On November 3rd, Missouri voters will decide five statewide ballot questions: four proposed constitutional amendments and one referendum.
Some of these measures deal with issues that have received a great deal of public attention. Others deal with the structure of state government and probably aren't as familiar.
My goal is simple: explain what each question does, what a "yes" or "no" vote means, and what the practical result would be.
Amendment 3: Abortion & Gender Transition Restrictions
Amendment 3 is a direct response to the reproductive rights amendment passed by voters in 2024.
Amendment 3 would:
- Repeal the 2024 constitutional amendment that provided & protected abortion access through fetal viability.
- Allow abortion in cases of rape or incest (under 12 weeks of pregnancy), medical emergencies and fetal anomalies.
- Allow the legislature to pass laws regulating abortion providers and facilities.
- Require parental consent before a minor can get an abortion.
- Prohibit public funding of abortion except in limited circumstances.
- Prohibit gender transition procedures for minors, including surgery, cross-sex hormones and puberty blockers, with exceptions for certain medical conditions.
A "yes" vote repeals the 2024 amendment and replaces it with these narrower protections.
A "no" vote leaves the 2024 provision in place, preserving abortion access through fetal viability and not addressing any restrictions for gender transitions for minors.
The state estimates no direct fiscal impact, though Greene County projects a possible unspecified increase in tax revenue.
Amendment 6: Initiative Petitions
This is the most important amendment on the ballet. If it passes, it will begin to deconstruct our Constitutional Republic.
Amendment 6 had a bumpy road to the ballot. Secretary of State Denny Hoskins initially found the petition insufficient in August, before the Missouri Supreme Court reversed that decision on September 3rd and ordered it certified for November.
An initiative petition allows out-of-state organizations or citizens to collect enough valid signatures to put a proposed law or constitutional amendment directly before Missouri voters, bypassing the legislature.
The process currently is mostly used by out-of-state organizations that spend millions of dollars paying individuals to collect signatures across the state when they can't get the legislature to pass something they want. It has become the way the largest of special interest groups can achieve their policy agenda even if the elected representatives of the citizenry won't comply.
The signature collection process is usually not done according to statute and voters who sign most often do not fully understand what they are agreeing to. Although the IP process was designed to be used by "regular citizens", the process is extremely expensive, costing millions which prevents citizens from actually using it.
The IP process is complex, but it is not functioning well and needs to be adjusted. However, Amendment 6 is not what we need.
Amendment 6 would change the Missouri Constitution to ALLOW:
- The Initiative Petition process to be considered a fundamental right.
- Allow the courts to rewrite ballot summaries through lawsuits.
If Amendment 6 passes, the Missouri Constitution would PROHIBIT:
- The legislature from EVER changing the IP process or referendum powers.
- The legislature from changing or repealing any statute or constitutional amendment passed by IP, retroactive back to January 1, 2010, UNLESS 80% of both the House & Senate agree to the referendum which would then go back to the voters for ratification.
- The legislature from passing a law "similar in effect" to one voters already rejected via referendum, UNLESS 80% of both the House & Senate agree to the referendum which would then go back to the voters for ratification.
If Amendment 6 passes, the Missouri Constitution would PRESERVE:
- Existing simple majority vote ratification and signature collection requirements for certification.
Amendment 7 The "Show-Me Prosperity Fund"
Amendment 7 would create a permanent public endowment fund intended to eventually replace state-imposed taxes.
Tax elimination would depend on the fund first accumulating enough assets and producing sufficient net investment earnings to support state government under the requirements contained in the amendment. There would be no immediate impact on taxes.
Key provisions:
- Establishes the Show-Me Prosperity Fund, a state investment endowment.
- Prevent the legislature from appropriating or diverting money from the fund until the State Treasurer certifies the fund's investment earnings are sufficient to eliminate state taxes.
- Caps annual withdrawals at 3% of the fund's average market value over the prior five years.
- Prohibits the legislature from reinstating eliminated taxes - except if the fund becomes insolvent or falls short, in which case lawmakers regain full authority to tax and spend as needed.
A "yes" vote sets this fund in motion with the long-term goal of phasing out state taxes.
A "no" vote leaves the Constitution unchanged. The fund would not be created.
The state projects no immediate fiscal impact, since any tax eliminatio would dependon th efund's investment performance over time.
Amendment 8: Constitutional Sheriffs
Missouri law already generally provides for county sheriffs to be elected to four-year terms. Amendment 8 would move several provisions concerning sheriffs from state statute into the Missouri Constitution.
It would:
- Constitutionally guarantee the right of Missourians to elect their county sheriff every four years (currently a statutory requirement).
- Enshrine sheriffs' duties, currently governed by statute, directly in the constitution.
- Specify that an elected sheriff can only be removed through a writ of quo warranto initiated by the Attorney General.
Because four-year elected terms for sheriffs already exist under Missouri law, the practical effect of a "yes" vote is mostly to make removal harder and to insulate the office from future statutory change without another constitutional amendment.
A "no" vote leaves sheriff elections and removal governed by ordinary statute, which the legislature can amend more easily.
Proposition A: Congressional Redistricting Referendum
Unlike the amendments above, Prop A is a referendum - meaning it asks voters to approve or reject a law the legislature already passed, House Bill 1 from the 2025 second extraordinary session. It does not amend the Constitution.
- A "yes" vote approves the new congressional map passed by the General Assembly, which redraws Missouri's congressional district boundaries and keeps more counties intact than the current map.
- A "no" vote rejects the new map and leaves the congressional boundaries drawn in 2022 in place.
This measure exists because opponents of the legislature's new map successfully petitioned to force a public vote on it rather than let it take effect automatically.
The Bottom Line
The five questions on the ballot cover very different issues, but each one could have lasting effects on Missouri law and the Missouri Constitution. Each of these measures will be decided by a statewide simple majority of votes cast on that question.
Before you vote, I encourage you to read the official ballot language and, when possible, the full text of the proposals themselves. These are decisions that belong to the people of Missouri, and informed voters make better decisions.
