As Promote the Vote continues their campaign for Proposal 2, unsettling revelations indicate the ballot language may open the doors for criminals currently serving time to be able to vote. Patrice Johnson, Pure Integrity for Michigan Elections (PIME) chairwoman, recently slammed Promote the Vote in a statement, warning that Proposal 2 does not restore faith in elections, but rather it attacks the state’s values.
Proposal 2 could give more than 33,000 prison inmates statewide the ability to vote, according to data from World Population Review.
“Proposal 2 is an attack on Michigan values. We do not want to make it easier for criminals to vote. Michiganders want election integrity and to restore trust in our elections, Proposal 2 does not do that,” Johnson said.
The proposal could also permit more Michigan prisoners to vote than the total amount of voters who decided the 2016 presidential election. Former President Donald Trump received 2,279,543 votes while Hillary Clinton had 2,268,839 votes, a difference of 10,704 votes, according to 270towin.com.
Article 2, Section 2 of the Michigan Constitution, which concerns the election process with regard to those who are mentally incompetent or imprisoned, states that “the legislature may by law exclude persons from voting because of mental incompetence or commitment to a jail or penal institution.”
Article 2, Section 4(a) of the Michigan Constitution, which concerns the place and manner of elections, currently states: Every citizen of the United States who is an elector qualified to vote in Michigan shall have the following rights: (a) The right, once registered, to vote a secret ballot in all elections.
The Promote My Vote Petition would amend Article 2, Section 4(a) to state, in pertinent part: (1) Every citizen of the United States who is an elector qualified to vote in Michigan shall have the following rights: (a) THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO VOTE, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO the right, once registered, to vote a secret ballot in all elections. NO PERSON SHALL: (1) ENACT OR USE ANY LAW, RULE, REGULATION, QUALIFICATION, PREREQUISITE, STANDARD, PRACTICE, OR PROCEDURE; (2) ENGAGE IN ANY HARASSING, THREATENING, OR INTIMIDATING CONDUCT; OR (3) USE ANY MEANS WHATSOEVER, ANY OF WHICH HAS THE INTENT OR EFFECT OF DENYING, ABRIDGING, INTERFERING WITH, OR UNREASONABLY BURDENING THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO VOTE.
Michigan Supreme Court Justice Brian Zahra argues the language of Proposal 2 does not abrogate the current language in the Michigan Constitution. He states, “Article 2, Section 1 expressly acknowledges that who is qualified to be an elector in Michigan can be limited by other provisions of the Constitution, and Article 2, Section 2 expressly grants the Legislature permissive authority to enact statutes imposing such limitations as to mentally incompetent or incarcerated individuals.”
