In their words: Michigan governor candidates on key environmental issues

How Michigan gubernatorial candidates say they’d address top environmental issues, data centers and more
Republican John James and Democrat Jocelyn Benson both responded to Bridge questions
Candidates were asked to limit their responses to 300 words

Editor’s note: This story was updated on Aug. 19, 2026, to focus on candidates who won their primary elections.

Bridge readers say Michigan’s environment is one of the most pressing issues facing the state this election year.

So we asked related questions to the major party candidates, including both who qualified for the general election ballot:

Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, a Democrat
US Rep. John James, a Republican

Here’s what they had to say, in full:

Data centers

The question: In 2024, Michigan lawmakers passed tax breaks that prompted a wave of data center proposals in Michigan. That, in turn, has sparked debate about whether the industry’s promised economic benefits are worth its impacts on land, water and the electrical grid. How would you approach the data center industry? Would you change anything about state policies governing the industry?

Benson (D): I want to be crystal clear: If any data center wants to come to Michigan, they will have to do right by Michiganders. We should always welcome innovation and jobs to our state, but we must do so in a transparent way without allowing companies to harm our environment, abuse our water or drive up energy costs. When it comes to data centers, Michigan must enact clear, strict, enforceable guardrails to ensure they only move forward if they transparently commit to delivering well-paying union jobs without harming residents through higher utility bills or excessive water use.

Related:

Data centers must help power Michigan’s clean energy future with new investment that strengthens the grid, supports affordable energy, and ensures families and small businesses aren’t burdened with rising costs. My plan includes several major elements:

Public hearings to ensure projects do not go through without residents having the opportunity to share their concerns.
Transparency and disclosure reporting to ensure no backdoor deals that exclude communities.
Requiring developers to prove prior to construction that the data center will not abuse natural resources – from water to land – and it will not drive up energy costs for Michiganders.
Data centers bear the cost of additional energy usage. Not the consumer.
Union contracts that ensure the creation of well-paying jobs.

James (R): Michigan should welcome growth, investment and innovation, but we should not hand out blank checks or ignore the real impacts major developments can have on land, water, energy and local communities.

Data centers may create economic opportunity, but they also place significant demands on the electrical grid, water resources and local infrastructure. The question is not whether Michigan should be open for business, we absolutely should be. The question is whether state policy protects taxpayers, ratepayers, landowners, farmers and local communities when these projects are proposed and implemented.

Any state incentive for a data center should be tied to measurable public benefit: real job creation, long-term capital investment, responsibility for infrastructure and transparency about water and energy use. Data centers should be encouraged to use recycled wastewater or non-potable water sources for cooling instead of drawing from drinking water supplies. Michigan’s freshwater resources are one of our greatest advantages and must be managed responsibly.

Private companies must contribute to the roads, water systems, wastewater capacity and grid upgrades they require. Those costs will not be passed on to taxpayers or ratepayers. We should also prioritize brownfields and blighted areas for data center locations instead of green farmland and residential neighborhoods.

Any public support must come with enforceable benchmarks and full transparency for affected communities. Non-disclosure agreements will not be acceptable. Communities should not be treated as an afterthought when large developments affect their land, water and quality of life, regardless of promised economic benefits.

Very simply, if you want to build a data center in Michigan with any public support or use of public resources, you will have to prove it will not harm ratepayers or our environment and you will have to prove it in public.

Dams

The question: In the span of five years, Michigan has endured repeated failure crises at aging, undersized and often privately-owned dams whose owners failed to address longstanding safety concerns. These events have endangered the public and cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars. What steps, if any, would you take to reduce the risks posed by dangerous dams? And what is your position on Consumers Energy’s proposal to sell its 13 dams to a private company?

Benson (D): Michigan’s repeated dam failures put families at risk and devastate local economies. They are a reflection of a broken system rooted in aging infrastructure, unaccountable bad actors and a reactive rather than proactive approach to maintenance, leaving taxpayers to cover cleanup costs. As governor, I’ll prioritize public safety by strengthening dam inspections, improving oversight and enforcement and ensuring owners are held accountable for long-term maintenance and repairs before disasters happen. And because preventive maintenance is cheaper than disaster recovery, we’ll also create a dedicated dam safety and resilience fund to enable us to proactively prevent costly failures before they harm our communities.

