Justin Michal was born in Saginaw, Michigan. He served in the U.S. Army. He graduated from Grayling High School. He earned a bachelor's degree from Palm Beach State College in 2019, a Ph.D. from Nova Southeastern University, and graduated from Florida Atlantic University in 2021. His career experience includes working as an entrepreneur.[1]
Note: At this time, Ballotpedia is combining all declared candidates for this election into one list under a general election heading. As primary election dates are published, this information will be updated to separate general election candidates from primary candidates as appropriate.
General election
The general election will occur on November 3, 2026.
General election for U.S. House Michigan District 1
Justin Michal completed Ballotpedia's Candidate Connection survey in 2025. The survey questions appear in bold and are followed by Michal's responses. Candidates are asked three required questions for this survey, but they may answer additional optional questions as well.
Justin Michal is a U.S. Congressional Candidate for Michigan’s 1st Congressional District, representing Northern Michigan and the Upper Peninsula. A proud Army veteran, conflict resolution expert, and advocate for education and veterans' rights, Justin’s life has been defined by service, leadership, and a commitment to Bridging the Divides.
Raised in Grayling, Michigan, Justin understands small-town struggles—hard work, resilience, and the drive to create a better future. After a distinguished military career, he championed veterans' benefits, co-founded student veteran organizations, and helped raise millions in support. His research exposed housing allowance discrepancies for student veterans, leading to significant policy changes and national recognition from the Department of Veterans Affairs.
Justin holds an MBA from Florida Atlantic University and is completing a Ph.D. in Conflict Analysis and Resolution. His work has informed UN officials and international NGOs. As an ombudsperson, he has helped resolve disputes and foster inclusive dialogue.
His campaign centers on listening to the people, investing in infrastructure, expanding digital access, improving healthcare and education, protecting the environment, and building economic opportunity. For Justin, small-town values and real leadership can drive real change.
For too long, Northern Michigan and the Upper Peninsula have been overlooked by special interests and left behind by leaders in Washington. Our campaign is about changing that—about putting the people of Michigan’s 1st District first. I’m running to bridge the divide between rural communities and Washington, bringing integrity, transparency, and real representation back to Congress. As a combat veteran, public servant, and advocate, I will fight every day to ensure our voices are heard and our needs are met—because we deserve better.
I know what it means to work hard, struggle, and still fall short. Raised in Grayling, I’ve lived the challenges that working families across Northern Michigan and the Upper Peninsula face every day. I’m not a career politician—I am one of you. I have served our country and dedicated my life to resolving conflict and standing up for what’s right. In Congress, I’ll continue that mission—fighting for affordable healthcare, rural investment, veterans’ services, and real economic opportunities that put people over politics. It’s time we had a voice in Washington that truly understands us.
Our communities are being torn apart by division and political games. It’s time to break down barriers and bring people together with solutions—not slogans. I believe in principled leadership rooted in service, not self-interest. Whether it’s protecting our natural resources, defending our constitutional rights, or ensuring access to education and healthcare—we can find common ground. My campaign is about transparency, engagement accountability, and motivation to build a better future for Michigan’s 1st Congressional District. Together, we’ll Bridge the Divides and build something sustainable and lasting—together.
I’m personally passionate about public policies that uplift rural communities, protect our constitutional rights, and ensure every American—no matter their background—has access to opportunity. That means fighting for veteran services, mental health care, and rural infrastructure; defending the Second Amendment and individual freedoms; and advancing government accountability and transparency. I believe in strengthening public education, supporting working families, and investing in sustainable local economies. My passion lies in creating a government that serves people over politics—and makes sure no one is left behind.
Yes. I would recommend the book "Profiles in Courage" by John F. Kennedy. It highlights U.S. Senators who chose principle over politics, even when it cost them personally. It reflects my belief that leadership means doing what's right for the people.
The most important characteristics and principles for an elected official are rooted in integrity, accountability, empathy, and a steadfast commitment to public service. At the heart of public leadership lies integrity—the ability to remain honest, transparent, and consistent in one’s values, even when facing pressure or adversity. Constituents must trust that their representative will act ethically and make decisions that prioritize the well-being of the people over personal gain or special interests.
Accountability is equally essential. An elected official must be willing to answer to the public, admit mistakes, and take corrective action when necessary. This includes maintaining open lines of communication with constituents and making decisions that are informed by their needs and concerns. Listening is a critical yet often overlooked trait in leadership. A good official must have the humility to listen and the courage to act based on what they’ve heard.
Empathy allows officials to understand the diverse experiences and struggles of those they represent. It fuels equitable policymaking and helps ensure that no community is left behind. In a nation as diverse as the United States, recognizing and valuing different perspectives strengthens the social fabric and brings more people into the democratic process.
Finally, service-driven leadership must be the foundation of all decisions. Public office is not about power or prestige—it is about being a steward of the people’s trust. An effective leader works to bridge divides, solve problems, and uplift communities. Especially in times of division, the ability to lead with vision, unity, and compassion is not just important—it is essential.
I believe the qualities that would make me a successful officeholder are rooted in service, integrity, and real-world leadership—not political ambition. As a retired U.S. Army combat veteran, I’ve spent my life putting duty before self, working under pressure, and making decisions that impact the lives of others. That experience taught me discipline, accountability, and the importance of fighting for those who can’t always fight for themselves. I carry those same values with me into public life.
I also bring a background in conflict resolution and ombuds service, which has trained me to listen deeply, mediate difficult conversations, and find common ground where others see only division. In today’s hyper-partisan environment, we need leaders who can build bridges, not burn them. I’m not interested in political games—I’m focused on delivering results, solving problems, and restoring trust in government.
