Missouri Amendment 1, Lobbying, Campaign Finance, and Redistricting Initiative (2018)

Elections in Missouri, 2018

• General election: Nov. 6
• Voter registration deadline: Oct. 10
• Early voting: N/A
• Absentee voting deadline: Nov. 6

• Online registration: Yes
• Same-day registration: No
• Voter ID: Non-photo ID required
• Poll times: 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.

---

On the ballot: U.S. Senate • U.S. House • State executive offices • State Senate • State House • Special state legislative • Supreme court • Appellate courts • Local judges • State ballot measures • Local ballot measures • School boards • Municipal • Recalls • Democratic primaries • Republican primaries

Missouri Amendment 1
Election date November 6, 2018
Topic Elections and campaigns
Status a Approved
Type Constitutional amendment	Origin Citizens
List of Missouri measuresMissouri Proposition A - AugustMissouri Amendment 1Missouri Amendment 2Missouri Amendment 3Missouri Amendment 4Missouri Proposition BMissouri Proposition CMissouri Proposition DSubmit

Missouri Amendment 1, the Lobbying, Campaign Finance, and Redistricting Initiative, was on the ballot in Missouri as an initiated constitutional amendment on November 6, 2018. The measure was approved.

A "yes" vote supported this constitutional amendment to make changes to the state's lobbying laws, campaign finance limits for state legislative candidates, and legislative redistricting process.

A "no" vote opposed this constitutional amendment to make changes to the state's lobbying laws, campaign finance limits for state legislative candidates, and legislative redistricting process.

Election results

Missouri Amendment 1
Result		Votes	Percentage
Yes		1,469,093	62.02%
No		899,613	37.98%

Results are officially certified.

Source

Aftermath

Missouri Amendment 3, Redistricting Process and Criteria, Lobbying, and Campaign Finance Amendment (2020)

See also: Missouri Amendment 3, Redistricting Process and Criteria, Lobbying, and Campaign Finance Amendment (2020)

The Missouri Lobbying, Campaign Finance, and Redistricting Amendment (SJR 38) appeared on the ballot in Missouri as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment on November 3, 2020. It was approved by the Missouri State Senate on February 10, 2020, in a vote of 22-9. On May 13, 2020, the state House passed SJR 38 in a vote of 98-56 with eight absent. The amendment was designed to amend Article III of the Missouri Constitution to change certain provisions of Missouri Amendment 1 passed in 2018. It would enact the following changes:

• eliminate the nonpartisan state demographer and revert back to a bipartisan commission appointed by the governor;
• alter the criteria used to draw district maps;
• change the threshold of lobbyist gifts from $5 to $0; and
• lower the contribution limit for state senate campaigns from $2,500 to $2,400.

The measure must receive a simple majority vote in the state House to appear on the November 3, 2020 ballot.

Resignation

On November 30, 2018, state Sen. Jacob Hummel (D-4) resigned from the Missouri State Senate to keep his right to register as a lobbyist. Beginning on December 6, 2018, Amendment 1 required state legislators to wait at least two years after the end of their terms to work as lobbyists. Hummel was serving as the Missouri AFL-CIO's secretary-treasurer. He said, "If, in the future, this position or any other requires filing [as a lobbyist], I want to ensure that I am able to do so."

Overview

What was the legislative redistricting system in Missouri?

Redistricting is the process by which new congressional and state legislative district boundaries are drawn. As of 2018, two commissions were responsible for drawing state legislative district boundaries in Missouri. The commision responsible for state Senate districts was composed of 10 members, five Democrats and five Republicans, selected by the political parties' state committees. The commission responsible for state House districts was composed of 16 members, eight Democrats and eight Republicans, selected by the political parties' congressional district committees. To approve a state legislative redistricting map, the plan needed to win the support of 70 percent of the commissioners in order to be enacted. Prior to 2018, the last time the commissions adopted state legislative maps was in 2011, which followed the 2010 U.S. Census.

What did Amendment 1 change about legislative redistricting in Missouri?

Amendment 1 created a position called the non-partisan state demographer, which was tasked with drawing state legislative districts. The state demographer was to be selected from a pool of applicants, with the state auditor, state Senate majority leader, and state Senate minority leader involved in the selection process. The state demographer was required to file the proposed map with the existing commissions, which were allowed to amend the demographer's map via a 70 percent vote of the commissioners, provided that amendments met Amendment 1's redistricting criteria. If the commissions made no changes or could not approve changes to the demographer's map, then Amendment 1 required that the demographer's map beenacted. Amendment 1 required the state demographer and commissions to consider specific criteria, including what the initiative calls partisan fairness and competitiveness, contiguousness, compactness, and the boundaries of political subdivisions.

What changes did Amendment 1 make to campaign finance and lobbying policies?

Amendment 1 addressed campaign finance and lobbying policies related to state legislators and legislative employees. The ballot initiative prohibited the Missouri State Legislature from passing laws allowing for unlimited campaign contributions to candidates for the state legislature. Amendment 1 established campaign contribution limits for legislative candidates and their committees for a single election cycle to $2,500 per person to a state Senate candidate and $2,000 per person to a state House candidate. The measure prohibited making or accepting contributions using a fake name, using the name of another person, or through another person to conceal the actual donor's identity. Amendment 1 required legislators and legislative employees to wait two years after the conclusion of the legislative session in which the legislator or employee served to become a paid lobbyist. Amendment 1 also prohibited legislators and legislative employees from accepting gifts from paid lobbyists in excess of $5.

Who was behind the campaigns surrounding the ballot initiative?

Clean Missouri led the campaign in support of Amendment 1. Clean Missouri and an allied committee raised $5.63 million, including $1.01 million from the Action Now Initiative and $1.00 million from the National Education Association. The Missourians First and Advance Missouri PACs, which registered to oppose Amendment 1, raised $343,201, including $200,000 from Show-Me Institute co-founder Rex Sinquefield.

How was redistricting addressed across the U.S. in 2018?

In 2018, voters decided six ballot measures in five states designed to change how congressional districts, state legislative districts, or both types are drawn following the decennial U.S. Census. As of 2018, six was the highest number of redistricting-related ballot measures in a single year since 1982, when nine measures were on the ballot. Joshua Silver, CEO of the organization Represent.Us, described the measures as "the best reform map we’ve seen in decades." The ballot measures followed the U.S. Supreme Court's unanimous dismissal of the case Gill v. Whitford, which addressed the claim of partisan gerrymandering in Wisconsin. In June 2018, the Supreme Court ruled that plaintiffs failed to demonstrate standing. Therefore, the justices did not address the broader question of whether partisan gerrymandering claims can be brought to trial under the U.S. Constitution. The following measures were on the ballot in 2018:

Measure	Description	Status
Colorado Amendment Y	Create an independent commission for congressional districts	Approved a
Colorado Amendment Z	Create an independent commission for state legislative districts	Approved a
Michigan Proposal 2	Create an independent commission for congressional and state legislative districts	Approved a
Missouri Amendment 1	Create the position of state demographer to draw state legislative districts	Approved a
Ohio Issue 1	Change state legislative requirements to approve maps of congressional districts	Approved a
Utah Proposition 4	Create an independent commission for to recommend congressional and state legislative districts	Approved a

Initiative design

Click on the arrows (▼) below for summaries of the different provisions of the initiative governing lobbying, campaign finance, and redistricting.

