Question 2: Should Nevada constitution’s language be updated?

Voters will be asked this fall to replace dated language in the state constitution referring to certain disabilities and supportive services.

Question 2 is one of seven questions on the November ballot and is being proposed to make Nevada’s guiding document more modern and inclusive.

What the question asks: If passed, Question 2 would change the descriptions of people who benefit from state “institutions” as “insane,” “blind” and “deaf and dumb.” It would instead refer to “persons with significant illness,” “persons who are blind or visually impaired” and “persons who are deaf or hard of hearing” who benefit from state “entities.” Additionally, approval would officially add “persons with intellectual or developmental disabilities” to the list of those who benefit from state programming.

History and background

Then-Assemblywoman Robin Titus, a Republican who currently represents Wellington in the state Senate, successfully introduced the proposal to the Legislature as Assembly Joint Resolution 1 in 2021 and again in 2023. As is required for a constitutional amendment, the measure needed to get lawmaker approval in two sessions to make it to the ballot. It passed unanimously in both chambers, both sessions.

Why the time is now

Titus, who is a physician, said the antiquated language of the Constitution, which was adopted in 1864, contains terms that are “discriminating, stigmatizing or derogatory” toward people with disabilities.

“I am aware that when the Nevada Constitution was written, different terminologies were used to describe persons with disabilities or a mental illness,” she told the Assembly Committee on Health and Human Services at the resolution’s first hearing in 2021. “However, more than 156 years after Nevada was admitted into the Union, it is time to give these words a more critical look.”

If not offensive, the terms can be narrow — vision and hearing loss, for example, are on a spectrum, she said.

Titus said she got the idea from a constituent who taught special education at Churchill County Middle School in Fallon. In addition to teaching young students with profound disabilities, Andrew Campbell has total deafness in one ear, has had temporary total blindness, and taught American Sign Language after school and at the local community college.

In the 2024 Ballot Question Guide issued by the Nevada Secretary of State, the arguments for passage add that lawyers, judges, social workers and others who reference the law in their work must use the “outdated and offensive” language.

“By replacing the terms ‘insane’ and ‘deaf and dumb’ with more dignified terms, we can avoid stigmatizing and marginalizing individuals and reduce the discriminatory barriers they may face when seeking employment, housing or mental health services,” the guide reads. “For these same reasons, the United States Congress acted over 10 years ago to remove the terms ‘mental retardation’ and ‘lunatic’ from the United States Code.”

The argument against

The guide includes brief persuasive essays both pro and con. In arguing against passage, the guide says the changes would be unnecessary, as “most Nevadans do not consult the Nevada Constitution to determine which terms are acceptable to use, and many Nevadans are likely unaware of their state’s constitutional provisions.” In addition, Nevada already provides services to people with intellectual and developmental disabilities and people with low vision, making the change have no tangible impact.

Also, the state constitution is a product of its time, the argument suggests.

“While terms like ‘insane’ and ‘deaf and dumb’ can be seen as offensive by today’s standards, the language was acceptable at the time the provision was written,” the guide reads. “The Nevada Constitution is a historical document, and we should not expect it to keep pace with the ever-changing nature of language.”

But the proposed change has broad support. It picked up about 20 primary and joint sponsors from both parties, and support from the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada and Nevada’s Department of Health and Human Services.

Campbell, the teacher who knows disability first-hand, backed up Titus’ proposal at both sessions and called it “a joyful task” to follow through when he returned to the Legislature for Round 2 last year.

“I know this means a lot to many people throughout Nevada,” he said.

[email protected] / 702-990-8949 / @HillaryLVSun