I

n the wake of the 2022 
midterm elections, Michigan 
defied expectations of a red 
wave, reelecting Gov. Gretchen 
Whitmer and electing both a 
Democratic 
state 
Senate 
and 
House for the first time in nearly 
40 years (although Democrats 
did hold the state House about 15 
years ago). With this Democratic 
trifecta in power comes the 
opportunity to address education, 
make progress on workers’ rights 
and better leverage federal funds 
in Michigan.
Education
One concern this trifecta can 
address with regards to education 
is literacy. The Read by Grade 
Three Law requires schools to give 
reading and writing assessments to 
children in kindergarten through 
third grade. If a student falls 
more than one grade level behind 
proficiency, they must repeat 
third grade, which is ultimately 
unhelpful to students as it merely 
serves to set them behind their 
peers. A more favorable method of 
alternative education for students 
who fail the test would be to ensure 
that they can continue onto the 
next grade level with their peers 
and learn the skills they fall behind 
on with remedial education. 
In order to assure that the 
education system is addressing 
literacy 
throughout 
all 
parts 
of the state, state funds should 
be allocated to different school 
districts based on demonstrated 
need. While each district and 
student is different and there is no 
perfect spending plan, more can 
be done to address the fact that a 
large number of Michigan’s school 
districts spend at least 10% less 
than the national average on each 
student. The curriculum should 
also be standardized at the state 
level to minimize disparities in 
curricula from district to district 
and to ensure greater access to 
accelerated education programs 
for each district.
A 
more 
equitable 
learning 
experience 
can 
be 
furthered 
beyond the classroom in funding 
students’ access to technology 
and free lunches. Ann Arbor 
Public Schools, for example, were 
able to help level the playing field 
among students during COVID-
19 by providing Chromebooks for 
remote learning to every student.
Not all school districts have 
the funds to provide adequate 
technology to each student, but 
as learning becomes increasingly 
dependent on technology, that 
must change. Also, during COVID-
19, a federal program existed that 
allowed students to obtain free 
lunches. This program ended in 
July, but free and reduced school 
lunches are still needed urgently 
as rising inflation creates further 
food insecurity for low-income 
families. Free and reduced school 
lunches reduce food insecurity, 
obesity rates and poor health 
outcomes, making these programs 
paramount 
in 
maintaining 
healthy 
and 
equitable 
school 
environments.
These 
provisions, 
however, 
must extend beyond students and 
to teachers. Because teachers form 
the minds of the next generation, 
a minimum salary should be set 
statewide to retain teachers and to 
ensure a quality education for all 
Michigan students.

Workers’ Rights
Now that Democrats have won 
the governorship and the state 
legislature, they can holistically 
approach the issue of workers’ 
rights 
and 
reinvigorate 
the 
economy as we move past the 
immediate COVID-19 crisis. A first 
priority should be to repeal the 
“right-to-work” laws implemented 
by former Gov. Rick Snyder, which 
weakened union membership in 
the state to the point where union 
membership is currently at its 
lowest point in decades. Although 
it may seem backward to pay to 
work, unions require dues and fees 
to increase their bargaining power 
— which allows them to increase 
wages and safety in the workplace 
across the board. Decreased union 
membership allows companies to 
exploit their workers more than if 
they were unionized and decreases 
pay and equity, according to the 
U.S. Department of Labor. For 
the sake of workers during these 
increasingly 
uncertain 
times 
and 
record-breaking 
inflation, 
repealing Snyder’s anti-labor laws 
should be a top priority for this 
new trifecta government.
Another 
priority 
should 
be 
continuing 
to 
reinvigorate 
the economy after COVID-19. 
Michigan actually saw a higher 
GDP growth than the average 
U.S. state: 6.2% compared to the 
national average of 5.7% in 2021. 
Under Whitmer, the state had 
the best post-pandemic economic 
recovery in the nation. This trend, 
albeit 
hopeful 
for 
Michigan’s 
broader recovery after the 2008 
recession, should be continued 
with smart legislation and policy 
that 
encourages 
investment 
without sacrificing the rights of 
the laborer.
One might say that repealing 
Snyder’s 
right-to-work 
laws 
would 
discourage 
companies 
from coming to and investing in 
Michigan. While that might be true 
to some degree, Snyder’s right-to-
work laws didn’t attract companies 
from 
coming 
back 
after 
the 
recession either. Regardless, many 
companies are either outsourcing 
their labor to other countries. 
Further, would Michigan laborers 
want to sacrifice their rights to 
bolster the profits of distant CEOs, 
such as in Texas? Companies that 
would so brazenly violate the 
rights of their workers shouldn’t be 
welcome, under any circumstance. 
There are other ways to usher 
in economic prosperity without 
sacrificing the rights of the worker.
One way to do this is to assist in 
the broader shift in the automotive 
industry from fossil fuels to electric 
or hybrid vehicles. Michigan’s 
automotive industry is the largest 
in the country and makes up about 
18% of the state’s labor force. It’s 
integral to the economy of the 
state and should be encouraged 
to develop and prosper with more 
climate-conscious means.
Renewable energy is a rapidly 
expanding industry, and Michigan 
could put itself at the forefront of 
this burgeoning industry through 
electric vehicles (EVs) and more. 
One strategy could be tax breaks or 
subsidies for firms manufacturing 
renewables and EVs. Encouraging 
movement of firms to Michigan 
while 
retaining 
environmental 
integrity 
would 
be 
fantastic. 
Retraining programs for workers 
shifting from more traditional 
manufacturing jobs into cleaner 
industries would be important as 
well.