Any proposal involving the ownership or operation of dams, including Consumers Energy’s proposal to sell its dams to a private company, must include strong safeguards, full transparency and enforceable accountability standards to ensure public safety and environmental protections are always prioritized. We also need regulations to protect the land around dams and rigorous safeguards so taxpayers don’t end up with all the liability if the private owners go under or the dams fail.

James (R): Michigan’s recent dam failures are a failure of accountability. When aging infrastructure is ignored, owners defer maintenance and the government reacts only after disaster strikes, taxpayers and communities pay the price.

As Governor, I will require a comprehensive review of high-risk dams across the state, especially those that are aging, privately owned, undersized, or already known to have safety concerns. Dam owners must be held responsible for maintenance and safety. They should not be allowed to ignore problems for years and then leave families, farmers, businesses and taxpayers vulnerable to the consequences.

Dam policy should be based on engineering, public safety, local input and peer-reviewed science, not political ideology. Some dams may need removal. Some may need repair. Some serve important functions including recreation, flood control, water level regulation, drainage and aquifer recharge. A one-size-fits-all approach will be detrimental to our water systems.

Flood mitigation must also be addressed through broader infrastructure investment. In Congress, I secured $40 million in federal funding for flood mitigation projects, including the Chapaton pump station in St. Clair Shores.

Reinforcing our dams is especially important for agriculture and rural communities. Michigan Farm Bureau policy recognizes that dams located on drains and waterways play a role in aquifer recharge and should not be removed without considering the consequences on water tables and agricultural water availability. It also opposes allowing existing dam owners to avoid maintaining them. I agree with both principles: protect public safety and protect responsible water management.

Regarding Consumers Energy’s proposal to sell its 13 dams to a private company, I will not rubber-stamp the deal. Any buyer must prove it has the financial capacity, technical expertise and long-term maintenance plan to operate those dams safely. Michigan communities deserve enforceable guarantees, not vague promises.

Energy

The question: Michigan in 2023 passed a suite of legislation aiming to hasten the state’s energy transition, most notably a requirement for regulated utilities to achieve 100% clean energy by 2040 and a law that allows the state to approve large wind and solar arrays over local objections. How is the system working and would you push to change anything about it?

Benson (D): I’m really proud of the work that led to Michigan leading many other states in setting clear standards and goals that make our state ahead of the curve in advancing towards a more affordable, reliable and clean energy future. This is the right direction for Michigan. It positions our state to lead in clean energy manufacturing and innovation while reducing pollution, protecting our water and health and driving down energy bills.

The Clean Energy and Jobs Act starts at the local level and incentivizes municipal leaders and property owners to reach consensus. It also streamlines the permitting process to prevent local bureaucrats from overriding individual property rights.

As governor, I’ll make sure local leaders have a seat at the table when it comes to projects in their own communities and that we work together with labor, policy experts and business to do this right. If done right, this law puts Michigan in a position to lead the nation: expanding clean energy, strengthening grid reliability and lowering costs for families at the same time. My job as governor will be to make sure those promises are fully delivered in practice, not just on paper.

James (R): As governor, my first priority will be repealing the Whitmer “green energy” mandates. Our state’s current energy policy has been designed to benefit the powerful political elite while eroding public confidence, increasing burdens on ratepayers and undermining reliability.

Whitmer’s destructive mandates have driven up the cost of living and doing business in Michigan. She has chosen communism over common sense. Even New York’s Democrat governor is now renouncing her support for these mandates in her state, but Whitmer stays on the path to ruin for Michigan.

Michigan needs an energy policy that is affordable, reliable and grounded in common sense. My record in Congress reflects my approach. I led the fight against the Biden administration’s tailpipe emissions rule. I supported overturning the Advanced Clean Trucks rule because Michigan should not be forced into unrealistic mandates that raise costs, weaken supply chains and limit consumer and business choice. I also opposed policies that damage Michigan’s trucking, manufacturing and agricultural supply chains.

As Governor, I will pursue an all-of-the-above energy strategy. That includes natural gas, nuclear, hydro, renewables where they make economic sense, biofuels and emerging technologies. I support expansion of refining capacity for biofuel production and sustainable aviation fuel because Michigan corn, soy and forestry products can create new markets for farmers while strengthening American energy independence.

I will restore meaningful local control over large-scale wind and solar siting by repealing PA 233 of 2023. Productive farmland is finite. Once it is covered by industrial solar or locked into long-term energy leases, it can be taken out of food production for a generation.

