John Chamberlin, Nancy Wang, Sharon Dolente, Christopher Thomas, and Richard McLellan look at Proposal 2 and Proposal 3.
Transcript:
I'm Michael Barr I'm the Joan and
Sanford Weill Dean of the Gerald R Ford
School of Public Policy it is my great
honor and pleasure to be with you this
afternoon and to welcome you to the Ford
school for this really fantastic
conversation today's policy talks at the
Ford school event is hosted by the
Center for local state and urban policy
known as close-up welcome as well to our
online viewers and our thanks to Detroit
Public Television WTBS for their
partnership in making today's event
available to voters throughout the state
of Michigan our state faces a big day in
just under a month among the important
issues Michigan voters will decide on
November 6th our two key ballot
initiatives one proposal addresses who
essentially draws and how our
congressional districts are drawn and
another one would amend the state
constitution around voting eligibility
and other requirements to help us better
understand the pros and the cons of
these proposals Ford school emeritus
professor John Chamberlin has assembled
today's expert panel like you just to
start by helping me thank John for
making this happen
full bios for our speakers are in your
printed program and John is going to say
a bit more about each one of them in
just a moment so please just join me for
now in welcoming Nancy Wang Sharon
delante
Richard McClelland and Christopher
Thomas we're gonna follow our usual Ford
school format after John and the
panelists do their work together we're
going to open it up to the audience and
the way you ask questions is by writing
your questions on a note card there'll
be a staff member coming around to pick
them up they'll bring them to the front
and we have a wonderful student team
who's going to sort through them and
make sure that they get asked here to
this terrific panel I'm closed up
program manager Tom Ivanko is going to
help the Ford School students do that if
you are watching or listening online you
can also send your questions in via
twitter with the hashtag policytalks
with that let me turn things over to
John and ask him to come up to the
podium and really look forward to the
event we're gonna have today thank you
very much
Thank You Dean bar and welcome to our
audience here in Annenberg auditorium it
to those of you watching the live
streams of today's event either on
Detroit Public TV or on the Ford school
website before we begin I'd like to
acknowledge and thank supporters and
sponsors of today's policy talks at the
Ford school the Center for local state
and urban policy in the Ford school the
department of political science at the
College of LSN a the U of M Alumni
Association the OEM student group we
listen and the Ford school student group
the domestic policy Corps and the League
of Women Voters of the Ann Arbor area
today's panel is entitled electoral
reform by a ballot initiatives as most
of you already know citizens of Michigan
can place before voters proposed
amendments to the Michigan Constitution
to do so they must gather at least
favored house discussing two such
proposals that will appear on the
November 6 ballot proposal to will if
approved by voters amend the
Constitution to provide for an
independent redistricting commission
that will be responsible for drawing new
congressional and state legislative
districts following each decennial
census proposal 3 will if approved by
voters amend the Constitution to make
voter registration and voting easier for
citizens including automatic and
election day registration no reason
absentee ballots and the option of
straight ticket voting your program
contains the ballot wording for each of
these proposals in addition there are
several handouts that provide additional
information that was available as you
came in and now the requisite request
that you've checked your cell phones and
turn them off so that we can proceed
uninterrupted by phone calls I'd now
like to introduce our panelists to my
direct left is Richard McClelland a
graduate of Michigan State and Michigan
law school who's practiced law in
Michigan for nearly 50 years
or maybe 50 years in a little bit 50
here his circuit advisory capacities to
mission government Michigan governor's
Milliken angler and Schneider and his
legal practices included extensive
representation of political candidates
political action committees ballot
question campaigns super PACs and 401 C
reasons for believing that proposal 2 is
not good for Michigan and also offers
some comments about proposal 3 next to
him is Nancy Wang the board chair for
voters not politicians the group that
spearheaded the drive to place proposal
Nancy graduated from the college of
engineering at U of M and the Michigan
law school practice environmental law
and she's going to argue in favor of
proposal 2 next to her is Sharon delante
the voting rights strategist for the
ACLU of Michigan one of the lead
partners in the promote the vote drive
that was backed by more than a dozen
organizations and that led to proposal
three being on the ballot sherrod is a
graduate of the Ford school and the
Michigan law school and will argue in
favor of proposal 3 and on the far end
Christopher Thomas is the former
elections director the state of Michigan
a post he held for 36 years he graduated
from MSU and the Thomas Cooley School of
Law he was twice elected president of
the National Association of state
election directors and in 2012 received
that Association's Distinguished Service
Award in 2013 he was appointed by perfet
President Barack Obama to the
Presidential Commission on election
administration Chris will offer comments
on both of these proposals that we're
talking about today now that you know a
bit more about today's panelists let's
begin with Nancy Wang thank you so much
before we begin I'd like to just take a
quick survey to see how many people in
the audience know have heard about
voters not politicians before today I
see a lot of familiar faces okay great
I just like to thank the Ford school and
close up for this opportunity our
research shows that
our biggest challenge now 29 days before
Election Day is not the policy but
rather just people knowing about it so I
really really welcome and appreciate
this opportunity to talk about proposal
to as John mentioned I am the board
chair of voters not politicians we are a
group of ordinary citizens who got
together and responded to a Facebook
post that our founder Katie Fahey put up
in November of 2016 so I've been
volunteering I and 4,000 other
Michiganders have been volunteering for
voters not politicians now and I'm still
a volunteer what we wanted to do was we
wanted to get together we knew that
gerrymandering was a huge problem in
Michigan it's one of the worst
gerrymandered states in the country and
we wanted to find a non partisan
solution that would work for voters not
politicians hence our name and you might
have heard a little bit about our
activities when we were out collecting
petition signatures we were able to
collect 428 thousand signatures in just
over a hundred days from all 83 counties
and it was all done by volunteers which
is incredible but also it was out of
necessity because we are completely
grassroots and self-funded and so but it
worked out really well and now we have a
proposal on the ballot
so the problem I'll start with the
problem
like I said Michigan is one of the top
three most gerrymandered states in the
country and it's not a group that we
want to you know be a part of you guys
might have heard of Gil V Whitford which
went up to the US Supreme Court this
past term that is a case that challenged
Wisconsin's
district maps on the basis of partisan
bias Michigan's maps are actually more
biased than Wisconsin's
and the the process of how it works here
in Michigan is that our legislatures the
state legislature gets to draw its own
maps for its own election district so
you know the state reps and state
senators they get to draw the maps for
their own districts as well as the
congressional districts obviously that's
a huge conflict of interest if they draw
the maps one way they can basically
guarantee that the district will be a
safe Republican or a safe democratic
district and the reason they can do that
is because of the the vast amount of
data that's available today you know
you're not just your voting history but
your income and even you know Facebook
and all of that is available as well as
really sophisticated computer programs
and really fast computers that can draw
you know tens of thousands of maps in
the space of a minute and so what what
the legislature has been doing and you
don't have to take my word for it I'm
really appreciative of the the media
actually in the state's been covering
gerrymandering Michigan really really
well and so for example Bridge magazine
has put out a bunch of articles that
have really gone in depth and and and
what you know examining what the problem