Lobbying: provisions related to lobbying

Amendment 1 required legislators and legislative employees to wait two years after the conclusion of the legislative session in which the legislator or employee served to become a paid lobbyist.

The measure prohibited legislators and legislative employees from accepting gifts from paid lobbyists in excess of $5.

Campaign Finance: limitations on campaign contributions

Amendment 1 prohibited the Missouri State Legislature from passing laws allowing for unlimited campaign contributions to candidates for the state legislature.

The measure established campaign contribution limits for legislative candidates and candidate committees for a single election cycle in the following amounts:

• $2,500 from one person to elect an individual to the state Senate
• $2,000 from one person to elect an individual to the state House

The measure prohibited making or accepting contributions using a fake name, using the name of another person, or through another person to conceal the actual donor's identity. The measure created a presumption that a contribution is made or accepted with the intent to go around limitations if the contribution is from a committee that is primarily funded by a single person (more than 50 percent of the committee's annual funding comes from a single person).

Amendment 1 prohibited state legislators from holding fundraising activities on public state property.

Redistricting: process of state legislative redistricting

Amendment 1 changed how the state does state legislative redistricting. The position of non-partisan state demographer was created. The demographer was made responsible for drawing legislative redistricting maps and presenting them to the House and Senate apportionment commissions.

The state auditor was authorized to select at least three applicants from the pool of submissions for the position of state demographer. The auditor was empowered to determine what qualifications and expertise an applicant would need to be selected. However, Amendment 1 disqualified anyone who served in a partisan, elected position during the four-year period before the selection. It prohibited whoever is ultimately selected for the position from serving as a legislator for four years after. The auditor's list was to be sent to the majority and minority leaders of the Missouri State Senate. If the leaders were to agree on a single applicant, then that person would be selected. If the leaders were to disagree on a final candidate, each leader would remove one-third of the persons on the list and the state auditor would select the demographer by random lottery.

The state demographer was required to use the following criteria, in order of priority, for state legislative redistricting:

• making districts as equal in population as practicable;
• complying with requirements of U.S. Constitution and applicable federal laws, such as the Voting Rights Act of 1965;
• promoting partisan fairness, which would be defined as parties being able to translate their popular support into legislative representation with about equal efficiency;
• promoting competitiveness, which would be defined as parties' representation in the state legislature being similarly responsive to changes in the electorate's preferences;
• making districts composed of contiguous territory;
• making districts coincide with the boundaries of political subdivisions of the state; and
• making districts compact in form.

The criteria of partisan fairness and competitiveness were to be determined using formulas. The demographer was to calculate an index, called the electoral performance index, using the following factors:

• the electoral performance of the two parties receiving the most votes in the three preceding elections for governor, U.S. senator, and president.
• the sum of the election results for each of the two parties in the nine elections and divide by the total number of votes in the nine elections.

To determine partisan fairness, the demographer was to:

• calculate wasted votes, defined as votes cast for a losing candidate or a winning candidate below or above the 50 percent threshold to win the election, for each party.
• sum the wasted votes for each party across each state legislative district in the plan.
• made sure the difference between the two parties wasted votes, divided by the total votes cast for the two parties, is as close to zero as possible.

To determine competitiveness, the demographer was to:

• use the electoral performance index to run simulations in which a hypothetical statewide vote shifts by 1 percent, 2 percent, 3 percent, 4 percent, and 5 percent in favor of each party.
• in each simulation, make sure the differences between the two parties’ total wasted votes, divided by the total votes cast for the two parties, is as close to zero as practicable.

The House and Senate apportionment commissions were permitted allowed to change the demographer's legislative redistricting plan, provided that changes meet the redistricting criteria, and that the changes are approved by seven-tenths of the commissioners. If no changes are made or approved, the demographer's tentative plan was to become final.

Public Records: provisions governing public records

Amendment 1 required that legislative records, including legislative proceedings, be considered public records.

Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title was as follows:

“

Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to: change process and criteria for redrawing state legislative districts during reapportionment; change limits on campaign contributions that candidates for state legislature can accept from individuals or entities; establish a limit on gifts that state legislators, and their employees, can accept from paid lobbyists; prohibit state legislators, and their employees, from serving as paid lobbyists for a period of time; prohibit political fundraising by candidates for or members of the state legislature on State property; and require legislative records and proceedings to be open to the public? State governmental entities estimate annual operating costs may increase by $189,000. Local governmental entities report no fiscal impact.

”

Ballot summary

The ballot summary was as follows:

“

A “yes” vote will amend the Missouri Constitution to change the process and criteria for redrawing state legislative district boundaries during reapportionment (redistricting). Currently, bipartisan house and senate commissions redraw boundaries and those maps are adopted if 70% of the commissioners approve the maps. This amendment has a state demographer chosen from a panel selected by the state auditor redraw the boundaries and submit those maps to the house and senate commissions. This amendment would then allow changes to the demographer's maps only if 70% of the commissioners vote to make changes and do so within two months after receiving the maps from the state demographer. The amendment also reduces the limits on campaign contributions that candidates for state senator or state representative can accept from individuals or entities by $100 per election for a senate candidate and $500 for a house candidate. The amendment creates a $5 limit on gifts that state legislators and their employees can accept from paid lobbyists or the lobbyists’ clients, and prohibits state legislators and their employees from serving as paid lobbyists for a period of two years after the end of their last legislative session. The amendment prohibits political fundraising by candidates for or members of the state legislature on State property. The amendment further requires all legislative records and proceedings to be subject to the state open meetings and records law (Missouri Sunshine Law). A “no” vote will not amend the Missouri Constitution regarding redistricting, campaign contributions, lobbyist gifts, limits on lobbying after political service, fundraising locations, and legislative records and proceedings. If passed, this measure will have no impact on taxes.

”

Constitutional changes

See also: Article III, Missouri Constitution

The measure amended Sections 2, 3, 5, 7, and 19 of Article III and added Sections 20(c) and 20(d) to Article III of the Missouri Constitution. The following underlined text was added and struck-through text was deleted:

Note: Use your mouse to scroll over the below text to see the full text.

