Become part of the movement for unbiased, accessible election information. Donate today.
Idaho Veto-Proof State Legislative Oversight of Administrative Rules and Regulations, HJR 5 (2016)
| Idaho HJR 5 | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Election date November 8, 2016 | |
| Topic State legislatures measures | |
Status Approved | |
| Type Constitutional amendment | Origin State legislature |
| 2016 measures |
|---|
 |
| November 8 |
| HJR 5 |
| Polls |
| Voter guides |
| Campaign finance |
| Signature costs |
The Idaho Veto-Proof State Legislative Oversight of Administrative Rules and Regulations Amendment, also known as HJR 5, was on the November 8, 2016, ballot in Idaho as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment. It was approved.
| A vote "for" the measure was a vote to include the legislative power to review, approve, and reject administrative rules in the legislature in the state constitution. |
| A vote "against" the measure was a vote to keep this legislative authority as a state statute rather than include it in the state constitution. |
House Joint Resolution 5 (HJR 5) also made it so that legislative approval and rejection of administrative rules were not subject to a veto by the governor. Administrative rules—usually written and implemented by agencies or commissions in the state executive branch—were regulations meant to help enforce existing legislation rather than enact new laws.[1]
Election results
| HJR 5 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
| Yes | 347,327 | 55.52% | ||
| No | 278,219 | 44.48% | ||
- Election results from Idaho Secretary of State
Overview
2014 measure
A similar constitutional amendment, which would have given the legislature constitutionally protected power to delegate rulemaking authority to executive agencies and to reject administrative rules, was narrowly defeated in 2014 in spite of unanimous support from the legislature.
Constitutional protection
As of 2016, legislative authority to approve and reject rules was protected by state law. However, this power was not included in the state’s constitution and was vulnerable to challenges, according to proponents of this amendment.
The power was challenged in the Idaho Supreme Court in 1989, but the court upheld it in a 3-2 vote. Between 1990 and 2014, the legislature rejected 4.5 percent of rules created by state executive agencies.[2]
Text of measure
Ballot title
The ballot title appeared as follows:[1]
| “ | Proposing an amendment to Article III of the Constitution of the State of Idaho by the addition of a new Section 29 to provide that the Legislature may review, approve or reject any administrative rule to ensure it is consistent with legislative intent and to provide that legislative approval or rejection of a rule is not subject to gubernatorial veto.[3] | ” |
Ballot question
The ballot question appeared as follows:[4]
| “ | Shall Article III, of the Constitution of the State of Idaho be amended by the addition of a new Section 29, to provide that the Legislature may review any administrative rule to ensure it is consistent with the legislative intent of the statute that the rule was written to interpret, prescribe, implement or enforce; to provide that, after review, the Legislature may approve or reject, in whole or in part, any rule as provided by law; and to provide that legislative approval or rejection of a rule is not subject to gubernatorial veto under Section 10, Article IV, of the Constitution of the State of Idaho?[3] | ” |
Ballot summary
The meaning, purpose, and result to be accomplished by HJR 5 was presented as follows:[4]
| “ | The Legislature writes the laws of the state under which the state agencies adopt agency rules. By statute, agencies make rules that only interpret and implement these laws, and the legislature reserves the authority to review and reject agency rules if a rule is contrary to the intent of the law.
The Legislature's ability to approve or reject agency rules is an important aspect of the separation of powers, because these rules have the force and effect of law. The Legislature currently oversees that rulemaking process by accepting or rejecting agency rules. The proposed amendment confirms and protects the Legislature’s practice to authorize agency rulemaking, and to accept or reject agency rules.[3] |
” |
Constitutional changes
- See also: Article III, Idaho Constitution
The measure added a Section 29 to Article III of the Idaho Constitution:[4]
Full text
The full text could be read here.
