Yes on Question 1. Auditor Diana DiZoglio’s ballot question would give her office explicit authority to conduct audits of the Massachusetts Legislature. The idea is deeply unpopular on Beacon Hill, but that’s not the only reason to support it. Forcing the legislature to operate more openly would lead to better governance. While DiZoglio’s proposal isn’t a silver bullet and could lead to a constitutional battle in court, it at least has a chance to make the state’s notoriously opaque legislature a little more transparent.

No to question 2. Education reforms in the 1990s made Massachusetts schools among the best in the country. Why mess with success? The MCAS exam was a key part of those reforms, and eliminating it as a graduation requirement would take away a pillar of the state’s excellence. Without the test, Massachusetts would have only a patchwork of local high school diploma requirements — likely reverting to the days of separate and unequal education for lower-income and minority children.

Yes to question 3. Labor laws were written long before gig work existed. Question 3 would extend to drivers at companies like Uber and Lyft a right that other private sector workers take for granted: the ability to unionize and bargain for better wages and working conditions.

No to question 4. Psychedelic drugs show promise as a way to treat certain serious psychiatric conditions, but they also pose real dangers. Evaluating the benefits and harms of powerful drugs in a rigorous, scientific manner is why the United States has a Food and Drug Administration. The agency has a strict process for approving pharmaceutical products, which is the right way for psychedelics to gain approval.

Yes to question 5. Many restaurant servers and certain other service workers in Massachusetts make the majority of their money from tips. Question 5 wouldn’t change that basic reality: Those workers would still get tips and still have every incentive to rush to get more. What it would do is raise the floor by ensuring that all those servers are making at least minimum wage when business is slow or their employers shortchange them. That should happen now, but in practice it sometimes doesn’t.

In the race for the U.S. Senate, Republican John Deaton has run a credible campaign, and he deserves a future in state politics. But Democratic incumbent Elizabeth Warren deserves re-election. She is a serious, hardworking senator, and a vote for her is also a vote to keep the Senate in Democratic hands.

Finally, there is also the presidential race, which has not without reason swallowed up all the political oxygen this fall. Former president and Republican candidate Donald Trump’s attempted comeback poses a serious threat to America’s future. He would roll back environmental protections, ally with foreign dictators and unleash destructive trade wars. He has shown contempt for the rule of law and for democracy itself.

His economic agenda, built around imposing 10 to 20 percent tariffs on all imported goods, would drive up costs for Americans as surely as high inflation or income taxes. His promise to deport millions of undocumented immigrants would indiscriminately remove many hardworking people who pay taxes and contribute to their communities, and harm a slew of industries that depend on their labor, from homebuilding to dairy farming to meatpacking.

His disastrous tenure between 2017 and 2021, which culminated in his failed handling of the COVID-19 pandemic and the January 6, 2021 uprising, is the best argument against returning to office.

Vice President Kamala Harris, on the other hand, offers a forward-looking vision and would fight for women’s reproductive rights, preserve America’s democracy-protecting foreign alliances and treat key issues like housing and climate change with the seriousness they deserve. Unlike some other newspapers that seem to be pondering this question, the Globe unreservedly endorses Harris’ candidacy.

Editorials represent the views of the Boston Globe Editorial Board. Follow us @GlobeOpinion.