Section 2 After the effective date of this section, no person serving as a member of or employed by the General Assembly shall act or serve as a paid lobbyist, register as a paid lobbyist, or solicit prospective employers or clients to represent as a paid lobbyist during the time of such service until the expiration of two calendar years after the conclusion of the session of the general assembly in which the member or employee last sewed and where such service was after the effective date of this section. (a) No serving as a member of or employed by the General Assembly shall accept directly or indirectly a gift of any tangible or intangible item, service, or thing of value from any paid lobbyist or lobbyist principal in excess of five dollars per occurrence. This Article shall not prevent Candidates for the General Assembly, including candidates for reelection, or candidates for offices within the senate or house from accepting campaign contributions consistent with this Article and applicable campaign finance law. Nothing in this section shall prevent individuals from receiving gifts, family support or anything of value from those related to them within the fourth degree by blood or marriage. The dollar limitations of this section shall be increased or decreased each year by the percentage of increase or decrease from the end of the previous calendar year of the Consumer Price Index, or successor index as published by the U.S. Department of Labor, or its successor agency and rounded to the nearest dollar amount. (c) The General Assembly shall make no law authorizing unlimited campaign contributions to candidates for the General Assembly, nor any law that circumvents the contribution limits contained in this Constitution. In addition to other campaign contribution limitations or restrictions provided for by law. The amount of contributions made to or accepted by any candidate or candidate committee from any other than the candidate in any one election for the General Assembly shall not exceed the following: (1) To elect an individual to the office of state senator, two thousand five hundred dollars: and (2) To elect an individual to the office of state representative, two thousand dollars. The contribution limits and other restrictions of this section shall also apply to any person exploring a candidacy for a public office listed in this subsection. For purposes of this subsection, "base year amount" shall be the contribution limits prescribed in this section. Contribution limits set forth herein shall be adjusted on the first day of January in each even-numbered year hereafter by multiplying the base year amount by the cumulative consumer price index and rounded to the nearest dollar amount for all years after 2018. (d) No contribution to a candidate for legislative office shall be made or accepted, directly or indirectly, in a fictitious name, in the name of another person, or by or through another person in such a manner as to, or with the intent to, conceal the identity of the actual source of the contribution. There shall be a rebuttable presumption that a contribution to a candidate for public office is made or accepted with the intent to circumvent the limitations on contributions imposed in this section when a contribution is received from a committee or organization that is primarily funded by a single person, individual, or other committee that has already reached its contribution limit under any law relating to contribution limitations. A committee or organization shall be deemed to be primarily funded by a single person), individual, or other committee when the committee or organization receives more than fifty percent of its annual funding from that single person, individual, or other committee. (e) In no circumstance shall a candidate be found to have violated limits on acceptance of contributions if the Missouri Ethics Commission, its successor agency, or a court determines that a candidate has taken no action to indicate acceptance of or acquiescence to the making of an expenditure that is deemed a contribution pursuant to this section. (f) No candidate shall accept contributions from any federal political action committee unless the committee has filed the same financial disclosure reports that would be required of a Missouri political action committee. Section 3 (a) There is hereby established the post of "non-partisan state demographer." The non-partisan state demographer shall acquire appropriate information to develop non-procedures in preparation for drawing legislative redistricting maps on the basis of each federal census for presentation to the house apportionment commission and the senatorial apportionment commission. (b) The non-partisan state demographer shall be selected through the following process. First, state residents may apply for selection to the state auditor using an application developed by the state auditor to determine an applicant's qualifications and expertise relevant to the position. Second, the state auditor shall deliver to the majority leader and minority leader of the senate a list of at least three applicants with sufficient experience and qualifications, as determined by the state auditor, to perform the duties of the non-partisan state demographer. Third, if the majority leader and minority leader of the senate together agree that a specific applicant should be selected to be the non-partisan state demographer, that applicant shall be selected and the selection process shall cease. Fourth, if the majority leader and minority leader of the senate cannot together agree on an applicant, they may each remove a number of applicants on the state auditor's list equal to one-third of the total number of applicants on that list, rounded down to the next integer, and the state auditor shall then conduct a random lottery of the applicants remaining after removal to select the non-partisan state demographer. The state auditor shall prescribe a time frame and deadlines for this application and selection process that both encourages numerous qualified applicants and avoids delay in selection. The non-partisan state demographer shall serve a term of five years and may be reappointed. To be eligible for the non-partisan state demographer position an individual shall not have served in a partisan, elected position for four years prior to the appointment. The non-partisan state demographer shall be disqualified from holding office as a member of the general assembly for four years following the date of the presentation of his or her most recent legislative redistricting map to the house apportionment commission or the senatorial apportionment commission. (c) The house of representatives shall consist of one hundred sixty-three members elected at each general election and apportioned in the following manner as provided in this section. (1) Within ten days after the population of this state is reported to the President for each decennial census of the United States or, in the event that a reapportionment has been invalidated by a court of competent jurisdiction, within ten days after such a ruling has been made, the non-partisan state demographer shall begin the preparation of legislative districting plans and maps using the following methods, listed in order of priority: (a) Districts shall be established on the basis of total population. Legislative districts shall each have a total population as nearly equal as practicable to the ideal population for such districts, determined by dividing the number of districts to be established into the total population of the state reported in the federal decennial census. (b) Districts shall be established in a manner so as to comply with all requirements of the United States Constitution and applicable federal laws, including, but not limited to, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (as amended). Notwithstanding any other provision of this Article, districts shall not be drawn with the intent or result of denying or abridging the equal opportunity of racial or language minorities to participate in the political process or diminishing their ability to elect representatives of their choice, whether by themselves or by voting in concert with other persons. Districts shall be designed in a manner that achieves both partisan fairness and, secondarily, competitiveness. Partisan fairness means that parties shall be able to translate their popular support into legislative representation with approximately equal efficiency. Competitiveness means that parties' legislative representation shall be substantially and similarly responsive to shifts in the electorate's preferences. To this end, the non-partisan state demographer shall calculate the average electoral performance of the two parties receiving the most votes in the three preceding elections for governor, for United States Senate, and for President of the United States. This index shall be defined as the total votes received by each party in the three preceding elections for governor. for United States Senate, and for President of the United States, divided by the total votes cast for both parties in these elections. Using this index, the non-partisan state demographer shall calculate the total number of wasted votes for each party, summing across all of the districts in the plan. Wasted votes are votes cast for a losing candidate or for a winning candidate in excess of the fifty percent threshold needed for victory. In any plan of apportionment and map of the proposed districts submitted to the respective apportionment commission, the non-partisan state demographer shall ensure the difference between the two parties' total wasted votes, divided by the total votes cast for the two parties, is as close to zero as practicable. To promote competitiveness: the non-partisan state demographer shall use the electoral performance index to simulate elections in which the hypothetical statewide vote shifts by one percent, two percent, three percent, four percent, and five percent in favor of each party. The vote in each individual district shall be assumed to shift by the same amount as the statewide vote. The non-partisan state demographer shall ensure that in each of these simulated the difference between the two parties' total wasted votes divided by the total votes cast for the two parties, is as close to zero as practicable. (c) Subject to the requirements of subdivisions (1)(a) and (1)(2), Districts shall be composed of contiguous territory. Areas which meet only at the points of adjoining corners are not contiguous. (d) To the extent consistent with subdivisions (1)(a)—(1)(c) of this subsection, district boundaries shall coincide with the boundaries of political subdivisions of the state. The number of counties and cities divided among more than one district shall be as small as possible. When there is a choice between dividing local political subdivisions, the more populous subdivisions shall be divided before the less populous, but this preference shall not be drawn along a county line which passes through a city that lies in more than one county. (e) Preference shall be that districts are compact in form, but the standards established by subdivisions (1)(a)—(1)(d) of this subsection take precedence over compactness where a conflict arises between compactness and these standards. In general, compact districts are those which are square, rectangular, or hexagonal in shape to the extent permitted by natural or political boundaries. (2) Within sixty days after the population of this state is reported to the President for each decennial census of the United States and or, in the event that a reapportionment has been invalidated by a court of competent jurisdiction, within sixty days after notification by the governor that such a ruling has been made, the congressional district committee of each of the two parties casting the highest vote for governor at the last preceding election shall meet and the members of the committee shall nominate, by a majority vote of the members of the committee present, provided that a majority of the elected members is present, two members of their party, residents in that district, as nominees for reapportionment commissioners. Neither party shall select more than one nominee from any one state legislative district. The congressional committees shall each submit to the governor their list of elected nominees. Within thirty days the governor shall appoint a commission consisting of one name from each list to reapportion the state into one hundred and sixty-three representative districts and to establish the numbers and boundaries of said districts. If any of the congressional committees fails to submit a list within such time the governor shall appoint a member of his own choice from that district and from the political party of the committee failing to make the appointment. Members of the commission shall be disqualified from holding office as members of the general assembly for four years following the date of the filing by the commission of its final statement of apportionment. For the purposes of this article, the term congressional district committee or congressional district refers to the congressional district committee or the congressional district from which a congressman was last elected, or, in the event members of congress from this state have been elected at large, the term congressional district