O

n Jan. 19, coming off a 
year of unprecedented 
attacks on the right 

to vote by Republican state 
legislatures 
throughout 

the 
country, 
congressional 

Democrats made their last-
chance 
gambit 
and 
finally 

had a vote on carving out an 
exception for the filibuster 
for voting rights and election 
reform 
legislation. 
As 
had 

been telegraphed for months, 
the move failed, coming up 
two votes short of the 50-vote 
threshold 
needed. 
All 
50 

Senate Republicans were in 
opposition, joined by centrist 
Democrats 
Joe 
Manchin, 

D-W.Va., and Kyrsten Sinema, 
D-Ariz. It was a deflating 
end to a long and seemingly 
hopeless effort, capped off 
with 
intraparty 
fighting 

and a prevailing pessimistic 
mentality. It also left a choice 
for congressional Democratic 
leaders: fold over and move on, 
or go back to the drawing board 
in hopes of getting at least 

something passed to protect 
an 
imperiled 
democracy. 

Thankfully, it appears some 
in Congress are beginning to 
choose the latter.

Seemingly 
just 
as 
the 

filibuster carveout vote failed, 
reports began to surface of an 
amplified bipartisan push to 
reform the Electoral Count Act, 
which lays out the procedure 
for counting Electoral College 
votes, along with the potential 
for 
increased 
funding 
for 

the facilitation of elections 
and measures to ensure the 
fair counting of votes. There 
has also been reporting that 
lawmakers are looking at ways 
to defend election workers, 
who had to endure an onslaught 
of 
dangerous 
rhetoric 
and 

physical threats of violence. 
The effort also seems to have 
real potential for success, with 
politicians on the ideological 
scale ranging from Sen. Chris 
Coons, D-Del. Chris Coons 
to 
House 
Minority 
Leader 
 

Kevin McCarthy R-Calif., who 
himself voted to overturn the 
election, expressing at least 
some sort of optimism and 
interest in a deal. 

These are all policies that 

would 
make 
an 
important 

difference, and would address 
some of the most important 
problems facing our elections. 
The potential to have wide-
ranging bipartisan support for 
such an issue that has sadly 
turned so contentious is a 
unique opportunity and one 
that should gladly be seized. 
Unfortunately, some Democrats 
don’t view it as such.

Some progressive Democrats 

have 
dismissed 
the 
effort, 

either as a distraction from the 
larger problem or insufficient 
to address the problems at 
hand. Sen. Raphael Warnock, 
D-Ga., when asked about the 
potential reform, stated, “They 
are not serious. And this is a 
diversion in order to prevent 
us from ensuring that every 
eligible 
American 
has 
the 

right to vote.” First, there does 
seem to be a serious effort at 
play, especially by senators 
like Susan Collins R-Maine, 
who 
has 
worked 
earnestly 

with Democrats in the past, 
on infrastructure for example. 
Second, if Democrats have an 
all-or-nothing attitude, in a 

50–50 Senate, they are going to 
struggle to get things done for 
the remainder of this session in 
Congress. When dealing with 
the realities of a 50–50 Senate, 
a bare House majority and a 
Democratic senator from a state 
that voted for Trump by more 
than 35 points, compromise is 
inevitable and necessary.

Additionally, 
Senate 

Majority 
Leader 
Chuck 

Schumer claimed the effort 
simply 
“says 
you 
can 
rig 

the 
elections 
anyway 
you 

want and then we’ll count it 
accurately.” This too, is the 
wrong approach. If all voter 
suppression, intimidation and 
barriers to the ballot suddenly 
evaporated, yet those counting 
and deeming the winner could 
simply throw out the results, 
turnout would be irrelevant. 

The reality is, though voter 

suppression and barriers to the 
ballot are real and dangerous, 
especially for minorities and 
the underserved, the larger 
threat to democracy is not 
actually solved by addressing 
voter 
suppression. 
For 

example, in the 2020 election, 
mail-in voting as a result of 

the pandemic made it easier 
than ever to vote. Turnout 
flourished, reaching numbers 
not seen since at least 1980. 

Yet, many would admit that 

the integrity of the election 
was under attack in ways not 
seen in the modern political 
era. 
State 
and 
local-level 

Republicans 
made 
attempts 

to send fraudulent “alternate” 
electors 
and 
prevent 
state 

election results from being 
certified, and 147 Republican 
members of Congress even 
voted to throw out the will of 
millions of voters in multiple 
states, even after the Jan. 
6 
insurrection 
had 
taken 

place. This is all on top of 
the sustained push by then-
President Trump and his allies 
to have then–Vice President 
Pence unilaterally reject slates 
of electors, a wildly anti-
democratic course of action 
that, thankfully, Pence did 
not pursue. If Pence had gone 
along with Trump, there is no 
clear telling what would have 
happened. As written, such a 
scenario is not explored within 
the Electoral Count Act, and 
it is worrisome to imagine 

how such an event would have 
unfolded.