Support
Citizens for HJR 5 led the support campaign for HJR 5.[5]
Supporters
Legislators
- Secretary of State Lawerence Denney (R)
Endorsements
Citizens for HJR 5 listed the following endorsements on its campaign website:
- Idaho Farm Bureau
- Food Producers of Idaho
- National Federation of Independent Business
- Idaho Chamber Alliance
- Boise Metro Chamber of Commerce
- Idaho Association of REALTORS®
- Idaho Dairymen’s Association
- Idaho Milk Producers Association
- Idaho Grain Producers Association
- Idaho Potato Industry PAC
- Idaho Sugarbeet Growers Association
- Idaho Water Users Association
- Idaho Association of Commerce & Industry (IACI)
- Idaho Forest Group
- Idaho Irrigation Pumpers Association
- Idaho Beer and Wine Distributors Association
- Idaho Land Fund
- Idaho Petroleum Marketers & Convenience Store Association
- Idaho Building Contractors Association
- Idaho Materials & Construction
- Freedom Foundation
- Idaho Republican Party
- Idaho Young Republicans
- Senator Jim Risch (R)
- Senator Mike Crapo (R)
- Congressman Mike Simpson (R-2)
- Congressman Raúl Labrador (R-1)
- Idaho House Speaker Scott Bedke (R-27A)
- Idaho Senate Pro Tempore Brent Hill
(R-34)
Arguments
Secretary of State Lawerence Denney (R) argued that putting this legislative power in the state's constitution was a good idea and that voters were not well-informed of the reason for the amendment when it was rejected in 2014.[6]
Official arguments
The secretary of state's office provided the following arguments in favor of HJR 5:[4]
| “ |
1. The proposed constitutional amendment safeguards the ability of the legislature - elected by the people - to review and reject agency rules created by unelected state officials if those rules conflict with legislative intent. This will protect Idahoans from unfair or over regulation. 2. The legislature's current ability to review agency rules is in the law. Idaho's Supreme Court previously held that statute valid, a future supreme court could potentially declare it invalid, because Idaho's Constitution does not expressly recognize the ability of the legislature to review agency rules. The proposed constitutional amendment would protect the legislature's authority to ensure that agency rules conform with legislative intent. 3. If a future court determined the legislature did not have the right to review and reject agency rules, then Idahoans would have to hire lawyers and file lawsuits to challenge agencies' rules. That would be a much more expensive and time-consuming process than the current system which this amendment proposes to protect. 4. A Governor's veto is not required, because agency rules are proposed by the Governor's departments and agencies. [3] |
” |
Individual arguments
- Scott Bedke (R-27A), speaker in the Idaho House of Representatives, wrote the following:[7]
| “ |
Our nation was founded on a system of government with three co-equal branches of government, each with its own role to play. The balance of power among these three branches helps guarantee that no single person or group can gain excessive power. Idaho’s government is no different. Voting “Yes” on HJR 5 encourages cooperation within our branches of state government and holds both elected officials and unelected state agency employees accountable to Idaho citizens. It makes sure that the balance of power will not be upset. It guarantees our ability to review administrative rules. Most importantly, it will ensure that your voices are heard before any new state regulations can be approved.[3] |
” |
- Bill Sizemore, a Nampa resident, wrote the following in a letter to the editor:[8]
| “ |
Coming from a state where administrative rules adopted by unelected bureaucrats have all but destroyed private property rights, I want to add my perspective to Idaho’s HJR 5 debate. In my opinion, Idaho voters would be well advised to approve HJR 5. [...] Most states have far more administrative rules than they do laws, and all of those rules were adopted by barely accountable bureaucrats. Administrative rules are enforceable government actions with the same power as laws, but no elected body passed them. That amounts to government by bureaucracy, which is why I’m voting Yes on HJR 5.[3] |
” |
Opposition
Opponents
- Gov. Butch Otter (R)[9][10][11]
- Attorney General Lawrence Wasden (R)[6]
Official arguments
The secretary of state's office provided the following arguments against HJR 5:[4]
| “ |
