HJR 4 is on your Idaho ballot. What does it mean for you? More representation, advocates say
Voters will see a constitutional amendment on their Nov. 3 ballot that will decide whether to solidify how many people must be elected to the Idaho Legislature.
The amendment, HJR 4, would set in law that Idaho must have 35 legislative districts across the state — its current number — no more and no less. When the resolution was pitched in the House of Representative earlier this year, it passed with only three no votes. It received only four no votes in the Senate.
Each legislative district in Idaho has two representatives and one senator.
Since 1992, there have been 35 legislative districts and senators in Idaho, but the Idaho Constitution permits as few as 30 and as many as 35, with the number determined during redistricting.
Proponents of the amendment say it would eliminate the possibility of creating fewer districts, which they say would lessen representation in a growing state.
Redistricting is done by the Idaho Commission for Reapportionment, a group of residents responsible for drawing district boundaries for legislative and congressional elections. The commission will meet next in 2021, after the results of the 2020 U.S. Census are released.
Majority Caucus Chairwoman Rep. Megan Blanksma, R-Hammett, noted that lawmakers want to be accessible to their constituents and that the resolution received overwhelming bipartisan support.
“In a time when we are all so divided, this was one thing where all of us came together,” said Blanksma on HJR 4.
There was concern by lawmakers that the commission could reduce the number of districts in the state, she said.
Blanksma offered her District 23 as an example, saying she has the third-largest district in the state in terms of geographical size and it can take three to fours to get from one side to the other.
“I would hate to see us play the what-if game and end up with much larger districts and less access to legislators,” she said.
In a recent column, Speaker of the House Scott Bedke, R-Oakley, described why he supports the amendment.
“HJR 4 would eliminate the possible loss of districts. Our state is growing,” Bedke wrote. “People are being drawn here from across the country by our quality of life, thriving economy and minimal regulations. The last thing we need is fewer state legislators representing more Idahoans at a time when the Legislature is debating complex issues related to growth. “
Stances against the amendment include limiting the commission’s flexibility and opening the state up to court challenges.
While Republicans and Democrats supported the amendment, a few voted against it when the bill was making its way through the Statehouse earlier this year.
Sen. Michelle Stennett, D-Ketchum, voted against it in March, largely because Idaho already operates with 35 districts without factoring in future growth.
“We’ve been held at 35 for some time,” she said. “Our growth is exploding, and I felt it was pretty shortsighted.”
Some districts are very small and densely populated, while others are geographically very large but less populated. She said she hoped the measure would be more “forward thinking,” and she anticipates that in 10 years, the number of districts will need to be re-evaluated to serve the bigger population.
While she didn’t vote in favor in the Senate, Stennett said she likely will vote in favor of the amendment in the November election, because she is not a proponent of having less than 35 districts.
The amendment requires a simple majority to pass on Election Day.
This story was originally published October 13, 2020 at 6:00 AM.
CORRECTION: This story has been corrected to reflect that the constitutional amendment requires only a simple majority to pass on Election Day, not a supermajority, two-thirds vote.
