State House - 20Th District - Republican
DIANA THERESA MOHYI
Diana Mohyi is a self-employed attorney in private practice who lives in West Bloomfield. She is a graduate of University of Michigan and Case Western Reserve University Law School. She is a member of the Oakland County Bar Association, Greater West Bloomfield Chamber of Commerce, Lakes Area Chamber of Commerce, Junior League of Birmingham, Impact 100 of Oakland County and German American Business Council of Michigan.
Legislative bans on education topics
In 24 states legislation has been introduced to restrict or outright ban the teaching and/or discussion of certain topics such as race, racism, gender-based issues and how American history is taught in the K-12 public school system. Critics of these efforts to restrict what is taught in public schools say such legislation prevents open inquiry into important issues. Should the state legislature in Michigan dictate or restrict what is taught in public school classrooms? Would you support such legislation? Why or why not? Please be specific in your answer.
The state legislature should restrict what is taught in public classrooms to protect children just like protecting minors from advertising. I would support banning the teaching of critical race theory curriculum because it is divisive inaccurate value based curriculum. It is a parent’s inalienable right to decide on the values that should be taught to their children. It is the responsibility of schools to provide the highest quality education in core curriculum: math, science, reading and writing. Many Michigan children barely know how to read and write. The policies of the school administrators in the last two years have caused children’s education to suffer. The first priority must be to fix the damage. Suicidal behavior of young people is skyrocketing and school administrator’s response is to buy therapy dogs instead of solving the issue, division, isolation and loneliness. Canceling the St Mary’s Fair was callous.
Michigan continues to rank near the bottom in comparison with other states when it comes to codified ethics and transparency rules for state lawmakers. The Michigan House, during several recent sessions, has approved bills to force disclosure of personal financial information of House and Senate members, along with members of the administration, and in some cases members of the state Supreme Court and university boards, although the Senate has not advanced such bills. Would you support financial disclosure legislation and, if so, are the current bills approved by the House sufficient? Should the disclosed information be publicly available?
I would support reasonable financial disclosure legislation. Public servants do not have the same expectation of privacy regarding their finances as the general public because their decisions impact the public. With regard to current legislation, I don’t believe it is enough. The public should be able to view the financial disclosure that legislative officials must provide. Public officials must disclose the sources of their income with reasonable protections for client confidentiality mandated for legal professionals.
Term limits for legislators/administration
Do you think the current term limits for House and Senate members are in need of review? Do you support the proposal for term limits that could be on the November ballot which would allow an elected House or Senate member to serve longer terms in either the House or Senate? Why or why not?
The current Michigan term limits appear reasonable. I would not support a proposal which would allow legislators to serve longer terms because that would be tantamount to electing kings and queens to rule over us. Term limits keep the swamp from getting too deeply rooted in the government system by acting as a drain.
State budget surplus
The state of Michigan has been running a general fund and school aid fund surplus for two years and is expected to carry over a surplus of $7 billion moving into the budget for fiscal year 2022-2023, which must be adopted by October 1. The surplus has been driven by growing tax revenues and a decline in student population, which reduces spending in that area by about $300 million annually. The budget surplus does not include nearly $15 billion in federal pandemic funding that will be spent over the next several years. A variety of proposals from the administration and the Republican-controlled Senate have been put forth, including tax cuts for both business and individuals. What are your ideas for using the budget surplus for the coming fiscal year’s budget? Be specific.
The legislature should return funds back to taxpayers by cutting taxes and issuing tax refunds to taxpayers. Michiganders and small businesses are financially damaged by the government imposed shutdowns put in place by decree of Governor Whitmer. It is the state government’s responsibility to try to do what little it can to make up for it by providing Michiganders financial relief. Part of that fund could be used towards fixing the roads and infrastructure.