Leveraging Federal Funds
In 
order 
to 
achieve 
the 
policy 
goals 
outlined 
above, 
the trifecta must manage and 
direct the use of federal funds in 
a productive manner. With the 
growing economic importance of 
developing innovative technology, 
the federal funding provided by 
the CHIPS and Science Act would 
allow Michigan to progress as a 
technology-manufacturing titan, 
if used correctly. The CHIPS and 
Science Act has put forth around 
$50 billion for semiconductor 
research 
and 
manufacturing 
in order to further bring back 
manufacturing jobs to the United 
States.
With Michigan’s history of 
being 
a 
manufacturing 
titan, 
mainly in the automotive industry, 
there is an opportunity for the 
state to start the transition from 
automotive 
manufacturing 
to 
technological manufacturing with 
the CHIPS and Science Act. If the 
Democratic trifecta can use the 
money allocated by the CHIPS 
Act to motivate technological 
innovation 
and 
manufacturing 
across the state, it will create 
millions of jobs and spur major 
economic growth.
Properly leveraging the funds 
provided by the CHIPS and 
Science Act would not only result 
in overt economic benefits but 
also further growth in many 
urban centers as well. Cities 
such 
as 
Detroit, 
Hamtramck 
and Dearborn — centers of the 
automotive industry — can also be 
hotspots for semiconductor and 
other technological development 
with the CHIPS and Science Act. 
This would not only help the 
individuals in the city but also 
revitalize the cities by reinventing 
the way money flows in and out of 
these areas. Furthermore, a focus 
on creating tech manufacturing 
jobs within the state would also 
provide local job opportunities for 
University of Michigan graduates.
Another area that the newly 
instated trifecta should focus on 
is counteracting climate change. 
With the Inflation Reduction Act 
of 2022, there is now over $350 
billion in federal funds to help 
fight climate change and support 
energy security, which means that 
a Michigan government focused 
on environmental policy could and 
should make great strides toward 
protecting 
the 
environment. 
The act itself explicitly provides 
a variety of Michigan-centered 
commitments to support cleaner 
air, electric vehicle production and 
lower energy costs.
The trifecta could use this 
newly 
allocated 
money 
in 
a 
plethora of ways. A newer form of 
climate-friendly 
infrastructure 
is the addition of solar panels 
on homes and other buildings. 
Subsidies, 
tax 
exemptions 
and other factors that would 
incentivize solar panel additions 
on homes could be enacted by 
the trifecta to spur individual 
motivation on environmentally 
progressive actions. A focus on 
solar panel construction and other 
progressive infrastructure would 
ensure that Michigan reaches its 
goal of carbon neutrality by 2050.
A third point of impact for the 
trifecta could be the opportunity 
to improve and develop various 
areas of infrastructure within 
the state with the newly enacted 
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. 

T

he speculation that the 
2022 midterm elections 
would be a red wave for 
the Republicans turned out to be 
incorrect. In fact, Nov. 8 turned 
out well for the Democrats. 
With fewer than expected losses 
in the House and the Senate’s 
remaining 
blue, 
the 
Biden 
administration 
retained 
more 
power than expected. While 
Republicans managed to hold 
their governorships in Georgia, 
Florida and Texas, Democrats 
won in Pennsylvania, Michigan 
and Wisconsin. In Michigan, 
Democrats 
flipped 
both 
the 
state House and Senate, giving 
Democrats a trifecta for the first 
time since 1982. Reproductive 
rights were on the ballot in five 
states, with all ballot initiatives 
resulting in wins for abortion 
rights supporters.
While Election Day’s results 
will determine the balance of 
power for the next two years, 
sights have already turned to 2024 
— specifically, to the Republican 
primary. 
Former 
President 
Donald 
Trump’s 
inability 
to 
deliver big wins for Republicans 
has thrown into doubt whether 
he can lead the party to take 
back the White House in 2024. 
Meanwhile, Florida Gov. Ron 
DeSantis seems poised to vie for 
the Republican nomination.
While Trump announced his 
reelection bid on Nov. 15, no one 
should expect that he will cruise 
to an easy victory. Considering 
DeSantis’s strong performance in 
Florida’s gubernatorial election 
and Trump’s failure to deliver 
major wins for the Republicans, 
America 
should 
prepare 
for 
a Republican primary pitting 
Trump against DeSantis.
Not only do political pundits 
and commentators predict that 
DeSantis will challenge Trump 
in the 2024 Republican primary, 
but Trump seems to fear the 
same scenario. On Election Day, 
the former president spoke to 
reporters about the possibility 
of a DeSantis run, saying that it 
would be a mistake because “I 
will tell you things about him 
that won’t be very flattering. 
I know more about him than 