committee refers to those persons who last served as the congressional district committee for those districts from which congressmen were last elected, and the term congressional district refers to those districts from which congressmen were last elected. Any action pursuant to this section by the congressional district committee shall take place only at duly called meetings, shall be recorded in their official minutes and only members present in person shall be permitted to vote. (3) Within six months after the population of this state is reported to the President for each decennial census of the United States or, in the event that a reapportionment has been invalidated by a court of competent jurisdiction, within six months after such a ruling has been made, the non-partisan state demographer shall make public and file with the secretary of state and with the house apportionment commission a tentative plan of apportionment and map of the proposed districts, as well as all demographic and partisan data used in the creation of the plan and map. The commissioners so selected shall, on the fifteenth day, excluding Sundays and holidays, after all members have been selected, within ten days of receiving the tentative plan of apportionment and map of the proposed districts, meet in the capitol building and proceed to organize by electing from their number a chairman, vice chairman and secretary. The commission shall adopt an agenda establishing at least three hearing dates on which hearings open to the public shall be held to hear objections or testimony from interested persons. A copy of the agenda shall be filed with the clerk of the house of representatives within twenty-four hours after its adoption. Executive meetings may be scheduled and held as often as the commission deems advisable. The commission may make changes to the tentative plan of apportionment and map of the proposed districts received from the non-partisan state demographer provided that such changes are consistent with this section and approved by a vote of at least seven-tenths of the commissioners. If no changes made or approved as provided for in this subsection, the tentative plan of apportionment and map of proposed districts shall become final. Not later than two months of receiving the tentative plan of apportionment and map of the proposed districts. The commission shall file with the secretary of state a final statement of the numbers and the boundaries of the districts together with a map of the districts. The commission shall reapportion the representatives by dividing the population of the state by the number one hundred sixty-three and shall establish each district so that the population of that district shall, as nearly as possible, equal that figure. Each district shall be composed of contiguous territory as compact as may be. Not later than five months after the appointment of the commission, the commission shall file with the secretary of state a tentative plan of apportionment and map of the proposed districts and during the ensuing fifteen days shall hold such public hearings as may be necessary to hear objections or testimony of interested persons. Not later than six months after the appointment of the commission, the commission shall file with the secretary of state a final statement of the numbers and the boundaries of the districts together with a map of the districts, and no statement shall be valid unless approved by at least seven-tenths of the members. After the statement is filed members of the house of representatives shall be elected according to such districts until a reapportionment is made as herein provided, except that if the statement is not filed within six months of the time fixed for the appointment of the commission, it shall stand discharged and the house of representatives shall be apportioned by a commission of six members appointed from among the judges of the appellate courts of the state of Missouri by the state supreme court, a majority of whom shall sign and file its apportionment plan and map with the secretary of state within ninety days of the date of the discharge of the apportionment commission. Thereafter members of the house of representatives shall be elected according to such districts until a reapportionment is made as herein provided. Each member of the commission shall receive as compensation fifteen dollars a day for each day the commission is in session but not more than one thousand dollars, and, in addition, shall be reimbursed for his actual and necessary expenses incurred while serving as a member of the commission. No reapportionment shall be subject to the referendum. Section 5 (a) The Senate shall consist of thirty-four members elected by the qualified voters of the respective senatorial districts for a term of four years. For the election of senators, the state shall be divided into convenient districts of contiguous territory, as compact and nearly equal in population as may be. Senatorial districts shall be apportioned as provided for in Article III, Section 7. Section 7 (1) Within ten days after the population of this state is reported to the President for each decennial census of the United States or, in the made, the non-partisan state demographer authorized in Article Ill Section shall begin the preparation of senatorial districting plans and maps using the same methods and criteria as those by Article Ill. Section 3 for the establishment of districts for the House of Representatives. (2) Within sixty days after the population of this state is reported to the President for each decennial census of the United States, and or within sixty days after notification by the governor that a reapportionment has been invalidated by a court of competent jurisdiction, the state committee of each of the two political parties casting the highest vote for governor at the last preceding election shall, at a committee meeting duly called, select by a vote of the individual committee members, and thereafter submit to the governor a list of ten persons, and within thirty days thereafter the governor shall appoint a commission of ten members, five from each list, to reapportion the thirty-four senatorial districts and to establish the numbers and boundaries of said districts. If either of the party committees fails to submit a list within such time the governor shall appoint five members of his own choice from the party of the committee so failing to act. Members of the commission shall be disqualified from holding office as members of the general assembly for four years following the date of the filing by the commission of its final statement of apportionment. (3) Within six months after the population of this state is reported to the President for each decennial census of the United States or in the event that a reapportionment has been invalidated by a court of competent within six months after such a ruling has been made, the non-partisan state demographer shall file with the secretary of state and with the senatorial apportionment commission a tentative plan of apportionment and map of the districts. The commissioners so selected shall on the fifteenth day, excluding Sundays and holidays, after all members have been selected, meet in the capitol building and proceed to organize by electing from their number a chairman, vice chairman and secretary. and The commission shall adopt an agenda establishing at least three hearing dates on which hearings open to the public shall be held to hear objections or testimony from interested persons. A copy of the agenda shall be filed with the secretary of the senate within twenty-four hours after its adoption. Executive meetings may be scheduled and held as often as the commission deems advisable. The commission may make changes to the tentative plan of apportionment and map of the proposed districts received from the non-partisan state demographer provided that such changes consistent with this Section and the methods and criteria required by Section 3 of this Article for the establishment of districts for the House of Representatives and approved by a vote of at least seven-tenths of the commissioners. If no changes are made or approved as provided for in this subsection, the tentative plan of apportionment and map of proposed districts shall become final. Not later than two months after receiving the tentative plan of apportionment and map of the proposed districts. The commission shall file with the secretary of state a final statement of the numbers and the boundaries of the districts together with a map of the districts. The commission shall reapportion the senatorial districts by dividing the population of the state by the number thirty-four and shall establish each district so that the population of that district shall, as nearly as possible, equal that figure; no county lines shall be crossed except when necessary to add sufficient population to a multi-district county or city to complete only one district which lies partly within such multi-district county or city so as to be as nearly equal as practicable in population. Any county with a population in excess of the quotient obtained by dividing the population of the state by the number thirty-four is hereby declared to be a multi-district county. Not later than five months after the appointment of the commission, the commission shall file with the secretary of state a tentative plan of apportionment and map of the proposed districts and during the ensuing fifteen days shall hold such public hearings as may be necessary to hear objections or testimony of interested persons. Not later than six months after the appointment of the commission, the commission shall file with the secretary of state a final statement of the numbers and the boundaries of the districts together with a map of the districts, and no statement shall be valid unless approved by at least seven members. After the statement is filed senators shall be elected according to such districts until a reapportionment is made as herein provided, except that if the statement is not filed within six months of the time fixed for the appointment of the commission, it shall stand discharged and the senate shall be apportioned by a commission of six members appointed from among the judges of the appellate courts of the state of Missouri by the state supreme court, a majority of whom shall sign and file its apportionment plan and map with the secretary of state within ninety days of the date of the discharge of the apportionment commission. Thereafter senators shall be elected according to such districts until a reapportionment is made as herein provided. Section 19 (a) Senators and representatives shall, in all cases except treason, felony, offenses under this Article, or breach of the peace, be privileged from arrest during the session of the general assembly, and for the fifteen days next before the commencement and after the termination of each session; and they shall not be questioned for any speech or debate in either house in any other place. (b) Legislative records shall be public records and subject to generally applicable state laws governing public access to public records, including the "Sunshine Law." Legislative records include, but are not limited to all records, in whatever form or format, of the official acts of the general assembly, of the official acts of legislative committees, of the official acts of members of the general assembly, of individual legislators, their employees and staff, of the conduct of legislative business and all records that are created, stored or distributed through legislative branch facilities, equipment or mechanisms, including electronic. Each member of the general assembly is the custodian of legislative records under the custody and control of the member, their employees and staff. The chief clerk of the house or the secretary of the senate ate the custodians for all other legislative records relating to the house and the senate, respectively. (c) Legislative proceedings, including committee shall be public meetings subject to generally applicable law governing public access to public meetings, including the "Sunshine Law." Open public meetings of legislative proceedings shall be subject to recording by citizens, so long as the proceedings are not materially disrupted. Section 20(c). No political fundraising activities or political fundraising event by any member of or candidate for the general assembly, including but not limited to the solicitation or delivery of contributions, supporting or opposing any candidate, initiative petition, referendum petition, ballot measure, political party or political committee, shall occur in or on any premises, property or building owned, leased or controlled by the State of Missouri or any agency or division thereof. Any purposeful violation of this section shall be punishable by imprisonment for up to one year or a fine of up to one thousand dollars or both, plus an amount equal to three times the illegal contributions. The Missouri Ethics Commission or its successor agency is authorized to enforce this section as provided by law. Section 20(d). If any provision of sections 2, 3, 7, 19, or (20)(c) or the application thereof to anyone or to any circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of those provisions and the application of such provisions to other or other circumstances shall not be affected thereby.

