A bipartisan mail ballot bill in Nevada? It's not as crazy as it sounds.
Anything is possible in the Nevada Legislature — including a bipartisan bill on the politicized issue of mail ballots.
The top Democrat and Republican in the Assembly are joining forces on a bill that would require all sample ballots to be sent to voters before mail ballots are distributed. An amendment also would provide a clearer timeline for when mail ballots must be sent to voters.
Assembly Minority Leader Gregory Hafen (R-Pahrump) is the lead sponsor of AB148, and on Tuesday, Assembly Speaker Steve Yeager (D-Las Vegas) joined as a sponsor. The bill was heard Tuesday in the Assembly Committee on Legislative Operations and Elections, where it was supported by the Nevada Republican Party and progressive groups such as Silver State Voices and All Voting is Local.
Nevada Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar, a Democrat, also supports the bill.
Mail ballots are among the most politically fraught topics in the Legislature, as Republicans have long opposed universal mail ballots and the counting of certain mail ballots postmarked on or before Election Day but received after. Democrats, meanwhile, have led efforts to protect existing mail ballot laws largely adopted during the COVID pandemic.
'This may be the only mail-in ballot bill that we agree on,' Yeager said in an interview before the bill hearing. 'But we'll take the win for the day and see what else comes up.'
Under AB148, all mail ballots must be distributed to voters living in Nevada between the fourth and fifth Monday before an election. Existing law requires that mail ballots be distributed to in-state residents no later than 20 days before an election, but in practice, county election officials send mail ballots out over a wider time range before an election.
'There is nothing in statute that would prevent them from sending (mail ballots) in July after the primary's over,' Hafen told reporters Tuesday. 'To me, that would be concerning.'
The bill would also set an earlier deadline for local election officials to send out sample ballots.
Nevada law requires that sample ballots be sent before the start of early voting, which is the third Saturday before a general election. But under AB148, sample ballots must be sent out by the last day that mail ballots can be sent, which would be five days earlier than the current sample ballot requirement.
The bill sponsors said they will also look into changing the timeline to send ballots to out-of-state voters.
In the 2024 general election, some Nevadans reported not receiving their sample ballots at all.
Hafen said some of his constituents were confused after receiving their sample ballots after their mail ballots last year.
'They thought their mail ballot was their sample ballot,' Hafen said. 'We've got to streamline the process.'
Bipartisan agreement may be difficult to find on other election law changes. Republican lawmakers have introduced bills rolling back several mail voting provisions, although they have little chance of passing in a Democrat-controlled Legislature.
Gov. Joe Lombardo, a Republican, has also supported stopping mail ballot counting after Election Day, and he said during his State of the State address this year that he would be willing to take the issue to voters if the proposal — as expected — fails to win over the Democratic majority in the Legislature.
But it's a different story for AB148.
'Surprise, surprise, I'm here supporting something,' said Lynn Chapman, vice president of Nevada Families for Freedom, a conservative group that is a frequent critic of mail ballot laws. 'It's important to have a sample ballot come out first.'
Hafen said that the bill has the support of groups, such as the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada, that typically do not support his election-related proposals.
'It's no-brainer, common sense,' Hafen said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Bloomberg
29 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
The Budget Bill Is Creating a Republican Existential Crisis
The Republican budget bill, a $3.7 trillion tax cut packaged with $1.2 trillion in spending cuts, is deeply problematic legislation from almost any perspective — including those of its authors. The Congressional Budget Office has the details about how it will be expensive and ineffectual. But for Republicans, President Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' is creating what amounts to an existential crisis. For half a century, Republicans have been committed to the policy of lower taxes to aid the economy — impervious to any evidence that tax cuts are inefficient and prohibitively expensive. At this point, to walk away from the bill is to abandon their economic raison d'etre.
44 minutes ago
Support for solar energy, offshore wind falls among Democrats and independents: poll
Americans' support for green energy tax credits and renewable energies like wind and solar power has decreased in recent years, according to a new poll, driven by a softening in support from Democrats and independents. The poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research finds that U.S. adults' support for tax credits for electric vehicles and solar panels has weakened, as well as their enthusiasm for offshore wind farm expansion. While Democrats remain the strongest supporters of these initiatives, the poll reveals signs of growing cynicism within their ranks. The poll results coincide with sweeping changes President Donald Trump's Republican administration is making to regulations related to energy and climate change, including slashing the federal workforce in these departments. And although Democrats and independents have weakened their support for some green energy initiatives, there has not been an increase in support for Trump's energy policies. The poll found only about 4 in 10 U.S. adults — including only 1 in 10 Democrats and about 2 in 10 independents, along with three-quarters of Republicans — approve of the way Trump is handling climate change, which largely tracks with his overall approval rating. About 6 in 10 Democrats, 58%, favor tax credits for purchasing an electric vehicle, down from about 7 in 10 in 2022. Among independents, support declined from 49% in 2022 to 28%. Only one-quarter of Republicans supported this policy in 2022, and that hasn't changed measurably. 'As far as the pollution goes ... the vehicles nowadays put out very little emissions to the air,' said JD Johnson, a 62-year-old Democrat from Meadowview, Virginia, who somewhat opposes tax credits to purchase an electric vehicle. That's partly because he sees the electric vehicle manufacturing process as energy intensive and believes gasoline-powered vehicles have made improvements with the pollutants they emit. The decline in favoring solar panel tax credits was across the board rather than being concentrated among Democrats. 'For solar panels, in all honesty, I don't think they're that efficient yet,' said Glenn Savage, 78, a left-leaning independent from Rock Hill, South Carolina. 