Another quality I possess is authenticity. I’ve lived the struggles that many working and middle-class families face—economic uncertainty, navigating the VA system, and fighting for access to quality healthcare. I understand what it’s like to live in a rural community and feel overlooked by Washington. That lived experience allows me to connect with people not as a politician, but as a neighbor who knows what they’re going through and is willing to fight alongside them.
I am also guided by unshakable integrity. I believe public office is a sacred trust, not a steppingstone. I’m not beholden to special interests, political elites, or wealthy donors. I’m committed to putting people over politics—always. I believe in showing up, telling the truth, and standing firm in my values.
The core responsibilities of someone elected to public office center on representing the will of the people, protecting constitutional rights, and working to improve the lives of constituents through ethical, informed, and effective policymaking. First and foremost, an elected official must act as a voice for the people—listening to their concerns, understanding the unique challenges faced by the district, and advocating for policies that reflect the community’s needs and values. This requires ongoing engagement with residents, local leaders, and organizations to ensure every voice—especially those often unheard—is part of the conversation.
Another critical responsibility is to uphold and defend the Constitution, ensuring that all legislation and actions taken are rooted in the rule of law and respectful of individual rights and liberties. This includes preserving checks and balances, standing against corruption, and maintaining transparency in decision-making.
A representative must also be a bridge-builder and problem-solver, working across political lines when necessary to advance the common good. Ideological purity means little if it prevents progress or deepens division. Compromise, when done without sacrificing core values, is a powerful tool for governance.
Effective oversight of federal programs, support for small businesses and working families, advocacy for veterans and rural communities, and securing resources for infrastructure, education, and healthcare are also key components of the role.
Lastly, an elected official must lead by example—showing up, doing the work, and never forgetting who they serve. Public office is not a position of entitlement—it is a solemn responsibility, built on trust, that demands hard work, integrity, and an unwavering focus on service over self.
The Red Badge of Courage- Stephen Crane is my favorite book because it captures, with striking realism and emotional depth, the internal battle between fear and courage—something I have experienced firsthand as a combat veteran.
The U.S. House of Representatives is unique among American institutions because it was intentionally designed to be the most direct and immediate voice of the people. Unlike the Senate, where members serve six-year terms and represent entire states, House members serve two-year terms and represent smaller, more localized districts. This structure ensures that Representatives remain closely connected to the communities they serve, making the House the chamber most responsive to shifts in public opinion and the everyday concerns of American families.
One of the House’s defining qualities is its proportional representation, meaning the number of representatives per state is based on population. This guarantees that more populous states have a stronger voice, while still preserving a fair and balanced national conversation. It also allows diverse perspectives to enter the legislative process—from rural districts like those in Northern Michigan and the Upper Peninsula to densely populated urban areas—creating a mosaic of American life within a single institution.
The House also holds the exclusive power of the purse, meaning all revenue-related bills must originate there. This grants the chamber significant influence over taxation and federal spending, reinforcing its responsibility to ensure fiscal accountability and protect taxpayers' interests. In addition, the House plays a central role in oversight and investigations, often serving as the first check against executive overreach and governmental inefficiency.
Another important feature is the sheer speed and adaptability of the House. With 435 members and shorter terms, the chamber can be more agile in responding to crises, public demand, and emerging issues. While this can lead to fierce debate and partisan divisions, it also reflects the vibrancy of a healthy democracy.
I do not believe it is necessarily beneficial for representatives to have previous experience in government or politics. In fact, some of the most authentic and effective leadership comes from those who have lived real-world experiences outside of the political bubble. Career politicians often become disconnected from the struggles of everyday Americans—they learn how to play the game, protect their careers, and serve special interests rather than the people they were elected to represent.
Our government was never meant to be run by a permanent political class. It was designed for citizen leadership—people from all walks of life bringing their skills, experiences, and values to the table to serve their fellow Americans. I believe that servant leadership should come from those who have served their communities in meaningful ways—whether in the military, small business, education, healthcare, or public service—not just those who’ve climbed the political ladder.
Having a fresh perspective is a strength, not a weakness. It allows for bold thinking, innovative solutions, and a willingness to challenge the status quo. My background in the military, conflict resolution, and advocacy has taught me how to lead under pressure, listen with empathy, and work through complex problems to find real solutions. Those qualities aren’t taught in politics—they’re learned in life.
While some knowledge of the legislative process is important, it can be learned. What cannot be taught is authenticity, accountability, and a deep commitment to doing what’s right, even when it’s hard. We need more people in Congress who haven’t been conditioned by partisan politics or beholden to donors—but who are there to serve the people with honesty and courage.
Over the next decade, two of the United States’ greatest challenges will be preserving the long-term solvency of Social Security and addressing the growing national debt. These two issues are deeply intertwined and demand responsible, forward-thinking leadership that prioritizes fiscal sustainability without compromising the well-being of everyday Americans.
Social Security is a cornerstone of economic security for millions of retirees, people with disabilities, and survivors of deceased workers. However, current projections indicate that the Social Security trust fund could be depleted within the next decade if reforms are not enacted. This would result in reduced benefits for future recipients—many of whom rely on these funds as their primary source of income. We must protect Social Security, not by cutting benefits or raising the retirement age, but by modernizing its funding model. Preserving this program is not just an economic imperative—it is a moral commitment to the generations who built this nation.
At the same time, the United States faces the challenge of a rapidly increasing national debt, now exceeding $37 trillion. If left unchecked, rising interest payments on the debt will crowd out essential investments in infrastructure, education, healthcare, and defense.
Addressing these challenges requires fiscal responsibility paired with compassion. We must ensure that future generations inherit a nation that is not only financially secure but still honors its promises. If we act with courage and common sense, we can strengthen Social Security and reduce the debt.
