Wes Nakagiri

Livingston County Commissioner, District 3

If you have read any of my recent articles you know I was dismayed when I discovered Governor Whitmer attempting to use confidential, personal health data for her own political gain. That she would use citizens’ private health information for political gain is frightening. And that she attempted this during the biggest public health crisis is the epitome of dirty politics.

Having witnessed this abuse of public trust I become suspicious that she might use other COVID data in a similar manner. Therefore, I decided to do my own analysis of COVID data. I’m glad I did.

I published my first COVID analyses on May 6, 2020.  Nearly two weeks ago, COVID data I viewed firsthand indicated that Governor Whitmer did not need to lockdown all of Michigan. Since the initial report, I’ve spent countless hours sifting through additional COVID data from Michigan as well as other states. In total, nine reports were published, all with the same conclusion. Governor Whitmer’s draconian lockdown was, to put it mildly, too draconian.

In fact, if Michigan used benchmarks implemented by other states, the only counties that should not re-open are Wayne, Washtenaw, and Monroe counties. The rest of the state could have already safely re-opened.

She indicated she would be guided by facts and data, but clearly, she was not. The Mackinac Center for Public Policy called her out on May 6 stating, “Although claiming to use ‘the best science,’ Gov. Whitmer has provided virtually no details over the last eight weeks as to what that means.”

Now, sensing her subjects can see she has no clothes, Emperor Whitmer is showing signs of using traditional science instead of political science as the basis for her decisions. On May 18, 2020, the Detroit News reported that “Gov. Gretchen Whitmer is expected to announce Monday some reopening plans for Northern Michigan and the Upper Peninsula.”

Indeed, she is starting to see the light, not fully, but she took a step in the right direction. At least she is not in total darkness. If she stepped out into the light just a little further, she would see that the science indicates Livingston County could also safely re-open.

Will she open up our county based upon the “science?” Who knows? In addition to being concerned about Whitmer’s definition of science, Livingston County residents have another concern as Whitmer recently changed regional boundaries, placing Livingston in Michigan’s worst COVID region. Were her changes to these long-established boundaries based on “traditional science,” or “political science?”

With a Democrat-friendly media, Governor Whitmer has never been aggressively questioned about the facts and data she was using to support her draconian lockdown. How long would Whitmer have continued the charade of COVID emergency across the entire state if she hadn’t been called out by public protests and independent data analyses?

Note about the author: Prior to being a Livingston County Commissioner, Wes Nakagiri was an Engineering Executive and Six-Sigma statistical analyst at a Fortune 200 automotive supplier. He holds a Bachelor of Mechanical Engineering Degree from General Motors Institute (now called Kettering University), and a Masters Degree in Applied Statistics from Oakland University. A complete list of his research and findings on COVID can be found here.

Added after initial publication

Bridge Magazine published an article titled, "When will Gov. Whitmer reopen Michigan? It’s complicated. And a bit vague." This article discussed Governor Whitmer's resistance to using quantifiable "metrics like case counts or available hospital beds to guide her decision on when businesses can reopen."

She clearly misled Michiganders when she said, "We're going to have to make decisions based on the best science . . ." So somewhere between April 14th and May 17th Whitmer discarded the "best science" and started making decisions using something less than the "best science." 

What type of sub-optimum science she decided to use and when she decided to use it is not precisely known. However, it is precisely known that she wasn't using the best science on April 17th. It was on this date she was caught using "political science" as she attempted using the COVID crisis to further her political ambitions. Yes, on April 17th I published my discovery that she planned to acquire citizens' private health information and store it in a Democrat voter database to benefit herself and her political allies. To this day she continues to stonewall on this issue.