2024 ELECTION INFORMATION – Green Valley Television

Click here for Former News Director, Trevor Tumminia to help explain to you the voting process.

HOW TO REGISTER:

ONLINE REGISTRATION FOR NEVADA HAS ENDED, BUT YOU CAN STILL FILL OUT A REGISTRATION FORM AND MAIL OR DELIVER IT TO YOUR COUNTY’S OFFICE.

NEVADA ALSO HAS SAME-DAY REGISTRATION WHERE YOU CAN REGISTER AND VOTE IN-PERSON ON ELECTION DAY, AS LONG AS YOU HAVE A FORM OF IDENTIFICATION.

EARLY VOTING:

EARLY VOTING IN NEVADA ENDS ON NOVEMBER 1, 2024. CLICK HERE TO SEE ALL EARLY VOTING LOCATIONS AND TIMES.

VOTING ON ELECTION DAY:

VOTING FOR THE 2024 GENERAL ELECTION IS ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 5, 2024 FROM 7:00AM-7:00PM. CLICK HERE FOR INFORMATION ON VOTING LOCATIONS AVAILABLE ON ELECTION DAY. THIS INCLUDES IN-PERSON AND MAIL BALLOT DROP-OFF LOCATIONS.

NEVADA BALLOT QUESTIONS:

GVTV IS HERE TO HELP YOU UNDERSTAND ALL SEVEN QUESTIONS ON THE BALLOT THIS YEAR. DOWN BELOW ARE ONLY SIMPLIFIED DESCRIPTIONS OF EACH QUESTION. CLICK HERE TO SEE THE FULL TEXT OF ALL BALLOT QUESTIONS.

FOR EACH QUESTION, YOU SELECT EITHER “YES” OR “NO” ON THE BALLOT.

QUESTION 1: ASKS WHETHER OR NOT AN AMENDMENT TO THE NEVADA CONSTITUTION SHOULD BE MADE TO REMOVE THE BOARD OF REGENTS, WHICH OVERSEES THE NEVADA SYSTEM OF HIGHER EDUCATION (NSHE). THE REMOVAL OF THE BOARD WOULD PUT THE STATE LEGISLATURE IN CHARGE OF FUNDING AND AFFAIRS OF STATE UNIVERSITIES, LIKE THE UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA, LAS VEGAS (UNLV) AND THE UNIVERSITY OF RENO (UNR).

PROPONENTS OF THE PASSAGE OF THIS AMENDMENT SAY THAT THE STATE LEGISLATURE’S CONTROL AND OVERSIGHT OF THE NEVADA SYSTEM OF HIGHER EDUCATION WILL BENEFIT TAXPAYERS AND STUDENTS BECAUSE THEY WILL BE BETTER MANAGEMENT OVER FINANCIAL DECISIONS WITHIN NSHE.

OPPOSERS OF THE PASSAGE EXCLAIM THAT THIS IS AN ATTEMPT OF THE STATE LEGISLATURE TO GAIN MORE POWER AND THE BOARD OF REGENTS IS BEST FIT TO MAKE DECISIONS REGARDING NSHE.

QUESTION 2: ASKS IF AN AMENDMENT SHOULD BE MADE TO CHANGE THE LANGUAGE IN THE CONSTITUTION REGARDING PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES. THE PASSAGE OF THE AMENDMENT WOULD CHANGE THE WORD “INSANE” TO “PERSONS WITH SIGNIFICANT MENTAL ILLNESS.” IT WILL ALSO CHANGE THE WORD “BLIND” TO “PERSONS WHO ARE BLIND OR VISUALLY IMPAIRED.” LASTLY, IT WILL CHANGE THE WORDS “DEAF AND DUMB” TO “PERSONS WHO ARE DEAF OR HARD OF HEARING.” THESE CHANGES WOULD ONLY APPLY TO THE WORDING WITHIN THE NEVADA CONSTITUTION.

PROPONENTS OF THE PASSAGE SAY THAT MORE MODERN TERMINOLOGY SHOULD BE USED TO DESCRIBE PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES.

OPPONENTS OF THE PASSAGE SAY CHANGING THE TERMINOLOGY IN THE CONSTITUTION IS NOT AN EFFECTIVE WAY OF ALTERING THE EVERYDAY USE OF LANGUAGE.

