You can’t separate the six proposed constitutional amendments from how they were devised. The Republicans rushed these amendments through at the last minute, without debate, discussion, or even an implementing statute, which means they’ll get to decide later—in a lame-duck session—what these amendments really do, after you’ve already voted on them. The proper response to this chicanery: Vote no on all six.

Protect the right to hunt and fish: No

It’s unclear exactly how North Carolinians’ right to hunt and fish has come under threat, and none of the amendment’s backers have convinced us of the need to enshrine these rights in the state constitution. What is clear is that this is another case of the General Assembly doing the NRA’s bidding, and that this amendment exists primarily to drive Republican voters to the polls. That sort of politics shouldn’t be rewarded. In addition, there could be unintended (or maybe intended) consequences: The amendment could override regulations on controversial hunting and fishing methods such as gillnetting, which kills sea turtles.

Strengthen protections for crime victims: No

Marsy’s Law is a nationwide victims’ rights movement bankrolled by a California billionaire. Again, it’s unnecessary: North Carolina already has protections for victims in state law, and there’s nothing stopping the legislature from adding additional protections to state statutes rather than the constitution. It was really done so that Republicans could paint the Nix All 6 effort as being pro-crime. Again, that sort of politics shouldn’t be rewarded. And again, there could be unintended consequences: decreased transparency, a slower criminal justice system, and so on.

Reduce the income tax cap to 7 percent: No

Right now, the state constitution caps the top income tax rate at 10 percent. This amendment would lower that cap to 7 percent. Again, this is unnecessary and transparently political, as no one is threatening to raise taxes to 10 percent, even on the wealthy. But it’s also short-sighted and benefits the rich. A vote to significantly raise taxes is always difficult, and for a future legislature to do so would likely mean lawmakers were responding to a crisis; if they did raise taxes, it would almost certainly be on the affluent, and that’s the possibility this amendment is designed to foreclose.

Change the process for fulfilling judicial vacancies: No

Another power grab, this amendment would transfer the authority for appointing judges from the governor—who has the gall to be a Democrat—to the legislature, which is more likely to remain in Republican hands for the foreseeable future. Even former Republican governor Pat McCrory thinks this is a terrible idea.

Establish an eight-member Board of Ethics and Elections Enforcement: No

Yet again, a naked power grab. Under the old system, the governor appointed the nine members of the State Board of Elections. Under this amendment, the board would have four Democrats and four Republicans—a recipe for gridlock, and for keeping the board from investigating elections-related shenanigans.

Require voter ID: Hell no.

A few years ago, a federal court ruled that the General Assembly’s previous voter ID law unconstitutionally “targets African Americans with almost surgical precision.” Now the Republicans are back for a second bite at the apple, using the veneer of a popular referendum to mask their intentions. It’s pretty simple, really: Voter ID makes it more difficult for lower-income minority communities to vote. Since these groups vote overwhelmingly for Democrats, Republicans want them to stay away from the polls. Even if you give Republicans the benefit of the doubt—and we don’t—it’s still bad policy. In theory, this is being done to counteract widespread voter fraud, a problem that barely exists—the equivalent of employing a bazooka to kill an ant.