'I'd rather see them pour money into research and try to get the solar panels more efficient before they start giving tax breaks to the public. I may be wrong on that, but that's just my thought.' Scientists say transitioning to renewable energies and ditching fossil fuels that release planet-warming emissions are essential to protect the planet. Billions of dollars in project grants for clean technologies awarded during President Joe Biden's Democratic administration have been canceled by the Trump administration, and the offshore wind sector has been stunted by Trump's executive order that paused approvals, permits and loans for wind energy projects. Fewer than half of U.S. adults, 44%, now say that offshore wind farms should be expanded in the U.S., down from 59% in 2022. About half favor expanding solar panel farms, while about two-thirds were in support in 2022. When people are concerned about the economy and their personal finances, environmental issues are sometimes prioritized less, said Talbot Andrews, an assistant professor in the department of government at Cornell University who was not involved in the poll. 'I think it makes people anxious to think about increased taxes or increased spending on environmental issues when the cost of eggs are going through the roof,' Andrews said. Trump has championed the expansion of offshore oil drilling, as well as domestic coal production. Despite a decline in support for expanded renewable energies, the new poll shows that only about one-third of U.S. adults think offshore drilling for oil and natural gas should be expanded in the U.S., and only about one-quarter say this about coal mining. In both cases, Republicans are much more likely than Democrats to support expanding these energy sources. Trump has sought to open up national monuments for oil drilling, but more U.S. adults oppose than support auctioning off more public space for oil drilling. Only about one-quarter of U.S. adults favor this, while 4 in 10 are opposed. Republicans are much more likely than independents or Democrats to be in support. The Energy Star program that certifies appliances, such as dishwashers and refrigerators, as energy efficient recently appeared in headlines when the EPA made plans to scrap the program. The blue and white logo is well recognized, and experts say the program has long had bipartisan support until recently. The poll found three-quarters of Democrats support providing consumer rebates for efficient home appliances, compared with 6 in 10 Republicans. Patrick Buck, 54, from Chicago, describes himself as a liberal Republican and is a fan of the consumer rebates for energy-efficient appliances. 'It seems to work in terms of transforming what people have in their houses, because a lot of people have a lot of old appliances and just can't afford new ones,' he said. The poll found only about 2 in 10 U.S. adults are 'extremely' or 'very' confident in the federal government's ability to ensure the safety of their drinking water, the air they breathe and the meat, poultry, fruits and vegetables they buy in grocery stores. About 4 in 10 U.S. adults are 'somewhat' confident in the federal government's ability to ensure the safety of each of these, and about 4 in 10 are 'not very' or 'not at all' confident. The Trump administration has announced plans to roll back rules and policies related to limiting pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, such as rules that limit pollution from power plants and blocking California's efforts to phase out cars that run on gas. The federal government has also cut staff at the Food and Drug Administration, the federal agency tasked with protecting public health and ensuring food supply safety. ___ The AP-NORC poll of 1,158 adults was conducted June 5-9, using a sample drawn from NORC's probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for adults overall is plus or minus 4 percentage points. ___ The Associated Press' climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. The AP is solely responsible for all content. Find the AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at
44 minutes ago
What to know about debate over protesters and ICE agents wearing masks amid immigration crackdowns
CHICAGO -- President Donald Trump and his allies have repeatedly called for mask-wearing at protests to be banned and for protesters whose faces are covered to be arrested, with the most recent push following demonstrations in Los Angeles over immigration raids. Legal experts told The Associated Press there are a variety of reasons people may want to cover their faces while protesting, including to protect their health, for religious reasons, to avoid government retaliation, to prevent surveillance and doxing, or to protect themselves from tear gas. With legislative action happening across the U.S., they say it's only a matter of time before the issue returns to the courts. Protesters, meanwhile, have voiced anger over footage of Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents covering their faces at immigration raids and masked officers at the Los Angeles protests, calling it a double standard. Here are some things to know about the debate over face masks: At least 18 states and Washington, D.C., have laws that restrict masks and other face coverings in some way, said Elly Page, senior legal adviser with the International Center for Not-For-Profit Law. Since October 2023, at least 16 bills have been introduced in eight states and Congress to restrict masks at protests, according to the center. Many of these laws date back to the 1940s and '50s when many states passed anti-mask laws as a response to the Ku Klux Klan, whose members hid their identities while terrorizing victims. Amid protests against the war in Gaza and the Republican president's immigration policies, Page said there have been attempts to revive these rarely used laws to target protesters, sometimes inconsistently. Trump's calls to arrest protesters for wearing masks came as federal agents were seen donning masks while conducting raids in Los Angeles and other U.S. cities. Democratic lawmakers in California have introduced legislation aiming to stop federal agents and local police officers from wearing face masks amid concerns that ICE agents were attempting to hide their identities and avoid accountability for potential misconduct during high-profile immigration raids. The issue also came up at a congressional hearing on June 12, when Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, a Democrat, criticized ICE agents wearing masks during raids, saying: 'Don't wear masks. Identify who you are.' Republican federal officials have maintained that masks protect agents from doxing. Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin called the California bill 'despicable." Geoffrey Stone, a University of Chicago law professor, said the U.S. Supreme Court has made clear that the right to free speech includes the right to speak out anonymously. But he said how it should apply to protesters wearing masks remains 'an unresolved First Amendment question.' For Stone, that raises a key question: Why should protesters and ICE agents be subject to different rules? 'The government doesn't want them to be targeted because they engaged in their responsibilities as ICE agents,' Stone said. 'But that's the same thing as the argument as to why you want demonstrators to wear masks. They want to wear masks so they can do their 'jobs' of engaging in free speech properly. The same rationale for the officers wearing masks should apply to the protesters.'