1. This constitutional amendment is unnecessary because the legislature already has legal authority to review agency rules. Even if the legislature did not have this authority, sufficient methods of challenging agency rules exist: the legislature can pass a law limiting an executive agency's rulemaking ability, or a rule can be challenged in court. 2. The legislature is overly involved with state agencies when it examines their rules to see whether they conform to legislative intent, and that practice should not be in Idaho's Constitution. Legislative review of agency rules is time-consuming and makes it more difficult for state agencies to conduct day-to-day business. 3. The legislature responds to agency rules in different ways. One way is to pass a bill, which it does every year to extend the agency rules from previous years. The proposed constitutional amendment would prohibit any veto of a rule approval or rejection and would infringe on the Governor's right to veto bills under the Idaho Constitution.[3] |
” |
Individual arguments
- Attorney General Lawrence Wasden (R) argued that the power given to the legislature by the supreme court decision was an "overreach" and that the rejection of the amendment by voters in 2014 indicated that the people of Idaho did not want this legislative power in the state's constitution.[6]
- Governor Butch Otter (R), who originally supported HJR 5, wrote the following in opposition to the measure:[9]
| “ |
The Idaho Supreme Court decided in 1990 that legislators have the authority to reject rules from Executive agencies that they believe are inconsistent with the legislative intent of the law behind the rule. The review process dominates the opening weeks of each annual legislative session. I want to make it clear that I have no problem with the Legislature’s rules review process as it now exists in statute. It is designed to protect Idaho citizens from what HJR 5 proponents contend are the threats of rules that undermine legislative intent and bureaucrats imposing unreasonable regulations – shortcomings more accurately attributed to the federal government. Not satisfied with the existing guarantees that legislative intent will be protected in rules, HJR 5 backers now are seeking constitutional protection against the existing law and court precedent somehow being overturned. [...] Does any of that sound good to you? Does anyone want a single branch of government writing the laws and developing the rules for how those laws are implemented with no check on its authority? If not, I encourage you to join me in voting NO on HJR 5 on November 8.[3] |
” |
Campaign finance
As of January 31, 2017, one ballot question committee was registered to support HJR 5, and there were no committees registered to oppose the measure.[12][13]
| Cash Contributions | In-Kind Contributions | Total Contributions | Cash Expenditures | Total Expenditures | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Support | $129,000.00 | $0.00 | $129,000.00 | $129,000.00 | $129,000.00 |
| Oppose | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 |
| Total | $129,000.00 | $0.00 | $129,000.00 | $129,000.00 | $129,000.00 |
Support
The following table includes contribution and expenditure totals for the committees in support of the measure.[12]
| Committees in support of HJR 5 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Committee | Cash Contributions | In-Kind Contributions | Total Contributions | Cash Expenditures | Total Expenditures |
| Citizens for HJR 5 | $129,000.00 | $0.00 | $129,000.00 | $129,000.00 | $129,000.00 |
| Total | $129,000.00 | $0.00 | $129,000.00 | $129,000.00 | $129,000.00 |
Donors
The following were the top donors to the committee.[12]
| Donor | Cash Contributions | In-Kind Contributions | Total Contributions |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clearwater Paper | $5,000.00 | $0.00 | $5,000.00 |
| House Republican Caucus | $5,000.00 | $0.00 | $5,000.00 |
| Idaho Association of Realtors | $5,000.00 | $0.00 | $5,000.00 |
| Idaho Conservative Growth Fund | $5,000.00 | $0.00 | $5,000.00 |
| Idaho Dairyman's Association | $5,000.00 | $0.00 | $5,000.00 |
| Idaho Forest Group | $5,000.00 | $0.00 | $5,000.00 |
| Idaho Power | $5,000.00 | $0.00 | $5,000.00 |
| Micron | $5,000.00 | $0.00 | $5,000.00 |
| Scott Bedke | $5,000.00 | $0.00 | $5,000.00 |
| Senate Republican PAC of Idaho | $5,000.00 | $0.00 | $5,000.00 |
| Simplot | $5,000.00 | $0.00 | $5,000.00 |
| Simpson for Congress | $5,000.00 | $0.00 | $5,000.00 |
