Washington — Initiative 670 (1996)

Overview

Washington voters considered Initiative 670 (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 670

• Year: 1996

• Adoption method: Citizen initiative

• Election date: November 5, 1996

• Result: Defeated

Ballot Language

Initiative 670 proposed instructing Washington’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 Washington’s congressional delegation to support a constitutional amendment establishing congressional term limits.

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

Ballot Information Architecture

Initiative 670 authorized informational statements to appear on election ballots identifying candidates who did not support the voter instruction concerning 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 670.

Litigation History

Washington courts had previously considered litigation concerning congressional term-limit initiatives prior to the adoption of Initiative 670.

In Gerberding v. Munro (Washington Supreme Court, 1994), the court addressed the constitutionality of a Washington initiative imposing congressional term limits and held that states could not add qualifications for federal office beyond those specified in the United States Constitution.

That litigation predated U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton (1995) and formed part of the broader judicial context surrounding state efforts to regulate congressional term limits during the early 1990s.

Relationship to Cook v. Gralike (2001)

Washington’s Initiative 670 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

Washington’s proposal illustrates a ballot informational statement architecture within the Ballot Instruction Phase that closely resembled systems adopted in other states during the same period.

Unlike those states, however, Washington voters rejected the proposal before it could be implemented.

Sources

• Washington Secretary of State — Initiative 670 (1996) ballot title and measure information
  https://www.sos.wa.gov/elections/initiatives/

• Washington Secretary of State — 1996 General Election Results
  https://www.sos.wa.gov/elections/results_report.aspx?e=33

• Ballotpedia — Washington Congressional Term Limits Instruction Initiative (Initiative 670, 1996)
  https://ballotpedia.org/Washington_Congressional_Term_Limits_Instruction_Initiative,_Initiative_670_(1996)