Readability score

See also: Ballot measure readability scores, 2018

Using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) formulas, Ballotpedia scored the readability of the ballot title and summary for this measure. Readability scores are designed to indicate the reading difficulty of text. The Flesch-Kincaid formulas account for the number of words, syllables, and sentences in a text; they do not account for the difficulty of the ideas in the text. The secretary of state wrote the ballot language for this measure. The FKGL for the ballot title is grade level 12, and the FRE is 29. The word count for the ballot title is 110, and the estimated reading time is 29 seconds. The FKGL for the ballot summary is grade level 16, and the FRE is 27. The word count for the ballot summary is 265, and the estimated reading time is 70 seconds. In 2018, for the 167 statewide measures on the ballot, the average ballot title or question was written at a level appropriate for those with between 19 and 20 years of U.S. formal education (graduate school-level of education), according to the FKGL formula. Read Ballotpedia's entire 2018 ballot language readability report here.

Support

Clean Missouri, also known as Yes on 1, led the campaign in support of Amendment 1.

Supporters

Officials

• U.S. Sen. Claire McCaskill (D)
• Sen. Rob Schaaf (R-34)
• Rep. Martha Stevens (D-46)
• Rep. Nick Marshall (R-13)

Former officials

• U.S. Sen. John Danforth (R-Missouri)
• Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R-California)
• Sen. Jim Lembke (R-1)

Organizations

• Demos
• Jews United for Justice – St. Louis
• Missouri Council for the Environment
• Missouri Faith Voices
• Missouri Health Care for All
• Missouri Rural Crisis Center
• Missouri Jobs with Justice Voter Action
• NAACP – Missouri State Conference
• NARAL Pro-Choice – Missouri
• National Council of Jewish Women – St. Louis
• Our Revolution
• Planned Parenthood Advocates in Missouri
• Sierra Club Missouri Chamber
• The League of Women Voters

Unions

• Missouri AFL-CIO
• Missouri National Education Association
• UFCW Local 655

Individuals

• Paul S. DeGregorio, former chairman of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (2003–2007)
• Trevor Potter, former commission of the Federal Election Commission (1991-1995)

Arguments

• Kathleen Boswell, president of the League of Women Voters of Missouri, said, "Year after year, politicians are re-elected with big money, in districts drawn by politicians and party insiders. Amendment 1 limits the influence of special interests in the legislature and ensures no party is given an unfair advantage when redistricting occurs after the next census."

Opposition

Missourians First, also known as No on 1, led the campaign against Amendment 1.

Opponents

Officials

• Attorney General Josh Hawley (R)
• Sen. Dan Hegeman (R-12)
• Rep. Sara Walsh (R-50)

Former officials

• Former U.S. Sen. Jim Talent (R)

Parties

• Missouri Republican Party

Organizations

• Missouri Chamber of Commerce and Industry

Arguments

• Former U.S. Sen. Jim Talent (R) said, "I call it the gerrymandering initiative because it would work a massive change in Missouri’s constitution in order to require partisan gerrymandering of districts in order to achieve certain partisan goals. That’s the worst thing about it."
• Dan Mehan, CEO of the Missouri Chamber of Commerce and Industry, said, "If we move from the nonpartisan redistricting standards of compact and contiguous districts to Amendment 1’s 50-50 mandate, gerrymandering would be enshrined in our constitution, creating long, spaghetti-like districts drawn from the more urban areas into the suburbs and, in some cases, into the surrounding rural areas. The effect would geographically marginalize certain areas of our state."

