The standard election year question, “Are you better off today than you were four years ago?” isn’t fully applicable in the current campaign for governor between Democratic incumbent Gretchen Whitmer and Republican challenger Tudor Dixon.

The devastation of the COVID-19 pandemic and the crushing wave of inflation and shortages that followed would have challenged any governor’s ability to execute an agenda aimed at moving the state forward.

More relevant, then, is a reframing of the query: “Would you be better off today than you are had Michigan had more effective leadership over the past four years?”

To that question, we believe the answer is yes.

Throughout the pandemic, we were critical of Whitmer’s instinct toward authoritarianism. Like most other governors, she responded, appropriately, to the sudden and deadly spread of the novel coronavirus with emergency orders aimed at containing the outbreak until a battle strategy could be developed.

MORE NEWS: Long Overdue: Michigan Library Book from the Nixon Era Finally Returned

Our issue is not that she took control of the state at that dark moment, but rather that she held onto unilateral authority well beyond the initial sorting out period and used it to bypass representative governing.

Whitmer issued a string of orders that were often arbitrary and capricious, and sometimes baffling — she allowed hardware stores to stay open, but roped off shelves of gardening supplies; Michiganians could go fishing in a canoe, but not in a motorboat, etc.

Despite pushback, she didn’t stop and reassess, or welcome input from state lawmakers. She stubbornly stuck to her COVID policies regarding nursing homes despite industry warnings of their risk.

When the state Supreme Court ruled her orders unconstitutional, the governor exploited loopholes to avoid engaging with the Legislature.

Whitmer set aside basic civil liberties; her orders at times closed houses of worship, banned personal travel and even regulated gatherings in private homes. These were extraordinary demands in the name of the public good and should have come with the maximum amount of transparency.

Instead, the governor suspended portions of the Freedom of Information Act and conducted her business in the dark, held few honest press conferences and refused requests for interviews from the local media.

While she demanded unquestioning compliance with her orders, she often violated them herself.

States such as Florida that took a lighter touch to shutdowns and prioritized reopening schools and businesses fared no worse than Michigan in terms of COVID death rates, while suffering less long-term harm.

Michigan was unprepared to respond to economic opportunity coming out of the pandemic. Ford Motor Co., its quintessential hometown business, took its $11 billion investment in electric vehicle facilities to Kentucky and Tennessee.

In her endorsement interview, we were encouraged that Whitmer is now focused on winning the EV race for Michigan. She also appears to have moderated her position on other key economic issues, including expressing support for a concrete tunnel beneath the Straits of Mackinac to contain the Line 5 pipeline.

And we applaud both Whitmer and Dixon support extending the Freedom of Information Act to the governor’s office. That would help improve Michigan’s worst-in-the-nation ranking on government transparency.

Still, her first-term performance does not recommend Gretchen Whitmer for a second term as governor.

In the beginning, we had some trepidation about Tudor Dixon. The conservative commentator, mother and former steel industry executive is a political novice with no governing experience.

We also sought clarity on her position on the 2020 election, and more importantly, her commitment to assuring future elections are not undermined by sore losers.

Dixon said she supported an audit of the 2020 balloting, which we felt was unnecessary given the lack of evidence of fraud, but we also believe more transparency will enhance confidence in the outcome of elections. Most importantly, she expressed a commitment to abiding by the will of the voters, and we trust she’ll honor her word.

We are reassured by our personal experience with Dixon in interviews and by her performance on the debate stage.

She is informed, measured and focused on the right priorities.

For example, Dixon would set Michigan on a responsible course to phase out the state income tax. That stands in contrast to Whitmer, who says she’d be open to a proposal to move to a graduated income tax.

A tax code that punishes success would be a huge blow to the state’s ability to attract jobs and investment, and would likely send businesses and residents packing to other states with a less tax burden.

Dixon says she would insist Michigan schools concentrate first on improving academic performance, and assure parental concerns about age-appropriate curriculum are heard. Parents, she says, would have a larger voice in education than teacher unions, which make up the core of Whitmer’s political support. 

As a businesswoman, Dixon would be more receptive to the concerns of the business community about overregulation. She would be less beholden to union interests than Whitmer has been.

On abortion, Dixon takes the hard-line position of banning the procedure except to save the life of the mother. That’s out of line with the majority of Michigan residents. But she has pledged to implement Proposal 3, which would protect reproductive rights, if it is passed by voters on Nov. 8. (In her interview, Whitmer finally answered the question of whether some regulation on abortion is warranted, including parental notification, by saying, “Yes and yes.”)

We are confident Dixon, a fiscal conservative, would be a good steward of Michigan’s finances and not squander its historic surplus, which is fueled by Washington’s reckless spending spree, on expanding the size of government.

Dixon would not be the first governor to come to office with no previous governing experience. It will, however, present a challenge.

Her success will depend on surrounding herself with a smart, competent team and, quite frankly, putting a wall between her administration and the radical right wingers who control the state’s Republican Party.

We appreciate her forthrightness, her openness to good ideas and her energy and enthusiasm for the job.

Tudor Dixon would return Michigan to consensus governing. She is the best choice to lead the state for the next four years.