No, I do not believe that a two-year term is the right length for members of the U.S. House of Representatives. While the original intent behind the two-year term was to ensure accountability and keep representatives closely tied to the will of the people, the realities of modern campaigning and governance have significantly changed since our nation’s founding. Today, the constant cycle of campaigning severely limits a representative’s ability to focus on long-term solutions, thoughtful policymaking, and meaningful constituent service.
From the moment a representative is sworn into office, they are already under pressure to prepare for the next election. The demands of fundraising, political positioning, and securing party support consume valuable time and energy that should be spent crafting legislation, overseeing government operations, and engaging with the community. In many cases, representatives are pulled away from their districts to raise money or travel for campaign events—just to remain competitive in the next election. This non-stop cycle benefits entrenched power structures and wealthy donors, not the people.
The result is a system that encourages short-term thinking and political calculation, rather than thoughtful leadership and bold action. Representatives are often hesitant to take difficult but necessary positions for fear of immediate electoral backlash, which stifles progress on critical issues like Social Security reform, veterans' care, and debt reduction. It’s a system that rewards talking points over solutions and headlines over hard work.
Extending the term length—while maintaining transparency and accountability—would allow representatives more time to govern effectively, engage deeply with issues, and deliver real results for the American people. It would also reduce the influence of money in politics by minimizing the constant need to campaign.
I believe it’s time for a serious, balanced discussion on how to ensure a government that remains responsive, effective, and in touch with the people it serves. While term limits are often proposed as a way to prevent career politicians from holding office indefinitely, I believe an even more practical and impactful solution is to establish a mandatory retirement age for elected officials—aligned with the federal retirement age as determined by Social Security.
In nearly every other profession, individuals are expected to step aside at a certain point to make room for the next generation. Why should public office be any different? As the Social Security Administration determines when individuals are eligible for full retirement benefits—typically between ages 66 and 67 depending on birth year—it’s only reasonable that elected officials should follow the same guideline. This approach respects the experience of seasoned leaders while also ensuring that those making laws and guiding national policy are physically and mentally equipped to handle the demands of the job.
Mandatory retirement would naturally limit tenure without undermining voter choice or cutting short the careers of effective public servants too early. It would also encourage greater generational diversity in government—something that is sorely needed in a rapidly changing world. Fresh perspectives, innovative thinking, and representation of younger Americans are essential to maintaining a dynamic and forward-looking democracy.
This policy could also help reduce the entrenched power structures that often develop over time and pave the way for more competitive and open elections. While experience is valuable, it should not become a barrier to progress. Public service should be about contribution, not career preservation.
Yes, one story that left a lasting impact on me came from a fellow veteran I met during a visit to a small town in Michigan’s 1st Congressional District. He was a combat veteran who had served multiple tours overseas, much like myself, and returned home hoping to build a peaceful life for his family. But instead of peace, he faced bureaucratic delays, inadequate healthcare through the VA, and a painful sense of abandonment by the very country he had risked everything to protect.
He told me about struggling with service-connected injuries, both visible and invisible, and how difficult it was to access consistent, quality mental health care in a rural area. The nearest VA clinic was hours away, and appointments were often delayed or canceled due to staffing shortages. He felt like a number in a broken system—left behind, despite having honored his commitment to serve.
What struck me most was his resilience. Despite everything, he wasn’t angry—he was hopeful. He believed that change was possible, and he wanted to be part of a community and a country that didn’t forget its own. His story reminded me why I chose to run: to fight for people like him, who have given so much and ask for so little in return.
That conversation reinforced my commitment to improving Veterans Affairs, especially in rural communities. But beyond that, it reminded me that policy is personal. Behind every issue—whether it's Social Security, healthcare, or economic opportunity—are real people with real struggles who deserve better. Listening to their stories isn’t just a campaign activity—it’s a responsibility and a privilege.
Stories like his are why I’m committed to servant leadership rooted in empathy, action, and accountability. They remind me that our mission is not about power—it's about people. And we must never forget the human impact of the work we do.
Yes, I believe that compromise is both necessary and desirable for effective policymaking—especially in a nation as diverse, complex, and dynamic as the United States. At its core, compromise is not about surrendering values or weakening principles; it’s about finding common ground to move our country forward. Our Founders built a system of checks and balances that requires cooperation. That system only works when leaders put results over rhetoric and focus on what’s best for the people—not just their party.
As someone with a strong background in conflict resolution and service to this country, I’ve learned that real leadership means listening, understanding different perspectives, and having the courage to work with those you may disagree with. That’s not weakness—it’s strength. It takes more conviction to build a bridge than to stand on one side shouting across the divide.
For Republican constituents, I recognize the importance of limited government, fiscal responsibility, and personal liberty. Those are values I share and will always defend. But advancing those principles effectively often requires working with others to create laws that are not only grounded in conservative values but are also implementable, balanced, and respectful of the broader public interest. No lasting solution—on Social Security, border security, veterans’ care, or debt reduction—can happen without bipartisan effort.
Refusing to compromise leads to gridlock, dysfunction, and missed opportunities. The American people deserve results, not more political theater. Compromise done right isn’t about abandoning beliefs—it’s about delivering real-world solutions that reflect the will of the people while maintaining the integrity of our Constitutional framework.
In Congress, I won’t compromise on integrity or the Constitution, but I will always be willing to sit down at the table, listen, and find common sense solutions—because that’s how we get things done for the American people.
The Constitution’s requirement that all bills for raising revenue originate in the House of Representatives reflects a powerful principle: taxation must be directly accountable to the people. As the chamber closest to the public—elected every two years and representing smaller districts—the House is uniquely positioned to ensure that fiscal policy reflects the will and needs of everyday Americans. If elected, I would take this constitutional responsibility seriously and use it to prioritize fiscal responsibility, protect working families, and strengthen long-term economic stability.
