MACKINAC ISLAND — A recent Detroit Regional Chamber survey found nearly 68% of us here in Michigan are dissatisfied with the condition of our democracy, with “corrupt politicians” virtually tied for first on the list of problems respondents offered as the “biggest threat to democracy.”

That’s not hard to imagine given the latest revelatory allegations from the long-festering Lee Chatfield scandal.

For starters, the former Speaker of the House used $132,000 from a nonprofit “social welfare” fund to pay off his personal credit card bills, according to an affidavit the Michigan Attorney General filed in April to justify charging Chatfield with more than a dozen counts of public corruption.

Investigators said Chatfield’s expenses included purchases at Honeydukes, which — contrary to what you may expect given Chatfield’s reputed penchant for adult entertainment — is just a Harry Potter-themed candy store. The Levering Republican is also accused of demanding kickbacks from political action committee payments made to family and friends, asking one of his brothers to chisel a chunk off a PAC check for him just before they toddled off to the Bahamas or Miami (the brother couldn’t remember which), and pocketing six grand he collected from a cat who shared a Lansing apartment Chatfield rented using nonprofit funds. We’ll dive deeper into Chatfield’s alleged depravity in a minute.

Given the Detroit Regional Chamber’s concern for the state of our Republic, and the solutions-oriented agenda the business organization crafted for its annual policy conference here at the Grand Hotel, you’d think there would have been at least one panel exploring ways to restore confidence in government. Like maybe a chat about how best to provide us with the tools we need to figure out just what all these pols are doing with their lucre in Lansing. Because it’s never a bad idea to increase transparency in government — or to at least create rules that will scare wobbly elected officials straight.

Instead, the business, nonprofit and political poohbahs converging and carousing here were treated to former “Meet the Press” host Chuck Todd, former vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan and sessions on “Solving Michigan’s Housing Crisis,” “Policy Solutions for the Economic and Health Burdens of Tobacco-Addiction,” “Developing Talent for Michigan’s Emerging EV Ecosystem” and “Funding and Fixing Michigan’s Infrastructure.”

Todd and Ryan were engaging. And the sessions were illuminating. But nothing and no one on the agenda did anything to help us shine a light in the dark corners where doubt about our democracy takes root and grows.

‘Civic betterment’ at the Spider-Man Shop

Despite my tease a few paragraphs earlier, I was tempted to skip detailing some of Chatfield’s alleged malfeasance to get right to the leaders who want to fix the system — and the ones who can’t seem to find their voice when it’s time to shout “fire” in this building packed with fat cats, philanthropists and politicians on the muscle. But I can’t resist the urge to report that Chatfield is accused of using money from the nonprofit Peninsula Fund — ostensibly created “to support public policies … that will bring about civic betterment and social improvements to Michigan residents” — for purchases at the Spider-Man Shop and Three Broomsticks during a family vacation to Universal Studios in Orlando, Florida.

Then there’s the text investigators say Chatfield’s wife, Stephanie, sent in September 2020 — four months before the powerful speaker and prodigious fundraiser would leave office and, presumably, lose his ability to leverage potential donors for loot. It said: “I don’t want to get caught come January with our tail between our legs and no money in the account to pay it off.”

Chatfield allegedly also had a penchant for giving friends and family checks from his political action committees, but only on the condition they kick some of it back.

Wilbur Lovitt, a friend who accompanied Chatfield and some cronies to the Bahamas in December 2018, was paid $5,000 from Chatfield Majority Fund II — which is one of four political action committee kitties created to help Chatfield elect the candidates who would support him as speaker and advance his agenda. Investigators said Lovitt was told it was a “bonus check” for past wages, but Lovitt knew that wasn’t true. One clue was that he had to use $3,000 to give Chatfield cash and cover their expenses.

Around that same time, Chatfield’s brother, Aaron, told investigators he got a check for $1,000 from a Chatfield PAC — which sounds like a swell gift from a big brother — until you consider that Chatfield allegedly told lil bro: “I’m going to give you a check. You’re going to give me a certain amount back. And then maybe the rest if needed.”

Chatfield’s attorney Mary Chartier has called the charges politically motivated and said: “We are prepared to fight them each and every step of the way.”

The Chatfield case has given a couple prominent Democrats an opportunity to garner headlines with their call for stronger disclosure laws, but what strikes me is how few other leaders in Lansing are rising to the occasion.

Perhaps they’re just too comfortable with the status quo …

Roll call

When it comes to posing together like Charlie’s Angels for a photo, Attorney General Dana Nessel and Secertary of State Jocelyn Benson can count on Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.

Nessel and Benson’s fellow Democrat was nowhere to be seen when they got together last month to testify in favor of good government legislation that would increase accountability, transparency and slow the revolving door elected officials use to transition from lawmaker to lobbyist.

Benson and I connected during the policy conference, where she told me she wants lawmakers to give her legal tools to help uncover potential wrongdoing and bring accountability to candidates who refuse to comply with her staff’s queries and collection efforts.