Highland Park water/sewer debt
Highland Park, a member of the Great Lakes Water Authority, since 2012 has failed to pay for what now amounts to over $54 million in water and sewer debt, which means member communities in Oakland County will be placed in a position to underwrite this debt whether through increased rates for water and sewer or tapping budget reserves to accomplish the same. The state of Michigan has failed to deal with this issue. What do you think should be the solution to this growing problem of a GLWA member community failing to pay for water and sewer services? Please be specific.
Highland Park must be held accountable for the debt. Responsible member communities are not responsible for the debts of the delinquent member and it would be an illegal taking to impose that responsibility. Highland Park could be sued in court by member communities which have been aggrieved by this failure. The state government should take over local government’s duties when it is not doing its job on an emergency basis to avoid a public health crisis. The state or county government should directly collect taxes from communities to pay for these services since the current structure is not working. The state government could pass a law which mandates that.
Voting law changes
Voters approved no-reason absentee voting and a number of other changes by a wide margin in 2018. There have been several attempts since 2020 to make changes to the election laws, but critics have charged that some of the changes would negatively impact some voters. Do you think further changes to the election laws are needed and if so, what specifically would those changes be? If you do, why do you think so? How would that impact the proposal voters passed in 2018?
Yes, the election law needs to be changed to protect election integrity. Ballot harvesting must be absolutely illegal, absentee ballots must be specifically requested, voter ID must be required, time limits must be upheld for whether votes are counted if they are sent to the clerk past election day, and signature verification must be enforced on absentee ballot processing by clerks. These proposed changes would not interfere with the 2018 changes and will only improve the Michigan election system all Michiganders.
2020 presidential election results
Do you accept the presidential election results of 2020 in Michigan? Will you accept the results of the 2022 primary and general election? Explain why or why not.
I accept the result of the 2020 Michigan election under protest because on information and belief, Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson interfered with a lawful election audit by destroying evidence necessary to conduct said audit. The people of Michigan need to move forward and not backwards. Michigan must be able to hold election audits without interference from officials, especially those charged with upholding the integrity of elections. I would accept the results of the 2022 primary and general, however, I would support election audits to verify the accuracy of the election.
Michigan abortion ban law
In 1931, Michigan legislators adopted a law that banned abortion in the state, based on an 1846 ban that had been in effect. Now with the U.S. Supreme Court preparing to rule and likely overturn Roe v. Wade, some are concerned that the 1931 Michigan law will prevent any abortions here. Do you think the 1931 Michigan act banning abortion should be revised or eliminated to allow for abortions here if Roe V. Wade is overturned? Why or why not?
I am pro-life. I do not think there should be a revision to the law because abortion is the termination of a human life. This issue could be decided by ballot proposal by voters.
Right of redress
The Michigan House and Senate have in the past employed seldom used maneuvers to prevent the public from challenging laws that were enacted. Lawmakers accomplish this by attaching an expenditure provision to the legislation which then prevents citizens from petitioning to overturn the law. Citizens in Michigan are allowed referendum rights when it comes to legislation but not laws involving spending. Do you think that such legal maneuvers should be used by the legislature or do such actions diminish the rights of the public to challenge what lawmakers have adopted? What can be done to eliminate such maneuvers on the part of the legislature?
The legislature should never use maneuvers to prevent the public from challenging laws adopted by legislature. A law should be passed which prohibits such maneuvers.
Why select you?
Why should voters choose you over your opponent(s) in this contest? Please be specific.
I have a track record of being responsible and practical and fulfilling my duties to my clients and the public. I am an attorney with over 10 years practice experience and a full time small business owner for over five years in legal practice. I focus on family law and have served my clients with the highest quality service. I have had real life experience in the working world and understand what the needs of small business and families are. I am not a product of government bureaucracy. I am the only Republican candidate who fulfilled my precinct delegate duties at the county and state convention. My Republican opponent failed to show up. I recognize the destruction that has happened to small business and education in the last two years and I am committed to fixing it. I am committed to protecting our constitutional freedoms.