IT IS UNKNOWN WHETHER OR NOT CHANGING THESE TERMS IN THE CONSTITUTION WILL HAVE AN FINANCIAL IMPACTS.

QUESTION 3: ASKS IF AN AMENDMENT SHOULD BE MADE TO THE CONSTITUTION TO ALLOW NEVADA VOTERS THE RIGHT TO PARTICIPATE IN OPEN PRIMARY ELECTIONS AND BE ABLE TO RANK CANDIDATES IN AN ELECTION RATHER THAN JUST SELECTING ONE. CURRENTLY, NEVADA CONDUCTS CLOSED PRIMARIES, MEANING THAT YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO VOTE IN A PRIMARY ELECTION IF YOU ARE NOT REGISTERED AS EITHER A DEMOCRAT OR REPUBLICAN. OPEN PRIMARIES WILL ALLOW ALL CITIZENS, NO MATTER THEIR PARTY AFFILIATION, TO VOTE IN ANY PARTIES’ PRIMARY, WHETHER THAT BE DEMOCRATIC, REPUBLICAN, OR NON-PARTISAN. THIS SYSTEM WILL CREATE A RANKED-CHOICE VOTING GENERAL ELECTION. THIS MEANS THAT INSTEAD OF VOTING FOR ONE CANDIDATE, VOTERS WILL RANK THEIR TOP FIVE CANDIDATES IN ORDER FROM MOST PREFERRED TO LEAST PREFERRED.

IF PASSED, THESE CHANGES WOULD GO INTO EFFECT DURING THE 2026 ELECTION CYCLE.

PROPONENTS OF THE PASSAGE SAY THAT CLOSED PRIMARIES SHOULD BE REMOVED BECAUSE THEY LEAVE MANY VOTERS FEELING LIKE THEIR VOICES AREN’T BEING HEARD SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT REGISTERED AS A CERTAIN PARTY. SUPPORTERS ALSO SAY THAT A RANKED-CHOICE ELECTION SYSTEM GIVES VOTERS THE OPPORTUNITY TO SELECT MULTIPLE CANDIDATES THAT BEST REPRESENT THEIR PREFERENCES, INSTEAD OF HAVING TO PICK BETWEEN THE “LESSER OF TWO EVILS.” SUPPORTERS SAY THIS SYSTEM ENSURES THAT NO VOTES ARE UNCOUNTED OR EXCLUDED.

OPPOSERS OF THE PASSAGE SAY THAT THIS SYSTEM IS TOO COMPLICATED AND TIME-CONSUMING FOR VOTERS AND IT COULD COST NEVADANS MILLIONS OF TAXPAYER DOLLARS TO IMPLEMENT.

QUESTION 4: ASKS WHETHER OR NOT AN AMENDMENT SHOULD BE PASSED TO CHANGE THE ORDINANCE IN THE CONSTITUTION THAT STILL ALLOWS FOR SLAVERY TO BE USED AS PUNISHMENT FOR CRIMES. CURRENTLY, THE NEVADA CONSTITUTION STATES THAT SLAVERY AND INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE IS PROHIBITED, EXCEPT AS CRIMINAL PUNISHMENT. THE PASSAGE OF THIS AMENDMENT WOULD COMPLETELY REMOVE THIS EXCEPTION.

SUPPORTERS OF THE PASSAGE SAY THAT SLAVERY AND INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE ARE MORALLY UNACCEPTABLE AND SHOULD NOT EXIST IN ANY FORM.

OPPOSERS OF THE PASSAGE STATE THAT THIS AMENDMENT COULD LEAD TO UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES WITHIN THE NEVADA JUSTICE SYSTEM. THEY SAY THAT REMOVING THE LANGUAGE MIGHT CREATE LEGAL UNCERTAINTY AROUND PRISON WORK ASSIGNMENTS.

QUESTION 5: ASKS WHETHER OR NOT THE SALES AND USE TAX ACT OF 1955 SHOULD BE AMENDED TO PROVIDE AN EXEMPTION FROM TAXES IMPOSED ON CHILD AND ADULT DIAPERS. IF PASSED, THE TAX EXEMPTION ON DIAPERS WILL BECOME EFFECTIVE ON JANUARY 1, 2025 AND EXPIRE ON DECEMBER 31, 2050.

