No Voting Rights for Idiots. No, really.

I’m working on some coverage of the upcoming school board election (early voting has started!), and one of the topics I’m looking at is how voter turnout for these elections is always in the single digits. This is partly due to voter apathy, I’m sure, but it also has to do with the state constitution, which says school board elections must be held at different times than all other elections. So, no combining them with municipal elections is allowed, for example. A person could certainly argue that combining these elections would save money and boost turnout.

As it happens, there’s a House Joint Resolution before the legislature this session that proposes changing the constitutional language so school board elections could be held concurrently with other elections, just not partisan ones. Handily, the resolution includes the current constitutional language, and also shows what the Resolution sponsors want to change. I’m just going to hit you with it word for word. Strike-thru shows what the lawmakers want to remove, and underline shows what they want to add. Bold is my own way of showing you the funny parts.

“Every citizen of the United States who is over the age of twenty-one years and has resided in New Mexico twelve months, in the county ninety days, and in the precinct in which he the person offers to vote thirty days, next preceding the election, except idiots, insane persons and person convicted of a felonious or infamous crime unless restored to political rights, shall be qualified to vote at all elections for public officers. The legislature may enact laws providing for absentee voting by qualified electors. All school elections shall be held at different times from other partisan elections.”

OK, let’s start at the beginning. The federal voting age in this country is 18. So that part is wrong. To my knowledge, no one in the 18-21 age bracket has been denied the right to vote in an election on the basis of the state constitution, because it is superseded by federal law. But the real gem here is the part that says idiots don’t have the right to vote.

I will start by saying I understand this document is a product of a different time, and that idiot once had a different (and offensive) meaning related to mental illness or disability. But given the way we use idiot in common parlance, the passage is kind of hilarious, yeah? Just imagine a world where idiots couldn’t vote. Go ahead, I’ll wait.

So that stuff is pretty awesome, but in my opinion it gets better. Take a gander at the changes proposed by Rep. James Smith and Sen. Daniel Ivey-Soto. These enlightened guys were thoughtful enough to change “he” to “the person” in the name of gender equality, and of course the “partisan” change is the point of the resolution. BUT, they didn’t think it would be important to make the state constitution consistent with federal law or, you know, take out the part that disenfranchises idiots.

I’m told by a colleague that this particular section of the constitution is very hard to amend, requiring large margins of public support in all counties of the state. This could explain some of the anachronisms, to be fair. But that doesn’t make it any less silly. Happy Friday.