Campaign finance

See also: Campaign finance requirements for Missouri ballot measures

Total campaign contributions:
Support:	$5,634,916.10
Opposition:	$343,201.09

There were two campaign committees, Clean Missouri and Fight For Reform, registered in support of Amendment. Together, the committees raised $5.63 million and spent $5.59 million. The top contributor to the support committees was the Action Now Initiative, which contributed $1.01 million.

The campaign committees Advance Missouri and Missourians First were registered in opposition to Amendment 1. Together, the committees raised $343,201 and spent $277,788. The top contributor to the opposition committees was Rex Sinquefield, who contributed $200,000.

Support

The following table includes contribution and expenditure totals for the committees supporting the initiative.

Committees in support of Amendment 1 Supporting committees Cash contributions In-kind services Cash expenditures Clean Missouri $4,767,296.61 $802,425.49 $4,724,316.34 Fight for Reform - Missouri $65,194.00 $0.00 $61,910.50 Total $4,832,490.61 $802,425.49 $4,786,226.84

Totals in support Total raised: $5,634,916.10 Total spent: $5,588,652.33

Donors

The following were the top five donors who contributed to the support committees:

Donor	Cash	In-kind	Total
Action Now Initiative	$900,000.00	$111,000.00	$1,011,000.00
National Education Association	$1,000,000.00	$0.00	$1,000,000.00
Missouri National Education Association	$500,000.00	$654.00	$500,654.00
MOVE Ballot Fund	$250,000.00	$130,802.48	$380,802.48
Django Bonderman	$250,000.00	$0.00	$250,000.00

Opposition

The following table includes contribution and expenditure totals for the committees opposing the initiative.

Committees in opposition to Amendment 1 Opposing committees Cash contributions In-kind services Cash expenditures Missourians First $222,000.00 $0.00 $161,580.15 Advance Missouri $50,000.00 $71,201.09 $45,006.64 Total $272,000.00 $71,201.09 $206,586.79

Totals in opposition Total raised: $343,201.09 Total spent: $277,787.88

Donors

The following were the top donors who contributed to the opposition committees:

Donor	Cash	In-kind	Total
Rex Sinquefield	$200,000.00	$0.00	$200,000.00
Fair Lines America, Inc.	$50,000.00	$0.00	$50,000.00
Missouri Alliance for Freedom	$47,000.00	$0.00	$47,000.00
Missouri Senate Leadership PAC	$20,000.00	$0.00	$20,000.00
Liberty Alliance	$0.00	$12,201.09	$12,201.09

Media editorials

Support

• Kansas City Star: "Corruption and ethics issues have plagued Missouri government for too long. And lawmakers have been unwilling to address obvious problems. It’s up to voters to approve Amendment 1 for needed ethics reforms in Jefferson City."
• St. Louis Post-Dispatch: "There is ample voting evidence that Missourians want these reforms. The tightening of campaign contribution limits in particular has been approved via statewide referendum before, only to have the Legislature reverse it. Because Amendment 1 changes the state constitution, and not just statutes, lawmakers wouldn’t be able to reverse it if it passes."

Opposition

Ballotpedia did not find any media editorial boards opposing Amendment 1. If you are aware of an editorial, please email it to [email protected].

Background

Redistricting in Missouri

See also: Redistricting in Missouri

In Missouri, two politician commissions are responsible for state legislative redistricting, one for the Missouri State Senate and another for the Missouri House of Representatives. Membership on these commissions is determined as follows:

• Senate redistricting commission: The state committee of each major political party nominates 10 members to the commission, for a total of 20 nominees. From this pool, the governor selects five members per party, for a total of 10 commissioners.

• House redistricting commission: The congressional district committee of each major political party nominates two members per congressional district, for a total of 32 nominees. From this pool, the governor appoints one member per party per district, for a total of 16 commissioners.

Active lobbyists are prohibited from serving on these commissions. In each commission, a redistricting plan must win the support of 70 percent of the commissioners in order to be enacted. In the event that a commission is unable to agree on a redistricting plan, the Missouri Supreme Court appoints a special panel of six appellate court judges to draw the district lines.

Procedures for state legislative redistricting in U.S.

In 33 of the 50 states, state legislatures play the dominant role in state legislative redistricting. Commissions draw state legislative district lines in 14 states. In three states, hybrid systems are used, in which state legislature share redistricting authority with commissions. See the map and table below for further details.

Campaign finance ballot measures in Missouri

See also: Campaign finance on the ballot

Voters in Missouri had approved two ballot measures related to campaign finance between 1990 and 2018.

Proposition A (1994)

See also: Missouri Campaign Contribution Limits, Proposition A (1994)

In 1994, voters approved Proposition A, which limited campaign contributions from one person or committee to another person or committee to $100 or $200 per election cycle, depending on the population of the legislative district. Proposition A also required individuals who contributed more than $25 to disclose their employer or occupation. The Missouri State Legislature voted to repeal Proposition A in 2008. Gov. Matt Blunt (R) signed the repeal legislation.

Amendment 2 (2016)

See also: Missouri State and Judicial Campaign Contribution Limits, Constitutional Amendment 2 (2016)

Voters approved a campaign finance ballot measure, titled Amendment 2, in 2016. Amendment 2 limited campaign contributions to candidates in state and judicial elections. The measure was designed to do the following:

• prohibit candidates for state and judicial offices from receiving more than $2,600 from any one individual, other than the candidate himself or herself, per election.
• cap contributions from any one individual or committee to a political party at $25,000 per election.
• prohibit corporations and labor unions from making direct contributions, although they could still form continuing committees.
• prohibit one candidate's committee from contributing to another candidate's committee.
• prohibit candidates from accepting funds from out-of-state committees.
• ban committees and parties from accepting contributions from non-citizens, foreign governments, and foreign corporations not permitted to do business in the state.
• permit contributions under $25 to remain anonymous.
• mandate that limits on campaign contributions be adjusted every four years relative to inflation.

On May 5, 2017, Judge Ortrie Smith of the U.S. District Court of Western Missouri ruled that sections of Amendment 1, but not the entire amendment, were unconstitutional. The sections of the amendment ruled unconstitutional were:

• cap on the contributions amount from any one individual to candidates for state or judicial offices at $2,600.
• ban corporations and unions from making contributions to campaign, candidate, and party committees.
• ban political action committees from receiving contributions from entities other than those formed under chapters 347 to 360 of Missouri Revised Statutes.
• ban political action committees from receiving contributions from other political action committees.
• ban committees from accepting contributions from foreign corporations.

Election policy on the ballot in 2018

Electoral system
Electoral systems by state
Ranked-choice voting (RCV)
Academic studies on RCV
Election dates
Election agencies
Election terms
Ballotpedia's Election Administration Legislation Tracker

Voters considered ballot measures addressing election policy in 15 states in 2018.

Redistricting:

See also: Redistricting measures on the ballot

• Ohio Issue 1, Congressional Redistricting Procedures Amendment (May 2018) a - The Ohio State Legislature, through a bipartisan vote, referred Issue 1 to the ballot for the election on May 8, 2018. The measure was written to change the vote requirements to pass congressional redistricting maps and the standards used in congressional redistricting in Ohio. Voters approved Issue 1.