is and I've asked the Ford school to
attach one of their articles as part of
this packet that's available to you and
you know there's what the evidence shows
there's emails there's witness testimony
now because the League of Women Voters
is a plaintiff in a case and they're
challenging Michigan's maps just like
that Wisconsin case and they've
uncovered all these emails that show
exactly you know why Michigan's maps are
so skewed and it's because the
Republican Party which happens to be in
power right now and they control the map
drawing process in 2011 they gave a
million dollars to a group that has no
staff has no offices just a Pio box that
group paid a consultants to sit in a
dark you know in a
I know about dark but to sit in secret
and draw maps that favor the Republican
Party as much as possible and there's
emails that say okay you know this is
great we have a strong 9 to 5 result and
that'll endure from 2012 and beyond 9 to
Republican current congressional
representatives so we in Michigan have
send to DC nine of them are Republican
and five of them are Democrat and this
is despite the fact that in 2012 2014
and 2016 in the federal races that
Republicans candidates actually won less
than 50 percent of the vote from
Michigan voters so why this matters it
matters because the politicians are
picking their voters not the other way
around these maps are so they're drawn
so well I guess you could say that it
enshrines a you know it embeds a party
advantage again despite election
outcomes so there's nothing that you
know there's nothing the voters can do
so that's something in an argument that
we hear a lot well you know to the
victors go the spoils and if people
really cared then they would just vote
these politicians out and that is
exactly the problem because these maps
are so gerrymandered we can't vote the
politicians out you know you're hearing
things about a blue wave coming maybe in
one in a million year maybe event for 4
million I don't know a large large
portion of the electorate to shift
parties for for these politicians to be
unseated so what we see in elections is
we see you know a lot of races go
uncontested right or maybe you know the
primaries are that's the race that that
that matter
we have politicians who are
unaccountable to us no seats change
hands between the parties and again all
of this is very well documented so
voters not politicians proposal - we
seek to take the power of redistricting
out of the politicians hands and put it
into the voters hands this is not a new
idea even in Michigan so right now in
our 1963 Constitution there is an there
is a independent Redistricting
Commission that's written and it
actually operated for three
redistricting cycles it unfortunately it
was ruled unconstitutional because it
this is kind of getting a little bit
into the weeds but it was allowed to
draw districts that had different
numbers of people in it and the Federal
Constitution requires that you have
districts that have equal population so
that's the reason that that Commission
no longer operates it's been ruled
unconstitutional so what we would do
actually is we would take away those
constitutional infirmities we would
re-establish an independent
Redistricting citizens Commission in
Michigan to draw the district lines so
what we are the proposal and I encourage
everyone to please you know if you have
any questions there are a lot of
volunteers actually from bottom photos
not equalities right in the audience and
they'll be happy happy to answer them me
as well but the proposal on what it does
is it takes the fundamental problem with
politicians drawing their own lines out
so politicians you can put safeguards in
there but it's it's the fox guarding the
hen house right it's it's it's too much
at stake their own livelihoods at stake
their own careers and the their parties
that that hinge on whether they make the
decision to draw this district you know
around this community or if they break
that into 40 parts so that they can get
for you know really safe districts and
so what this
Mazal does is it takes the politicians
out of the redistricting business again
framers of our 1963 Constitution
recognize that this is the better way to
go that Commission was also citizens
Commission six other states have
citizens Commission's are operating
already and what the research shows is
that unsurprisingly Commission drawn
districts are more fair they're more
impartial and a hallmark of our proposal
is that everything would be transparent
so everything the Commission does from
the selection process how they're
selected the names in the Hat who got
removed all of that would be made public
all the deliberations of the Commission
would be would be public they could only
meet they would only be able to do
business and open meetings there there
you know the maps that they seek to
adopt they'd have to go around the state
and have ten at least ten public
hearings to show the public you know
what they're considering and to get
input from the public and they have to
accept also you know maps that are drawn
by the public and and they would get
public testimony about okay you know do
these communities do these districts
actually make sense or not do they are
these actual communities in the real
world as opposed to you know politically
expedient ones like I said these
Commission's are already operating in
other states and they've been shown to
be more fair that means you know one
party doesn't get an advantage just
because they got to draw the maps the
number of seats that a party gets more
accurately kind of drives with the
number of votes they got all right is
it's it's it just makes common sense the
just the races are more competitive so
they're actually you know new candidates
that get into the into the races there
are fewer uncontested races
and they're more responsive so seats
actually do change hands with a change
in in the vote in voter sentiment and
that's exactly what we are seeking to
have again here in Michigan and so I
want to take I have like one minute
unfortunately but I wanted to kind of
maybe address some of the more common
arguments that we hear against the
proposal number one that it's a bunch of
amateurs you know and this is like a
really technical process in fact the
legislators right now like I said you
know the evidence just shows that they
outsource and they and there's a one
quote in in a bridge article as well we
outsource everything and then they
outsource redistricting as well to
experts and consultants and and that
would that would be the same process
that this commission would have
available to it so we guaranteed them a
budget and they could hire their experts
to advise them and the big difference of
course like I said before is that it
would all be transparent you would know
who they hired and what maps they were
considering and why they rejected ones
and then adopted other ones thank you I
could talk all day happy to but
unfortunately we have time limits Thank
You Nancy now turn to Sharon delante who
will talk about proposal three hi
everyone thank you so much for welcoming
me back to the Ford school yes I am the
alumni on the panel here what I went
here we did not have this beautiful room
or this beautiful building so I
appreciate very much being welcome back
to enjoy the fruits of what has come
after I graduated and I also just want
to before I start I think as an alumni
and also for the students in the room I
see lots of students you know I just
want to give you a second for how did I
get here right like why I'm the voting
rights strategist at the ACLU of
Michigan and I just you know want to
share for a minute like how does that
come to be and any
sir as I spent a lot of time protecting
voters on election day I I spent a lot
of time volunteering in different
programs that seek to address challenges
that voters have on Election Day I did
that going back to the time that I
graduated actually from here and was
waiting for my bio results and I've done
it in every election primary
presidential midterm elections and so
what that means is I hear a lot of noise
and chaos of what happens on election
day right I hear all the challenges well
as many as I can possibly answer the
phone of the challenges that voters are
facing when they go to cast their ballot
here in Michigan and so that really
became the passion that led to me just
really spending all of my time now at
the ACLU working on voting rights so I'm
here to talk about proposal 3 otherwise
known as promote the vote we needed to
have catchy names because you know
proposal 3 proposal 2 it's not quite as
exciting as these awesome names we've
come up with so so so in my lifetime
which is not necessary a plenty of folks
on the panel who can talk outside of the
scope of my lifetime voting rates and
access to the ballot was a fundamental
right that there you know while people
could disagree perhaps to some degree
about the mechanics there was this
general consensus that people should be