PROPONENTS OF THE PASSAGE SAY THAT DIAPERS SHOULD NOT HAVE A SALES TAX BECAUSE THEY ARE BASIC HEALTHCARE NECESSITIES THAT SHOULD REMAIN AFFORDABLE.

OPPOSERS OF THE PASSAGE SAY THAT REMOVING THE SALES TAX FROM DIAPERS WILL RESULT IN LESS REVENUE FOR THE STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND REDUCE FUNDING FOR PUBLIC SCHOOLS.

QUESTION 6: ASKS WHETHER OR NOT AN AMENDMENT SHOULD BE MADE TO THE CONSTITUTION TO ALLOW THE RIGHT TO AN ABORTION FROM THE START OF A PERSON’S PREGNANCY TO THE START OF “FETAL VIABILITY.” CURRENTLY, THE RIGHT TO ABORTION UP TO 24 WEEKS IS PROTECTED IN NEVADA, HOWEVER THE RIGHT IS NOT WRITTEN IN THE CONSTITUTION. THE AMENDMENT WOULD ALLOW ABORTION UP UNTIL THE PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENT OF A HEALTHCARE PRACTITIONER ESTABLISHES THAT THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT LIKELIHOOD OF A FETUS BEING ABLE TO SURVIVE OUTSIDE THE UTERUS. THE ONLY TIME ABORTION UP UNTIL “FETAL VIABILITY” DOES NOT APPLY IS WHEN THE PERSON PREGNANT NEEDS MEDICAL CARE TO PROTECT THAT PERSON’S LIFE OR HEALTH. IN THIS CASE, ABORTION CARE THROUGHOUT THE REST OF THE PREGNANCY IS ALLOWED.

SUPPORTERS OF THIS PASSAGE SAY THE DECISION OF ABORTION SHOULD BE LEFT UP TO WOMEN AND THEIR MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS TO DECIDE. ESTABLISHING THIS RIGHT IN THE STATE CONSTITUTION WOULD PROTECT NEVADA FROM A FEDERAL BAN OF ABORTION.

OPPOSERS OF THE PASSAGE STATE THAT RE-WRITING THE STATE CONSTITUTION IS NECESSARY BECAUSE ABORTION IS ALREADY LEGAL IN NEVADA. THEY ALSO SAY THAT THIS AMENDMENT COULD HAVE SERIOUS EFFECTS ON TAXPAYER DOLLARS.

QUESTION 7: ASKS WHETHER OR NOT AN AMENDMENT SHOULD BE MADE TO THE CONSTITUTION TO EITHER REQUIRE IN-PERSON VOTERS TO SHOW PHOTO IDENTIFICATION TO VERIFY THEIR IDENTITY OR TO PROVIDE CERTAIN PERSONAL INFORMATION TO VERIFY THEIR IDENTITY WHILE FILLING OUT THEIR MAIL BALLOT. SOME ACCEPTABLE FORMS OF IDENTIFICATION INCLUDE A NEVADA DRIVER’S LICENSE, EMPLOYEE PHOTO ID, U.S. PASSPORT, STUDENT PHOTO ID, ETC. VOTERS WHO VOTE BY MAIL MAY NEED TO PROVIDE CERTAIN INFORMATION LIKE THE LAST FOUR DIGITS OF THEIR SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER OR THE LAST FOUR DIGITS OF THEIR DRIVER’S LICENSE NUMBER.

SUPPORTERS OF THE PASSAGE SAY THAT CHECKING VOTER ID WOULD ENSURE BETTER CONFIDENCE OVER THE OUTCOME OF ELECTIONS AND LIMIT PEOPLES’ WORRIES ABOUT VOTER FRAUD.

OPPOSERS OF THE PASSAGE SAY THAT STRICTER VOTER ID LAWS MINIMIZE VOTER TURNOUT BECAUSE THERE ARE LESS ELIGIBLE PEOPLE TO VOTE. THIS IS BECAUSE SOME PEOPLE MIGHT NOT POSSESS A CERTAIN IDENTIFICATION.
FOR MORE INFORMATION ON THE 2024 ELECTION CLICK HERE