Idaho — Initiative 1 (1998)

Overview

Idaho voters adopted Initiative 1 (1998), establishing a candidate pledge system concerning congressional term limits.

The initiative authorized informational ballot statements identifying candidates who declined to pledge support for a constitutional amendment establishing congressional term limits.

The initiative formed part of the ballot-instruction phase of congressional term-limits reform that followed U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton (1995).

Measure Identification

• Measure name: Initiative 1

• Year: 1998

• Adoption method: Citizen initiative

• Election date: November 3, 1998

• Result: Approved

Ballot Language

Initiative 1 created a candidate pledge system relating to congressional term limits.

Candidates for Congress could pledge to support a constitutional amendment establishing term limits of:

• three terms for Members of the House of Representatives

• two terms for Members of the Senate

The initiative authorized ballot statements identifying candidates who declined to make the pledge.

Institutional Architecture

Voter Instruction Mechanism

The initiative created a system in which congressional candidates could pledge support for a constitutional amendment establishing congressional term limits.

Ballot Information Architecture

Initiative 1 authorized informational statements to appear on election ballots identifying candidates who declined to pledge support for congressional term limits.

These statements communicated candidate positions regarding the proposed amendment.

Candidate Declaration / Pledge Mechanism

Candidates could make a public pledge supporting the proposed constitutional amendment establishing congressional term limits.

Candidates declining to make the pledge could be identified through informational ballot statements.

Election Administration

Ballot Implementation

Following adoption of Initiative 1, Idaho election officials were authorized to implement ballot statements identifying candidates who declined to pledge support for congressional term limits.

Litigation History

Ballot informational statements concerning congressional candidates were later affected by the Supreme Court’s decision in Cook v. Gralike (2001), which addressed ballot labels favoring or disfavoring candidates based on policy positions in federal elections.

Relationship to Cook v. Gralike (2001)

The Supreme Court’s decision in Cook v. Gralike addressed ballot labels attached to congressional candidates based on policy positions.

Because Idaho’s Initiative 1 authorized ballot informational statements identifying candidates who declined to pledge support for term limits, the decision affected the broader legal viability of such ballot-label systems.

Institutional Design Observations

Idaho’s Initiative 1 represents a continuation of the pledge-and-ballot-information architecture that emerged following the 1996 instruction initiative wave.

The measure relied on candidate pledges and informational ballot statements to communicate positions regarding congressional term limits.

Sources

• Idaho Secretary of State — Initiative 1 (1998) ballot materials and election records
  https://sos.idaho.gov/elections/

• Idaho Secretary of State — 1998 General Election Results
  https://sos.idaho.gov/elections/results/

• Ballotpedia — Idaho Congressional Term Limits Pledge Initiative (Initiative 1, 1998)
  https://ballotpedia.org/Idaho_Congressional_Term_Limits_Pledge_Initiative,_Initiative_1_(1998)

• Cook v. Gralike, 531 U.S. 510 (2001)
  https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/us/531/510/