Montana — Initiative 132 (1996)

Overview

Montana voters considered Initiative 132 (1996), proposing a system of voter instruction directing Members of Congress to support a constitutional amendment establishing congressional term limits.

The initiative included provisions authorizing informational ballot statements identifying candidates who declined to support the voter instruction.

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

The measure was defeated.

Measure Identification

• Measure name: Initiative 132

• Year: 1996

• Adoption method: Citizen initiative

• Election date: November 5, 1996

• Result: Defeated

Ballot Language

Initiative 132 proposed instructing Montana’s Members of Congress to support a constitutional amendment establishing congressional term limits.

The proposed amendment specified limits of:

• three terms for Members of the House of Representatives

• two terms for Members of the Senate

Institutional Architecture

Voter Instruction Mechanism

The initiative proposed a voter instruction directing Montana’s congressional delegation to support a constitutional amendment establishing congressional term limits.

The instruction would have expressed the position of Montana voters regarding the proposed amendment.

Ballot Information Architecture

Initiative 132 authorized informational statements to appear on election ballots identifying candidates who did not support the voter instruction concerning congressional term limits.

These statements were intended to inform voters regarding candidate positions on the proposed amendment.

Candidate Declaration / Pledge Mechanism

The initiative allowed candidates to declare whether they supported the proposed constitutional amendment establishing congressional term limits.

Candidates declining to support the instruction could be identified through informational ballot statements.

Election Administration

Ballot Implementation

Because the initiative was defeated, no ballot informational statement system was implemented.

Administrative History

No administrative system was established following the defeat of Initiative 132.

Litigation History

No significant litigation arose from the initiative.

Relationship to Cook v. Gralike (2001)

Montana’s Initiative 132 proposed informational ballot statements similar to those later addressed by the Supreme Court in Cook v. Gralike.

Because the initiative was defeated, the informational statement system was never implemented and did not produce litigation.

Institutional Design Observations

Montana’s proposal illustrates a ballot informational statement architecture within the Ballot Instruction Phase.

Like Washington’s Initiative 670, the proposal combined voter instruction with informational ballot statements identifying candidates who declined to support the proposed amendment.

Unlike similar measures adopted in other states during the same period, Montana voters rejected the initiative.

Sources

• Montana Secretary of State — Initiative 132 (1996) ballot materials
  https://sosmt.gov/elections/

• Montana Secretary of State — 1996 General Election Results
  https://sosmt.gov/elections/results/

• Ballotpedia — Montana Congressional Term Limits Instruction Initiative (Initiative 132, 1996)
  https://ballotpedia.org/Montana_Congressional_Term_Limits_Instruction_Initiative,_Initiative_132_(1996)