anybody other than perhaps his 
wife, who is really running his 
campaign.” Trump also did not 
endorse DeSantis in this election 
cycle 
and 
called 
him 
“Ron 
DeSanctimonious” at a rally on 
the Saturday before Election Day.
Trump has good reason to fear 
a DeSantis challenge in 2024. For 
one, while some Trump-endorsed 
candidates were successful on 
Election Day, such as J.D. Vance, 
the newly elected senator from 
Ohio, and Wisconsin Sen. Ron 
Johnson, many were not, such as 
Pennsylvania Senate candidate 
Dr. Mehmet Oz and Arizona 
gubernatorial 
candidate 
Kari 
Lake. Trump does not have the 
hold on the Republican Party 
he once had. Even in Florida, 
DeSantis won a higher percentage 
of the vote than Sen. Marco Rubio, 
who received an endorsement 
from Trump last year. While 
Trump continues to shape the 
direction of the Republican Party, 
voters are not as drawn to him as 
they previously were.
Trump’s 
reelection 
bid 
could be further marred by his 
continued legal problems with 
the Department of Justice and 
the Jan. 6 committee subpoena. 
These issues could continue his 
challenges with the electorate 
that were evidenced by the lack of 
his endorsed candidates who won 
in the election this year.
DeSantis, on the other hand, 
has only become more popular 
with voters, at least in the state of 
Florida. In 2018, DeSantis barely 
won the gubernatorial election 
against Democratic challenger 
Andrew Gillum by 0.4%. This 
year, DeSantis won by a margin of 

19.4%. DeSantis also won a higher 
percentage of the vote than 
Trump in 2020, who received 
51.2% of the vote to President 
Joe Biden’s 47.9% in Florida. 
Additionally, DeSantis performed 
well in traditional Democrat 
strongholds, such as Miami-Dade 
County, showing that DeSantis 
could perform well in other swing 
states and districts. 
DeSantis can also use the 
policies he has implemented 
as governor to his advantage. 
DeSantis has taken controversial 
policy 
actions 
to 
become 
a 
star on the right. The COVID-
19 pandemic led DeSantis to 
implement a variety of policies 
that elevated him in conservative 
circles 
and 
horrified 
those 
on the left. DeSantis banned 
mask mandates in schools and 
lifted COVID-19 restrictions on 
businesses in Sept. 2020. Besides 
COVID-19 
policies, 
DeSantis 
signed restrictions on discussion 
of sexual orientation, gender 
identity and critical race theory 
into law, all of which appeal to 
many Republicans. DeSantis has 
also taken actions on the national 
level. He chartered flights to 
take Venezuelan asylum seekers 
to Martha’s Vineyard, Mass. in 
Sept. and refuses to say whether 
or not he supports Trump’s 2020 
election lies. 
DeSantis’s actions and policies 
appeal to the right without taking 
Trump’s 
approach 
of 
brash 
election denial and potential 
criminal 
conduct. 
However, 
Trump has one advantage over 
DeSantis. 

Opinion

The 2022 Midterms have set up for 
a Republican showdown in 2024

The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
12 — Wednesday, November 30, 2022

From The Daily: How Michigan Democrats 
can take advantage of their trifecta

LYDIA STORELLA
Opinion Columnist

W

hat is life like after 
midterms? What do 
we do in the time 
leading up to the next election 
season? The rhetoric around 
the significance of voting can 
feel both overwhelming and 
inadequate. It’s one of the few 
tools we have at our disposal as 
we work towards, in the words of 
scholar Aziz Rana, “a future we 
demand but cannot guarantee.” 
But is voting really the only 
obligation we have to one another 
and to our democracy? Once 
we’ve casted our vote… what 
comes next? 
Here at the University of 
Michigan, I am a student at the 
Ford School of Public Policy. 
In my studies, I am continually 
struck by how long it takes for 
systemic 
change 
to 
happen. 
Whether we are talking about 
local, state or federal government, 
once a person has been elected 
or appointed and starts to enact 
legislation, the headlines may 
stop rolling out — but that’s 
where the grueling work of what 
we’ve resigned ourselves to call 
“democracy” 
begins. 
Often, 
things like administrative bloat, 
implementation and bureaucracy 
mean that legislative wins, such 
as the Infrastructure Investment 
and Jobs Act, can take years 
to yield fruits for everyday 
Americans.
Democracy can’t take years, 
and neither can the pressing 
needs of so many Americans. 
You might have seen the wins 
you wanted this election cycle, 
but despair, polarization and 
divisiveness still threaten the 
very fabric of our country. If we 
want a more just society that 
lasts longer than our lifetimes, 
beyond the pendulum swing of 