I will also replace each of the current members of the Michigan Public Service Commission, who have demonstrated they are far more interested in pursuing an extremist ideological agenda and rubber-stamping rate increases for big utility monopolies than protecting ratepayers.

My goal as Governor is to make Michigan the state with the most affordable and reliable energy and to make our state an energy exporter.

Climate change

The question: Leading scientists warn that humanity’s reliance on fossil fuel energy is dangerously warming the globe. In Michigan, effects range from shorter winters and more intense periods of storm and drought to worsening wildfire smoke, disappearing boreal forests and shrinking fish. What, if anything, would you do to mitigate the causes of climate change or help Michigan weather its impacts?

Benson (D): From farmers contending with increasingly unpredictable growing seasons to coastal homeowners dealing with shoreline flooding and erosion, Michiganders are grappling with a changing climate in real time. We’re seeing our Michigan ‘way of life’ be whittled away when snowmobilers can only operate in a short set of months, anglers don’t know if they can eat the fish they catch and families can’t enjoy our beaches. Finding solutions is both an imperative and an economic opportunity, which is why I believe Michigan should lead the nation in clean energy manufacturing, innovation and climate resilience.

As governor, I’ll commit to growing clean energy jobs that will protect our water, modernize our infrastructure, expand public transit and reduce pollution. I’ll also take steps to unleash Michigan-made energy and make sure the benefits of the clean energy transition are available to everyone.

These investments will also lower energy costs across the board for Michiganders and prepare our workforce to compete in the economy of the future. Together we can keep the lights on, lower bills,and create well-paying union jobs while protecting our environment.

James (R): Michigan should take changing weather patterns seriously. Farmers already see the effects of intense storms, drought, flooding, shifting growing seasons and unpredictable conditions. But the answer is not to punish the people who feed us, employ our communities and steward our land.

My approach to climate policy will be based on resilience, innovation and peer-reviewed science. We should focus on what actually works, not what makes politicians feel good.

Michigan needs stronger infrastructure. That means better stormwater systems, drainage, roads, bridges, water infrastructure, forest management and emergency preparedness. Over half of Michigan’s farmland depends on drainage to produce food, feed and fiber. Maintaining those systems is not just an agricultural issue. It is a climate resilience issue. In Congress, I secured $40 million for flood mitigation, sewer and stormwater projects in southeast Michigan.

We should reduce emissions through innovation rather than mandates. Michigan can lead in advanced manufacturing, nuclear energy, biofuels, sustainable aviation fuel, precision agriculture, water recycling and cleaner industrial technology. These are practical solutions that create jobs rather than driving them out of state.

We should also strengthen voluntary, incentive-based conservation programs. MAEAP and GAAMPs work because they treat farmers as partners, not suspects. Farmers live on the land, drink the water and want to pass their farms to the next generation. No one has a stronger incentive to protect soil and water.

Michigan also needs to improve our wildfire-fighting capability. That begins with a prevention strategy for Michigan forests and must include a partnership with Canada to address theirs.

Such a partnership can reduce costs and protect Michigan summers from wildfire smoke. I reject the false choice between environmental protection and economic strength. Michigan can prepare for climate impacts, protect natural resources and remain affordable and competitive. But we have to follow science, not emotion and results, not ideology.

Great Lakes

The question: Gone are the days when industry openly dumped toxic waste into the Great Lakes. But challenges remain, from invasive mussels that have tanked fish populations to algae blooms fueled by farm runoff and the unsettled debate about the Line 5 pipeline. What do you see as the biggest threats to the Great Lakes and how would you seek to address them?

Benson (D): The future of Michigan’s economy and our quality of life are inseparable from the future of our Great Lakes. From anglers in Monroe watching Lake Erie turn green with worsening algae blooms, to parents on Lake Michigan beaches concerned about E. coli contamination, to Northern Michiganders anxious about the threat of an oil spill beneath the Straits of Mackinac, these threats impact all of us.

In addition to the impact of climate change, some of the biggest threats to our Great Lakes link back to unaccountable bad actors and outdated infrastructure. Whether it’s the possibility of an oil spill due to the aging Line 5, toxic runoff, sewage overflows and contamination, unchecked sulfide mining, invasive species, or chemicals that threaten our health and our children’s future, state government must create enforceable guardrails including expanded safety reviews, inspection requirements and enforceable contingency planning of any company whose work impacts the Great Lakes.

