A moderator of a forum event should not taint the proceedings with your opinions on the issues as you are doing. Organizers should stay neutral, as the League of Woman Voters tries hard to do. (Your "award," whoever gave that out, what is it, is more like a participation trophy?)
But since you've opened the door for discussion, let's look at the questions:
Q1 - If passed, to start with, there wouldn't be enough nurses to fill the required positions. This is a union led effort looking to get thousands of more nurses paying dues. Plus, the number of nurses per patient is reduced to the lowest common denominator of the slowest and most inefficient workers because you can't set a limit that is impossible even for a single nurse to meet. By law, people would indeed have to be turned away from a facility if the nursing quota were to be filled. When patient levels drop, dozens of nurses would be left with sitting around looking at their smart phones.
This is Marxism at its best. Besides the enormous cost to healthcare, and thus to us all, Q1 takes away all incentive for a nurse to excel.
Q2 - Corporate money in politics is only a "threat" to the uneducated, uninformed, gullible voters, which is what you are calling voters by being for Q2.
Big money PACs by law have to identify themselves when they do expensive TV ads, which are taken with a grain of salt by knowledgeable voters. Corporations are made up of people and if they prosper and profit because of legislation, their employees prosper. The law creates another useless commission with vague goals and clearly violates the First Amendment.
Q3 - The "yes" people are feeding a big lie to the voters. They keep saying that people born of 1 sex but believe they are of another sex are discriminated in "public areas," as if they can't take a book out of a library of buy a ticket at a train station. This is pure deception. The law, as signed by our democrat governor Baker, was never needed. Existing laws already protected ALL people in "public areas." The "bathroom bill" is just that. Bathrooms, showers in schools or locker rooms in fitness centers are not "public areas." They are areas of privacy and safety. The law created civil rights and creates a new class of people for those with a disorder at the expense of other peoples' rights to privacy and security.
Maura Healy said they looked across the country and found no examples of problems in such places. They apparently didn't look too hard because there are dozens of instances as enumerated on the main page of VoteNoTo3.com
Transgenders have been using facilities for years, but that's not the point. The law permits any man to just stroll naked into a women's shower and know they can simply claim they "feel feminine" at that moment. They don't even need to have the trappings of the opposite sex. Try complaining about a pervert and see who's fined or jailed. (Hint, wouldn't be the pervert)
The law also cheapens the existing support for true transgenders, the tiny percentage of people born with physical characteristics of both sexes who have a right then to decide who they want to be and to have everyone's support.
What's best for our society?
Vote "No" on all 3 questions.
Don't fall for the Marxist takeover approach