able to access the ballot that that we
you know once we we passed the Voting
Rights Act and we moved out of the civil
rights era there was a there was more of
a frame at least in my lifetime that
people should be able to vote barriers
to voting were on American right you
shouldn't be erecting barriers to people
being able to make their voices heard
that the core of our democracy is
citizens being able to make their voices
heard on election day and so we had you
know a series of of laws that were
adopted nationally by Republicans and
Democrats signed by you know legends
signed by Democratic presidents and in
in in these instances they expanded
access to the bill so the things that
I'm thinking of are the national voting
and voter registration act in 1993
significantly increases access to voter
registration in 2002 we have the help
America Vote act adopted nationally
again significantly addressing access
issues ensuring that individuals are
never turned away at the at the ballot
box that that is the direct quote of the
Sixth Circuit interpreting a law under
the help America Vote Act no citizen
should be turned away well you remember
my story about how what I got here and
how I've been listening to the stories
of voters voters are turned away in
every single election voters are turned
away right here in Ann Arbor voters are
turned away in the primary every
election I talked to voters who were
turned away at the ballot box
sometimes I'm able to give them advice
and send them back because it's before 8
o'clock and and they're able to resolve
that situation but not always just in
the primary I have individuals who were
disenfranchised in violation of state
and federal law so that concerns me
every single if there's even one voter
that concerns me that's how passionate I
am about it so so so so we have this non
partisan history of embracing access and
then one of the things that you may not
know is that Michigan in part due to
this gentleman sitting next to me but
others that I'll talk about was a
pivotal state in expanding access so I
spoke about the National Voter
Registration Act the National Voter
Registration Act is the is the law that
nationally adopted the motor voter
program that's the thing that everybody
who's my age or younger is familiar with
when you go to get your driver's license
you're able to get registered well as
others on the panel can definitely tell
you it didn't used to be so easy you had
to take the onus on yourself to show up
at a different elected officials or
appointed officials office and fill out
a form it used to be much harder well
guess where that amazing innovation that
registered millions and millions and
millions I see heads shaking nope
the extraordinary impact of that
innovation it started right here in
Michigan so under the then Secretary of
State Richard Austin and the gentleman
to my left who will have an opportunity
to talk more about this Michigan was the
first day to adopt this innovation and
it wasn't the only innovation that
Michigan led on the second law that I
mentioned was the help America Vote Act
it has a very critical provision where
it required states to have a statewide
voter registration database so when you
move around the state you can easily
move your registration with you again an
access a way to increase access a way to
make sure that individuals are staying
registered so they're never silenced at
the ballot box that also was a national
innovation that was adopted that began
here in Michigan so Michigan has this
extraordinary history as an innovator in
so many areas technology the automobile
industry but also in voting but
unfortunately at some point that history
came to a grinding halt and so sadly
today Michigan and Mississippi are the
only states that have failed to adopt
any recent reforms that increase access
to the ballot I just want you to I want
to say that one more time
Michigan and Mississippi are the only
states in the country that have failed
to adopt recent reforms to increase
access to the ballot what do I mean by
that name your favorite reform early
voting no reason absentee voting
pre-registration election day
registration same-day registration
online voter registration take your pick
we're the only it's us and Mississippi
and so what does that tell me
that tells me actually that voting
rights is still a very non partisan
issue why because all the states in the
country are finding ways to increase
access and I've been saying that from
day one on proposal three why is that
because the citizens of this state and
the rest of the country believe that
voting access is a nonpartisan issue
that access isn't is without question
something that citizens who are eligible
and meet the requirements of eligibility
in our state and every other state
should be able to cast their ballot
elected officials may wrangle about it
they may argue about it but that's not
how the citizens feel and and so
proposal three comes out of that very
shocking statistic it comes out of that
very shocking reality that Michigan has
fallen behind I'm often asked why I'm
not an elected official in the state
legislature or the state Senate I'm not
the governor I can't answer that
question I think my time is better
served trying to solve the problem so
proposal three I have a half sheet if
you want it here you can get a full
summary of it
the proposal three what would would
adopt a number of amendments to our
Constitution they're all in one section
but a number of policies would be
enshrined in the Constitution that would
increase access and also increase
security because citizens again across
the political spectrum in a non-partisan
way are also concerned about security
and there are things that Michigan can
and should be doing so the first thing
that promote the vote does proposal
three does is protect the right to a
secret ballot there is language in the
Constitution right now regarding a
secret ballot but it entrusts the
legislature with the authority to
protect that I don't know about you all
but I would rather have my own right to
a secret ballot and not leave that to
the legislature so proposal three would
address that the second thing is
proposal three would enshrine in the
Constitution the requirement that
military and overseas voters be sent to
ballot forty-five days before this is
mirroring obligations that are in state
or federal law but it's enshrining that
I'm in our Constitution and and
therefore it could not be eliminated by
future acts of the legislature the next
thing is automatic voter registration
allowing citizens to be automatically
registered unless they refuse this is
still America you can still choose to
say no but if you don't say no your
automatical you're automatically
registered to vote at the Secretary of
State's office this is something that is
the newest reform of the of the access
to the ballot register reforms that have
come online but already in just a few
short years fourteen states have adopted
automatic voter
just raishin and they're seeing really
significant impacts they're seeing
significant impacts because individuals
who are registered and are on the rolls
are then communicated with by partisan
campaigns or non partisan campaigns and
so they start to be a part of the
Democratic little D Civic infrastructure
and they are and then they they are not
voting necessarily at the same rate that
all citizens are voting but they are
voting in significant numbers and so
those individuals would not have gotten
registered if there hadn't been
automatic voter registration so I'll
quickly move through the other
components it would Michigan is one of
only about a dozen states that has a
voter registration deadline tomorrow and
everybody's anybody unregistered in the
room come see me we can handle that ask
everybody you know between here and
bedtime tonight and all day tomorrow
make sure they're all registered we have
a 30-day voter registration deadline
it's the longest allowed by federal law
most states don't have a deadline that
long anymore and a number of states have
gone to the point of allowing citizens
to register up to an including Election
Day and proposal three would allow that
but in a secure way you'd have to
provide proof of residency and you'd
have to appear in person before an
election official this is not new people
the three states that first created
adapted election day voter registration
have had it for 40 years I think we can
do it I think we can just a few more no
reason absentee voting which thank you
to the gentleman next to me
Michigan has been trying to get that
since 1990
here we are 28 years later thank
proposal 3 will finally deliver it to
you it's it's a very non partisan reform
absentee voting or early voting so you
as a citizen can choose to vote prior to
Election Day if that's what's most
convenient for you imagine that make it
convenient for you to vote and therefore
you'll make your voice heard the last
two components are straight ticket
