Voters on track to approve Idaho Constitutional Amendment HJR4 by wide margin - East Idaho News
East Idaho Elects

Voters on track to approve Idaho Constitutional Amendment HJR4 by wide margin

  Published at  | Updated at

IDAHO FALLS – With 67% of voters in favor of Idaho Constitutional Amendment HJR4, the proposed amendment appears poised to be added to Idaho’s Constitution.

Near midnight Tuesday, the measure had 353,270 votes in favor and 169,927 votes in opposition.

A ‘yes’ vote requires the legislature to consist of 35 districts. Currently, the state constitution permits between 30 and 35 districts, depending on how they are drawn after a U.S. census.

A ‘no’ vote would have allowed the number of districts to remain flexible.

There have been 35 districts and senators since 1992, according to an outline of the proposal on the Secretary of state’s website. Senate President Pro Tempore Brent Hill told us last month one reason for the measure is to keep the constitution consistent with what is already in place.

RELATED | A proposed constitutional amendment is on the Idaho ballot this year. Here’s what it means.

Another reason is that it makes it more likely that Idaho residents have representation relevant to their local interests.

“If the number of districts is reduced, rural residents could be added to mostly urban districts, and urban residents could be added to mostly rural districts. This could result in legislators being less responsive to some constituents’ interests than others,” the proposal says.

The proposal also mentions several reasons for voting against the measure. One has to do with the complicated nature of the redistricting process and the need for flexibility.

“The commission currently has the flexibility to determine the number of districts within a certain range because it is possible that a plan with 30 larger districts could better satisfy legal requirements than a plan with 35 smaller districts,” the proposal says.

It also suggests the amendment would result in a significant change right before redistricting occurs in 2021 without enough time to consider the consequences.

“Changes to the redistricting process should be proposed well in advance of a redistricting year,” the proposal says.

The proposal originated in the House and was required to pass both the House and the Senate with a two-thirds majority before it could appear on the ballot.

The amendment will go into effect in January.

SUBMIT A CORRECTION