This power is not just procedural—it’s foundational to ensuring that the people have a voice in how their money is raised and spent. I would use it to advocate for a fairer tax code that doesn't overburden the middle class or small businesses while ensuring that the wealthiest individuals and corporations pay their fair share. Our tax policies must support American workers, not leave them carrying the weight of irresponsible federal spending or outdated tax loopholes.
This role would also support my focus on protecting Social Security and addressing the national debt. These aren’t abstract numbers—they’re about the future of retirement security and economic opportunity. I believe we can and must pass revenue legislation that responsibly funds Social Security without cutting benefits or increasing the burden on those already struggling. Revenue bills should reflect our priorities as a nation—and mine are clear: take care of those who have paid in, ensure veterans and working families are supported, and stop mortgaging our children’s future for short-term political gains.
I would fight to restore public trust in how government handles taxpayer dollars. This power is not just about money—it’s about accountability, values, and making sure Washington serves the people—not the other way around.
The investigative powers of the U.S. House of Representatives are a critical tool in upholding our system of checks and balances. These powers must be used responsibly, impartially, and in service to the American people—not for political theater or partisan gain. At its core, the House’s ability to investigate ensures transparency, promotes accountability, and defends the integrity of our democratic institutions.
First and foremost, investigations should focus on protecting taxpayer dollars and exposing waste, fraud, and abuse in government agencies and programs. Whether it's ensuring the responsible use of federal funding or uncovering mismanagement within departments like Veterans Affairs or Social Security, the House has a duty to ask tough questions and demand honest answers. Oversight must be based on facts—not ideology—and it should lead to constructive solutions, not just headlines.
The House must also use its investigative authority to hold both public and private entities accountable when their actions harm the public good. This includes everything from corporate misconduct that affects consumers or workers, to examining the influence of foreign adversaries or powerful special interests that undermine national security, elections, or public trust.
As a veteran and public servant, I believe strongly that investigations should also be used to protect whistleblowers and ensure that those who speak out about wrongdoing are shielded from retaliation. A transparent government only exists when people feel safe to come forward and tell the truth.
However, with this power comes great responsibility. Oversight should never be used as a political weapon or a tool to score points. When investigations are driven by partisan agendas, they lose credibility and distract from real issues. The American people deserve seriousness, fairness, and results—not grandstanding.
Given my background as a combat veteran, conflict resolution expert, and advocate for veterans’ rights and government accountability, I am especially interested in serving on committees where I can directly impact the lives of everyday Americans and bring practical, solutions-focused leadership to the table.
First and foremost, I would be honored to serve on the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs. With firsthand experience navigating the challenges faced by veterans—including access to healthcare, mental health support, transition services, and the VA system—I understand the urgent need for reform and increased responsiveness. I would work to ensure that every veteran receives the care, respect, and support they’ve earned, especially those in rural and underserved areas like many parts of Northern Michigan and the Upper Peninsula.
I’m also drawn to the House Committee on Armed Services. As a retired U.S. Army veteran, I have a deep understanding of national security, defense policy, and the needs of active-duty service members and their families. I believe in maintaining a strong national defense while ensuring that our military strategy reflects the realities of modern warfare, cybersecurity threats, and global diplomacy.
Another area of strong interest is the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability. I’m passionate about ensuring transparency in government spending and holding public institutions accountable to the people they serve. I would advocate for stronger oversight of federal agencies, better protections for whistleblowers, and reforms to reduce waste, fraud, and abuse.
Finally, I would welcome the opportunity to serve on the House Committee on Ways and Means, particularly to focus on protecting and strengthening Social Security. This program is vital to millions of Americans, and I believe my voice—grounded in both personal experience and public service—can help guide responsible reforms that preserve it for future generations.
Financial transparency and government accountability are fundamental pillars of a healthy democracy. Without them, trust in public institutions erodes, corruption takes root, and the voices of everyday citizens are drowned out by special interests. I believe that elected officials have a moral and civic duty to be transparent in how public funds are used and to be fully accountable to the people they serve.
Financial transparency means that taxpayers should know where their money is going, how it’s being spent, and whether it’s producing results. Budgets, contracts, and expenditures should be easy to access and understand. Clear, public reporting builds trust and allows citizens to evaluate whether their leaders are acting responsibly and effectively. It also helps prevent waste, fraud, and abuse by keeping public institutions under watchful eyes—not behind closed doors.
Government accountability goes hand in hand with transparency. It means that public officials, from local governments to federal agencies, must be held to the highest standards of integrity and ethics. When mistakes are made or promises go unfulfilled, there must be consequences—not cover-ups. Leaders should admit when something isn’t working and take steps to fix it, not shift blame or hide behind bureaucracy.
I also believe in increasing oversight and strengthening protections for whistleblowers, journalists, and watchdog organizations that help shine a light on misconduct. Accountability shouldn’t be viewed as a threat by those in power—it should be welcomed as a tool to ensure we are always striving to do better.
Ultimately, public service is about stewardship—not control. The money spent is not the government’s money—it’s the people’s. Transparency and accountability aren’t just ideals to talk about during a campaign. They must be lived every day in office, with a clear and constant reminder: we work for the people, and the people deserve the truth.
Note: Ballotpedia reserves the right to edit Candidate Connection survey responses. Any edits made by Ballotpedia will be clearly marked with [brackets] for the public. If the candidate disagrees with an edit, he or she may request the full removal of the survey response from Ballotpedia.org. Ballotpedia does not edit or correct typographical errors unless the candidate's campaign requests it.
Note: Michal submitted the above survey responses to Ballotpedia on March 26, 2025.
Justin Michal is a U.S. Congressional Candidate for Michigan’s 1st Congressional District, representing Northern Michigan and the Upper Peninsula. A proud Army veteran, conflict resolution expert, and advocate for education and veterans' rights, Justin’s life has been defined by service, leadership, and a commitment to Bridging the Divides.
