A few thoughts on the impending midterm election

In Michigan, Proposal 3--the Reproduction Freedom Initiative--has garnered the most attention

The midterm election is only days away—a seeming lifetime if you’re a candidate trying to hold onto a slight lead and worried that some unforeseen event will cause further erosion and a rapidly-shrinking window of opportunity if you’re the one trying to catch up.

Of course, there are impending landslides and lost causes for which the final voting tallies will be a formality in confirming that assessment.

Michigan, being a purple state with enough Independents to keep the outcome of tight races suspenseful, these last days of the campaign have the horserace aspect to them… of various races coming down to the wire, with the announcer (or in this case, the media) shouting “And here they come!”

Which is why political enthusiasts and diehard partisans stay up on Election Night, anxiously awaiting the results. With the large number of absentee ballots that can’t be counted until after the polls close, it will likely be a long night stretching on into the morning for many outcomes.

The governor’s race, along with those for attorney general, secretary of state, and the two seats on the Michigan Supreme Court, have garnered much attention. But a couple of hotly-contested battles for seats on Congress—in large part because the districts were re-configured after the census—have gained a good deal in coverage. The primary one is the 7th District (where I reside) that pits Congresswoman Elissa Slotkin, a Democrat, against State Senator Tom Barrett, the Republican standard-bearer.

It’s apparently the most expensive Congressional race in the nation for money spend on ads.

But these candidate battles pale in comparison to the interest generated by Proposal 3 (the Reproductive Freedom initiative that’s on the ballot) and to a lesser extent, Proposal 2 that would expand the opportunities and means for voting.

The former is in response to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling earlier this year that overturned Roe v. Wade—the case from 50 years ago that had determined a woman’s right to an abortion, albeit with certain restrictions, was constitutionally protected. The decision has left the matter (for the time being) to each state.

The latter is a reaction to efforts by many Republican governors and legislatures across the country since the 2020 election (and even before that) to make it more difficult to vote. That concerted effort has included lawmakers and others in Michigan. This has been done in the name of Election Integrity. Here in Michigan, the election of a Republican governor coupled with GOP-controlled state legislature would likely make the creation of these legal obstacles a likelihood.

Those attempting to defeat Proposal 3—led by Michigan Right to Life, the Catholic Church, and social conservatives—have centered on proclaiming the would-be constitutional amendment “Confusing and Extreme” and brought up the specter of widespread partial-birth abortions and children getting the medical procedure without parental consent or knowledge. For good measure they’ve thrown in kids being able to get trans-gender treatments on the sly.

Parental notification is not be be summarily dismissed as a concern'; however, for the most part, the proposal is mainly “confusing and extreme” if you oppose it. Or wish to convince others to oppose it.

For supporters, it’s a way of guaranteeing the right of a woman to control this decision without undue governmental interference. To them, banning abortion or making it nearly impossible to obtain, along with the threat of legal restrictions on other facets of reproduction, including birth control, is what’s “extreme.”

The debate over abortion and some of these other aspects has been around for many years. I remember it being a hot-button issue even before Roe v. Wade. The Right to Life on one side and Planned Parenthood on the other have served as the poster children in this contentious dispute.

Polls over the years have indicated that the majority of Americans favor the right, but with some legal caveats. The ‘either-or stance’ of proponents and opponents—depending on where you stand on the issue—has made finding that middle ground elusive. Of course, ‘middle ground’ might not be the proper analogy to use. When you believe passionately in something or someone, it’s hard to nibble around the edges.

Elections are supposed to settle such matters. And they often do, and have. But not always.

In a few day we’ll find out who the governor will be, along with the winners of the many other state, county, local, and school races.

The fate of the three statewide proposals, including No. 3, will also be decided. But, before the ashes are cold on these ‘barn burner’ races and the proposals, the maneuvering for the next election (only two years away) and plans for legal challenges will have begun.

Steve Horton is a mid-Michigan journalist and editor-publisher of the ‘Fowlerville News & Views’ newspaper.