If civil discourse collapses, state-level reform gets harder. Durable wins depend on relationships that can survive disagreement and a public square where arguments are heard on their merits.
That’s why scores of SPN affiliates and partners have been pushing for civil discourse in their states. The Network is uniquely positioned to help: Affiliates have local credibility and can convene leaders who won’t otherwise share a room.
The latest example came from Michigan. Four former governors came together earlier this month for a forum hosted by the Michigan Civility Coalition, which includes the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, an SPN affiliate.
Former Govs. James Blanchard (D), John Engler (R), Jennifer Granholm (D), and Rick Snyder (R) discussed the state of civil discourse in America and what citizens can do to strengthen it. Mackinac President Joe Lehman closed with the challenge that anchored the event:
“Michigan hasn’t been ranked number one in a lot of things for a long time, but there’s no reason Michigan can’t be known as the top-ranked state for civility in the public square if we join together to make it a priority,” he said.
Why Civility Matters in 2026
Moderated by Detroit journalist Roop Raj, the event marked the first time all four governors shared a stage—three in person and Granholm joining by video.
The backdrop is familiar across states: Distrust is up, public debate is quicker to turn personal, and online incentives reward outrage more than persuasion. Against that backdrop, each governor argued that disagreement can be sharp and public without becoming dehumanizing.
“The way you see behavior in politics, would it be acceptable in any other part of your life?” Snyder asked. “Would it be acceptable at the workplace? Would it be acceptable at your family dinner table? I’ve tried to treat anyone in the political world just as if they had been a family member sitting at my dining room table.”
Snyder also cited a striking statistic: During his tenure as governor from 2011 to 2019, 90% of bills signed into law had supermajority support from both parties in both chambers—evidence that cross-party governing is still possible.
The governors also pointed to Michigan examples where working across disagreement produced durable results. Engler recalled the bipartisan effort behind Proposal A, the landmark school funding reform that reshaped education finance in Michigan. When the legislature couldn’t reach consensus, each party wrote its own plan, and voters were given a choice.
“Being able to work through to get solutions to problems is a very civil thing to do,” Engler said. “Using issues for political advantage is a very uncivil thing to do.”
Disagreement Without Contempt
The Michigan forum also clarified what affiliates are trying to protect when they talk about civil discourse. It’s not politeness for its own sake. It’s the civic space where people can argue hard, change minds, and still leave the room able to work together tomorrow. Granholm and Blanchard made that case from different angles.
“It’s not weakness to be honest and humble and to respect each other and to love our neighbor as ourselves,” Granholm said. “In fact, I think those traits are stronger and more heroic than any sniveling vitriol from the internet swamps.”
Blanchard agreed, and he aimed his warning as much at voters as at politicians. “It doesn’t have to be the way it is today in American society,” he said, pointing to his own record of cross-party collaboration as proof. The Chrysler rescue package that launched his Democratic gubernatorial career, for example, would never have succeeded without Republican co-sponsors.
“When your favorite candidate compromises with the other party or takes the risk to co-sponsor a bill with the other party, don’t get upset and start acting like they’re selling out.”
Michigan’s forum is a reminder of what affiliates can do that few other institutions can: convene credible leaders, set constructive standards, and keep the focus on workable solutions. Other states can adapt the model—by building coalitions with credibility and creating public venues that reward problem-solving over point-scoring.
