Story by Zachary Avery, Editor-in-Chief
As the colors on the trees change, so do the colors on our lawns. Is it just me, or are there lots more red-and-blue yard signs out these days?
That’s right, it is election time in the United States. It’s time for frequent campaign ads, ill-timed robo-calls and another list of constitutional amendment proposals that could have strong effects on our elections and lives for many, many years to come. But don’t worry. We’re here to help!
In addition to this year’s general election, the gubernatorial race is being held between incumbent Governor Gretchen Whitmer and challenger Tudor Dixon. Their recent televised debates on Oct. 13 and 25 included tense discussions on some of the issues that Americans have been concerned with this past few years: Abortion rights, the American school system and election security. This election’s proposed constitutional amendments consider similar topics.
The ratification of Proposal 1 would mean limiting state legislature to a maximum of 12 years in service, regardless of whether they work in the House or the Senate. This amendment would also strengthen certain financial disclosure rules for our publicly elected officials, including the Governor’s office. As of right now, Michigan and Idaho are the only two American states that do not require elected officials to disclose personal finance information, including their income sources. This proposal was initiated by the coalition Voters for Transparency and Term Limits.
The ratification of Proposal 2 would mean adding on nine days of early voting for our state elections, broadening accessibility for voters and their work schedules. This proposal carries some measures to continue the status quo, including the permission for voters to sign an affidavit swearing on their identity rather than presenting a photo I.D. or Driver’s License. Other effects of this proposal would seriously change aspects of our election process, including a surge of new ballot drop boxes for ease of access, as well as a restriction on post-election audits to only state or local officials, not federal offices (including the U.S. president).
And finally, Proposal 3 would invalidate a 1931 Michigan ban on abortion by adding the right into the state’s constitution under “reproductive freedom,” effectively nullifying the 90-year-old ban. Voting “No” on this proposal would mean leaving abortion access up to locally elected officials, including the courts’ choice on whether or not to prosecute when a Michigander receives an abortion.
Aquinas College falls under Precinct 32, and our polling place is the Alksnis Building.
Vote on November 8!