Raised in Grayling, Michigan, Justin understands small-town struggles—hard work, resilience, and the drive to create a better future. After a distinguished military career, he championed veterans' benefits, co-founded student veteran organizations, and helped raise millions in support. His research exposed housing allowance discrepancies for student veterans, leading to significant policy changes and national recognition from the Department of Veterans Affairs.
Justin holds an MBA from Florida Atlantic University and is completing a Ph.D. in Conflict Analysis and Resolution. His work has informed UN officials and international NGOs. As an ombudsperson, he has helped resolve disputes and foster inclusive dialogue.
His campaign centers on listening to the people, investing in infrastructure, expanding digital access, improving healthcare and education, protecting the environment, and building economic opportunity. For Justin, small-town values and real leadership can drive real change.
For too long, Northern Michigan and the Upper Peninsula have been overlooked by special interests and left behind by leaders in Washington. Our campaign is about changing that—about putting the people of Michigan’s 1st District first. I’m running to bridge the divide between rural communities and Washington, bringing integrity, transparency, and real representation back to Congress. As a combat veteran, public servant, and advocate, I will fight every day to ensure our voices are heard and our needs are met—because we deserve better.
I know what it means to work hard, struggle, and still fall short. Raised in Grayling, I’ve lived the challenges that working families across Northern Michigan and the Upper Peninsula face every day. I’m not a career politician—I am one of you. I have served our country and dedicated my life to resolving conflict and standing up for what’s right. In Congress, I’ll continue that mission—fighting for affordable healthcare, rural investment, veterans’ services, and real economic opportunities that put people over politics. It’s time we had a voice in Washington that truly understands us.
Our communities are being torn apart by division and political games. It’s time to break down barriers and bring people together with solutions—not slogans. I believe in principled leadership rooted in service, not self-interest. Whether it’s protecting our natural resources, defending our constitutional rights, or ensuring access to education and healthcare—we can find common ground. My campaign is about transparency, engagement accountability, and motivation to build a better future for Michigan’s 1st Congressional District. Together, we’ll Bridge the Divides and build something sustainable and lasting—together.
I’m personally passionate about public policies that uplift rural communities, protect our constitutional rights, and ensure every American—no matter their background—has access to opportunity. That means fighting for veteran services, mental health care, and rural infrastructure; defending the Second Amendment and individual freedoms; and advancing government accountability and transparency. I believe in strengthening public education, supporting working families, and investing in sustainable local economies. My passion lies in creating a government that serves people over politics—and makes sure no one is left behind.
Yes. I would recommend the book "Profiles in Courage" by John F. Kennedy. It highlights U.S. Senators who chose principle over politics, even when it cost them personally. It reflects my belief that leadership means doing what's right for the people.
The most important characteristics and principles for an elected official are rooted in integrity, accountability, empathy, and a steadfast commitment to public service. At the heart of public leadership lies integrity—the ability to remain honest, transparent, and consistent in one’s values, even when facing pressure or adversity. Constituents must trust that their representative will act ethically and make decisions that prioritize the well-being of the people over personal gain or special interests.
Accountability is equally essential. An elected official must be willing to answer to the public, admit mistakes, and take corrective action when necessary. This includes maintaining open lines of communication with constituents and making decisions that are informed by their needs and concerns. Listening is a critical yet often overlooked trait in leadership. A good official must have the humility to listen and the courage to act based on what they’ve heard.
Empathy allows officials to understand the diverse experiences and struggles of those they represent. It fuels equitable policymaking and helps ensure that no community is left behind. In a nation as diverse as the United States, recognizing and valuing different perspectives strengthens the social fabric and brings more people into the democratic process.
Finally, service-driven leadership must be the foundation of all decisions. Public office is not about power or prestige—it is about being a steward of the people’s trust. An effective leader works to bridge divides, solve problems, and uplift communities. Especially in times of division, the ability to lead with vision, unity, and compassion is not just important—it is essential.
I believe the qualities that would make me a successful officeholder are rooted in service, integrity, and real-world leadership—not political ambition. As a retired U.S. Army combat veteran, I’ve spent my life putting duty before self, working under pressure, and making decisions that impact the lives of others. That experience taught me discipline, accountability, and the importance of fighting for those who can’t always fight for themselves. I carry those same values with me into public life.
I also bring a background in conflict resolution and ombuds service, which has trained me to listen deeply, mediate difficult conversations, and find common ground where others see only division. In today’s hyper-partisan environment, we need leaders who can build bridges, not burn them. I’m not interested in political games—I’m focused on delivering results, solving problems, and restoring trust in government.
Another quality I possess is authenticity. I’ve lived the struggles that many working and middle-class families face—economic uncertainty, navigating the VA system, and fighting for access to quality healthcare. I understand what it’s like to live in a rural community and feel overlooked by Washington. That lived experience allows me to connect with people not as a politician, but as a neighbor who knows what they’re going through and is willing to fight alongside them.
I am also guided by unshakable integrity. I believe public office is a sacred trust, not a steppingstone. I’m not beholden to special interests, political elites, or wealthy donors. I’m committed to putting people over politics—always. I believe in showing up, telling the truth, and standing firm in my values.
The core responsibilities of someone elected to public office center on representing the will of the people, protecting constitutional rights, and working to improve the lives of constituents through ethical, informed, and effective policymaking. First and foremost, an elected official must act as a voice for the people—listening to their concerns, understanding the unique challenges faced by the district, and advocating for policies that reflect the community’s needs and values. This requires ongoing engagement with residents, local leaders, and organizations to ensure every voice—especially those often unheard—is part of the conversation.
Another critical responsibility is to uphold and defend the Constitution, ensuring that all legislation and actions taken are rooted in the rule of law and respectful of individual rights and liberties. This includes preserving checks and balances, standing against corruption, and maintaining transparency in decision-making.
