I would strongly suggest to everyone: DO NOT rely solely on “Summaries”. (Descriptions that appear on the ballot are drafted by the Missouri Secretary of State and Attorney General). Summaries have proven to be politically biased. In previous elections, ballot summaries have been written with deliberately confusing and deceitful verbiage to garner supporting votes. Please see my article, “Ballot Initiatives: The Problem with the Ballot Title”.
In drafting the Fiscal Summary for my “legalization” initiative, “Cannabis Restoration”, the Attorney General grossly exaggerated the cost of implementing the REAL expungement of past Cannabis-specific court records. As I have pointed out repeatedly, the current Cannabis law DOES NOT erase past criminal records (despite what the many television and radio ads that were aired before the election stated).
The current law only “seals” them, making them available for future investigations and charges via a court order.
The Secretary of State’s office put a price tag of hundreds of millions of dollars on my initiative, apparently to make it seem cost-prohibitive to implement.
I could have fought the state in court regarding the Summary. Just about every state that has Cannabis law has had to do so. Unfortunately, I didn’t have the financial backing to follow through.
It is absolutely imperative that you read the whole text before voting. The summaries I have listed are per the “sos.mo.gov” website. You can find the initiatives in their entirety there.
I will be discussing the Amendments in the order of importance. I cannot stress enough how absolutely crucial it is that we make our votes count in regard to these issues.
* * *
Amendment No. 4
Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to:
- Modify current requirements that a statewide majority of voters may approve initiative petitions to amend the constitution;
- Require a majority of voters in each congressional district to approve initiative petitions to amend the constitution; and
- Make available to each voter the full text of initiative petitions with their ballot?
The Department of Corrections estimates increased annual costs of up to $21,817. The Office of State Public Defender estimates an unknown fiscal impact. Other state governmental entities estimate no costs or savings. Local governmental entities estimate no costs or savings.
24 states have some form of citizen initiative process. Only 24 allow citizens to draft and propose completely new laws or constitutional amendments via petition. This is the ONLY real way that ANY citizenry in the United States can “self-govern”. Of these states, only 16 allow for a direct citizen-initiated constitutional amendment like Missouri. Those states include:
Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, and South Dakota.
With a “direct initiative”, if enough signatures are gathered, citizens can bypass lawmakers, even the Governor of a state, and put an issue before the people in a general election. In most cases, if a direct constitutional initiative passes, it’s locked into the constitution without the chance of lawmakers repealing it. The only recourse they have is through yet another general election. Which means they would have to again face a majority vote of the people.
I wrote considerably about this issue in my article “2024: Missouri’s General Election – Ballot Questions”. As I have stated in this and previous articles, Republicans have been working quite diligently over the last ten years to mute and/or repeal our ability to do a direct initiative. Oklahoma, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, and Missouri have all been threatened by a concerted national effort. Missouri is apparently becoming the most crucial in their attempts.
Republican lawmakers have publicly stated that their efforts are in direct response to citizen initiatives across the country that have affected issues like Cannabis and abortion.
Understand, these are our “elect” who are striving to limit our right to self-govern.
A “no” vote would stop Republicans from stealing our right to initiative and preserve our last semblance of “self-government”.
* * *
Amendment No. 5
Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to:
- Require legislative phase-out of the individual state income tax based on revenue growth, and authorize the expansion of sales and use taxes;
- Curtail constitutional limits on taxing goods and services; and
- Require local tax rate cuts without reducing school funding if local sales tax revenue increases?
The proposal has no direct impact on state or local tax revenue. If passed, implementing legislation will have an unknown impact to state and local tax revenue. If implemented, state government entities expect a reduction of $57,000 annually in income tax check-off donations and implementation costs of at least $100,000.
If you have been following all the insane cutbacks to social services that have been going on since the current administration took office, you’ve probably realized that they have been paying for trillion-dollar handouts to the ultra-rich by reducing or eliminating services to the poor and middle class. This amendment is no different.
Despite the high-priced AI-driven political ads currently flooding our tv screens, the truth is, this amendment shifts the state’s tax burden to seniors, the poor and the middle class, while benefiting the wealthy. The cost of running our state is massive. One would think the solution wouldn’t be to inflict even more burden on our state’s most vulnerable.
When the pro-big-business ads claim savings for Missourians, they’re not lying to you. Not entirely. They’re just choosing to be selective about who is actually benefiting.
I would vote “no”…but of course, I’m a senior…and I’m poor.
* * *
Constitutional Amendment No. 1
The Parks, Soils, and Water Sales Tax Renewal
Shall Missouri continue for 10 years the one-tenth of one percent sales/use tax that is used for soil and water conservation and for state parks and historic sites, and resubmit this tax to the voters for approval in 10 years?
The measure allows continued collection of the existing sales and use tax, which generates revenue of approximately $140 million annually.
A “yes” vote will continue for 10 years the one-tenth of one percent sales/use tax that is used for soil and water conservation and for state parks and historic sites.
This will be resubmitted to the voters for approval in 10 years.
A “no” vote will not continue this sales/use tax.
If passed, this measure will not increase or decrease taxes.
This automatic ballot measure renews every 10 years. It asks voters to renew an existing 0.1% (one-tenth of one percent) sales tax. Because it is a straight renewal, a “yes” vote keeps the tax exactly where it is, while a “no” vote would eliminate it entirely.
It brings in roughly $140 million annually, split right down the middle between state parks and agricultural/water conservation.
Our nation’s parks have been a lasting treasure for all our citizenry and visitors from around the world.
With the current administration’s cuts to our nation’s parks, I can’t help but feel this measure is needful. Parks have had to close or go without supervision. Services geared to preservation and safety have been curtailed. Over the past year, they have been threatened with commercial development while also battling what has become yearly, even year-round, forest fires.
I want to keep our nation’s parks. I believe they should be preserved for all of us and future generations. I’ll be voting “yes” on this one.
* * *
Constitutional Amendment No. 2
Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to:
– Require all charter counties, including Jackson County, to provide for the election of a county assessor; and
– Require assessors in all charter counties to comply with any training requirements established by general law?
State and local governmental entities estimate no costs or savings.
A “yes” vote will amend the Missouri Constitution to require that all charter counties, including Jackson County, elect a county assessor and that such assessors comply with training requirements established by state law.
A “no” vote will not change the current constitutional provisions, which exempt Jackson Cunty from the requirement to elect its assessor and do not require charter county assessors to follow training requirements under general law.
If passed, this measure will have no impact on taxes.
This amendment actually only affects Jackson County, since it’s the only county that doesn’t elect an assessor. Currently, their Assessor is appointed by the Jackson County Executive.
If this were to pass, it would mean that the people of Jackson County would determine their assessor by public vote. However, since Jackson County voters have already overwhelmingly decided in 2025 that this should be an “elected” position, this vote is relatively mute.
* * *