voting so the citizens of Michigan have
for 125 years 127 I think very sadly
will not be on the available this year
the citizens have twice had it taken
away by the legislature and they have
twice put it back in here's the dirty
little secret straight party voting is
not a partisan thing individuals in
Detroit use it and primarily vote
Democratic but so do into significant
numbers of individuals in Ottawa County
and they significantly vote Republican
it's an efficiency that makes it easier
for citizens to cast their ballot in an
efficient manner and the last one and
perhaps one of the most important ones I
think is an audit Michigan has had
something that is called an audit but
it's not actually checking that how
we're how we're tabulating the ballots
is also how they were meant to be
tabulated meaning when you put when you
put your ballots into the machine that
what's coming out as the counts of the
votes is actually being checked and
audited and so proposal three would
implement that as well and so again it's
this perfect marriage that is being
supported by over 70% of voters in
recent polls of increasing access and
having a some more secure election
system because we can have both and we
deserve to have both
thank you sure now having heard the
arguments in favor of the two ballad
reversals we turn to Richard McClellan
who will offer some views on the other
side picture I've been asked to talk
about why the vnp
would not be a good state policy so I'm
gonna follow strictly that instruction
is a complicated proposal and then I was
asked he had a couple of minutes on the
promote the vote proposal we just heard
about
let me just a bigger picture that is not
part of this but I something I've been
thinking about because I've been active
in this area for 50 years there seems to
be a trend to abandon kind of the old
traditional forms of democracy
representative government you get your
representatives they manage the
government for you
you decide a couple years later why do
you want them in there we we had Tom
we've always had in Michigan it's a good
reason the initiative and referendum the
people have always referred to
themselves the ability to this but it
was a very rare occurrence but as we
have gotten fed up with our legislature
and possibly because of gerrymander we
more and more are moving toward these
other non-traditional methods of running
the government giving people a package
deal and a vote up or vote down and you
don't have an opportunity to have the
process that I went through for 30 years
in the legislature until term limits
came along they used to spend months on
legislation
the election code and the election
committee was bipartisan they'd fight
over things but they really got into it
you don't see that anymore legislature
gets a bill in front of them they got
the votes they move it out so the system
has changed and the voters response to
it has changed this voters not
politicians is a as an example of that
if voters not by there's a grab bag of
good and bad provisions I don't
anybody's suggested it's it's all bad
in fact several of them are either
existing law or would be in anybody's
fair system respecting existing
boundaries although there are some
people that believe those are racist and
we should not be recognizing existing
county boundaries that were set up a
hundred years ago but in general that's
accepted minimizing the variance between
populations something that the Supreme
Court decided 3040 years ago of the
one-person one-vote now they're fighting
over whether one-person one-vote who the
persons are the only eligible voters in
a district or all the persons in the
Spiritist district I think it's all the
purses the census counts everybody
prisoners illegal aliens children so
that's what I think it should be but it
does get fought over it's not in this
proposal it accepts certain things
contiguous districts gerrymandering is
an art and your if if we didn't have
continuous dick districts we'd have a
piece of Democrats in the U P attached
to a piece and bass City to create a
dissertation or the other way around so
those are there they are decent
establishing a timeline and a procedure
is good government but here's what I
oppose about this it is this what I call
it I was worried about saying it a Rube
Goldberg structure very complicated and
and and it they keep talking about
nonpartisan nonpartisan no politicians
well the Commission is selected by a
partisan elected Secretary of State she
is to generate a list of 10,000 voters
randomly invited by her or him I guess
there's only two there are two women
running to apply and then SOS I'm going
to say randomly its selects from these
pools Democrats Republicans and self
identifying as being unaffiliated
doesn't mean they're not partisan it
means they're not affiliated it doesn't
mean they're independent they can be
very strong partisan and probably will
be just as long and they can technically
show they are unaffiliated so I
guarantee you there will be an effort
over the years to make sure each party
has its own list of unaffiliated people
that will be in the pools the biggest
proposal that I oppose in this is this
term communities of interest it to be
protected I gather it's used in other
states but I am at kind of the old
school
political districts represent people in
a particular geographic district now we
we shifted away from that a few decades
ago because of the racial issue and we
now that is a community of interest
that is particularly well protected and
if you watch the process it's been used
by both parties it's used because of the
the way people live there are more
minority voters in urban areas you can
as they say pack em and stack em you can
squeeze more minority districts into
some of these bigger urban areas and
disadvantage maybe a Democrats that
aren't the right color from this and it
goes the other way they go back and
forth who they cut deals with has been
amazing if you read the history of it so
once we get communities of interest and
to me this is largely a result of the
trend over the last couple you know
Reese not not right away but a few times
that the Democratic Party no longer
represents issues it represents
communities and interest if you talk to
people to go to their convention it's
all about which caucus you good are you
and the urban caucus are you in the gay
caucus are you in the whether it's it's
much more we're how the parties see
themselves and they see themselves as a
cluster of these groups that all have to
be accommodated and I would say there's
a community of interest in most of the
issues but but I don't think that's a
good idea and and so the the the
Commission has to defend these districts
you know through maps and statistics and
so on in the proposal but how are they
going to disclose who the communities of
interest are that it has favored in this
plan and who were the other communities
of districts that are going to be
disfavored they never answer that and
I'm Nancy's taking notes maybe she'll
answer
but I don't to me as a lawyer
and somebody who gets into this stuff I
guarantee you there could be some huge
battles over within the various
communities of interest that are
excluded compared to the ones that are
included one of the things that I just
didn't like in here it bans its bans
commissioners from them talking to
ordinary people you can't talk to
anybody you can only talk to your staff
attorneys experts and consultants well
I'm sorry these are a group of random
randomly selected people I want them
walking around talking people saying I'm
on this commission I just get my name
got drawn I'm gonna do my job what do
you think can't do that you can only
talk to your staff your attorneys here
experts and your consultants I don't
think that's good public policy that
accuses a lie to this idea that this is
for people not politicians I think that
it just is it's wrong and in final
conclusion I think this is a it tends to
do too much and end up ends up with a
complex structure that will end in
endless disputes now I'm 76 I'm not
practicing law anymore but many of my
younger colleagues are going to have a
lot of fun with this and it's gonna
anybody thinks that this is the perfect
structure that will last forever in
Michigan because it's the fairest and
the people will love it and the
politicians will accept it
I don't think so we fight over politics
because politics is a tool by which we
allocate wealth and earth state we
decide who gets money it's all about the
money it'll continue to be and they will
continue to be fight for it I'm gonna
stop on that one I'm give you two
minutes on
promote the vote I think the promote the
vote is largely just a grab bag of good
government ideas have been kicking
around the Republicans have basically
stopped them is correct
they have operated an another model that
is the integrity of the process requires
procedural steps and filing deadlines at
all those kinds of that was the view of
both parties and our political system
