Still not sure how to vote on HJR4, the constitutional amendment? Here’s the Statesman’s take

Idaho voters can feel safe in voting for a constitutional amendment, HJR4, that is on the ballot.

The Idaho Statesman endorses voting “yes” on HJR4, setting the number of legislative districts at 35.

A constitutional amendment is necessary because the Idaho Constitution permits a range of as few as 30 legislative districts and as many as 35.

A redistricting commission determines legislative districts every 10 years, after each decennial census. With the census taking place this year, the redistricting commission is scheduled to meet next year.

The amendment that’s on the ballot, if approved, would ensure that the redistricting commission, when it meets next year, couldn’t reduce the number of legislative districts below 35.

Idaho has had 35 legislative districts since 1992, so setting the number at 35 maintains the status quo.

The amendment is not perfect and it doesn’t address some other big problems, such as potential gerrymandering and ever-increasing district sizes, both in terms of population and geographic area.

But the amendment at least would limit the “damage” that could be done from reducing the number of districts.

Idaho’s population is an estimated 1.787 million. At that number, each legislative district would have about 51,000 people in each of 35 districts. If, for some reason, the redistricting commission next year decided to reduce the number of districts down to 30, each district would have nearly 60,000 people.

So fixing the number at 35 at least mitigates that possibility.

Idaho redistricting commission to meet

Our one reservation is that the amendment, if approved, would handcuff the commission next year even from considering a moderate alternative.

For example, if the commission looked at the maps, looked at the parameters of setting district boundaries and determined that the most equitable and logical solution were 34 legislative districts, the commission won’t even have that option. If the amendment is approved, commission members must create 35 districts.

The upside to that, though, is that it provides some legal cover if (and when) someone sues over the redistricting. If the amendment passes, it would be harder to sue by challenging the number of districts.

Overall, we find the benefits of locking in the number of legislative districts at 35 outweigh the downside.

The amendment has drawn wide bipartisan support, from House and Senate Democrats and Republicans. The votes to put the amendment on the ballot were a resounding 65-3-2 in the House and 31-4 in the Senate.

Of course, as Idaho grows, we should have more districts for better representation, so if we’re going around amending the constitution, we would have preferred to see more districts, such as 38 or 40 districts.

As it is, Idaho has some massive legislative districts. Consider District 8, which includes a whopping 15,712 square miles and includes Lemhi, Custer, Valley, Boise and Gem counties. Keeping the number of districts at 35 means that District 8 is going to get even bigger.

One way around this would be the creation of House sub-districts, in which one representative represents one half of the district, and the other representative represents the other half, similar to congressional districts.

If at any time over the next 10 years legislators and voters realize that our population growth necessitates adding legislative districts, we would simply go through the same voter-approved constitutional amendment process again.

While not the perfect solution, HJR4, the constitutional amendment locking in 35 legislative districts, deserves voter support.

This story was originally published October 16, 2020 at 4:00 AM.