Prop 3: Misinformation persists in campaign for, against ballot issue

Oct. 23—TRAVERSE CITY — One proposal on Michigan's ballot this November will ask voters to decide the future of access to abortions in the state.

The ballot language states that Proposal Three would "amend the state constitution to establish a new individual right to reproductive freedom, including the right to make all decisions about pregnancy and abortion."

This proposal came about as a result of the U.S. Supreme Court's June 24, 2022, ruling that overturned Roe v. Wade. That decision, celebrated by some, vilified by others, mobilized people across the country to try to restore — or guard against — access to abortion.

Michigan is one of five states that have this abortion issue on the ballot in the November midterm elections.

Misconceptions remain about the proposal in a climate where misinformation thrives and "extreme" is a word leveled by all sides against the others.

Local obstetrician/gynecologist Dr. Michael Hertz of Beulah said he remembers the health care situation before Roe v. Wade, which he viewed as a public health success since it eliminated the medical costs of illegal and unsafe abortions, life-threatening hemorrhages, infections and death.

"At that time, before Roe, most experts estimate that anywhere from 20 to 25 percent of maternal mortality across the country was the direct result of illegal abortion," Hertz said. "When Roe was decided, all of that went away."

If Proposal 3 passes

But one misconception about Proposal 3 is that it would, in effect, restore Roe v. Wade in Michigan.

Elizabeth Kirk, a law professor at Catholic University of America and associate legal scholar for the Charlotte Loizer Institute, said Proposal 3 language does not mirror Roe v. Wade because it is more vague.

"In my conversations with citizens about different initiatives, there's not always a real good understanding of civics, distinguishing between something that's in the Constitution versus a law that might pass," Kirk said.

According to Kirk, if Proposal 3 passes, it would add a new amendment to Michigan's constitution. That means it would require another ballot measure during a future gubernatorial election to be reversed. Any revisions to it would require an additional constitutional amendment, she said.

"Typically, things that are as contested as abortion policy are better left to the legislative process where, as time goes on, and different constituencies have different needs or goals, that can be changed to best meet the needs of the people," Kirk said.

As far as those different constituencies, billboards on both sides of the debate have been confusing about what the proposal truly means, some voters said.

One of the contested issues is whether Proposal 3 would remove "the age of consent," which is 16 in Michigan.

Chief Executive Officer of Traverse Bay Children's Advocacy Center Ginger Kadlec said she and others have seen billboards claiming that, if Proposal 3 passes, the age of consent would no longer exist.

"We want to make sure that the community understands that is not the case," Kadlec said.

According to the ballot language, if it passes, the proposal would provide a state constitutional right to "reproductive freedom."

The term "reproductive freedom" is defined as "the right to make and effectuate decisions about all matters relating to pregnancy, including but not limited to prenatal care, childbirth, postpartum care, contraception, sterilization, abortion care, miscarriage management, and infertility care," according to the Michigan Board of State Canvassers.

Abortion would be legal in the state prior to "fetal viability" or if the mother's health was at risk, according to the language.

If approved by Michigan voters, Proposal 3 would add Section 28 to Article I of the state's constitution. It "would amend the state constitution to establish new individual right to reproductive freedom, including right to make all decisions about pregnancy and abortion; allow state to regulate abortion in some cases; and forbid prosecution of individuals exercising established right."

Hertz said Proposal 3 would "banish the 1931 law criminalizing abortion to the dustbin of history."

He also dismissed some campaign claims that, under Proposal 3, veterinarians would be able to perform abortions or that abortions would be performed up until the moment of birth.

What Proposal 3 would do, Hertz said, is allow women and men to be able to make private reproductive healthcare decisions without interference.

The new amendment also would allow the state to regulate abortion after "fetal viability," except in cases that would harm the mother's physical or mental health, according to the ballot measure.

What defines fetal viability, however, is fiercely debated — as is what would constitute physical or mental harm to the mother.

Legal experts say issues such as these, and others not defined because of the vague wording that Kirk alluded to, would likely end up being argued in Michigan's courts, if Proposal 3 passes.

If Proposal 3 doesn't pass

Legal scholars also say the defeat of Proposal 3 does not necessarily mean that abortion would be illegal in Michigan — if an abortion bill was introduced and enacted through the Legislature.