for 100 years or so we really have been
moving along toward a much more open
process a for example straight
party-line voting Republicans block that
because they think it favors Democrats
no reason absentee they block that
because they think it serves people that
aren't serious about voting and don't
have reason and they should do it I
don't see anything wrong with those
proposals they are
I wouldn't put them in the Constitution
but they're fine but I think there's
some other things that may or may not
create problems there is this idea of
automatic registration as a result of
doing business with the Secretary of
State all you have to do is be do
business with her him that's not the
worst thing in the world if it's if it's
regulated no the secretary state doesn't
necessarily determine whether you're a
citizen or whether you're eligible to
vote or you're a former felon when
you're doing business the secretary see
that's not their business and then of
all of a sudden it it's been happening
where people who are not citizens go in
on this motor voter get their driver's
license and they the clerk was you know
do you want to be a do you want to vote
boom yes and they're not eligible the
registration by mail
is new it's something that I wouldn't
vote for but I think the way they've
written it or you have to show up a real
person has to show up the first time you
vote with a real ID
makes it worth same with same-day
registration I have been involved in a
lot of Elections for many many years I
sort of ran the what the Republicans
called the voter Integrity Unit to see
what was going on it was bad the
Democrats called us the voter
suppression unit they're winning that
argument unfortunately but what I found
was almost everything we got on Election
Day with people all over the state was
no corruption just people made mistakes
it's getting harder and harder to have
skilled election day workers and and
therefore it's getting raggedy around
the edges sometimes but there's very
little corruption in my mind organized
corruption it doesn't mean some voters
are not treated badly by argue that it's
mostly the people that are not the worst
part of this provision that I don't that
I feel is if you end up permanently
locking these things into the
Constitution you eliminate the normal
legislative process
now I'm sure I'll always find left-wing
groups that are listed as a draft
sponsors of it think they have created
the perfect model for elections and
they're going to lock it in the
Constitution the truth is in about ten
years they will want something different
too and I'll have to go back to the
people instead of going back to the
legislature
so the overall proposal three is not the
worst but it has some bad things in it
that at least
get me to vote no proposal too is awful
but you've heard the other side of that
wood that'll stop and listen to our
expert on the team and now we turn to
the professional election administrator
on our panel Chris Thomas who has served
governors and secretaries of state both
parties and it turned his hair gray
maybe but he was there for three and a
half decades and will get his views on
these two proposals great thank you very
much I'd like to thank the Ford school
for holiness the marvelous opportunity
for everyone to get a good view of
what's going on with these proposals and
it's good to be with my friend Richard
on a panel you always know where Richard
is you never have any doubt and you know
the ACLU used to sue me all the time and
in retirement they become my best
friends so it's been just great so I did
work in this business for a long time I
was the director of elections for 36
years as was a department for 40 and I
worked for the Federal Election
Commission for a few years before that
so it's been a long haul in election
administration and as an administrator I
was a civil servant so I didn't go out
and support ballot proposals it's the
first time I've had this opportunity so
I'm trying to catch up a bit so just for
I guess notice here I've not endorsed
proposal two but I have endorsed
proposal three and I'm not opposed to
proposal two but I just haven't done a
public endorsement so I make a few
comments about proposal two and then
move on to proposal three which gets my
blood running a little little thicker so
it's it is complicated I mean Richards
got it down exactly right this is a
complicated process it always has been
there's a lot of moving parts and the
lawyers will do well journalism will
have a good time following them but I
think it's time to try something new so
we've had Republicans have had their
good fortune to control the entire
process in in 2001 when the districts
are drawn and again in 2011 so they've
had basically a twenty year period where
they've had all the marbles and by the
time they got to 2011 they might have
gotten what some would call little
greedy which is why we're here today on
this issue because people I think
believe it's gone a little too far I
mean you look at our state Senate
there's 27 Republicans and 11 Democrats
now it's just hard to imagine in this
state how that could be well it's the
art of drawing the line so I would make
a couple other comments here so one of
the deals is you know the for
Republicans for Democrats and five
unaffiliated and Richards right I mean
it's gonna how they end up defining that
term is going to be critical but there's
one thing in Lansing thought which I
think doesn't really mirror the rest of
of the electorate is that people's
partisan affiliations whether they're
hard or loose somehow or another define
their character and in Lansing that's
pretty much the case I mean you're
either this or that and they believe
that there is no middle ground I think
most people have a leaning one way or
another but it's not the most central
thing in their life to be a lean
Republican or lean Democratic they have
many other issues that motivate them and
they may be ideology and they may be
just issues and of course we're all
starting to move with what they tell us
nationally together you know
ideologically we're finding our
Islands and I'm in the territory of Ann
Arbor today so when they talk about
drawing lines that don't
disproportionately advantage or
disadvantage one of the political
parties well the Republicans aren't
going to do so well here and they won't
do so well in Detroit but they'll do
very well in many other areas of the
state so it's good there will be more
competitive districts but not every
district is going to be competitive so
you just need to keep that in mind
because of the nature of the populations
that they represent and Richard is right
this concept of community of interests
though that is going to be a real
linchpin in this in terms of them
figuring out how this is going to work
and also this concept of the acceptable
measures of partisan fairness this is
the heart of the litigation that's been
going on is how do you determine
fairness and are these efforts from
Wisconsin and elsewhere to try to get
the supreme court to recognize that and
make that a factor I mean right now one
of the apportionment factors that's been
approved by the US Supreme Court is that
you don't throw the incumbent out of its
district now that's to most people kind
of a ridiculous deal so in California
which is very I think that's the one
that's most similar to Michigan the the
way it worked it was kind of interesting
because they use it in 2011 so 45
percent of the the incumbents had
territory that wasn't part of their
district before and 41 percent of them
had more newer voters that they never
represented so it did mix things up a
bit and they didn't consider where
incumbents were so they threw a lot of
incumbents together and sometimes they
ran against each other sometimes they
just retired so I think that this is a
proposal that's got some merit because
of where we find themselves now if the
Democrats get all those marbles
there's such nice people they would
never do the same thing would they yes
they would
and yes they would because that's the
game that's exactly the way the game
works there's nothing evil lurking in
this it's just the game of it this is a
zero-sum game folks
we don't not have proportionate
representation you either win the
district or you lose it and that that's
what that's all about so I'm going to
shift gears here so I want to talk a
little bit about proposal three promote
the vote this is a critical opportunity
for Michigan to catch up Michigan has
lagged behind the rest of the states in
terms of access to the ballot and the
way it's been done in this state before
the last decade and a half was that
access would be increased and there'd be
a measurable deterrent to balance it so
in other words you don't just slam the
door and say fraud fraud fraud we hear
the fraudsters all the time and that is
the biggest untruth out there and I
Richard hit it right there is not
massive fraud but that is the the reason
that's given in many cases of why we're