an election — we need to do more 
than a bi-annual vote. 
In 
fact, 
voting 
is 
wholly 
inadequate for the problems we 
face, especially when thinking 
about divisiveness and conflict. 
We’ve lost the ability to talk 
about sensitive issues such as 
race, gender or sexuality and 
we can’t seem to have political 
discourse in a civil manner. This 
is highlighted in the backlash 
that the University received for 
hosting Ben Shapiro. And by the 
way, some of our biggest public 
servants don’t succeed in civil 
discourse either, in cases such 
as Kari Lake and Paul Gosar. On 
his campaign trail, President 
Joe Biden often talked about 
his hopes for healing the soul 
of our nation. A good first step 
could be learning how to have 
conversations with people we 
disagree with. 
In a study room at the Public 
Policy 
School, 
I 
sat 
down 
with Olivia Vaden, a proud 
Michigander and Michigan State 
University alum who is currently 
a second-year Master of Public 
Policy 
student 
concentrating 
on 
workforce 
development. 
“I’ve definitely had a chip on 
my shoulder since (the 2016 
presidential election) about civic 
engagement and what that looks 
like,” she said. 
She worked hard to get out of 
her comfort zone and participate 
as much as she could. Canvassing, 
joining groups to help organize 
and get out the vote. But after 
the results, she was left stunned, 
especially after seeing all of 
the polling and punditry that 
predicted Hillary Clinton would 
win and history would be made. 
“I was like, this doesn’t make 
sense. This was not what you told 
me would happen if I did all this 
civic engagement,” Vaden said.
For her, being real with 
ourselves and others through 

open dialogue is a necessary way 
to engage. “I think processing 
and getting real about your 
feelings, 
or 
why 
something 
angers you, why the other side 
feels a certain way, that’s the 
next step. Some things we will 
never find a middle ground 
on, but we can have difficult 
conversations about policy and 
politics and values with people 
outside of our echo chambers,” 
Vaden said. The idea of stepping 
out of your echo chamber can 
feel uncomfortable. If you don’t 
agree with Republican ideologies 
or policies, why go out of your 
way to engage? If you dislike 
Democrats, why put yourself 
through a difficult conversation? 
Given that there are powerful 
forces, namely the media, seeking 
to divide us, it might seem that 
we’re already too polarized for 
conversation to do much good. 
Conversation is trivial to some 
for this reason. But others stand 
by its significance, like Young-
Chan Lim. Lim is a second-year 
Master of Public Policy student 
and works at the Ginsberg 
Center, where he advises student 
organizations at the University 
on 
community 
engagement 
direct impact grants. He is 
queer, a first-gen college student 
and an immigrant; his lived 
experience with those identities 
has sometimes posed a barrier 
between him and others, making 
him well aware of how deep 
conversation can bridge gaps in 
experience. “Engaging in deep 
and 
powerful 
conversations 
with one another is (a) hard but 
necessary day-to-day activity,” 
he said. “Every discipline, every 
expert has their own thesis 
on what that looks like, but I 
think it starts with compassion, 
especially for people I disagree 
with.” 

Conversation is the first step 
toward a healthier democracy

ELINA MORRISON
Opinion Columnist

THE MICHIGAN DAILY 
EDITORIAL BOARD

Stanford Lipsey Student Publications Building
420 Maynard St. 
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
 tothedaily@michigandaily.com

Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890.

PAIGE HODDER
Editor in Chief
JULIAN BARNARD AND 
SHUBHUM GIROTI
Editorial Page Editors

Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of The Daily’s Editorial Board. 
All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors.

EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS

Ammar Ahmad

Julian Barnard

Brandon Cowit

Jess D’Agostino

Ben Davis

Shubhum Giroti

Devon Hesano

Sophia Lehrbaum

Olivia Mouradian

Siddharth Parmar

Rushabh Shah

Nikhil Sharma

Lindsey Spencer

Evan Stern

Anna Trupiano

Jack Tumpowsky

Alex Yee

Quin Zapoli

VANESSA KIEFER 
AND KATE WEILAND 
Managing Editors

Design by Grace Filbin

 Read more at MichiganDaily.com

 Read more at MichiganDaily.com
 Read more at MichiganDaily.com

