Commentary: Science shapes Michigan policy. Voters deserve to know candidates’ views.

Policy decisions do not happen in isolation, nor are they confined to Capitol Hill or Lansing. Decisions made across all levels of government directly affect Michiganders’ health and livelihoods. From monitoring our food supply to protecting drinking water, scientists help governments identify risks, evaluate possible responses, and decide what actions to take.

Recent events in Michigan, such as this summer’s Cyclospora outbreak, display how the relationship between science and public policy influence our everyday lives.

As of early October, Michigan had reported 15,472 cases of cyclosporiasis in 2026, compared with roughly 50 cases in a typical year, a greater than 30,000% increase. Normally, a large team of epidemiologists and laboratory scientists at the state and federal levels work together to identify outbreaks and trace their sources and implement mitigation efforts to protect the public.

However, in July, WIRED reported that the CDC laboratory responsible for responding to Cyclospora outbreaks had been reduced from eleven staff members to three. CDC officials warned that staffing losses could inhibit the agency’s ability to respond to an outbreak, the exact outcome experienced this summer. This outbreak illustrates that policy decisions about scientific staffing and infrastructure directly shape the strength and reliability of the public health systems our communities depend on.

Unfortunately, voters often lack accessible, reliable, non-partisan information on how candidates will approach science and scientific evidence. Campaign conversations often focus on broad political and economic priorities, while questions about how candidates evaluate evidence, respond to scientific uncertainty, or engage with scientific expertise receive less attention.

A troubled birthday for the National Science Foundation

When scientific topics do arise on the campaign trail, the rhetoric surrounding these topics is often hyper-polarized and politicized. Regardless of how candidates may view specific policy issues, voters deserve the opportunity to understand how those seeking office evaluate evidence and approach science and technology-related challenges facing Michiganders.

Stance on Science is a grassroots, nonpartisan initiative led by early-career researchers working to make the connection between science and policymaking more visible to voters. As scientists from or living in Michigan, we know that research doesn’t end when a study is published, but when its findings are implemented to improve the lives of people around us. Engaging with policy is a critical next step for us as scientists, aiming to help our communities through our research.

However, scientific evidence alone does not determine what happens next. Elected officials decide which research is supported, how scientific expertise is incorporated into government, and whether new findings are translated into policies that affect the people they represent.

Stance on Science was created to help make this information more accessible to voters. Our initiative seeks to help both candidates and constituents by providing candidates an opportunity to address science-related policy issues that affect their communities, and by making this rarely discussed information accessible to voters.

Stance on Science asks candidates about issues that are already part of daily life in Michigan, including water and energy infrastructure, public health, agriculture, research, and the use of scientific evidence in policymaking. Candidates’ responses are available through the Stance on Science website and social media accounts, allowing constituents to read candidates’ positions in their own words. We hope to enable voters to consider all of the information on issues that matter to them when casting their ballot.

Scientific research and policymaking influence our everyday lives. Whether it is the Great Lakes surrounding our state, the safety of our food, or the health of every Michigander, voters deserve to understand how the people seeking to represent them will approach these important issues. Candidate responses and additional information from Stance on Science are available at snapcoalition.org/initiatives/stance-on-science/states/mi.

Assisting Milligan in writing and preparing this commentary were: Joseph van Linn – PhD student in Civil and Environmental Engineering at Cornell University; Brishti White  – PhD student in Neuroscience at Michigan State University ; Cate Beckman – PhD student in Physics at Michigan State University; Linnea Hartz – PhD student in Cell Biology at Yale University; Mikayla Smith-Craven, PhD – Scientist at Charles River Laboratories and Zehra Husaini – PhD student in Pharmacology and Molecular Sciences at Johns Hopkins University.