not moving forward firm limits may well
play a role in that that is probably one
of the most unhealthy things that
Michigan has ever done so when you look
at no reason absentee balloting the
Presidential Commission on election
administration highly recommended that
every state should give the voters that
opportunity to vote Michigan is one of
funny we give everyone 60 and older the
opportunity to vote no reason age is not
a reason folks that's just a grant of no
reason absentee voting to one segment of
the population and they've handled it so
well that I'm sure that the rest of the
population can get on board and
learn from senior citizens like myself
that this works just fine automatic
registration I mean look the beginning
and the end of automatic registration is
the question nobody's being
automatically registered without them
standing there and answering a question
right now the Secretary of State said
you know right assertive oh yes or no
this will say you'll be registered to
vote unless you decline to be registered
that's the only difference
all the citizenship safeguards done at
Secretary of State's office remain in
full effect
so non-citizens are not sneaking through
because of this proposal so I think
that's something that everyone needs to
bear in mind and it actually follows the
National Voter Registration Act which
says they voter a driver's license
application shall be a voter
registration application unless the
voter declines in writing we don't do it
that way we should be doing it that way
that's the federal law so the safeguards
are there this this is just a good way
to go about it in straight party voting
now we've had consolidation of Elections
in this state for the last decade and a
half which is a good thing we've
eliminated all these special elections
all over the place and gone to for
election dates and now three but when we
did that straight party voting was a
predicate and so what did the
legislature do knowing that straight
party voting was there they loaded up
the general election ballot first they
put all the villages on the general
election ballot then they put all the
school districts on the election the
general election day ballot and now
they've permitted cities to go on to the
Election Day ballot in November of the
even year so we're making this a longer
and longer process for voters and
without straight party voting it's just
going to make it worse for everybody and
obviously they put an appropriation in
to take care of the
the in the to kill the ability to have a
referendum because you can't referendum
appropriation bill it's a very sneaky
tactic that's being used now in Lansing
when they did it before and 64 and 2002
BAM as a referendum overwhelmingly react
re-enacted by the voters so I would note
that the other things that deal with
registration in terms of moving to 30
day that's fine it's not going to cause
any problems we have a lot of electronic
registrations now that are coming in so
there's no real Clerk issue there the 14
days before the election it got to show
up in person you've got to have proof a
document proving where you register or
where your ro your resident and this is
going to be a very low volume it's an
extra trip folks that people have to
make to the clerk's office election day
registration is really a safety net
it'll really kind of remove what we have
now with the affidavit ballots and one
thing I want to make absolutely clear
this is not done in the polling place on
Election Day this will only be done in a
clerk's office so it's not like people
are going to inundate pulling places and
try to force themselves onto the file
they're going to have to go to the
actual city clerk and go through this
process to get on the ballot and the
post-election audits this fits right in
with the national security issues on our
election system and Michigan is stepping
up to this and it's time for them to
really take this on the Bureau has done
a great job in Lansing and we're ready
for that next step they have come up
with risk limiting audits they can use
statistical sampling that actually can
tell you something about the results
rather than just taking five percent and
trying to make some sense out of it so
these are rights
these are rights for voters and these
are things that are being done their
common sense programs that are being
done in many other states without any
big fraud issues or anything else so
it's really time for Michigan to step up
and open up access and maintain security
thank you thank you to our four
panelists and now we'll turn to some
questions from the audience for Ford
school students will be responsible for
sorting the questions and choosing them
they represent two of the sponsors of
our panel the student groups we listen
and domestic policy core two of them
have a microphone and they will
introduce themselves the other to lack
of microphone so let me introduce them
the folks who are sorting the the
questions down here are Chris Carson
Rivera in the domestic policy core and
nikto may know from we listen and Tom
vivanco the associate director of
close-up is giving him a hand here on
the end so let me turn first to the Oh
before we turned any questions Leslie
that our timekeeper who has kept us
right on schedule here is Heather
getting hammered we thank her so let me
turn now to the students who will be
reading the questions let them introduce
themselves and ask the first question hi
I'm Sophie I'm a first year MPP student
here and I am also part of the domestic
policy Corps and also as a lifelong
Michigander and someone very interested
in democratic engagement as clearly so
many other people are thank you all very
much for being here we have a lot of
really great questions so we'll try to
get through as many as we can but maybe
just keep that in mind while we're going
through that we'll try to get to as many
as possible our first one is in regards
to proposition three has research been
done to estimate how much this proposal
may increase voter participation rates
yes the Center for American Progress did
a report earlier this year they actually
did they've done a number of
ports that were really helpful for me
one was on election security but then
they did a report where they estimated
the the impact of all the sort of
common-sense reforms that different
states are doing and so what we're
saying now is that it would increase
turnout by several hundred thousand
voters in 2020 according to the Center
for American Progress they would
estimate about four hundred thousand
voters but I'm guessing this gentleman
might have a okay all right so that's um
you know it's a little bit hard to
predict because any any forms of those
research are always done in another
state right and so all the different
intricacies of an election system can
have an impact but that's the estimate
that that we've been going with because
they did the report to help us out with
it
wonderful so my name is Allie berry I am
a senior in the undergraduate BA program
here and I'm involved with we listen our
question is for Nancy about prop 2 how
how would it be possible to stop
lobbyists and their dollars from
influencing the members of the
commission of this redistricting
committee right so again I would go to
transparency so mr. McClellan said
earlier that the commissioners would not
be able to be talking to the public
that's that's not true it's that they
would have to do the commissioners would
have to be talking to the public at open
meetings only there's there'd be no more
of this backroom kind of secretive
redistricting that's going on right now
so we know what we have right now which
is that lobbyists go and and they're
they're able to have influence on the
maps again this bridge article uncovered
you know the I mean they were going
through the emails that were uncovered
during this litigation and the people
the consultants that were drawing these
maps shared them with you know the DeVos
family and other
being Republican donors for their input
so that is happening right now it's just
that we don't actually know you know
who's involved and what influence they
have unless you know it comes to light
through litigation under our proposal
the commissioners again it would be
written into the Constitution that they
would have to conduct all of their
business in the light of day so that's
how you would know this is perhaps a
little bit towards proposition three
what is any of your opinion on laws such
as what the Australians have that
mandate that each voter must vote this
question writer notes that perhaps it's
a little invasive on people's rights but
an interesting idea do you have thoughts
yeah well that would be interesting to
try to do in this country I think every
voters should vote what I believe they
do is levy a little fine or tax on them
if they don't vote it might stimulate a
few to do that but one thing we have in
this country right now is a right not to
vote anybody else want to comment on
that one okay so this one is for mr.
