55°F
weather icon Partly Cloudy

REVIEW-JOURNAL ENDORSEMENT: Question 4

Question 4 would place a declaration of voters’ rights into the constitution. In 2002, the Legislature put this list of rights into statute. It includes several obvious provisions, such as the ability to “cast a ballot that is written in a format which allows the clear identification of candidates and accurately records the voter’s selection of candidates.”

Another provision allows voters to “receive instruction on the use of voting equipment.”

This is the type of bill that moves forward because legislators don’t have the guts to point out the obvious. These provisions aren’t objectionable per se, but their inclusion in the state constitution is. What happens when the Nevada Supreme Court one day determines that the right to “request assistance in voting, if needed” requires government-funded ballot harvesting? Or the right to “vote without being intimidated” means all-mail elections are unconstitutional?

The Legislature should make these decisions, not an activist court. You should vote no on Question 4.

THE LATEST
REVIEW-JOURNAL ENDORSEMENT: Question 2

Question 2 would recognize all marriages, regardless of gender, overturning the traditional definition of marriage in the state constitution.

REVIEW-JOURNAL ENDORSEMENT: Question 6

Question 6 would mandate that Nevada generate 50 percent of its energy from renewable sources by 2030.

REVIEW-JOURNAL ENDORSEMENT: Question 1

Question 1 removes the Board of Regents from the Nevada constitution, but doesn’t introduce any immediate changes.