A representative must also be a bridge-builder and problem-solver, working across political lines when necessary to advance the common good. Ideological purity means little if it prevents progress or deepens division. Compromise, when done without sacrificing core values, is a powerful tool for governance.
Effective oversight of federal programs, support for small businesses and working families, advocacy for veterans and rural communities, and securing resources for infrastructure, education, and healthcare are also key components of the role.
Lastly, an elected official must lead by example—showing up, doing the work, and never forgetting who they serve. Public office is not a position of entitlement—it is a solemn responsibility, built on trust, that demands hard work, integrity, and an unwavering focus on service over self.
The Red Badge of Courage- Stephen Crane is my favorite book because it captures, with striking realism and emotional depth, the internal battle between fear and courage—something I have experienced firsthand as a combat veteran.
The U.S. House of Representatives is unique among American institutions because it was intentionally designed to be the most direct and immediate voice of the people. Unlike the Senate, where members serve six-year terms and represent entire states, House members serve two-year terms and represent smaller, more localized districts. This structure ensures that Representatives remain closely connected to the communities they serve, making the House the chamber most responsive to shifts in public opinion and the everyday concerns of American families.
One of the House’s defining qualities is its proportional representation, meaning the number of representatives per state is based on population. This guarantees that more populous states have a stronger voice, while still preserving a fair and balanced national conversation. It also allows diverse perspectives to enter the legislative process—from rural districts like those in Northern Michigan and the Upper Peninsula to densely populated urban areas—creating a mosaic of American life within a single institution.
The House also holds the exclusive power of the purse, meaning all revenue-related bills must originate there. This grants the chamber significant influence over taxation and federal spending, reinforcing its responsibility to ensure fiscal accountability and protect taxpayers' interests. In addition, the House plays a central role in oversight and investigations, often serving as the first check against executive overreach and governmental inefficiency.
Another important feature is the sheer speed and adaptability of the House. With 435 members and shorter terms, the chamber can be more agile in responding to crises, public demand, and emerging issues. While this can lead to fierce debate and partisan divisions, it also reflects the vibrancy of a healthy democracy.
I do not believe it is necessarily beneficial for representatives to have previous experience in government or politics. In fact, some of the most authentic and effective leadership comes from those who have lived real-world experiences outside of the political bubble. Career politicians often become disconnected from the struggles of everyday Americans—they learn how to play the game, protect their careers, and serve special interests rather than the people they were elected to represent.
Our government was never meant to be run by a permanent political class. It was designed for citizen leadership—people from all walks of life bringing their skills, experiences, and values to the table to serve their fellow Americans. I believe that servant leadership should come from those who have served their communities in meaningful ways—whether in the military, small business, education, healthcare, or public service—not just those who’ve climbed the political ladder.
Having a fresh perspective is a strength, not a weakness. It allows for bold thinking, innovative solutions, and a willingness to challenge the status quo. My background in the military, conflict resolution, and advocacy has taught me how to lead under pressure, listen with empathy, and work through complex problems to find real solutions. Those qualities aren’t taught in politics—they’re learned in life.
While some knowledge of the legislative process is important, it can be learned. What cannot be taught is authenticity, accountability, and a deep commitment to doing what’s right, even when it’s hard. We need more people in Congress who haven’t been conditioned by partisan politics or beholden to donors—but who are there to serve the people with honesty and courage.
Over the next decade, two of the United States’ greatest challenges will be preserving the long-term solvency of Social Security and addressing the growing national debt. These two issues are deeply intertwined and demand responsible, forward-thinking leadership that prioritizes fiscal sustainability without compromising the well-being of everyday Americans.
Social Security is a cornerstone of economic security for millions of retirees, people with disabilities, and survivors of deceased workers. However, current projections indicate that the Social Security trust fund could be depleted within the next decade if reforms are not enacted. This would result in reduced benefits for future recipients—many of whom rely on these funds as their primary source of income. We must protect Social Security, not by cutting benefits or raising the retirement age, but by modernizing its funding model. Preserving this program is not just an economic imperative—it is a moral commitment to the generations who built this nation.
At the same time, the United States faces the challenge of a rapidly increasing national debt, now exceeding $37 trillion. If left unchecked, rising interest payments on the debt will crowd out essential investments in infrastructure, education, healthcare, and defense.
Addressing these challenges requires fiscal responsibility paired with compassion. We must ensure that future generations inherit a nation that is not only financially secure but still honors its promises. If we act with courage and common sense, we can strengthen Social Security and reduce the debt.
No, I do not believe that a two-year term is the right length for members of the U.S. House of Representatives. While the original intent behind the two-year term was to ensure accountability and keep representatives closely tied to the will of the people, the realities of modern campaigning and governance have significantly changed since our nation’s founding. Today, the constant cycle of campaigning severely limits a representative’s ability to focus on long-term solutions, thoughtful policymaking, and meaningful constituent service.
From the moment a representative is sworn into office, they are already under pressure to prepare for the next election. The demands of fundraising, political positioning, and securing party support consume valuable time and energy that should be spent crafting legislation, overseeing government operations, and engaging with the community. In many cases, representatives are pulled away from their districts to raise money or travel for campaign events—just to remain competitive in the next election. This non-stop cycle benefits entrenched power structures and wealthy donors, not the people.
The result is a system that encourages short-term thinking and political calculation, rather than thoughtful leadership and bold action. Representatives are often hesitant to take difficult but necessary positions for fear of immediate electoral backlash, which stifles progress on critical issues like Social Security reform, veterans' care, and debt reduction. It’s a system that rewards talking points over solutions and headlines over hard work.
Extending the term length—while maintaining transparency and accountability—would allow representatives more time to govern effectively, engage deeply with issues, and deliver real results for the American people. It would also reduce the influence of money in politics by minimizing the constant need to campaign.
