A layman's explanation of HJR 4

Of the many state races/initiatives appearing on this year's general election ballot, approval of Idaho Constitution Amendment HJR 4 may be the one flying lowest under the public’s radar.

According to the wording of the proposed amendment, HJR 4 would change language in the Idaho constitution and would require maintaining exactly 35 state legislative districts.

The number of districts is currently determined by state statute, which allows the legislature to vote in favor of adjusting the number of districts between 30 and 35- depending on results from the United States’ Decennial Census.

As of now, Idaho’s legislature is made up of a 35 member Senate (one from each district) and a 70 member House of Representatives (two from each district).

Amendment HJR 4 was originally sponsored by Idaho Speaker of the House, Scott Bedke (District 27 A - Burley area), and then subsequently passed through the Idaho House and Senate with overwhelming support.

It is worth noting that in the Idaho Senate, HJR 4 was supported universally by Senate Republicans (28), while Senate Democrats (7) were split on the bill and represented the only four ‘no’ votes.

In his argument for sponsoring the bill, Rep. Bedke spoke to how the current number of districts has benefitted Idaho and questioned why that number would ever be changed (reduced being the only option at this time).

"[Since the 1980s], we have had 35 legislative districts, and it seems to suit us well. Yet your Constitution says you can have as few as 30. So why would we want to change this?” asked Bedke. “I think the reasoning is as Idaho grows, then our citizens are better served with more legislative districts than fewer. It’s certainly something that we’re all used to for the last 30-plus years. But our Constitution allows for fewer legislative districts, and I think we’d be well-served going forward pegging that at 35."

With Idaho being a constantly evolving state with several blended communities that include both urban and rural interests, the argument for HJR 4 is that it makes sense keeping the number as high as possible to allow for better representation for everyone.

However, critics have voiced concerns with the amendment’s verbiage, which at its core is an important part of any constitutional amendment.

Ideas such as amending the proposal’s verbiage from, “the Constitution of the state of Idaho be amended to require that the Legislature shall be apportioned to 35 districts?” to, “the Constitution of the state of Idaho be amended to require that the Legislature shall be apportioned to AT LEAST 35 districts?”

The argument is that adding the “at least” to the amendment allows for future growth if needed.

Some have advocated for Idaho to treat each county as its own legislative district, but that would require additional amendments and bump the number of districts up to 44. This would allow smaller counties to have equal footing in the State Senate with the larger counties.

Boiled down, if HJR 4 is adopted, the number of districts and senators would be fixed at 35 and could not change during any redistricting. Also, any flexibility moving forward would require passing future amendments.

When voting on this topic, Idahoans should ask themselves the question of: Are we content with the current 35 legislative districts and the stability of not having to worry about redistricting, or do we risk possible instability in favor of future flexibility?

Here is the full text of the question that voters will be asked on their ballots:

“Shall Section 2, Article 3 of the Constitution of the state of Idaho be amended to require that the Senate shall consist of 35 members; and shall Section 4, Article 3, of the Constitution of the state of Idaho be amended to require that the Legislature shall be apportioned to 35 districts?”