DETROIT – One of the most bizarre primary campaigns in Michigan history ended Tuesday. While there was dissatisfaction with Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, no Republican of any stature stepped forward to challenge her.
Indeed, many of the state’s top Republicans admitted that a year ago, they had never heard of any of the five candidates who made the primary ballot; five others, including former frontrunner James Craig, a former Detroit police chief, were knocked off because they submitted fraudulent petition signatures.
But if that sounds odd, consider this: This fall, the main attention is probably not going to be on the candidates for any office, but on two hugely important ballot proposals which may stimulate turnout far more than the candidates.
Both are proposed constitutional amendments. And whether they pass or fail, they are bound to have a major impact on the state for as far into the future as anyone can see. One would make it much easier and more convenient to vote. The other deals with what has become the hottest of all hot button issues: Abortion.
When the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade on June 24, Michigan apparently reverted to a 1931 law that outlawed almost all abortions and made performing one a felony. A state judge has temporarily blocked enforcement of that law because of a lawsuit challenging its constitutionality, but it could be reinstated.
Pro-choice individuals and groups anticipated abortion rights could be in jeopardy long before the Supreme Court ruling, and formed a group called Michigan Reproductive Freedom for All.
They then collected 753,759 signatures — the most in state history — to get a constitutional amendment on the ballot that would protect a woman’s right to an abortion in virtually all circumstances.
While it says “the state may regulate the provision of abortion care after fetal viability,” it emphasizes “that in no circumstance shall the state prohibit an abortion that … is medically indicated to protect the life or physical or mental health of the pregnant individual.”
Opponents are likely to charge that this means abortion on demand in any case, no matter how far along the pregnancy.
What does seem certain is that this proposed constitutional amendment is likely to break all records for spending.
Groups in favor of keeping abortion legal had already raised nearly $10 million by the end of June, before the proposal was even certified for the ballot; Citizens to Support MI Women and Children, an ad hoc group opposing it had raised $400,000, but that figure is likely to dramatically increase, thanks to contributions from Right to Life and the Roman Catholic Church.
The result may depend on what may be a majority of voters who are favor of keeping abortion legal in the early stages of pregnancy and in cases of rape or incest, but who aren’t happy with the extremes of either a total ban or third trimester abortions on demand.
While the abortion issue is bound to bring voters to the polls, another proposed constitutional amendment, Promote the Vote 2022, may excite almost as much interest.
Four years ago, the ad hoc group Promote the Vote managed to get an amendment passed that allowed anyone in the state to get an absentee ballot and added a number of other reforms, such as allowing voters to register on Election Day itself.
Promote the Vote 2022 is designed to make voting easier still; it would provide for nine days of early voting, something that hasn’t been allowed in Michigan, and would also publicly subsidize absentee ballots. In fact, it would allow voters of any age to register to get absentee ballots for every election.
The amendment would also, among other things, allow people without ID to continue to cast ballots if they sign an affidavit, require numerous ballot drop-off boxes, require that only the official vote count can be certified; and prevent outsiders from auditing the vote.
Generally speaking, Democrats enthusiastically support this amendment; Republicans do not. Supporters raised $8.4 million through June alone, after which they turned in 669,972 signatures, far more than the 425,059 valid signatures needed.
Opponents raised and spent about $1.6 million on behalf of their ballot initiative, Secure MI Vote, which so far has failed to collect enough signatures, though there is an outside chance it still could qualify. It would do nearly the polar opposite of Promote the Vote, and make voting harder, not easier.
What if both get on the ballot and pass?
In that case, Promote the Vote II would prevail, because it is a constitutional amendment, and the other just a law.
There is also a third proposed constitutional amendment that, in any other year, would have gotten more attention. It was put on the ballot by the legislature in May and which is backed by a group called Voters for Transparency and Term Limits.
Currently, Michigan legislators can serve up to 14 years – six in the state house of representatives, and eight in the state senate. Then they are banned for life. The proposed amendment would cut the time they can serve to 12 years, but allow them to serve it all in one chamber. Supporters say it would make for a better legislature with more experienced lawmakers. Opponents are against any change in the state’s strict term limits policy, which was enacted in 1992.
The original proposal also established strict financial disclosure requirements for the lawmakers, but that panicked the legislature, which weakened those requirements considerably.
Still, for those concerned with ethics, passing this would be a start. As it stands now, Michigan and Idaho are the only states whose legislators have no financial requirements whatsoever.
What remains to be seen is how many otherwise stay-at-home voters will be motivated by any of these proposals — and if that higher turnout helps either party, as well.
-30-