These 
threats, 
among 

many others, illustrate the 
most dangerous threats to 
American democracy. Though 
discussions are preliminary, 
there is evidence to suggest 
that the new bipartisan push 
would help to greatly thwart 
these problems. If an avenue 
is there, as one appears to be, 
congressional Democrats must 
take it and work to maximize 
the reforms that could be 
enacted. Moreover, none of 
this is to say voting rights 
cannot and should not be 
addressed whenever possible, 
as they clearly should. If 
Democrats manage to win 
at least two Senate seats in 
upcoming 
midterms, 
their 

voting 
rights 
and 
election 

reform bills will have a real 
chance of passing, so long as 
they can hold the House. But 
as the last few months have 
shown, that option is closed at 
the moment, and it would be 
irresponsible and dangerous 
not to take whatever electoral 
reform they can now, a sizable 
amount at that.

H

ow do you talk to your 
roommates 
about 

COVID-19 safety? I’m 

nervous about cases spiking and 
want to make sure we’re all on the 
same page. – H

Hi H! I think it’s good to 

center the conversation around 
the rising cases and how your 
behaviors should change in 
response. Start by bringing up 
your feelings around COVID-19, 
then get into how you would like 
yourself and your roommates to 
respond. Ask them about how 
they’re 
feeling. 
Be 
specific: 

Fewer 
people 
visiting 
your 

space? More frequent testing? I 
think one of the most important 
topics to address is what to 
do if someone gets COVID-
19. Will that person move into 
quarantine 
housing? 
Will 

the rest of your roommates 
quarantine? 
Whatever 
your 

goals are, frame them as things 
both your roommates and you 
can do, instead of asking for 
changes from your roommates 
alone. 
Even 
if 
they’re 
less 

concerned about COVID-19 than 
you are, it’s not unreasonable 
to ask for more precautions. If 
you’re concerned about possibly 

upsetting your roommates, I 
don’t think this conversation 
needs to be confrontational at all 
— as long as you’re honest about 
your feelings and goals. 

I think my roommate might 

have a crush on me. What do I 
do? We get along really well, but 
I’m in a really happy relationship 
already. I don’t think she would 
act on it, so should I just ignore 
it? – B ’25 (she/they)

Hi B! Admittedly, that’s a 

tough one, but I think there 
are several ways to approach 
this. We can’t control who we 
develop feelings for, but we 
can control how we handle 
the situation. Assuming you’re 
right about your roommate’s 
feelings, the responsible thing 
on their part would be to respect 
your relationship and not act 
on their feelings. In this case, 
I would suggest leaving the 
situation alone and allowing 
your roommate space to work 
through 
their 
feelings. 
If 

they’re acting more flirtatious 
and you’re concerned about it 
affecting your friendship, it 
might be better to talk with 
them about their feelings. I’ll 
be honest, it will probably be 
awkward at first, but in this 
case, I think it would be best to 
be open so both of you can be on 
the same page. 

The paradox of choice – I feel 

like I’m having a very hard time 
settling down and committing 
to someone because I’m always 
worried about something better 
coming along, or that I’ll like 
someone else I’m talking to more. 
How do I get over that? – L ’24 
(she/her)

Hi L! I think it’s important 

to 
explore 
your 
options 

before getting into a serious 
relationship. Go on multiple 
casual 
dates 
with 
different 

people and see who you connect 
with the most. I think once you 
find someone that you really 
connect with, you shouldn’t 
find yourself being so concerned 
with the possibility of someone 
better. If you’re worried about 
finding 
someone 
else, 
then 

maybe it’s a sign that whoever 
you’re with isn’t working out. 
Be honest about your feelings 
and don’t rush into anything just 
because you feel obligated. I’d 
also suggest working through 
these 
concerns 
while 
you 

navigate the dating scene. What 
would something “better” look 
like? Would you feel trapped in 
a relationship? You’re never tied 
down to someone, but I hope 
that when you find someone, 
you feel confident about your 
feelings and unbothered by the 
thought of other possibilities. 

 The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
Opinion
10 — Wednesday, February 9, 2022 

Relationships, COVID-19 and the 
paradox of choice; it’s advice time

ELIZABETH WOLFE
Opinion Advice Columnist

Design by Ambika Tripathi, Opinion Cartoonist

DEVON HESANO
Opinion Columnist

An opening emerges to protect American elections

Design by Anya Singh, Opinion Cartoonist

To Greet a Virus

Snow-Fall

