Nevada Ballot Changes May Impact Tight Election Results

Nevada's upcoming 2024 elections promise to be a fiercely contested battleground state. A Las Vegas-style buffet of ballot measures is being prepared, aimed at drawing diverse constituencies to vote on November 5th. These proposals are intended to appeal not only to Democrats and Republicans but also to nonaffiliated voters, who form the largest voting bloc both in Nevada and nationwide.

This strategy reflects a growing trend among state parties collaborating with advocacy groups to introduce proposed constitutional amendments onto general election ballots. The aim is to motivate single-issue voters, who will likely support their respective candidates as well.

In Nevada's context, it is expected that pro-abortion measure supporters will use this tactic, hoping it draws Democrats, while a voter ID mandate could rally Republicans. Furthermore, there's also a ranked-voting amendment supported by independent, non-affiliated voters that requires second-vote confirmation according to state law.

These ballot measures have the potential to influence outcomes across several key electoral contests, including three Democrat-held Las Vegas-area congressional elections and Senator Jackie Rosen's battle for re-election against her Republican opponent.

Down-ballot proposals may also have an impact on the outcome of the presidential election, where former President Donald Trump has been leading in polls since announcing his intention for a rematch after narrowly losing in 2020.

Nevada isn't alone; similar initiatives are underway across other states like Arizona, Florida, Maryland, and New York, along with efforts in Colorado and Montana. South Dakota, Nebraska Missouri, Arkansas, etc., where either protection or expansion of abortion access is being proposed through November 2024 ballot measures

Through such tactics, Democrats have mastered ballot-harvesting mechanics while simultaneously galvanizing key constituencies. Notably successful were abortion-related measures that countered Republican gains during midterms by affirming constitutional amendments protecting abortion access, especially when contrasted against attempts to deny such access within conservative strongholds like Kansas, Kentucky, Montana, etc.

However, Dr. Sondra Cosgrove, a history professor at College Southern Nevada, opines that this might not have as much impact in Nevada. She references a 1990 referendum that encoded legal access to abortion up to 24 weeks, garnering a two-thirds majority vote; this law can only be changed by another two-thirds majority, thus effectively safeguarding it from any future amendments.

David Gibbs, the former Clark County GOP Chair, shares similar sentiments, doubting how significant an abortion measure would be in a state where access is already guaranteed. He believes those motivated by such measures were likely going to vote anyway.

Nevada could join other states like Alaska, Maine, California, etc. in adopting open primaries and ranked-choice voting if the proposal passes on the November 5th ballot. Cosgrove notes that about 35 percent of Nevadans are nonaffiliated voters, frustrated with having no choice within closed primaries but eager for reforms.

Gibbs agrees with her, except he argues election reform should focus on issues other than ranked choice voting. He predicts that Question 3 will face stiff opposition in 2024 due to its potential complications within electoral processes.

Repair The Vote's proposal requiring voter ID is also close to qualifying for inclusion in November's ballot, needing just around 25,000 signatures more, according to Gibbs' April assessment, who expects no difficulty meeting the target given bipartisan consensus favoring it.

In conclusion, while both parties explore all possible edges in tweaking turnout through varied proposals, they believe engaging their respective voter bases directly via specific issues beneficial to their candidates remains a key strategy moving forward into these closely contested elections.