McClellan the question is you touched on
a little bit how you do speak up a
little bit on Deafness your never heard
that's okay um you mentioned briefly
that you thought that prop three wasn't
necessarily the worst and so the
question is what election reforms would
you support if any at all perhaps the
elimination of the electoral college or
a ranked voting system to help move
politicians to the middle okay slow down
and speak up okay regarding prop three
which you mentioned wasn't necessarily
the worst the question is what election
reforms would you support what election
reforms would I support right and then
they give two examples one being the
elimination of the electoral college and
the other being a ranked voting system
well I'm conservative and
tend not to change something we've had
for a couple hundred years but I do
believe that the rules from time to time
and election should be changed I'm not
opposed at all in fact I've been
involved in them for 40 years
legislative changes to modernize and
make our rules of the elections more
consistent with the Constitution that
says preserve the purity of elections so
as new technology comes in things like
same-day registration a number of those
things might be work fine I'm not at all
opposed to them but things like the
electoral college that is such a huge
change it's like the National one-person
one-vote that would shift all the power
to California and New York and Texas I'm
against that and the kind shower running
that as a Republican I believe he's
delusional
the it's kind of an ugly situation the
electoral college but it certainly
reflects the fact that this u.s. United
States is a group of sovereign states we
are one country that has one population
so I'm I'm against that sort of thing I
got a number of other give me almost any
issue and I'll give you an opinion one
way or the other cuz I spent a lot of
time on a lot of things I'll just say
one more thing that I I was gonna bring
up voter voter who let everybody vote in
some communities means illegal aliens
people just come over they that I don't
believe in I believe the vote is a right
of a citizen and if you've ever been to
a citizenship swearing-in ceremony and
you see new Americans and what they
think about their adopted country and
the rights that they have
they do not want people who haven't gone
through the work is hard work to be a
citizen so I'm in favor of voting for
citizens all citizens unless you're
excluded and I'm not if you're in prison
no but if you get out of prison yes so
these are complicated issues and you're
not going to be able to solve them by
one-shot ballot proposal put together by
some group in a dark room no I was not
invited to their drafting session i
guaranteed motors not populations were
put together by a very secretive group
well that leads right into our next
question which is coming to us from
Twitter what is the logic of denying the
right to vote to convicted felons not
only the ones paroled but also ones
currently incarcerated and this can be
for Richard or mr. McCullen but also for
any of the panelists I think the only
theory is that they have forfeited their
right to be treated as a regular citizen
and I used to be chairman of the
Michigan Corrections Commission and and
I'd go down to the prisons a couple of
times and I it's one of those things
that I think may just be outdated
I bought firmly believe that if you've
done your time and you're back in
society you should not be disqualified
from getting licenses for professions
they rejected two former woman there
were inmates and had learned to be
massage therapists in prison so they
could get a job so they went to get a
job in the licensing board of the same
state government said no you can't do it
I just don't believe in that if you're
if you're a former convicted felon you
should be treated to all the rights of a
citizen restored to his or her lie when
they go to prison or certain things
that is a policy decision I don't know
that I would make but it was made and
it's not unreasonable to say you have
forfeited certain rights while you
forfeited your personal freedom for one
thing so that's my view on that I would
just make a quick comment so in Michigan
as Richards describing when you're
released you've served your time you
have your rights back and there's no
process you need to go through and this
is on the Florida ballot this year we're
in Florida you don't get your rights
back and you have to go to a board that
I believe that governor participates in
a very lengthy process in order to get
those back so there are big differences
across the country about how states
handle this okay great this is another
question for mr. Thomas you mentioned
two term limits as bad can you elaborate
on that and do others have thoughts
especially their impact on
gerrymandering yeah I think they stink
and I think as Richards indicator is had
a very bad effect on the continuity of
government the idea I mean everybody's
term limit you can vote them out I mean
the people stay because people continue
to vote them in and so what happened in
my opinion is that the power shifted
from these legislative committees like
Richard mentioned back in those days the
election committee it was very robust
and these folks were on that for a
number of years they understood a good
part of the process the folks that come
now they're there six years in the house
there are eight years in the Senate they
don't stay on the same committees they
move around they don't understand this
stuff the best thing about elections to
them is till they got elected under the
rules and it was good for them but they
don't really understand the intricacies
so where's that power gone
it's going to lobbyists and a little bit
to the bureaucracy because these folks
don't know and then when the committee
staff when they started retiring they
lost everything so it's it's been a bad
deal and I don't think the state's been
served well this is a concern that mr.
McCullen bought brought up perhaps this
would be for ms wang to respond to but
proposal two proposes a 13 member board
composed of four Democrats four
Republicans and five independence or
non-affiliated what is or how would
independence be selected will it be
verified that they are independent or
non-affiliated right so if I may just
start with a clarification so mr.