| Zions Bank | $5,000.00 | $0.00 | $5,000.00 |
Path to the ballot
- See also: Amending the Idaho Constitution
A two-thirds vote in both chambers of the Idaho Legislature was required to refer House Joint Resolution 5 (HJR 5) to the ballot. The amendment was introduced in the Idaho House of Representatives on March 10, 2016. The bill passed the House with a 62-3 vote on March 14, 2016, and the Senate with a 34-1 vote on March 24, 2016. The bill was delivered to the secretary of state's office on March 28, 2016.[1]
House vote
March 14, 2016 House vote
| Idaho HJR 5 House Vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
| Yes | 62 | 95.38% | ||
| No | 3 | 4.62% | ||
Senate vote
March 24, 2016 Senate vote
| Idaho HJR 5 Senate Vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
| Yes | 34 | 97.14% | ||
| No | 1 | 2.86% | ||
State profile
| Demographic data for Idaho | ||
|---|---|---|
| Idaho | U.S. | |
| Total population: | 1,652,828 | 316,515,021 |
| Land area (sq mi): | 82,643 | 3,531,905 |
| Race and ethnicity** | ||
| White: | 91.7% | 73.6% |
| Black/African American: | 0.6% | 12.6% |
| Asian: | 1.3% | 5.1% |
| Native American: | 1.3% | 0.8% |
| Pacific Islander: | 0.1% | 0.2% |
| Two or more: | 2.6% | 3% |
| Hispanic/Latino: | 11.8% | 17.1% |
| Education | ||
| High school graduation rate: | 89.5% | 86.7% |
| College graduation rate: | 25.9% | 29.8% |
| Income | ||
| Median household income: | $47,583 | $53,889 |
| Persons below poverty level: | 16.9% | 11.3% |
| Source: U.S. Census Bureau, "American Community Survey" (5-year estimates 2010-2015) Click here for more information on the 2020 census and here for more on its impact on the redistricting process in Idaho. **Note: Percentages for race and ethnicity may add up to more than 100 percent because respondents may report more than one race and the Hispanic/Latino ethnicity may be selected in conjunction with any race. Read more about race and ethnicity in the census here. | ||
Presidential voting pattern
- See also: Presidential voting trends in Idaho
Idaho voted Republican in all seven presidential elections between 2000 and 2024.
More Idaho coverage on Ballotpedia
- Elections in Idaho
- United States congressional delegations from Idaho
- Public policy in Idaho
- Endorsers in Idaho
- Idaho fact checks
- More...
Related measures
See also
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 Idaho Legislature, "House Joint Resolution 5," accessed March 30, 2016
- ↑ KBTV, "Lawmakers pass resolution to amend Idaho Constitution," March 19, 2014
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source. Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; name "quotedisclaimer" defined multiple times with different content Cite error: Invalid<ref>tag; name "quotedisclaimer" defined multiple times with different content Cite error: Invalid<ref>tag; name "quotedisclaimer" defined multiple times with different content Cite error: Invalid<ref>tag; name "quotedisclaimer" defined multiple times with different content Cite error: Invalid<ref>tag; name "quotedisclaimer" defined multiple times with different content Cite error: Invalid<ref>tag; name "quotedisclaimer" defined multiple times with different content - ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 Idaho Secretary of State, "H.J.R. 5," accessed July 28, 2016
- ↑ Citizens for HJR 5, "Home," accessed November 4, 2016
- ↑ 6.0 6.1 6.2 Spokesman Review, "Land Board members differ on proposed constitutional amendment on Nov. ballot," April 19, 2016
- ↑ Clearwater Tribune, "Guest Opinion on HJR 5," October 28, 2016
- ↑ Idaho Press-Tribune, "HJR 5 empowers voters," October 28, 2016
- ↑ 9.0 9.1 News BF, "HJR5 a solution in search of a problem," October 28, 2016
- ↑ Capital Press, "Idaho governor flip-flops on HJR 5," October 31, 2016
- ↑ Magic Valley, "Idaho governor opposes constitutional amendment," October 27, 2016
- ↑ 12.0 12.1 12.2 Idaho Secretary of State Election Division Campaign finance, "Candidate and committee campaign finance database," accessed December 12, 2016
- ↑ Idaho Secretary of State, "2016 Scanned Campaign Finance Reports - Measure and Miscellaneous Committees," accessed December 12, 2016
 |
State of Idaho Boise (capital) |
|---|---|
| Elections |
What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2025 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures |
| Government |
Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy |
