Michigan House panel creates stir by moving to crack down on foreign influence

Lansing — The Michigan House is poised to consider a multi-bill package meant to crack down on foreign influence in the state by setting up limits on property purchases, education programs and technology linked to countries such as China, Russia or North Korea.

The package of Republican-sponsored bills, six of which moved out of the House Government Operations Committee Wednesday, have raised concerns from civil liberties groups that certain nationalities would be targeted unfairly by the legislation. And some of the bills rely on help from federal agencies when it's not clear there is such support at the federal level. One bill would effectively halt future incentive-laden economic development deals with Chinese-owned firms.

State Rep. William Bruck, R-Erie, said the package would create state-level guardrails, reporting requirements, accountability measures and transparency mandates for various institutions and transactions involving foreign entities of concern. Efforts to crack down on foreign influence also are in motion at the federal level, Bruck acknowledged, but state-level policy also is needed.

On Wednesday, the second-term lawmaker pointed to incidents last year when five University of Michigan graduates from China were charged after being found with cameras at the military training facility, Camp Grayling, a non-citizen, Chinese student was charged on allegations that he voted in the November election.

"We as a state need to take and make foreign influence and our own security a priority here," Bruck said. "Regardless of what the feds do, we need to do and put guardrails in place for our own state.”

The American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan, while recognizing the importance of national security, expressed serious concern about the legislation's potential constitutional violations and the overall conflation of individuals with the actions of foreign governments.

"Singling out individuals based on the actions of a foreign government are not only unjust, but also risk exacerbating xenophobia and anti-immigrant sentiment," said Kyle Zawacki, legislative director for the ACLU of Michigan. "Protecting national security and upholding constitutional rights are not mutually exclusive goals."

Two of the most controversial bills concerning property purchases have yet to move through committee as tweaks are made to address concerns raised during a hearing last week.

Those bills, as they stand, would prohibit a foreign principal from a country of concern from acquiring farmland in Michigan or owning property within 20 miles of key facilities.

What the legislation targets

Under the bills, the countries of concern would include China, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Russia, Syria and Venezuela. A foreign principal from those countries would be considered a government official; a member of the country's political party; someone living in those countries who is not a citizen or permanent resident of the U.S.; or an organization organized under the laws of one of the countries or one that has its primary place of business there.

Under the agricultural land bill, foreign principals who purchased land before the passage of the law would not need to divest from the property, but would need to register the land with the secretary of state within 60 days of the bill taking effect. Violations of the ban would be reported to the attorney general, who could then take control of the property and resell it in a manner similar to a foreclosure sale.

The prohibition on foreign ownership of properties near critical structures would bar a foreign principal from directly or indirectly owning property 20 miles from a military installation or key facility. Key facilities would include an electrical utility, natural gas, telecommunications, water intake, transportation or fuel storage facility; or a variety of manufacturing facilities including those related to chemicals, paper or pharmaceuticals. Individuals who acquired facilities near those locations before the bill takes effect would have to register them with the Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development.

Before purchasing property near any such structure, buyers would need to file an affidavit with the state agricultural department attesting they are not a foreign principal. Property purchases found to be in violation of the law could be taken over by the state and resold in the same way a foreclosure sale would be conducted. A purchaser or seller in violation of the law could face a misdemeanor charge carrying up to 93 days in jail and/or a fine of up to $500.

The bills prompted concerns in committee from real estate professionals worried about the liability for themselves in relation to the law and civil liberties groups who argued the bills amounted to "alien land laws," state statutes declared unconstitutional in 1952 that restricted property ownership among immigrants.

"We believe these bills dangerously conflate the actions of foreign governments with the presence and contributions of international students, immigrant families, asylum seekers, refugees who choose Michigan to study or live and build a future," said Henry Duong, organizing director for the Asian American leadership group Rising Voices.

While the two property bills have yet to be referred from the Republican-controlled committee, six other bills were voted out of committee Wednesday along party lines to the full House floor or for further review in the House Rules Committee.

Democratic State Rep. John Fitzgerald, minority vice chair for the Government Operations Committee, abstained on each of the votes Wednesday.

The Wyoming Democrat said he is largely in favor of bills barring certain apps on government devices or requiring medical records to be stored in the U.S. But he said he had concerns about the constitutional and diplomatic implications of other bills, as well as the willingness of the federal government to cooperate with the proposed state statutes.

"It was not clear as to where the origin of these bills really came from," Fitzgerald said Wednesday. "Is this something being asked for by the Department of State to improve national security? Or are these ideas that simply look good on paper, but not in practice?”

What advanced from the panel

The six bills that the House Government Operations Committee advanced Wednesday would:

∎ Prohibit the Michigan Strategic Fund from entering into an economic incentive agreement with a company owned, controlled or organized under a country of concern.

∎ Prohibit a public employer from accessing an app on a government-issued phone or computer if the app were created or owned by a foreign principal from a country of concern.

∎ Bar a public school from entering an agreement with or accepting a grant from a foreign country of concern if it gives that country direction over the curriculum or promotes an agenda "detrimental to the safety and security of the United States." The bill also would require schools to share with a federal agency for review any cultural exchange agreement made with a foreign country of concern.

∎ Prohibit a state university or community college from entering an agreement or taking a grant from a foreign country of concern if it gives that country direction over the curriculum or promotes an agenda "detrimental to the safety and security of the United States." The bill also would require a federal review of any cultural exchange program with a foreign country of concern. Universities would be required to provide information on any gift from a foreign source and submit a report twice a year with every foreign gift over $50,000. Governing boards of those institutions would need to review a sample of those gifts, and violations of the law would be investigated by the Michigan attorney general, who could pursue a civil fine of up to 105% of the value of the undisclosed gift.

∎ Ban public bodies from entering an agreement with or receiving a grant from a foreign country of concern if it gives that country control over the curriculum or promotes an agenda "detrimental to the safety and security of the United States." Any gift from a foreign source that exceeds $50,000 would need to be reported to the Department of Insurance and Financial Services. Any individual with certain connections to a foreign country of concern would have to submit a disclosure of those connections when applying for a grant or contract worth at least $100,000 that would be submitted to the state Department of Insurance and Financial Services. Individuals found to have violated disclosure requirements would be subject to fines starting at $5,000.

∎ Require public health professionals, facilities and agencies to onshore in the U.S. or Canada the storage of any physical or virtual patient medical records. Violations would be subject to a fine of up to $10,000 or a 90-day misdemeanor for a first offense.

eleblanc@detroitnews.com