McClellan said that's the secretary of
state would be selecting these
commissioners that's not true so people
would have the ability to apply and then
the selection is only just her or him
randomly choosing you know applications
from the pool of people that applied in
terms of party affiliation so here in
Michigan as many of you know we don't
have party registration and so on the
application form you'd have to
self-identify as a Republican or a
Democrat or non-affiliated under oath
the term unaffiliated or affiliated is
ripe for a lot of litigation are we
going to force party registration so
you're not registered well what do we
mean by not affiliated again it doesn't
mean you don't have partisan views it
means you're not affiliated at that time
with a particular party I'm just a
lawyer I I look for all of monkey
wrenches that we could possibly throw at
this but it's if it's adopted I won't be
doing it but I know other employers
this is a question for mr. Linton you
referred to voting access performance
bipartisan but historically Republicans
have not supported greater access to
polls how much reform across the nation
has been accomplished by citizen LED
ballot initiatives versus legislative
reform well that's tough okay so so I
sometimes people push back on me and
they ask this question they want me to
say that it is a partisan issue and if
and if you if you notice I said citizens
the citizens and the public think of
this as a non partisan issue I can't
necessarily speak to every individual
state legislature or even our own state
legislature over the last few years I
obviously know and and I and I wouldn't
suggest otherwise that since 20 since
the election of Barack Obama there's
been a wave of anti voter laws around
the country most significantly voter ID
laws and I'm aware of that
but I don't think that negates the fact
that you've also seen a variety of
states with Republican governors and
Republican legislatures adopting reforms
and so I think one thing that mr. Thomas
has been working on is online voter
registration 38 states have online voter
registration now that by definition must
include red states right another example
just off the top of my head would be
automatic voter registration automatic
voter registration is the newest some
states that come to mind that have it
are Alaska not a particularly blue state
in case you didn't know
and Alaska actually adopted it through a
ballot initiative so in Alaska's case
automatic you are automatically
registered to vote when you get I don't
remember the term but in Alaska when you
get benefits under there
oil and gas program so when you become a
part of that program you also get
automatically registered and that was
through ballot initiative
I'm not sure that I can't give you exact
numbers on how many states have adopted
reform through balan receives the other
one that comes to mind is Maryland I
think adopted some reforms through
ballot initiative I think if you have a
legislature that's willing to provide
the reform through the legislative
process you don't take the extraordinary
expense and hundreds of thousands of
signatures to try and do it through a
ballot initiative but after 28 years of
waiting for just no reason absentee
voting it doesn't seem like there were
any other options
this will be the final question we have
time for this can be for any of our
panelists for either of the propositions
what impact do these proposals have on
marginalized or economically
disadvantaged urban communities was
proposed in the question marginalized
what kind of marginalized groups or
economically disadvantaged communities
I'll just go first because I just talked
so I mean one of the things I mean I'm
sure I can be done so so you know
individuals who struggle to vote and
register are often individuals who move
a lot right who will have low levels of
education or low income why because all
those things kind of fit together right
if you have a low income you are more
likely to be moving your home your home
situation and your housing is likely to
be less stable and so the more often
you're moving the more often you have to
be updating your voter registration and
the more likely your registration is not
going to be valid for me at this point
in my life in the same house for 18
years I don't have to think about that
but for an individual whose housing is
not stable it's a much greater barrier
so I think you know providing an
opportunity for eligible citizens to
register on Election Day means that if
you happen to have moved because that's
your circumstance due to economics or
otherwise that you'll be able to remedy
that you'll be able to get rear edges
turn on on Election Day and still have
your voice and the fact that your
economics are just circumstance or your
housing circumstance doesn't necessarily
fit you know as well with our voter
registration system
won't disenfranchise you I agree with
that
urban areas is moving moving and
switching schools and all that is a very
disruptive of these citizens ability to
access the services that we others
expect hey I want them to say one more
thing before we go if you haven't read
it our good friend impact who runs
pretty magazine read this magazine read
this article about how a shadow
Republican group gerrymandered michigan
sparking a backlash i wanted his his
reporters have really dug deep into what
we thought was secret room it's where we
came up with this stuff but so it's a
good magazine if you want to read about
esther marginalized communities under a
proposal the commission would have to
abide by the federal Voting Rights Act
that's federal law it applies now it
applies under this proposal and I would
just say that as to all voters including
historically disenfranchised voters they
would they would have their votes count
with a yes vote on proposal two they
would not be packed and cracked in two
different districts just because you
know they can be reliably counted on to
vote for one party or another every vote
would actually count I would give a
cautionary tale so the US Supreme Court
last spring issued a decision called
Houston after the Ohio Secretary of
State and in Ohio this law said that if
you didn't vote in an election then a
cancellation notice would be sent to you
and in that packet of material you get
is a little card the er-2 return if you
want to stay on the file or you need to
vote sometime within the next two
federal elections the NVRA the National
Voter Registration Act says you cannot
even initiate the cancellation process
based on the failure to vote well that's
exactly what they do and for whatever
reason the US Supreme Court said well
they don't really cancel them because
that they cancel them because they
forgot to send a little card back
well how many little cards do you
receive in the mail that end up going in
the trash right that you never quite get
to so what this would result in in
Michigan if that were implemented here
and there have been some discussions
along those lines would be thousands and
thousands of voters thrown off the rolls
having no idea that it was because of
this little card four years ago that
they didn't respond to election day
registration is the safety net to any of
that type of activity to give people of
all economic situations the ability to
get back on the file and vote on
Election Day anyone else got a final few
thoughts they want to place before that
audience I did I did write once
non-citizens and I circled it a few
times you know as a voting rights
strategist the the the nightmare of
non-citizens is just so frustrating
because I think as mr. Thomas pointed
out we have a system for registering
individuals right now and they're
required to check a box and you know
affirm their eligibility which includes
that they're citizen and perhaps I just
need to say affirmative ly proposal
three is not going to allow citizens to
become registered there's nothing about
proposal three that allowed sorry
non-citizens that allows non-citizens to
become registered but and no voting
right advocate I've ever met is
advocating for non-citizens who don't
have a right to vote under you know
state law here in Michigan to be able to
register and vote but it is the
boogeyman it is that it is the nightmare
that's thrown out there no matter what
proposal you put forward I'm sure if it
had been the talking point back when
motor-voter was adopted here in Michigan
it would have been the argument for why
we do shouldn't have motor-voter it is
just the argument no matter whether
you're adopting the most basic thing
that every state already has or you're
adopting something new and novel and
none of the things in proposal three are
new and novel they've all been adopted
in other states and their voting system
is not falling down full of illegal
citizens on the voter registration rolls
so this is very disappointing that
that's always the argument regardless of
whether it has any basis in reality and
that includes Kansas yes so Kansas has
also adopted reforms even though they
have the individual who's most concerned
with non-citizens abscessed might some
some might say with non-citizens okay
well that brings our panel to a close I
hope you'll join me in thanking the
panelists