Missouri House GOP to resurrect ‘ballot candy’ provisions in initiative petition resolution

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (KY3) - Amid the legislative spring break, Missouri House Speaker Dean Plocher, who is running for Lt. Governor as a Republican, announced his intention to see controversial provisions restored to a Senate resolution fortifying the state’s initiative petition process.

“For too long, out-of-state billionaires have targeted Missouri to pass their Radical Left-wing agenda,” Plocher posted on the social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter. “The House is glad to add back the protections against noncitizen voting to SJR 74 and send one of THE MOST IMPORTANT election integrity reforms back to the Senate.”

Those provisions were removed from the version ultimately approved by the Senate after hours-long filibusters by Democratic Senators.

The resolution aims to make amending the state constitution more difficult for citizens by creating a new threshold for any citizen-led initiative petition.

Under the resolution, an initiative would need to win a statewide popular vote and a majority in at least 5 of the state’s eight congressional districts.

Supporters of the resolution contend that the current system allows for the passage of an initiative with votes coming exclusively from densely populated, urban areas like St. Louis and Kansas City while “shutting out the voices of rural Missourians.”

Opponents argue that democratic voting power should indeed rest in the hands of citizens, regardless of where in the state they reside, and that the proposed changes would grant voters in certain areas of the state outsized influence over ballot initiatives.

An analysis by the non-profit news organization The Missouri Independent found that under the resolution in its current form, any initiative petition could be defeated by just 20% of voters.

“What these resolutions are trying to do is destroy the one person, one vote, founding principle of our democracy,” said ACLU of Missouri attorney Jonathan Schmid. “By weighting rural voters more than urban voters, you’re destroying that principle.”

Pro-democracy groups have heavily criticized the resolution, including conservative organizations like Show Me Integrity and Conservatives Against Corruption.

“I oppose SJR 74 and any efforts to make it harder for Missourians to exercise our Constitutional freedom of the citizen initiative process,” said Fred Steinbach, former Mayor of Chesterfield and Finance Director for former Governor John Ashcroft. “In 1992, my former boss, Governor Ashcroft, vetoed similar attacks on the citizen initiative process. The then-Democratic majority was attacking the will of the people and trying to make the initiative process more difficult because the Democrats were bitter that conservatives had been using the citizen initiative, including to pass the Hancock Amendment with only 55% of the vote.”

In Gov. Ashcroft’s 1992 veto statement, he said, “the General Assembly should be reluctant…to enact legislation which places any impediments on the initiative power which are inconsistent with the reservation found in the Constitution.”

Ballot Candy

State Sen. Mary Elizabeth Coleman, R-Arnold, the main sponsor of SJR 74, included provisions in the resolution that bar noncitizens from voting in the state of Missouri and prohibit foreign contributions to initiative petition campaigns.

Both of those activities are already banned under state and federal law. Yet, both provisions would be listed on the ballot above the other, making the Constitution more difficult to amend and ensuring they are what voters see first.

The Missouri Secretary of State’s website clearly states that U.S. citizenship is a prerequisite for registering to vote.

While some countries allow noncitizens to vote in local elections, that is not the case anywhere in Missouri. Noncitizens law prohibits them from voting in federal or state elections.

Missouri’s Constitution states that “all citizens” are entitled to vote, which some Republicans have claimed as a loophole in the law, using it to justify the additional, redundant language in the resolution.

“Unfortunately, it does not say ‘only citizens’ can vote,” said state Sen. Denny Hoskins, R-Warrensburg, in a social media post. “In other States with similar language in their constitution or state statute, this is being misconstrued to say that since it doesnnoncitizens Citizens’ then noncitizens can vote.”

Hoskins did not respond to a request for an example of this occurring.

A recent appeals court decision struck down a New York City ordinance allowing green card holders and those on federal work authorization to participate in municipal elections. Still, that case did not center around the “all citizens/only citizens” issue.

Another ballot candy provision included in Coleman’s original version would ban foreign governments or political parties from sponsoring or funding initiatives, which is already prohibited by federal law in multiple sections.

After multiple, hours-long filibusters staged by Democratic senators, the ballot candy provisions were removed from the version ultimately approved by the Senate.

With Plocher’s promise to resurrect them, though, it means the resolution would need to return to the Senate, where the Republicans in the chamber can force a vote on it through a rarely used and heavily criticized procedure called the “previous question,” often referred to as the “PQ.”

The method jumps over any ability to filibuster legislation and forces an immediate vote on it.

Though Senate leadership has been largely hesitant to use that power, Sen. Coleman said in a recent House committee hearing that it would be on the table should the House reinstate the controversial provisions and return SJR 74 to the Senate.

Coleman’s comments drew backlash from both Republican and Democratic Senate leadership.

“I think all of us understand that we’re willing to work together on things and we respect each other, we respect positions that maybe we don’t hold,” said Senate Majority Leader Cindy O’Laughlin, R-Shelbina. “Anytime that topic of a previous question comes up, that’s an effort to kind of just mull over the other side. And that is something that we try to avoid. And for the success of the Senate, I believe that we have to try to exhaust all avenues before we take that kind of action.”

Senate Minority Floor Leader John Rizzo, D-Independence, said the specter of a PQ makes for a difficult working relationship in the Senate.

“As someone who’s trying to look for a partner to work through, you need to know that the partner on the other side is actually invested in your ideas,” said Rizzo. “It doesn’t look like they’re invested in your ideas when they’re saying they’re willing to shut down debate, specifically to put more ballot candy back on the initiative petition reform.”

What Voters Can Expect

Missouri’s elected GOP officials have stated that they want to place the initiative petition question on the August primary ballot so that the new threshold for passage will be in place for the November elections.

The November ballot is highly expected to pose a constitutional amendment to voters that would enshrine abortion rights into the state’s governing document.

According to Senate leaders, if the General Assembly passes the resolution on IP changes, that question will be placed on the August primary ballot.

Should abortion rights advocates secure the requisite 172,000 signatures gathered from at least 6 of the state’s eight congressional districts by May 6th, that question will be placed on the November 5th ballot.

Missouri voters who support abortion rights would then be highly motivated to vote in August against the changes to the IP process and would then have to vote again in November in support of abortion rights.

Those who do not support abortion rights but also don’t support the changes to the IP process would vote “yes” in August and “no” in November.

So far, each state that has put a question either restricting or expanding the right to abortion care has supported the expansion of care.

To report a correction or typo, please email digitalnews@ky3.com