Nevada Question 2 would revise language related to public entities for individuals with mental illness, blindness, or deafness
ID 196254122 © Roman Chazov | Dreamstime.com

Voters' Guide

Nevada Question 2 would revise language related to public entities for individuals with mental illness, blindness, or deafness

The proposed amendment simply changes the way persons with certain disabilities are described. 

Summary 

Nevada Question 2 is a proposed constitutional amendment referred by the state legislature to the 2024 ballot that would change certain language within Article 13 of the Nevada Constitution. Specifically, it would alter the current description of public establishments that treat mental illnesses and other disabilities. Currently, the Nevada Constitution describes these entities as: “institutions for the benefit of the insane, blind and deaf and dumb.” If Question 2 passes, this phrase would be changed to: “entities for the benefit of persons with significant mental illness, persons who are blind or visually impaired, persons who are deaf or hard of hearing and persons with intellectual disabilities or developmental disabilities.” 

Fiscal Impact 

Legislative staff did not prepare a fiscal note when Question 2 was presented as a legislative proposal. It is not expected to affect revenues or expenses at the state or local level. 

Proponents’ Arguments 

Nevada Assemblywoman Robin Titus (R-Churchill), a lead sponsor of Question 2 in the legislature, argued the change is necessary to reflect differences in how language is used and perceived today versus when the Nevada Constitution was written. In a committee hearing, she said: “I am aware that when the Nevada Constitution was written, different terminologies were used to describe persons with disabilities or a mental illness. However, more than 156 years after Nevada was admitted into the Union, it is time to give these words a more critical look. We should change them to contemporary language that is not deemed to be discriminatory or narrow.” 

Opponents’ Arguments 

During legislative hearings, no one testified in opposition to the proposal that is now Question 2. 

Discussion 

The constitutional amendment contemplated by Question 2 does not change any functions of the Nevada government. It simply changes the way persons with certain disabilities are described.