ESCANABA — Two candidates vying for the 108th State Senate seat, currently held by term-limited Republican Beau LaFave, faced off recently during a voter forum presented by the Delta County League of Women Voters and the American Association of University Women (AAUW).

When asked about their top priorities if elected to office, both Chris Lopez (D) and Dave Prestin (R) highlighted energy as a major concern for those in the 108th, but their idea of what should be done to protect Yoopers and Michiganders in general varied greatly.

Prestin, who currently serves on the Alger Delta Cooperative Electric Association board, said the Enbridge Line 5 tunnel is “vital.” Lopez argued a secure energy grid powered by nuclear energy was best. He said nuclear energy was the greenest, safest and cleanest power generation option.

The candidates other priorities highlighted their political divide.

Prestin noted ending governmental-overreach and regulatory reform were his top priorities and noted public safety was another major concern, but his time elapsing before he could clarify what his public safety goals were.

Lopez focused on education, stating he wanted to create a “symbiotic relationship” between high schools, colleges and employers to address both staffing and unemployment concerns. His focus remained on schools when he noted his third priority would be to add mental and behavioral health courses to school curriculums at all grade levels.

Before getting into the meat of their positions on policy issues, the candidates were asked to publicly state their stance on whether the 2020 presidential was free and fair or whether it was stolen from President Donald Trump.

Lopez stated he agreed with the Michigan oversight committee report that the election was fair, but that “every election has a certain amount of fraud in it.” He added he had concerns and would like more investigation into the security risks the use of private corporations’ third-party voting machines may pose.

Prestin did not take a hard stance on the validity of the 2020 presidential election.

“I believe in the findings of Michigan’s committee, I just don’t know that we’ll ever know the truth. I don’t know that COVID will ever allow us to know the truth. That being said, we are a country ruled by laws and the die was cast,” he said.

The candidates were then asked about the three statewide proposals appearing on the November ballot. First to be discussed was Proposal 1, which would amend the state constitution to require annual public financial disclosure reports by legislators and other state officers and change state legislator term limits to 12 total years in the legislature, which could be split in any combination of years between the Michigan House and Michigan Senate.

Prestin said he was in support of the proposal in its entirety. Lopez said he supported the financial disclosures and that he agreed with Prestin that the current term limits hindered the ability of legislators to accomplish goals. However, he is not fully in support of the proposal.

“I just don’t think Prop 1 really addresses the need for election reform, but I’m more for it than I am against it,” he said.

Lopez and Prestin were then asked about election and voting rights reform. While the question did not specifically mention Proposal 2, the proposal would make significant reforms to the election process by amend the state constitution to include things like nine days of early in-person voting, state-funded postage for absentee ballots, and the ability of publicly-disclosed donations to fund elections.

Prestin took a hard stance against Proposal 2, arguing instead that elections should be tightened. He said the current proposal’s single application for absentee ballots for all elections opened the door to “ballot harvesting,” as clerks would not be purging the voter rolls, and that allowing donor money affected the sovereignty of Michigan’s elections.

“The ballot initiative that’s coming out on the ballot I think will, if it’s put into the constitution, will completely eviscerate our election law process,” he said.

Lopez did not address Proposal 2 directly in his answer, instead saying he wanted to see more access and assistance for voters with disabilities.

“Those people who can’t leave their homes and those who can’t hold a pen themselves, we need a process for those people, and we need a larger review for the most needy voters in our districts to ensure that they have access to voting systems and people who can assist them to vote,” he said.

Other than provisions related to absentee voting, there are no parts of Proposal 2 that address accommodations for shut-ins or other disabled voters.

The most contentious proposal of the night, however, was Proposal 3, which would amend the state constitution to establish new individual rights related to reproductive freedom. The proposal allows individuals “to make and carry out all decisions about pregnancy, such as prenatal care, childbirth, postpartum care, contraception, sterilization, abortion, miscarriage management and infertility.”

“What alarms me on Proposition 3 is it is going to strip parents of all of their rights regarding parental consent, overseeing their children on reproductive rights, sex change operations, puberty blockers — I mean, the ramifications of this if it were put into law are staggering. I mean, it would allow abortion up to and including birth with nothing put in place to leave a baby that was born alive to stay alive,” said Prestin.

Proposal 3 does not mention minor children, gender affirming surgeries or puberty blockers. It allows the state to regulate abortion after fetal viability, but not to prohibit abortion if medically needed to protect a patient’s life or physical or mental health.

The proposal does not legalize infanticide.

Lopez said he did not believe it was the government’s role to interfere with decisions made between individuals and their doctors or families.

“Even though I personally don’t agree with abortion, I think that a lot of our elected officials forget that our personal opinions should not necessarily drive our policies. I support individual rights and privacy above all else,” he said, later adding that the proposal did nothing but secure the rights perviously held by Americans prior to the Supreme Court’s reversal of Roe v. Wade.

While not subject to a proposal on the November ballot, the candidates were asked to weigh in on whether they would support reforming gun laws in the state.

“If we’re going to be an open carry state, let’s just be constitutional concealed carry. It would make things much better. That being said, I really like Idaho’s program. They have an enhanced concealed carry, then you would get the reciprocity across the other states,” said Prestin.

Lopez took a unique perspective on the Second Amendment, saying he supported the amendment as originally intended — to support a “well regulated militia.”

“Those militias that our Founding Fathers were talking about eventually became the state’s National Guards, and I wholly believe that we would be a better society, a safer society and a much more resilient society against foreign attacks if we required all of our gun owners to be part of the state militia or the federal forces to get the proper training and mental health screenings that would help us ensure the safety of gun owners across the country,” he said.

The last question posed to the candidates was about the teacher shortage and whether or not it would be appropriate to allow unlicensed teachers to work in public schools. Lopez said teachers should get the same benefit packages as politicians but described hiring unlicensed teachers as “asinine.” Prestin disagreed, saying he believed adults could impart real-world knowledge on students, but that licensed teachers were still needed for kindergarten through fifth grade.