Vote Nevada PAC announced this week they’re withdrawing their ballot initiative to create an independent redistricting commission. The group says they can’t get around a legal obstacle that Democrats keep using to block them.
NN&V wrote about the lawsuit, here: Nevada Voter Challenges Redistricting Commission Ballot Initiative
This is the fourth attempt to get independent redistricting on the ballot in Nevada. Democrats have sued three times to stop it. And honestly, this whole mess shows how both sides care more about keeping power than letting voters have a real say.
The Players in This Fight
Vote Nevada wanted to replace Nevada’s current redistricting system with an independent commission. Right now, whoever controls the legislature draws the political maps. Democrats control the legislature. They drew the maps in 2021 in ways that helped their party.
So Democrats like the current system just fine. They’re using the courts to keep it that way.
Vote Nevada leaders Sondra Cosgrove, Doug Goodman, and Claire Thomas said in their withdrawal statement that Democrats are using:
“a misguided Nevada Supreme Court ruling to not only endorse the current, behind-closed-doors, and therefore corrupt redistricting process, but also to eliminate our right to amend the state constitution through the initiative process.”
But let’s be clear about Vote Nevada too. This isn’t some grassroots mom-and-pop operation. They’ve been pushing various election reforms for years. When their redistricting plans keep failing, they pivot to other ideas like ranked choice voting. More on that in a bit.
The Legal Problem
Here’s the technical issue. A 2022 Nevada Supreme Court ruling said ballot initiatives have to include a funding source if they cost the state any money. Setting up a redistricting commission would cost money for staff, offices, and public meetings.
Vote Nevada argued the commission could use volunteers and money saved from not having the legislature do redistricting. The court said that’s not good enough. You need to identify actual new revenue.
But adding a tax to the initiative opens it up to another lawsuit under Nevada’s single-subject rule. That rule says ballot measures can only ask about one thing at a time.
Vote Nevada called this requirement “an irresponsible and ludicrous proposition.” They pointed to Nevada’s mining tax, which is stuck in the constitution.
The group wrote:
“Based on that experience, we would never believe that putting more taxes in our Constitution is a sound idea.”
It’s a legal trap, and Democrats know it. They keep filing lawsuits because they know they can win on technicalities without ever debating whether the reform itself is good or bad.
Why Nobody Here Is the Good Guy
Democrats are clearly protecting their own interests. When you control the legislature, you get to draw maps that help you stay in control. Of course they want to keep that power. Their lawsuits aren’t about following the constitution. They’re about maintaining their advantage.
Vote Nevada accused Democrats of using lawsuits to silence voters, saying:
“Suing to silence the voices of the people may be a smart political strategy, but it ultimately undermines democracy.”
That’s rich coming from a group that wants to fundamentally change how Nevada runs elections.
Vote Nevada isn’t necessarily your friend either if you’re a conservative. Sure, they talk about fairness and accountability. But look at what else they’re pushing.
After this redistricting initiative failed, they’re doubling down on ranked choice voting. That’s the system where you rank candidates instead of picking one. Complex calculations decide the winner, sometimes days after the election.
Many conservatives don’t trust ranked choice voting. It can help moderate candidates beat conservative ones. In a crowded field, the person who’s nobody’s first choice but everybody’s second choice can win. That waters down clear conservative principles.
Vote Nevada also wants to open Nevada’s primaries so independents can vote in party primaries. Right now, Nevada has closed primaries where only registered Republicans can vote in the Republican primary and only registered Democrats can vote in the Democratic primary. Independents are locked out even though they’re the largest voting bloc in the state.
Opening primaries sounds fair on the surface. But it means Democrats could vote in Republican primaries and Republicans could vote in Democratic primaries. In a close primary race, voters from the other party could cross over and pick the weaker candidate. That takes power away from party members to choose their own nominees.
And their broader agenda includes election reforms that many conservatives oppose. Ranked choice voting and opening primaries to everyone aren’t about limited government. They’re about changing the rules to get different outcomes.
What This Means
Gerrymandering is real and both parties do it. When politicians draw their own district maps, they protect themselves and their friends. That’s bad for accountability.
An independent commission could fix that problem. Polls show 82% of voters nationwide want nonpartisan commissions drawing maps instead of politicians. That crosses party lines.
But the details matter. Who picks the commissioners? What rules do they follow? How much does it cost? Vote Nevada’s proposals have had real legal problems, not just political opposition.
And their broader agenda includes election reforms that many conservatives oppose. Ranked choice voting and nonpartisan primaries aren’t about limited government. They’re about changing the rules to get different outcomes.
The Bigger Picture
Right now, multiple states are fighting over redistricting. Texas, California, Missouri, and others are trying mid-decade map changes to grab partisan advantage. Nevada Democrats want to keep that option available.
The real issue is power. Democrats want to keep their power to draw maps. Vote Nevada wants power to change how elections work more broadly. Neither side is fighting for limited government principles.
Nevada’s constitution has rules about ballot initiatives. Those rules exist for good reasons, even if they make some reforms harder. But Democrats aren’t defending the constitution on principle. They’re defending their control.
Vote Nevada claims they’re defending democracy. But their solution involves complicated new voting systems that most voters don’t understand and many conservatives don’t want.
What Happens Next
Vote Nevada says they’ll keep fighting. They want to challenge the court’s interpretation or try another constitutional amendment.
They said:
“The current misguided interpretation of this critical right cannot be allowed to remain unchallenged.”
Their other initiative did survive legal challenges. That measure would force Nevada to open taxpayer-funded primaries to all voters, including independents. It’s heading to the signature-gathering phase.
For now, Nevada’s political maps will keep getting drawn by whoever controls the legislature. That means Democrats, since they’re in charge right now.
If you believe in limited government and accountability, you should want politicians to have less power over their own elections. But that doesn’t mean embracing every reform group that comes along with a plan. Read the fine print. Ask what else they’re pushing. Make sure the cure isn’t worse than the disease.
This fight isn’t about good guys versus bad guys. It’s about competing interests using the system to get what they want. Voters are just stuck in the middle.
The opinions expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Nevada News & Views. This article was written with the assistance of AI. Please verify information and consult additional sources as needed
