Statewide ballot questions to be reviewed at Democratic tele-luncheon

Sondra Cosgrove, President of the League of Women Voters of Nevada and Professor of History at the College of Southern Nevada, will be the featured speaker at Monday's Democratic tele-luncheon. Her presentation, to be teleconferenced via Zoom from Las Vegas, will spotlight the five questions on the November ballot in terms of their history and substance as well as the reasoning behind the League's positions for or against passage.

Question 1 removes the constitutional status of the Board of Regents. According to the Secretary of State's website, a “Yes” vote would amend the Nevada Constitution by:

(1) removing provisions governing the election and duties of the Board of Regents and its control and management of the affairs and funds of the State University and requiring the Legislature to provide by law for the governance, control, and management of the State University;

(2) requiring the Legislature to provide by law for the reasonable protection of individual academic freedom at public institutions of higher education in this State; and

(3) revising provisions governing the administration of certain funding derived under federal law and dedicated for the benefit of certain departments of the State University.

A “No” vote would retain existing provisions of the Nevada Constitution governing the election and duties of the Board of Regents and its control and management of the affairs and funds of the State University, would not require the Legislature to provide by law for the reasonable protection of individual academic freedom at public institutions of higher education in this State, and would not revise existing provisions governing the administration of certain funding derived under federal law and dedicated for the benefit of certain departments of the State University.

Question 2 recognizes the marriage of couples regardless of gender. According to the Secretary of State's website, a “Yes” vote would amend the Nevada Constitution to:

(1) remove the currently preempted and therefore unenforceable provision stating that only a marriage between a male person and a female person may be recognized and given effect in Nevada;

(2) require that the State of Nevada and its political subdivisions must recognize marriages of and issue marriage licenses to couples regardless of gender, and that all legally valid marriages must be treated equally under the law; and

(3) provide that religious organizations and members of the clergy have the right to refuse to perform a marriage, and that no person has the right to make a claim against a religious organization or member of the clergy for refusing to perform a marriage.

A “No” vote would keep the currently preempted and therefore unenforceable provision in the Nevada Constitution stating that only a marriage between a male person and a female person may be recognized and given effect in this State and would not add a provision in the Nevada Constitution providing that religious organizations and members of the clergy have the right to refuse to perform a marriage, and that no person has the right to make a claim against a religious organization or member of the clergy for refusing to perform a marriage.

Question 3 revises duties of the State Board of Pardons Commissioners. According to the Secretary of State's website, a “Yes” vote would require the State Board of Pardons Commissioners to meet at least quarterly, allow any member to submit a matter for the Board’s consideration, and authorize the Board to grant pardons and make other clemency decisions by a majority vote of its members without requiring the Governor to be part of the majority of the Board that votes in favor of such decisions.

A “No” vote would keep existing provisions of the Nevada Constitution, which do not specify the frequency of meetings of the State Board of Pardons Commissioners and which provide that the Board may grant pardons and make other clemency decisions by a majority vote of its members only if the Governor is part of the majority of the Board that votes in favor ofsuch decisions.

Question 4 creates a constitutional right to certain voting procedures and policies. According to the Secretary of State's website, a “Yes” vote would add a new section to the Nevada Constitution guaranteeing specific voting rights to all qualified and registered voters in the State.

A “No” vote would keep existing provisions of the Nevada Constitutionand would not add aconstitutional guarantee of specific voting rights to all qualified and registered voters in the State, but such voting rights would be protected by existing statutes.

There is no “Question 5” on this year's ballot.

Question 6 requires utilities to acquire 50 percent of their electricity from renewable resources by 2030. According to the Secretary of State's website, a “Yes” vote would amend Article 4 of the Nevada Constitution to require all providers of electric utility services that sell electricity to retail customers for consumption in Nevada to generate or acquire an increasing percentage of electricity from renewable energy resources so that by calendar year 2030 not less than 50 percent of the total amount of electricity sold by each provider to its retail customers in Nevada comes from renewable energy resources.

A “No” vote would retain the provisions of Article 4 of the Nevada Constitution in their current form. These provisions do not require all providers of electric utility services that sell electricity to retail customers for consumption in Nevada to generate or acquire an increasing percentage of electricity from renewable energy resources.

Sponsored by the Democratic Men's Committee, this event is scheduled for noon on Monday, September 21st, and will be held online via Zoom teleconference due to the restricted availability of in-person venues. Those wishing to be on distribution for these Zoom links can email Rich Dunn, Men's Committee Events Coordinator, at richdunn@aol.com.