I believe it’s time for a serious, balanced discussion on how to ensure a government that remains responsive, effective, and in touch with the people it serves. While term limits are often proposed as a way to prevent career politicians from holding office indefinitely, I believe an even more practical and impactful solution is to establish a mandatory retirement age for elected officials—aligned with the federal retirement age as determined by Social Security.
In nearly every other profession, individuals are expected to step aside at a certain point to make room for the next generation. Why should public office be any different? As the Social Security Administration determines when individuals are eligible for full retirement benefits—typically between ages 66 and 67 depending on birth year—it’s only reasonable that elected officials should follow the same guideline. This approach respects the experience of seasoned leaders while also ensuring that those making laws and guiding national policy are physically and mentally equipped to handle the demands of the job.
Mandatory retirement would naturally limit tenure without undermining voter choice or cutting short the careers of effective public servants too early. It would also encourage greater generational diversity in government—something that is sorely needed in a rapidly changing world. Fresh perspectives, innovative thinking, and representation of younger Americans are essential to maintaining a dynamic and forward-looking democracy.
This policy could also help reduce the entrenched power structures that often develop over time and pave the way for more competitive and open elections. While experience is valuable, it should not become a barrier to progress. Public service should be about contribution, not career preservation.
Yes, one story that left a lasting impact on me came from a fellow veteran I met during a visit to a small town in Michigan’s 1st Congressional District. He was a combat veteran who had served multiple tours overseas, much like myself, and returned home hoping to build a peaceful life for his family. But instead of peace, he faced bureaucratic delays, inadequate healthcare through the VA, and a painful sense of abandonment by the very country he had risked everything to protect.
He told me about struggling with service-connected injuries, both visible and invisible, and how difficult it was to access consistent, quality mental health care in a rural area. The nearest VA clinic was hours away, and appointments were often delayed or canceled due to staffing shortages. He felt like a number in a broken system—left behind, despite having honored his commitment to serve.
What struck me most was his resilience. Despite everything, he wasn’t angry—he was hopeful. He believed that change was possible, and he wanted to be part of a community and a country that didn’t forget its own. His story reminded me why I chose to run: to fight for people like him, who have given so much and ask for so little in return.
That conversation reinforced my commitment to improving Veterans Affairs, especially in rural communities. But beyond that, it reminded me that policy is personal. Behind every issue—whether it's Social Security, healthcare, or economic opportunity—are real people with real struggles who deserve better. Listening to their stories isn’t just a campaign activity—it’s a responsibility and a privilege.
Stories like his are why I’m committed to servant leadership rooted in empathy, action, and accountability. They remind me that our mission is not about power—it's about people. And we must never forget the human impact of the work we do.
Yes, I believe that compromise is both necessary and desirable for effective policymaking—especially in a nation as diverse, complex, and dynamic as the United States. At its core, compromise is not about surrendering values or weakening principles; it’s about finding common ground to move our country forward. Our Founders built a system of checks and balances that requires cooperation. That system only works when leaders put results over rhetoric and focus on what’s best for the people—not just their party.
As someone with a strong background in conflict resolution and service to this country, I’ve learned that real leadership means listening, understanding different perspectives, and having the courage to work with those you may disagree with. That’s not weakness—it’s strength. It takes more conviction to build a bridge than to stand on one side shouting across the divide.
For Republican constituents, I recognize the importance of limited government, fiscal responsibility, and personal liberty. Those are values I share and will always defend. But advancing those principles effectively often requires working with others to create laws that are not only grounded in conservative values but are also implementable, balanced, and respectful of the broader public interest. No lasting solution—on Social Security, border security, veterans’ care, or debt reduction—can happen without bipartisan effort.
Refusing to compromise leads to gridlock, dysfunction, and missed opportunities. The American people deserve results, not more political theater. Compromise done right isn’t about abandoning beliefs—it’s about delivering real-world solutions that reflect the will of the people while maintaining the integrity of our Constitutional framework.
In Congress, I won’t compromise on integrity or the Constitution, but I will always be willing to sit down at the table, listen, and find common sense solutions—because that’s how we get things done for the American people.
The Constitution’s requirement that all bills for raising revenue originate in the House of Representatives reflects a powerful principle: taxation must be directly accountable to the people. As the chamber closest to the public—elected every two years and representing smaller districts—the House is uniquely positioned to ensure that fiscal policy reflects the will and needs of everyday Americans. If elected, I would take this constitutional responsibility seriously and use it to prioritize fiscal responsibility, protect working families, and strengthen long-term economic stability.
This power is not just procedural—it’s foundational to ensuring that the people have a voice in how their money is raised and spent. I would use it to advocate for a fairer tax code that doesn't overburden the middle class or small businesses while ensuring that the wealthiest individuals and corporations pay their fair share. Our tax policies must support American workers, not leave them carrying the weight of irresponsible federal spending or outdated tax loopholes.
This role would also support my focus on protecting Social Security and addressing the national debt. These aren’t abstract numbers—they’re about the future of retirement security and economic opportunity. I believe we can and must pass revenue legislation that responsibly funds Social Security without cutting benefits or increasing the burden on those already struggling. Revenue bills should reflect our priorities as a nation—and mine are clear: take care of those who have paid in, ensure veterans and working families are supported, and stop mortgaging our children’s future for short-term political gains.
I would fight to restore public trust in how government handles taxpayer dollars. This power is not just about money—it’s about accountability, values, and making sure Washington serves the people—not the other way around.
The investigative powers of the U.S. House of Representatives are a critical tool in upholding our system of checks and balances. These powers must be used responsibly, impartially, and in service to the American people—not for political theater or partisan gain. At its core, the House’s ability to investigate ensures transparency, promotes accountability, and defends the integrity of our democratic institutions.