Upgrading this aging infrastructure while collaborating with our neighboring states is critical. I’ll hold polluters accountable, modernize our pipes and water infrastructure and take action to stop the toxic runoff and contamination that threatens our health, tourism economy and natural resources. I’ll build on the partnerships embedded in the Great Lakes Compact to work with neighboring states and Canada.

James (R): I don’t just talk about protecting the Great Lakes, I’ve already delivered on protecting them for the communities that depend on them. In Congress, I secured $22.4 million for a new Soo Lock in Sault Ste. Marie, $2 million for the Macomb Combined Sewer Overflow Elimination Project, $4 million for the Clinton Township Pilot Sanitary Sewer Lead Program, $1.75 million for Sewer Separation of the St. Clair Shores Martin Drain and $500,000 for the Clinton River Disposal Facility. That’s real money for real infrastructure, and it’s what separates talk from results.

The Great Lakes are central to Michigan’s identity, economy, agriculture and way of life. The biggest threats are invasive species, harmful algal blooms, aging water infrastructure and mismanaged energy policy. On invasive species, I’ll work aggressively with federal agencies, neighboring states, anglers and local communities to stop the spread before it starts. On algal blooms, farmers shouldn’t be scapegoated. Municipal stormwater, wastewater and urban runoff are equal contributors. I’ll support unbiased studies before imposing new regulations and strengthen incentive-based programs like MAEAP.

On infrastructure, Flint showed us what government failure costs. The water main breaks across Oakland and Macomb Counties are a warning we cannot ignore. Local governments must own their responsibility and the state should offer low-interest loans to expedite critical upgrades.

On Line 5, I led the letter to the Army Corps of Engineers supporting the Great Lakes Tunnel as a safer path forward. As Governor, I will end the Whitmer-Nessel litigation and stop using energy providers as political targets.

I am firmly opposed to Great Lakes water diversion and oil drilling in the Lakes. Full stop. I also remain opposed to diversion of Great Lakes water to other regions of the country and opposed to oil drilling in the Great Lakes.

Conservation and Recreation

The question: The Michigan Department of Natural Resources uses fees from park visitors, hunters and anglers to manage wildlife conservation and recreation, but stagnant revenue and inflation are straining budgets, sparking fears of hatchery closures, campground shutdowns and other cuts. Would you support any fee increases? If so, explain. If not, how do you think the state should pay for managing public lands and wildlife?

Benson (D): As the CEO of one of our state’s largest agencies, I have seen firsthand how to cut waste, fraud and abuse while modernizing operations to save money and enable us to do more with less. That’s exactly how I was able to transform our Department of State into the most efficient department of motor vehicles in the country – from eliminating long wait times at our branch offices to installing self-service stations in grocery stores and moving more services online. In doing so we’ve been able to save Michiganders time, save them money and make their lives easier.

For DNR specifically, we’ll develop a strategic plan in my first 100 days that will modernize the department’s structure and revenue sources to ensure resources are being used as efficiently as possible. We’ll prioritize driving down costs for Michiganders while developing innovative ways to identify new sources of revenue to ensure we are investing in our parks.

James (R): Stewardship of Michigan’s natural resources will be a top priority for my administration. As an avid sportsman, I firmly believe that Michigan’s public lands, parks, forests, fisheries and wildlife are part of what makes this state exceptional. They support tourism, outdoor recreation, local economies and quality of life across the state. But like every area of government, these resources must be managed responsibly and transparently.

I will not support automatic fee increases without first requiring a serious review of how current dollars are being spent. The government should not ask hunters, anglers, campers and outdoor families to pay more until it can show that existing revenue is being used efficiently.

I will explore other funding options, including federal conservation dollars, public-private partnerships for management of DNR assets and services, sportsmen’s organizations, volunteer groups, local partnerships and where appropriate, revenue from responsible forest management. I will also increase funding for Pure Michigan with the goal of bringing more tourism revenue from out of state to support our parks and recreation assets.

I want more families to have access to recreation in Michigan and to maximize our state’s economic benefits from tourism. That starts with enforcing the law on keeping schools out of session between Memorial Day and Labor Day.

Natural resource decisions should include people who actually know and use the land: hunters, anglers, farmers, foresters, conservation districts, local governments and outdoor recreation businesses. As Governor, I will rely on advice and expertise from these constituencies on issues like water use, land use, regulatory reform, trade and natural resources.

The goal should be simple: protect Michigan’s resources, keep them accessible and manage them with accountability. Conservation should be based on stewardship, science and local knowledge, not bureaucracy for its own sake.