LOWELL — Some legislators will now be urged to push for limiting corporate political spending after voters in some communities agreed to it in the Tuesday election.

Voters in certain communities, from Townsend to Burlington, had an extra referendum question on the ballot. Question 5 asked if voters wanted their state representatives to be instructed to “vote for a resolution calling up Congress to propose an amendment affirming that 1.) rights protected under the Constitution are the rights of natural persons only and 2.) both Congress and the states may place limits on political contributions and political spending?”

The question is non-binding, meaning legislators do not necessarily need to follow the instruction.

The question stems from the Supreme Court’s ruling on Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission in 2010, defining the corporations are the same as people in their rights to free speech and allowing them to make unlimited political spending. Concerned about big-money influence on politics, residents across the country began calling for a legislative action to limit corporate campaign spending.

In Tuesday’s election, the referendum passed in all 18 state-representative districts. In the 1st Middlesex District, which Rep. Sheila Harrington, R-Groton, represents, 8,935 people, or 59.4 percent of those who voted in Townsend, Pepperell, Groton, Dunstable and Ayer, voted for it.

In the 21st Middlesex District that Rep. Ken Gordon, D-Bedford, represents, the question also passed with 8,846 people, or 63.7 percent voting for it. Gordon’s district also includes Precinct 3 of Wilmington, but the town does not have the result of Question 5 just yet as the voting machine failed to record the result for the referendum question, according to the Town Clerk’s Office.