Missouri voters will likely soon be asked by the lawmakers they elected to strip themselves of some power to put initiative petitions on the ballot — to take action when politicians won’t. 

Voters could be asked to place further restrictions on the already difficult, and costly, job of passing an initiative petition. 

One proposal would raise the number of signatures to put something on the ballot. On top of that, it raises the margin a petition would need to pass. That’s a House proposal. A similar proposal in the Senate would raise the threshold for a measure to pass, but not the signatures needed to put a question to voters. 

Conservative lawmakers see the measures as the most surefire way to block Missouri voters from enshrining the right to an abortion in the state’s constitution in November. 

Both plans could drive up the cost of an initiative petition campaign. That could smother grassroots efforts — but preserve the power of groups with millions of dollars to remake Missouri’s statutes or constitution.

“The reality is that when you restrict the process and you make it more difficult for citizens to be able to qualify on the ballot,” said Sarah Walker, the director of policy and legal advocacy at the Ballot Initiative Strategy Center, “the implication is that it’s actually going to cost more money and make it less citizen-focused.” 

Lawmakers need to hit a sweet spot: something that makes it significantly harder for anyone outside the General Assembly to amend the state constitution or change laws, but in a way that doesn’t so obviously attack populist efforts that it fails.

Missouri is following the lead of other Republican-dominated states by asking voters to ratchet up the threshold. Voters in other states have rejected those measures. 

Under the Republicans’ plans, as few as 23% of voters could kill a ballot question, an analysis by the Missouri Independent found. 

Some elected officials have said outright that the issue is closely tied to abortion. Others have pointed to out-of-state interest groups and their ability to spend dollars to persuade Missourians on a proposal. 

“Legislatures across the country are typically trying to wrest control over the process,” said Craig Burnett, a political science professor at Hofstra University. “Ultimately what they’re doing is nipping at it because they don’t like it. It’s a majoritarian process, because it produces results that they don’t think they’d produce in the legislature, and they’re probably right.” 

The proposals have been loaded up with what even supporters call “ballot candy” — popular ideas (barring foreign governments from petition campaigns and limiting voting to Missouri residents) already in place. 

Missourians frequently turn to ballot initiatives to make policy when lawmakers don’t. They used a ballot measure to legalize marjuana, expand Medicaid and impose ethics rules on lawmakers. 

But if voters give one of the measures their OK, they’d take away some of their own ability to make popular policy. 

The cost of voter-led policy

Passing initiative petitions has evolved into an industry, supported by signature-gathering firms, advertising agencies and major corporate spending. 

The cost of collecting signatures has gone up nationwide. From 2016 to 2022, the average cost of a petition drive nearly tripled. 

In 2022, it cost organizers in Missouri nearly $3.7 million to hire signature-gatherers for Amendment 3, which legalized recreational marijuana. Collecting the 170,000 signatures meant organizers spent about $21 a signature. And groups typically try to aim for more signatures than they need for an extra cushion. 

“The kinds of issues that are going to attract lots of money are going to be more exciting issues,” Burnett said. 

In 2022, abortion was the most expensive topic, at an average signature-collection cost of $23. Marijuana was cheaper, at an average cost per signature of $15, while topics like elections or campaign finance came with a price tag of about $10 per signature. 

In 2022, abortion rights supporters in Ohio spent nearly $6.7 million collecting signatures (an average cost of $16 per signature) for the question that eventually enshrined the right to an abortion in the state’s constitution. 

Campaigns typically rely on a mix of signature-gathering companies and volunteers. Very few efforts attempt to qualify an initiative with just volunteer signature-gatherers. The National Conference of State Legislatures found that, essentially, your group will get something on the ballot if it has enough money. 

Californians rely heavily on the ballot measure process. An analysis published in the Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review last spring found that in nine of the 10 most expensive ballot initiatives there, the side that spent the most ultimately won. 

“This high cost of gathering signatures to qualify a ballot measure makes the system of direct democracy an agenda of issues set by the wealthy,” the report found, “not one which filters to voters only the issues of significant importance demanding direct democratic attention.” 

Although the process is less vast and expensive in Missouri, it still takes several million dollars to put a question on statewide ballots. The group backing 2022’s marijuana legalization campaign raised nearly $9 million, mostly from marijuana companies and law firms. 

The 2020 Medicaid expansion effort was more expensive. Campaign finance reports show the group backing the measure raised $10.7 million to pass the effort.  

More restrictions on signature requirements for a ballot initiative in Missouri

In one plan, petitioners would be required to gather more signatures for something to qualify for the ballot. 

Currently, the signature requirement is equal to 8% of voters in the last governor’s race in five of Missouri’s eight congressional districts. Based on turnout from 2020, that means roughly 170,000 signatures. 

The House plan would require 8% support from each of the eight congressional districts, adding about 60,000 signatures and increasing the cost by forcing campaigns to fan out more widely across the state.

“It’s going to cost more money, whether it’s through volunteer recruitment, managing volunteers or through paying more to pay firms to collect signatures,” Walker said. “So either way, the result is more work.” 

The General Assembly is also considering a bill that would require that signatures be collected on a form provided by the secretary of state’s office and that signatures be recorded in dark ink. 

It would also require that signature gatherers be U.S. citizens, Missouri residents or present in Missouri at least 30 days prior to when they start collecting signatures. It would prohibit petitioners from being paid based on the number of signatures they collect. 

That could push up the cost more because firms traveling from state to state would have to increasingly recruit Missourians to pass the petitions. 

Opponents argue the legislation would increase the time needed to collect signatures, a concern that came as statewide officials limited signature collection time by writing ballot summary language that was caught up in court challenges for months.

The bill passed the House and is being considered in the Senate. 

Raising the threshold to pass a ballot initiative

The crux of the measures comes to switching from the status quo of a simple majority to a more difficult task of getting majorities in every part of the state. 

Voters will be asked to raise the threshold for passage from the current status quo of a simple majority. The proposal would require a majority statewide, plus majority support in five of Missouri’s eight congressional districts. 

Ballot measures in Missouri typically pass with a slim margin. 

2022’s vote on recreational marijuana passed with 53% of the vote. 2020’s Medicaid expansion question yielded the same results. 

Burnett said measures that pass with wider margins, something like 56% of 58%, would still be likely to pass under the standards lawmakers want to use. 

“Anything that would approach that 50%, is where this is going to come into play,” he said. 

Opponents decry the effort as a move away from majority rule —which has been used as the benchmark for passing ballot measures since 1864. 

“It would give some voters more weight than other voters,” Walker said. “What that does is take away the voices of people living in the greater metro areas around Missouri. That flies in the face of majority rule and the will of people.”