First and foremost, investigations should focus on protecting taxpayer dollars and exposing waste, fraud, and abuse in government agencies and programs. Whether it's ensuring the responsible use of federal funding or uncovering mismanagement within departments like Veterans Affairs or Social Security, the House has a duty to ask tough questions and demand honest answers. Oversight must be based on facts—not ideology—and it should lead to constructive solutions, not just headlines.
The House must also use its investigative authority to hold both public and private entities accountable when their actions harm the public good. This includes everything from corporate misconduct that affects consumers or workers, to examining the influence of foreign adversaries or powerful special interests that undermine national security, elections, or public trust.
As a veteran and public servant, I believe strongly that investigations should also be used to protect whistleblowers and ensure that those who speak out about wrongdoing are shielded from retaliation. A transparent government only exists when people feel safe to come forward and tell the truth.
However, with this power comes great responsibility. Oversight should never be used as a political weapon or a tool to score points. When investigations are driven by partisan agendas, they lose credibility and distract from real issues. The American people deserve seriousness, fairness, and results—not grandstanding.
Given my background as a combat veteran, conflict resolution expert, and advocate for veterans’ rights and government accountability, I am especially interested in serving on committees where I can directly impact the lives of everyday Americans and bring practical, solutions-focused leadership to the table.
First and foremost, I would be honored to serve on the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs. With firsthand experience navigating the challenges faced by veterans—including access to healthcare, mental health support, transition services, and the VA system—I understand the urgent need for reform and increased responsiveness. I would work to ensure that every veteran receives the care, respect, and support they’ve earned, especially those in rural and underserved areas like many parts of Northern Michigan and the Upper Peninsula.
I’m also drawn to the House Committee on Armed Services. As a retired U.S. Army veteran, I have a deep understanding of national security, defense policy, and the needs of active-duty service members and their families. I believe in maintaining a strong national defense while ensuring that our military strategy reflects the realities of modern warfare, cybersecurity threats, and global diplomacy.
Another area of strong interest is the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability. I’m passionate about ensuring transparency in government spending and holding public institutions accountable to the people they serve. I would advocate for stronger oversight of federal agencies, better protections for whistleblowers, and reforms to reduce waste, fraud, and abuse.
Finally, I would welcome the opportunity to serve on the House Committee on Ways and Means, particularly to focus on protecting and strengthening Social Security. This program is vital to millions of Americans, and I believe my voice—grounded in both personal experience and public service—can help guide responsible reforms that preserve it for future generations.
Financial transparency and government accountability are fundamental pillars of a healthy democracy. Without them, trust in public institutions erodes, corruption takes root, and the voices of everyday citizens are drowned out by special interests. I believe that elected officials have a moral and civic duty to be transparent in how public funds are used and to be fully accountable to the people they serve.
Financial transparency means that taxpayers should know where their money is going, how it’s being spent, and whether it’s producing results. Budgets, contracts, and expenditures should be easy to access and understand. Clear, public reporting builds trust and allows citizens to evaluate whether their leaders are acting responsibly and effectively. It also helps prevent waste, fraud, and abuse by keeping public institutions under watchful eyes—not behind closed doors.
Government accountability goes hand in hand with transparency. It means that public officials, from local governments to federal agencies, must be held to the highest standards of integrity and ethics. When mistakes are made or promises go unfulfilled, there must be consequences—not cover-ups. Leaders should admit when something isn’t working and take steps to fix it, not shift blame or hide behind bureaucracy.
I also believe in increasing oversight and strengthening protections for whistleblowers, journalists, and watchdog organizations that help shine a light on misconduct. Accountability shouldn’t be viewed as a threat by those in power—it should be welcomed as a tool to ensure we are always striving to do better.
Ultimately, public service is about stewardship—not control. The money spent is not the government’s money—it’s the people’s. Transparency and accountability aren’t just ideals to talk about during a campaign. They must be lived every day in office, with a clear and constant reminder: we work for the people, and the people deserve the truth.
Note: Ballotpedia reserves the right to edit Candidate Connection survey responses. Any edits made by Ballotpedia will be clearly marked with [brackets] for the public. If the candidate disagrees with an edit, he or she may request the full removal of the survey response from Ballotpedia.org. Ballotpedia does not edit or correct typographical errors unless the candidate's campaign requests it.
Note: Michal submitted the above survey responses to Ballotpedia on March 25, 2025.
Campaign finance summary
Note: The finance data shown here comes from the disclosures required of candidates and parties. Depending on the election or state, this may represent only a portion of all the funds spent on their behalf. Satellite spending groups may or may not have expended funds related to the candidate or politician on whose page you are reading this disclaimer. Campaign finance data from elections may be incomplete. For elections to federal offices, complete data can be found at the FEC website. Click here for more on federal campaign finance law and here for more on state campaign finance law.
Justin Michal campaign contribution history
Year
Office
Status
Contributions
Expenditures
2026*
U.S. House Michigan District 1
Candidacy Declared general
$35,177
$28,059
Grand total
$35,177
$28,059
Sources: OpenSecrets, Federal Elections Commission ***This product uses the openFEC API but is not endorsed or certified by the Federal Election Commission (FEC).
Ballotpedia features 636,866 encyclopedic articles written and curated by our professional staff of editors, writers, and researchers. Click here to contact our editorial staff or report an error. For media inquiries, contact us here. Please donate here to support our continued expansion.
Note: The finance data shown here comes from the disclosures required of candidates and parties. Depending on the election or state, this may represent only a portion of all the funds spent on their behalf. Satellite spending groups may or may not have expended funds related to the candidate or politician on whose page you are reading this disclaimer. Campaign finance data from elections may be incomplete. For elections to federal offices, complete data can be found at the FEC website. Click here for more on federal campaign finance law and here for more on state campaign finance law.