• Colorado Amendment Y, Independent Commission for Congressional Redistricting Amendment (2018) a - The amendment was written to create a 12-member commission responsible for approving district maps for Colorado's congressional districts. Democrats and Republicans in the Colorado State Legislature voted to refer the measure. It was approved.

• Colorado Amendment Z, Independent Commission for State Legislative Redistricting Amendment (2018) a - The amendment was written to create a 12-member commission responsible for approving district maps for Colorado's state House and state Senate. Democrats and Republicans in the legislature voted to refer the amendment. It was approved.

• Michigan Proposal 2, Independent Redistricting Commission Initiative (2018) a - The organization Voters Not Politicians collected more than the required 315,654 signatures for the initiative. The initiative was designed to transfer the power to draw the state's congressional and legislative districts from the Michigan State Legislature to an independent redistricting commission. It was approved.

• Missouri Amendment 1, Lobbying, Campaign Finance, and Redistricting Initiative (2018) a - The PAC Clean Missouri collected signatures to get the initiated amendment on the ballot. The measure made changes to the state's lobbying laws, campaign finance limits for state legislative candidates, and legislative redistricting process. The position of nonpartisan state demographer was created. Amendment 1 made the demographer responsible for drawing legislative redistricting maps and presenting them to the House and Senate apportionment commissions.

• Utah Proposition 4, Independent Advisory Commission on Redistricting Initiative (2018) a - The measure created a seven-member independent redistricting commission to draft maps for congressional and state legislative districts. The committee Utahns for Responsive Government collected more than the required 113,143 signatures to get the initiative certified for the ballot.

Voting requirements and ballot access:

• Arkansas Issue 2, Voter ID Amendment (2018) a - Issue 2 was designed to require individuals to present a valid photo ID to cast non-provisional ballots in person or absentee. The Arkansas State Legislature referred the measure to the ballot, with Republicans and four of 30 Democrats voting to put Issue 2 on the ballot. It was approved.

• Florida Amendment 4, Voting Rights Restoration for Felons Initiative (2018) a - The committee Floridians for a Fair Democracy collected more than the required 766,200 signatures to get Amendment 4 placed on the ballot. The measure was designed to automatically restore the right to vote for people with prior felony convictions, except those convicted of murder or a felony sexual offense, upon completion of their sentences, including prison, parole, and probation. It was approved.

• Louisiana Amendment 1, Felons Disqualified to Run for Office for Five Years Amendment (2018) a - This measure was put on the ballot by the state legislature. Louisiana voters approved Amendment 9 in 1998 to prevent convicted felons from seeking or holding public office for 15 years following the completion of their sentences. Amendment 9 was struck down by the Louisiana Supreme Court in 2016. It was approved.

• Maryland Question 2, Election-Day Voter Registration Amendment (2018) a - Legislative Democrats voted to place the amendment the ballot. The measure was designed to authorize a process for registering qualified individuals to vote at a precinct polling place on election day. It was approved.

• Michigan Proposal 3, Voting Policies in State Constitution Initiative (2018) a - Promote the Vote collected more than 315,654 valid signatures to get the initiative placed on the ballot. Proposal 3 was designed to add several voting policies to the Michigan Constitution, including straight-ticket voting, automatic voter registration, no-excuse absentee voting, and same-day voter registration. It was approved.

• Montana LR-129, Ballot Collection Measure (2018) a - The Montana State Legislature voted to place the measure on the ballot, through the support of 80 of 91 Republicans and one of 59 Democrats. The measure was written to ban persons from collecting the election ballots of other people, with exceptions for certain individuals. It was approved.

• Nevada Question 5, Automatic Voter Registration via DMV Initiative (2018) a - The measure was designed to provide for the automatic voter registration of eligible citizens when receiving certain services from the Nevada Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). The Nevada Election Administration Committee, a project of iVote, collected more than the required 55,234 signatures to get Question 5 placed on the ballot. It was approved.

• North Carolina Voter ID Amendment (2018) a - This amendment was referred to the ballot by the state legislature along party lines with Republicans voting in favor of it and Democrats voting against it. It created a constitutional requirement that voters present a photo ID to vote in person. It was approved.

• North Dakota Measure 2, Citizen Requirement for Voting Amendment Initiative (2018) a - North Dakotans for Citizen Voting collected more than the required 26,904 valid signatures to qualify this initiative for the ballot. The measure was designed to clarify that only a U.S. citizen can vote in federal, state, and local elections in North Dakota. It was approved.

Arkansas Issue 3, a legislative term limits initiative, was certified for the ballot but was blocked by an Arkansas Supreme Court ruling. The measure would have imposed term limits of six years for members of the Arkansas House of Representatives and eight years for members of the Arkansas Senate. The ruling came too late to remove the measure from the ballot, but the supreme court ordered election officials to not count or certify votes for Issue 3.

Campaign finance, political spending, and ethics:

• Colorado Amendment 75, Campaign Contribution Limits Initiative (2018) d - Proponents collected more than the required 136,328 valid signatures and met the state's distribution requirement to qualify this initiative for the ballot. The measure would have established that if any candidate for state office directs (by loan or contribution) more than one million dollars in support of his or her own campaign, then every candidate for the same office in the same primary or general election may accept five times the aggregate amount of campaign contributions normally allowed. It was defeated.

• Massachusetts Question 2, Advisory Commission for Amendments to the U.S. Constitution Regarding Corporate Personhood and Political Spending Initiative (2018) a - This citizen initiative was designed to establish a 15-member citizens' commission to advocate for certain amendments to the United States Constitution regarding political spending and corporate personhood. It was approved.

• Missouri Amendment 1, Lobbying, Campaign Finance, and Redistricting Initiative (2018) a - Besides the redistricting provisions of Amendment 1 described above, Missouri Amendment one also made changes to the state's lobbying laws and campaign finance limits for state legislative candidates.

• North Dakota Measure 1, Ethics Commission, Foreign Political Contribution Ban, and Conflicts of Interest Initiative (2018) a - North Dakotans for Public Integrity collected more than the required 26,904 valid signatures to qualify this initiative for the ballot. Measure 1 established an ethics commission, ban foreign political contributions, and enact provisions related to lobbying and conflicts of interest. It was approved.

• South Dakota Constitutional Amendment W, State Campaign Finance and Lobbying Laws, Government Accountability Board, and Initiative Process Amendment (2018) d - The committee Represent South Dakota collected more than the required 27,741 signatures to get the initiative certified for the ballot. The measure was designed to revise campaign finance and lobbying laws, create a government accountability board, and enact new laws governing the initiative and referendum process. It was defeated.

• South Dakota Initiated Measure 24, Ban Out-of-State Contributions to Ballot Question Committees Initiative (2018) a - This citizen initiative banned out-of-state contributions to committees supporting or opposing ballot measures within South Dakota. Rep. Mark Mickelson (R-13), speaker of the South Dakota House of Representatives, sponsored the initiative. It was approved.

Path to the ballot

See also: Laws governing the initiative process in Missouri

Process in Missouri

In Missouri, the number of signatures required to qualify an initiated constitutional amendment for the ballot is equal to 8 percent of the votes cast for governor in the previous gubernatorial election in six of the eight state congressional districts. Signatures must be filed with the secretary of state six months prior to the election.

