W

hen it comes to voting

and elections the most

common question any-

one gets is: Who are you voting for?

Yet, reading the breaking news head-

lines every morning, watching the

Climate Clock in New York City tick,

hearing of Justice Ruth Bader Gins-

burg’s death or living through the on-

going COVID-19 pandemic, I am re-

minded of the importance of using my

vote as a means of advocacy and voice

in this election.

While filling out my absentee bal-

lot I found myself not thinking about

who I am voting for, but rather what

I am voting for. I am voting for poli-

cies that don’t place a monetary value

on human life. I am voting for the be-

lief in science — to save our planet and

the lives of so many Americans amid a

pandemic. I am voting for a woman’s

right to choose.

I cannot talk about women’s rights

without briefly mentioning RBG’s leg-

acy and the confirmation of the new

SCOTUS, the former United States

federal judge Amy Coney Barett. RBG

was a champion of women’s equality,

along with many other progressive

ideals. RBG particularly advocated

for women’s rights, seen specifical-

ly when she continuously protected

the precedent established in Roe v.

Wade — the right to an abortion — dur-

ing future cases that may have poten-

tially threatened the ruling. In Roe v.

Wade, the court framed the right to an

abortion as a matter of privacy. Even

though RBG was not on the court at

the time of this decision, she cleverly

and accurately framed her opinion on

the case as a matter of gender equality,

rather than privacy.

Even though overturning a Su-

preme Court case is both highly un-

likely and challenging, more recently, the

possibility of overturning Roe v. Wade has

become reality. With RBG’s death leaving

a vacant seat in the Supreme Court of the

United States, the intersection between

the election and the battle over the va-

cant Supreme Court seat surfaced. While

Republicans pushed to fill the seat be-

fore the election, Democrats argued that

we are in the midst of an election, and

the seat should not have been filled un-

til after the Presidential election. Demo-

crats plead that with the new SCOTUS

nominee nearly half a century of legal

precedent has the potential to be over-

turned — the right to choose, the right

to vote, dreamers who are risked of be-

ing expelled from the only country they

have ever known, union workers who are

at risk of losing their right to collectively

bargain. Democrats plead that because

millions of Americans have already cast

their ballots, they deserve to have their

voices heard.

Did President Trump think appointing

an attractive young woman will indemnify

the loss of RBG? President Trump’s deci-

sion to nominate Amy Coney Barrett was

strategic: Put a woman on the Supreme

Court to fill RBG’s seat to appear progres-

sive and equate her role. Maybe it would

be if Barrett could follow, or even more

importantly enhance, RBG’s legacy. How-

ever, Amy Coney Barrett will do just the

opposite. Amy Coney Barrett’s confirma-

tion means two things: The court will shift

to a 6-3 conservative majority, and the po-

tential of Roe v. Wade to be overturned is

real — as a law professor Judge Barrett

was a member of an anti-abortion group,

Faculty for Life, where she expressed her

skepitcism for the decision and her will-

ingness to revisit the case.

I found myself asking what this means

with an election around the corner, and

the answer came all too quickly: As a

woman, my rights are on the ballot.

I was curious about what students of

different identities than mine would say

in response to the same question. How-

ever, I was surprised to find a common

denominator in the responses from every-

one I spoke to: While all these students

are voting for something, they are fore-

mostly voting against something.

For LSA junior Katharine Boasberg,

this election means voting against hate

and ignorance. In a phone interview with

The Daily, Boasberg explained that the

fact that “Black Lives Matter” is political

speaks to the value we put on human life,

or lack thereof.

“We don’t value the lives of women,

minorities or poor people. All we value

are the lives of the people already in pow-

er,” Boasberg said. “Because morality has

been politicized, we are fighting a battle

against humanity and hate.”

Due to this, Boasberg said that “[she] is

voting against using race, gender and so-

cio-economic status as a means of putting

a level of value on human life.”

Similarly, Ross junior Oliver Ginns

stated that this election means “voting
against divisiveness, against a lack of em-

pathy and, most importantly, for human

decency,” in a phone interview with The

Daily.

To LSA senior Alexa Bates, this elec-

tion means voting against the rhetoric of

hate. In a phone interview with The Dai-

ly, Bates explained that she is aware hate

will not necessarily go away just because

of a change in office. Nonetheless, she is

voting to “take away the power and au-

thority that gives people the notion that

hate is OK.”

For some, voting represents a depar-

ture from their past education or fam-

ily life; it allows for largely autonomous

decision-making in the face of difficult

policy points.

In a phone interview, LSA junior Alli-

son Gonzalez said that this election means

voting against what she was indoctrinated

to believe in her previous education of at-

tending an all girls Catholic school. For

Gonzalez’s whole education, she has been

taught that Roe v. Wade should be over-

turned. Now, however, she can make her

own decision.

“I began to be critical about my educa-

tion,” Gonzalez said. “I was able to form

my own opinions on issues I realized are

important for me: women’s rights.”
I

n the final presidential debate on

Thursday Oct. 22, Joe Biden said,

“character is on the ballot.” The

president’s character has the ability to ei-

ther encourage or hinder hate.

Ginns was cautiously optimistic when

explaining that if Biden is to win the elec-

tion, saying “things won’t be fixed with

a snap of the fingers.” However, Ginns

noted that we, as a country, will be on the
trajectory to fixing things.

Like Ginns, I am well aware that this

election is not going to automatically fix

the many injustices in our society, the

economy or the fact that we are in the

midst of a pandemic. Nor do I expect it to.

However, this election is a testament for

what the future holds. This election is not

a matter of being a Democrat or Republi-

can — it is not a partisan issue. It is a hu-

man rights issue.

It is difficult for me to prioritize one

issue in this election because there is so

much at stake, and there is a connected-

ness amongst every issue. There is an

intersection between the economy and

racial justice; there is an intersection be-

tween climate change and the economy.

It is not merely a coincidence that when

the economy shut down because of CO-

VID-19, we began to see clearer skies and

higher air quality. It is not merely a co-

incidence that low-wage workers and

single parent households, many of whom

need unemployment insurance (because

they lost their work due to COVID), can-

not get it. It is not merely a coincidence

that COVID-19 hits low-income, minority

communities the hardest. All of these is-

sues will not magically be remedied with

a favorable election outcome. What this

election will do is ensure they are seen as

issues and treated like issues that must be

addressed and resolved.

It is undeniable that this is a symbolic

election. There is much more on the bal-

lot than just a candidate, just as there is

much more power behind simply shad-

ing in the name of a candidate. Our vote

is a form of speech. It allows us to express

what we condemn and what we condone.
As John Lewis, former civil rights leader

and former U.S. Representative compel-

lingly said at the prescient commence-

ment speech he gave in 2016, “The vote

is precious. It is almost sacred. It’s the

most powerful non-violent tool we have

in a democratic society and we’ve got to

use it.”

The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
12 — Wednesday, October 28, 2020
statement

BY MARISSA SABLE, STATEMENT COLUMNIST

ILLUSTRATION BY EILEEN KELLY

What are you voting for?