Currently, Michigan has a 1931 law on the books that bans abortions in almost all cases, with no exceptions for rape or incest.

In addition, Section 750.14 of the law states that distributing or taking drugs to produce a miscarriage is a felony in Michigan.

However, from 1973 until the Supreme Court decision in June, the ruling in Roe v. Wade invalidated Michigan's 1931 abortion ban.

Now, even without Roe v. Wade, the abortion ban in Michigan has not taken effect because it has been blocked by multiple injunctions and lawsuits filed Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and Planned Parenthood of Michigan.

Proposal drives activists on both sides

Earlier this week, the National League of Women Voters Traverse City Chapter hosted an event discussing the three state ballot measures.

Moderator and chapter secretary Margaret Goeman said the petition to place Proposal 3 on the ballot received 753,759 signatures — more than any other petition in the state's history.

Susan Anderson, who lives in Sault Saint Marie, said, prior to this ballot measure, she had never been that vocal about politics. After a friend of hers shared the petition asking for signatures for Proposal 3 on Facebook, she said all of that changed.

"As we started circulating [the petition] and talking to women," Anderson said, "I realized that there were a lot of women here like me that don't talk about abortion, don't talk about things that have happened in our past, that are really, really upset with what is going on."

Anderson has been canvassing and working with Reproductive Freedom For All, a group that supports Proposal 3, throughout northern Michigan. Through her work, she said she feels she is giving women an opportunity to have their voices heard.

"Being from Detroit, I felt that my view on abortion might have been a more urban view," she said. "But being up here, I realized that's not the case."

Christin Pollo, the spokeswoman for Citizens to Support MI Women and Children, said she also had not been politically active until now.

Pollo opposes Proposal 3. She said it is confusing and permanent. "The stakes are too high for us to pass this and hope that the changes that come from it are good."

Pollo said she has spoken to voters who believe in the right to choose — but not necessarily without any limitations or restrictions.

Citizens to Support MI Women and Children has used every effort one would see in a political grassroots campaign to get their word out, she said.

"It's been really interesting to talk to voters across the political spectrum, across the abortion issue, and find that there are things in Proposal 3 that are concerning to everyone [we've talked to]," Pollo said.

She said they have had teams in all 83 counties of the state, and the responses from voters have been the same.

Parental consent question

Based on the people she has met while canvassing, Pollo said the issue of parental consent for abortions has been a top concern.

Proposal 3 language does not specifically address parental consent.

But currently in Michigan, a minor is required to obtain written consent from a parent or guardian before having an abortion, according to legislation. Parental consent for abortions would not change, unless this is challenged in court or changed by lawmakers.

The Michigan Senate Fiscal Agency released a document addressing debates on both sides. In their discussion section, the agency notes that proponents and opponents of Proposal 3 have said, "It could take years and many court cases to determine the extent of the rights listed in the proposal."

The Reproductive Freedom for All PAC has registered in support of Proposal 3, and has received $10,628,722.73 in contributions, with the American Civil Liberties Union as the highest donor.

The Citizens to Support MI Women and Children PAC opposes the measure, and they have received $426,083.49 in donations, with the Michigan Catholic Conference and Right to Life of Michigan as the two highest donors.

Mary Owens from Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America said their organization launched a $200,000 advertising campaign in opposition of Proposal 3 in Michigan.

Earlier this month, both sides of the debate hosted protests involving hundreds of participants in favor and against Proposal 3 in downtown Traverse City.

For Traverse City resident Marsha Wheaton, Proposal 3 is personal. She said that as a young teenager in the 1970s she flew to another state because abortion was illegal in Michigan at the time.

Wheaton said that seeing disinformation about the proposal on yard signs and in television ads has been disheartening.

"People need to get out and vote," she said. "This is such an important election — and this is such an important proposal."

Proposal 3 impact on the vote

A Kaiser Family Foundation survey found that half of registered voters said, when compared to past elections, they are more motivated to vote in this election because of abortion access issues.

Four in 10 voters have reported to KFF that they are "more motivated" to vote because of their state's abortion laws.

That number jumps to more than 51 percent of voters in states where abortion access will be on the ballot this November — such as in Michigan.

Kaiser Health News contributed to this article.