Voters in Montana who could change the state’s constitution — and the way the Treasure State votes — decided not to as results inched closer to being tallied across the snow-dusted state.

The two changes were proposed in tandem and would have altered how voters choose candidates. While one of the initiatives, Constitutional Initiative 126 appeared close at times on Election Day to passing, but by Wednesday morning both it and its companion initiative, Constitutional Initiative 127 appeared destined for defeat.

The Associated Press called both races late Wednesday morning with about 92% of votes counted. CI-126 failed to pass by a margin of about 20,000 votes, 48% to 52%. while votes against CI-127 garnered 61% of the vote, to 38% in favor of the measure.

CI-126 would change Montana’s primaries and have a ripple effect on the general election.

It would allow for the top four candidates in most races to advance to the general election, regardless of party. Though the system has been referred to as an “open primary,” it’s more accurately called a “jungle primary.” Currently in Montana, the primaries are open to all voters, but Montana residents must choose which party ballot to vote.

Supporters of CI-126 said that it would allow Montanans to select the best candidate, regardless of parties. Opponents said it just adds confusion and uncertainty to the process.

CI-126 had been rejected by voters with 278,195 voting against it, while 258,470 supported it.

“Today is a disappointing day as we see politicians and special interests once again succeed at stopping Montanans from gaining more power in our elections,” said Frank Garner, a board member for the group behind the measure, Montanans for Election reform. “We fought hard against the entrenched politicians and special interests who didn’t want to give voters more voice and better choices on the ballot because the current system benefits them, not voters. We still believe open primaries are a powerful tool to hold politicians accountable and put the power over our elections back in the hands of voters, but they aren’t the only path forward. We will continue to stand up for freedom and choice in our elections.”

CI-127, which is supported by the same backers as CI-126, had 61% of voters opposing it and just 39% in favor at press time. It would require that the top candidate in any race be elected with a majority (50% or more) rather than a plurality. If no candidate receives at least 50% of the vote, then the Legislature would determine how the winner is selected.

Currently, the Montana Legislature has outlawed ranked choice voting, so it would either have to change or repeal the law, or consider another means of selecting a candidate, including a “snap run off,” which would require another statewide election.

CI-127 never appeared to be ahead in the polls.

Even though the initiatives were supported by the same group, both do not need to pass to function in law.

For example, if CI-126 passes, it would simply mean that the top four vote-getters, regardless of political party, would advance to the general election. Likewise, if only CI-127 passes, then it would require that the winner of an election receive at least 50%, regardless of how many people are on the ballot.

Constitutional Initiative 126 and 127 were two of three initiatives that could change the Montana Constitution. The other, Constitutional Initiative 128, would enshrine the right to an abortion in the constitution even though the procedure has been legal for years, based on Supreme Court precedent.