and John R. LaPlante, [http://www.mackinac.org/5022 Lock in Savings with Prison Privatization], Mackinac Center for Public Policy organizational report, Feb. 11, 2003</ref><ref>Michael D. LaFaive, [http://www.mackinac.org/546 Private Prisons Succeed], Mackinac Center for Public Policy organizational report, Sept. 1, 1996</ref>
+
+
=
===Privatizing Education
=
===
The Center has focused a great deal of its scholarly efforts on advancing school choice programs in Michigan, drawing great criticism for attacking teachers unions and public schools in the process. A 2002 study authored by three professors in the educational field, two from Columbia and another from Arizona State University, reviewed the Center's previous 11 years of work on education policy and found that "evidence presented in Mackinac Center studies is often weak and at times misleading." Continuing, they added that "it is hoped that this report has been helpful in revealing the shortcomings and the possible dangers inherent on basing public policy on the research of the Mackinac Center," and that the Center "is devoted to privatizing state institutions and to deregulating public education."<ref>Cookson, Molnar, Embree.[http://www.greatlakescenter.org/docs/mccp_full_buyer.pdf]Great Lakes Center for Education Research & Practice report. ''Let the Buyer Beware: An Analysis of Social Science Value and Methodological Quality of Educational Studies Published by the Mackinac Center for Public Policy'' (1990-2001). September 28, 2011.</ref>
The Center has focused a great deal of its scholarly efforts on advancing school choice programs in Michigan, drawing great criticism for attacking teachers unions and public schools in the process. A 2002 study authored by three professors in the educational field, two from Columbia and another from Arizona State University, reviewed the Center's previous 11 years of work on education policy and found that "evidence presented in Mackinac Center studies is often weak and at times misleading." Continuing, they added that "it is hoped that this report has been helpful in revealing the shortcomings and the possible dangers inherent on basing public policy on the research of the Mackinac Center," and that the Center "is devoted to privatizing state institutions and to deregulating public education."<ref>Cookson, Molnar, Embree.[http://www.greatlakescenter.org/docs/mccp_full_buyer.pdf]Great Lakes Center for Education Research & Practice report. ''Let the Buyer Beware: An Analysis of Social Science Value and Methodological Quality of Educational Studies Published by the Mackinac Center for Public Policy'' (1990-2001). September 28, 2011.</ref>