Idaho — HJR 4 (1998)

Idaho voters approved HJR 4 (1998), a legislatively referred measure continuing the ballot-instruction system originally adopted in 1996 (HJR 3).

The measure maintained the same informational architecture, combining voter instruction with ballot-label disclosures tied to candidate positions on congressional term limits. It did not introduce a new eligibility framework, ballot-access restriction, or structural modification.

Classification

Ballot-Instruction Regime (Indirect · Informational Signaling · Office-Specific)
(continuation of 1996 system)

Structural Status

• Architecture: unchanged

• Mechanism: unchanged

• Legal posture: unchanged (later rendered unenforceable under Cook v. Gralike (2001)

Relationship to 1996 Measure

→ Idaho — HJR 3 (1996)

The 1998 measure reflects continuation of the ballot-instruction system rather than the introduction of a new design.

Structural Significance

Idaho illustrates multi-cycle persistence of a ballot-instruction regime within the 1996–2000 phase without architectural change.

Sources

Ballotpedia — Idaho HJR 4, Congressional Term Limits (1998)
https://ballotpedia.org/Idaho_HJR_4,_Congressional_Term_Limits_(1998)

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

Cook v. Gralike, 531 U.S. 510 (2001)
Cornell Law School — https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/99-929.ZS.html
Justia — https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/531/510/

Cross-References

→ Ballot Instruction Phase (1996–2000)
→ Worked Example — Cook v. Gralike (2001)
→ Rotation Logic — Foundations (Washington–Madison Doctrine)
→ Worked Example — Canonical House 3-Term Limit (Testimony)
→ Framework
→ FAQs
→ Case Library
→ Rotation Logic