Editorial: Dumb voters

The state Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that Nevada voters are too stupid to understand that a proposed ballot question seeking to repeal the newly created commerce tax might have budgetary ramifications.

In a unanimous 10-page opinion, the justices essentially scuttled efforts to place the question on the November ballot, ruling the referendum’s “description of effect” was “deceptive” because it failed to announce that killing the tax might result in “financial uncertainty” for the state.

Those behind the anti-tax proposal will now have to rewrite the petition and begin the signature-gathering process anew if they plan to continue their effort.

Putting aside whether the tax is good public policy or deserves to be taken out and shot, the court’s action — and reasoning — is ridiculous.

In the first place, the 2017 Legislature could address any potential budgetary holes created by nullification of the tax. Second, Nevada petition signers are smart enough to understand that quashing the controversial levy — passed by lawmakers in 2015 and intended to raise $60 million annually — will leave the state with less money to spend.

For goodness sake, were the measure to make the ballot, the question itself would feature an entire “argument against” passage in which tax proponents would no doubt warn voters of the ills associated with repealing the commerce tax and upsetting the state’s budget blueprint.

Given that Nevadans over the years have been forced to trudge through more than a handful of confusing and disingenuous ballot questions, it’s especially odd that the court singled out this concise proposal for condemnation. Who could forget, for instance, when trial lawyers in 2004 tried to undermine a popular medical malpractice reform initiative by passing off their own competing referendum as “insurance reform”?

The referendum process represents an important mechanism for voters to express their desires. To that end, courts should tread lightly when considering challenges to citizen initiatives that aren’t blatantly unconstitutional or clearly intended to confuse and hoodwink the electorate.

The commerce tax measure was neither. The state Supreme Court erred in not allowing it to move forward.