“We don’t have subpoena power,” said Benson, a former dean of the Wayne State University law school. “So, if someone doesn’t respond, there’s not much we could do. We also don’t have the power to collect. That’s in the Treasury Department. In terms of collecting fees and fines, we don’t have that authority. And so we do have to work with other agencies to get them to prioritize this as well. And that has been a challenge.”

Nessel, who, as attorney general, has the authority to hunt down candidates who ignore Benson’s team, is leading the charge to crack down on bad actors in our political system. When we caught up at the Grand Hotel last week she made a statement that would be bold if it wasn’t so obvious: “The Michigan Campaign Finance Act is, for all intents and purposes, a joke.”

Nessel said the penalties are “laughable” and holding bad actors accountable is “nearly impossible.”

The biggest problem reformers face is that the biggest problem is the number of public officials with nonprofits, which are sometimes called leadership funds and are also known by the Internal Revenue Service designation 501c4. These so-called social welfare funds allow their beneficiaries to take wheelbarrows full of money without disclosing the donors or specifying how they spend the dough. Piercing that veil would do wonders to clean up Michigan politics — or at least give us a brief period where the sun shines in before politicians find a new hustle. But state law can’t supercede federal law, so there’s nothing Michigan lawmakers can do to break through the scum on the surface of these cesspools. Nessel, Benson and reform-minded legislators say it would at least help if lawmakers were required to disclose whether they have one of these cancerous kitties.

Nessel also has a novel and bold proposal to help neuter some of the biggest donors in Lansing: She wants to prohibit utility companies from making contributions. The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in the Citizens United case essentially gives corporations the right to give as much as they want. But Nessel told me: “I would argue that the utilities fall into a different category because they are a regulated monopoly. And we do that, of course, with the casinos.”

“You can’t own the Motor City Casino or MGM and then make contributions,” she said. “You could theoretically do the same thing with the utilities, and it has been done in other states.”

I don’t think Nessel’s proposal will go over well with the policy conference’s Platinum sponsor Consumers Energy or Gold sponsor DTE Energy. But since Nessel’s political career will likely end in 2026 when she leaves office after two terms, she may be the one statewide elected official who can push this proposal without fearing the consequences.

Brad Williams, vice president of government relations for the chamber, acknowledged that the organization has taken a hands-off approach to reform issues like expanding the Freedom of Information Act to cover the Legislature and governor. He said the chamber’s efforts to increase confidence in government has instead focused on issues like increasing voter engagement and “Top 5” voting, where the candidates who get the most votes advance to the general election, instead of just the top Democrat and top Republican. He also suggested that the Internal Revenue Service could be more effective in combating abuses among the social welfare funds.

And he’s absolutely right. But I hate to think Michigan’s best shot at cleaning up our political cesspool is dependent on Uncle Sam.

Potentially more troubling than the chamber’s seeming indifference to reform measures is the apparent lack of enthusiasm from the other Democratic leaders in Lansing.

House Speaker Joe Tate, of Detroit, told me he’s going to let the legislation work its way through the system before weighing in. A spokeswoman for Senate Majority Leader Winnie Brinks, of Grand Rapids, suggested that she would not have a comment until the legislation makes its way to the Senate, where she said the focus currently is on expanding the Freedom of Information Act to cover the Legislature and the governor’s office.

Tate told me he does not have a social welfare fund. Brinks’ spokeswoman told me “members don’t ‘have’ a 501c4, but can be associated with one that helps advance a mission. Leader Brinks works with a nonprofit that supports social welfare and government effectiveness.”

I’m not encouraged by what I heard back from the Whitmer camp. They pointed how she came out early in favor of expanded financial disclosure — becoming the first governor to voluntarily disclose her personal finances, tax returns and travel records — but then added that she is taking a wait-and-see position on the latest reform proposals. And they ignored my question about whether she has a position on 501c4s. The skeptical among you may reason that it’s because of the support has enjoyed from several such entities.

Nessel and Benson told me they don’t have social welfare funds, but I’ll leave it to your good judgment to determine whether that’s one of the reasons they’re the most outspoken on the need to bring these nefarious nonprofits to heel.

Looking ahead, I’m pretty sure the chamber, with its emphasis on seeking concensus and solutions, could shoehorn at least one reform item into next year’s agenda. If they’re not willing to do it for those of us in the hoi polloi concerned about the condition of democracy, they could consider it a service to their members.

After all, a lot of that money that Chatfield allegedly spent at the Spider-Man Shop, Three Broomstick and Honeydukes, came from them.

M.L. Elrick is a Pulitzer Prize- and Emmy Award-winning investigative reporter and host of the ML’s Soul of Detroit podcast. Contact him at mlelrick@freepress.com or follow him on X at @elrick, Facebook at ML Elrick and Instagram at ml_elrick.

This article originally appeared on Detroit Free Press: The Spider-Man Shop, Honeydukes and Michigan’s web of corruption