The requirements to get an initiated constitutional amendment certified for the 2018 ballot:

• Signatures: The smallest possible requirement was 160,199 valid signatures. The actual requirement depends on the congressional districts in which signatures were collected.
• Deadline: The deadline to submit signatures was May 6, 2018.

Once the signatures have been filed with the secretary of state, the secretary copies the petition sheets and transmits them to county election authorities for verification. The secretary of state may choose whether the signatures are to be verified by a 5 percent random sample or full verification. If the random sampling projects between 90 percent and 110 percent of required signatures, a full check of all signatures is required. If more than 110 percent, the initiative is certified, and, if less than 90 percent, the initiative fails.

Initiative 2018-048

Sean Soendker Nicholson filed 16 versions of the measure. Nicholson was a spokesperson for the campaign Clean Missouri. The campaign decided to collect signatures for one of the filed proposals, Initiative 2018-048. The initiative was approved for circulation on January 5, 2017.

On May 3, 2018, Clean Missouri filed 393,914 signatures for the initiative. On August 2, 2018, Ashcroft announced that the ballot initiative qualified to appear on the ballot. His office reported that 231,460 were valid.

Cost of signature collection:
Sponsors of the measure hired FieldWorks, LLC to collect signatures for the petition to qualify this measure for the ballot. A total of $1,082,515.83 was spent to collect the 160,199 valid signatures required to put this measure before voters, resulting in a total cost per required signature (CPRS) of $6.76.

Ritter v. Ashcroft

  

Lawsuit overview
Issue: Does Amendment 1 violate the state's single-subject rule?
Court: Cole County Circuit Court and Missouri Court of Appeals
Ruling: Cole County Circuit Court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, removing Amendment 1 from the ballot for violating the single-subject rule. Judge Daniel Green said Amendment 1 addressed two issues, not one—ethics and the state legislature's organization. The Missouri Court of Appeals overturned Judge Green's decision, allowing Amendment 1 to remain on the ballot.
Plaintiff(s): Paul Ritter	Defendant(s): Secretary of State John Ashcroft
Plaintiff argument: Amendment 1 violates the state's single-subject rule.	Defendant argument: Amendment 1 addresses policies related to a single issue—ethics.

  Source: The Kansas City Star

Cole County Circuit Court

In August 2018, Paul Ritter filed litigation against Secretary of State John Ashcroft in Cole County Circuit Court, asking his office to remove Amendment 1 from the ballot. Ritter's complaint stated that Amendment 1 violated the state's single-subject rule. Section 50 of Article III of the Missouri Constitution states that initiated laws "shall contain not more than one subject." The lawsuit said, "One purpose of the prohibition on multiple subjects in a single ballot proposal is to prevent ‘logrolling,’ a practice familiar to legislative bodies whereby unrelated subjects that individually might not muster enough support to pass are combined to generate the necessary support." Rev. Cassandra Gould, executive director of Missouri Faith Voices, called the lawsuit a "desperate attempt from a few political insiders to protect a corrupt system where legislators take millions in lobbyist gifts while ignoring voters back home."

On September 14, 2018, Judge Daniel Green ordered Secretary of State Ashcroft to remove Amendment 1 from the ballot. Judge Green said, "Instead, as explained below, the twenty or so substantive changes outlined in the petition relate to at least two different and extremely broad purposes: (One), the organization of the General Assembly, and (two), ethics or campaign finance regulation aimed at avoiding misconduct by public officials in multiple branches and levels of government."

Missouri GOP spokesperson Chris Nuelle responded to the ruling, saying, "From the beginning, Clean Missouri has used the guise of ethics reform and sleek marketing to distract Missourians from their real aim: radically redistricting Missouri to solely benefit liberal Democrats."

Clean Missouri appealed the ruling to the Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District. Hatfield stated, "We have always thought that this legal matter would be decided at the Appeals Court level. This is a speed bump, but the law is on our side, the people are on our side, and Amendment 1 will be passed in November to clean up Missouri politics." Clean Missouri sent an e-mail to supporters that said "[Judge Green] sided with lobbyists and special interests who are desperate to keep Amendment 1 off the November ballot."

Court of Appeals

On September 18, 2018, the Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District put a hold on Circuit Court Judge Green's decision, meaning Amendment 1 was to remain on the ballot pending the appeals court's ruling. The appeals court heard arguments on September 20. The Court of Appeals reversed the lower court's ruling on September 21, 2018, keeping Amendment 1 on the ballot. The ruling started, "Construing the initiative petition ‘liberally and non-restrictively,’ we conclude that the petition’s multiple provisions all relate to a single central purpose: regulating the legislature to limit the influence of partisan or other special interests."

Plaintiffs appealed the case to the Missouri Supreme Court, which, on September 24, 2018, declined to take on the case.

How to cast a vote

See also: Voting in Missouri

Poll times

In Missouri, all polling places are open from 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Central Time. An individual who is in line at the time polls close must be allowed to vote.

Registration requirements

Check your voter registration status here.

To vote in Missouri, one must be 18 years old, a United States citizen, and Missouri resident. An applicant may print an application, pick one up from a county clerk's office, or request that an application be mailed. The completed application must be returned by mail. All returned applications must be postmarked at least 27 days prior to Election Day in order to be processed. An applicant may also register to vote online.

Automatic registration

Missouri does not practice automatic voter registration.

Online registration

See also: Online voter registration

Missouri has implemented an online voter registration system. Residents can register to vote by visiting this website.

Same-day registration

Missouri does not allow same-day voter registration.

Residency requirements

To register to vote in Missouri, you must be a resident of the state. State law does not specify a length of time for which you must have been a resident to be eligible. Voters may file change-of-address forms after the registration deadline, up to and including Election Day, provided that they can present photo identification upon doing so.

Verification of citizenship

See also: Laws permitting noncitizens to vote in the United States

Missouri requires those registering to vote by mail for the first time to provide a form of identification that shows proof of United States citizenship.

Verifying your registration

The Missouri Secretary of State's office allows residents to check their voter registration status online.

Voter ID requirements

Missouri requires voters to present photo identification while voting.

The following were accepted forms of identification as of April 2023. Click here for the Missouri Secretary of State's page on accepted ID to ensure you have the most current information.

Voters can present the following forms of information:

• A nonexpired Missouri driver or non-driver license;
• A nonexpired military ID, including a veteran’s ID card;
• A nonexpired United States passport; or
• Another photo ID issued by the United States or the state of Missouri which is either not expired or expired after the date of the most recent general election.

If a voter does not have an ID, he or she can obtain one for free by filling out this form.

See also

Suggest a link

• Missouri 2018 ballot measures
• 2018 ballot measures
• Laws governing the initiative process in Missouri

External links

Information

• Initiative 2018-048

Support

• Clean Missouri
• Clean Missouri Facebook
• Clean Missouri Twitter

Opposition

• Missourians First
• Missourians First Facebook
• Missourians First Twitter