A lot of good can be found in the results of Tuesday’s election: the statewide turnout of 37 percent exceeded expectations by half; approval of the turnpike widening showed voters can lay their North-South differences aside; support for bond issues demonstrated a willingness to invest in environmental protection, transportation and handicapped access and safety in public buildings.

Even the defeat of the Forestry Compact, while leaving a big question still unanswered, suggests most want a balance between protecting the woods and preserving property rights and expect the Legislature to find it.

Where the state did not distinguish itself was in rejecting the constitutional amendment to extend voting rights to the mentally ill under the care of a guardian. Calling 195,000 “no” votes discriminatory and mean-spirited may be too harsh. Uninformed, the kindest interpretation, still is a damning indictment.

And so, for now at least, every resident over the age 18 gets to vote — newcomers, part-timers and short-termers, the illiterate, imprisoned murderers, liars, card cheats. Even patients confined in mental hospitals. Everyone except the 200 or so who struggle to be part of society while dealing with mental illness — perhaps depression or just the inability to manage personal finances — and who need help, often found in a group home, to do so.

Proponents of the amendment, advocates for the mentally ill and the legislators who sought to remove this anachronism from the state constitution, blame the defeat on several factors — confusion about what guardianship is, the stigma of mental illness, the lack of adequate programs to dispel the myths, the wording of the ballot. And, of course, the leading cause of electoral failure these days — not having enough money to stage a slick advertising campaign.

Such a campaign should not have been necessary here. The issue was adequately covered in the news media — print and electronic — in stories, editorials and guest opinion pieces. The information was there. Too many voters simply failed to digest it before they stepped into the booth. Complex issues like clearcutting and turnpike safety may need splashy ads to be understood; basic issues of civil rights should not.