Statewide Voices on Statewide Issues

Despite a shorter week in the Senate, around 12 hours of debate and filibusters took place on the Senate floor over one very important issue.

Since the early 1900s, Missouri has had a somewhat unique avenue in its constitution for its citizens to put matters important to them to a statewide vote. Under the initiative petition (IP) process, if a proposed ballot measure is approved by the Secretary of State, it simply requires a certain number of signatures (5% of legal voters in six of eight congressional districts for a statutory change, 8% for a constitutional change) on a petition to have the measure go before the entire state on the ballot. To pass statewide, the measure simply needs to pass with a simple majority: 50% plus one. That is 50% plus one of everyone that comes out and votes. The average voter turnout in Missouri is around 58% of eligible voters over the last three elections. So we are talking about 50%, plus one of that 58% that goes to the ballot, meaning it takes about 29% registered voters to get a measure passed on the ballot. A measure that affects the entire state. 

The IP process has been used to pass issues into law such as legalized marijuana, the expansion of Medicaid, the Handcock amendment that caps taxation and even the establishment of statewide departments such as the Missouri Conservation Department. I would also like to note that Missouri’s IP process is one of the most lax in the nation. This is why our state constitution is so incredibly large.

This year, it is one of the priorities of the majority in the Senate to pass a bill that would alter this process. Specifically, it would strengthen the required approval percentage to pass IP measures. Under Senate Joint Resolution 74, the approval method would add to the simple majority, also requiring a majority of votes in at least five Missouri’s eight congressional districts. With that being said, there are actually several different bills being brought before the body to be discussed with various ways to reform the IP process. That is why you see so many on my side of the aisle fussing! SJR 74 was selected in committee as the bill to carry the overall idea. Other bills suggested proposed a majority of Missouri House or Senate districts, others have wanted to increase the statewide threshold to 60% or more instead of the simple majority, and some suggested increasing the petition requirements in order to make it harder to get the measure on the ballot in the first place. At the end of the day, we need to reform this process, and we need to get it right. Some states have attempted reforms only to see their changes tossed out by the courts. With Missouri’s pro-life laws hanging in the balance, we do not have the time to mess this up. 

One of the great things about Missouri is our diverse makeup. We have two very large cities, very large areas made up of small, rural communities and everything in between. That makeup does present one large problem, in my opinion, in that the state’s overall population is stacked towards the larger cities. Often the needs and issues that are important to people in urban areas are vastly different than what matters to us in our rural communities. So when these IP issues are placed on the ballot, most of the time, our rural voices have simply not been a part of the equation. That must be changed.

That is why I feel it is vitally important that the threshold to change our state laws and, most importantly, our state constitution be high enough to ensure that a majority of communities and demographics are being represented in the decision. If population dynamics were reversed, I assume those in Kansas City and St. Louis would not want laws to be passed only representing rural community values and needs. 

There are currently multiple measures going through the IP process in an attempt to make it on the statewide election ballot in November. The issue receiving the bulk of attention, and the reason many want to ensure all voices are represented on IP ballot measures, is a petition to legalize abortion in Missouri’s constitution. No matter your opinion on this issue, I think we can all agree that it is of the utmost importance that the decision on its legalization represent Missouri as a whole, not just in part. I am 100% pro-life and a poll by Pew Research Center shows a majority of our state is as well. Our laws should reflect that. I am also very concerned that the next attempt to change our laws at the ballot through the initiative petition process will be to tighten our gun laws. I don’t have to explain to Y’all how detrimental that could be. We simply cannot allow Missouri’s lax IP process to continue as is.

IP reform, however, is not a partisan issue, because party dynamics can change. In fact, it is easy to forget that not long ago it was the current minority that was the majority in Jefferson City. This effort is simply about ensuring that our state laws have statewide representation. 

This issues is far from being decided. It still needs to pass the Senate, then the house, before ultimately being put before voters where the majority will decide whether it is time to ensure equity across Missouri’s lawmaking process. 

Contact Me

I always appreciate hearing your comments, opinions and concerns. Please feel free to contact me in Jefferson City at 573-751-2459. You may write me at Holly Thompson Rehder,
 Missouri Senate, State Capitol, Rm 433, Jefferson City, MO 65101, send an email to Holly.Rehder@senate.mo.gov or visit www.senate.mo.gov/Rehder.