Open debate and the free exchange of ideas are among the things that make this country great. Politics is the art and practice of governing — and governing well means grappling with disagreement, not avoiding it. We don't all see the world the same way. We carry different worldviews, values, and priorities; learning from one another takes patience and humility.
Governing well requires that we appreciate perspectives other than our own. As an elected state senator, I don't represent one faction or interest group — I represent an entire, diverse district. Creating policy for a state of six million people means coming together to put ideas on the table, debate them honestly, and see where the majority lands. No single person sees every side of every issue. My job as a lawmaker is to judge legislation on its merits: support what protects the freedom and liberty of all, oppose what tramples on it, regardless of who's for it or against it.
That means being willing to have hard conversations, and staying open to other people's ideas and perspectives even when we land in different places. When disagreement turns into personal attacks or threats, nothing is accomplished. It corrodes open debate, undermines the democratic process, and deepens the public's distrust of government.
The people deserve elected officials who protect their freedom and liberty, and advance policy that helps them build good lives — without punishing hard work or entrepreneurship along the way.
The debate around Amendment 5 has become a shameful example of what's wrong with politics. It's a sad state of affairs when honest debate gives way to lies, deception, coercion, and name-calling. The TV ads and mailers circulating don't accurately reflect what the amendment actually does. Some have gone further, shaming anyone who won't simply fall in line — branding people socialists or marxists for the offense of disagreeing.
Amendment 5 itself does not eliminate the state income tax — it's a path toward that end, not the end itself. That distinction matters, because it's being blurred or ignored in a lot of what voters are hearing. When we are told our property tax will be eliminated, that's not true. When we are told it is a tax reduction, that is also not true. When we are told data centers will foot the bill, that's not true either.
And then there's the mailer many of you received — the one suggesting your neighbors will know whether you voted and that voting will somehow improve your "score." That's outrageous. This isn't persuasion; it's propaganda, and it's neither honest nor helpful. These are just a few examples.
People have real, legitimate questions about this amendment, and they deserve honest answers grounded in what the text actually says — not opinions dressed up as predictions about what might happen after it passes.
Calling a fellow Republican a socialist or a Marxist over one amendment isn't debate. It's an attempt to end debate by making disagreement too costly to voice. The message is simple: don't read the amendment, don't think it through, just get in line or be branded a traitor to the cause.
That approach doesn't persuade anyone, and it doesn't inform voters about what the amendment actually does or fails to do. It punishes independent thought and rewards conformity — the opposite of what a party built on individual liberty is supposed to stand for. Good policy can withstand scrutiny, honest criticism, and a fair hearing of both sides. If it can only survive by misleading voters about its contents or bullying skeptics into silence, that tells you something about its merits on its own.
I didn't run for office to march in lockstep with a party, a mailer, or a 30-second ad. I ran to study the policy in front of me and vote my conscience on behalf of my district and the entire state. Republicans should be able to disagree about Amendment 5 without having their loyalty, principles, or character questioned. That kind of manufactured pressure doesn't strengthen the party; it hollows it out from the inside. It's precisely the sort of factional behavior our founding generation warned would corrode self-government if left unchecked.
Don't take my word for what Amendment 5 does, and don't take the mailer's word either. Read it yourself here: https://senatorjoenicola.com/page/amendment-5. Ask hard questions. Reach your own conclusion, even if it's different from mine — that's not a threat to the party, it's the whole point of having one.
There has been a great deal of confusion surrounding the constitutional amendments appearing on the August ballot, and I've received many questions from constituents wanting to know what these proposals actually do.
I've already written about Amendment 5 and recorded a video explaining the proposal to eliminate Missouri's state income tax and the potential long-term implications of that process. Please see my website for further information; senatorjoenicola.com.
However, Amendment 2 and Amendment 4 also deserve your attention.
Although Amendment 2 affects only Jackson County, it requires a statewide vote because it changes the Missouri Constitution.
Amendment 4 would make significant changes to Missouri's initiative petition process, which is the process citizens use to propose constitutional amendments without approval from the legislature.
Regardless of where you stand on these proposals, I believe every Missourian deserves the opportunity to read what the amendments actually say—not just the ballot summary or campaign advertisements.
Below, you'll find:
- A plain-language explanation of each amendment.
- The official resolution adopted by the General Assembly.
- Links to additional resources so you can read the proposals for yourself.
My goal is to help provide accurate information so you can make an informed decision when you cast your vote.
Thank you for taking the time to stay informed and engaged in Missouri's future.
Amendment 2 ~ Electing the Jackson County Assessor
Missourians will see Amendment 2 on the statewide ballot on August 4th. While every voter in Missouri will cast a vote on this measure, the proposal only affects Charter Counties, specifically, Jackson County.
So why is the entire state voting on a local issue?
Because this proposal amends the Missouri Constitution. Any constitutional amendment must be approved by voters statewide, even when its practical impact is limited to a single county. The truth is, Jackson County is the only county that is currently exempted from having an elected assessor in the state constitution.
If approved, Amendment 2 would require Jackson County's Assessor to be an elected position rather than allowing the county charter to determine how the assessor is selected. This would put Jackson County in line with all other counties as Jackson County has been constitutionally exempted from having an elected assessor. It would also require the assessor to complete the training already required under Missouri law.
One point worth noting is that the resolution highlights assessor training as though it is creating a new requirement.
It is not.
Missouri law already requires assessor training. The amendment simply places that existing requirement into the Missouri Constitution.
The larger question for voters is whether the Missouri Constitution should be amended to address a governance issue that applies only to one county.
Some voters may believe Jackson County residents should directly elect their assessor. Others may question whether a local government issue belongs in the state constitution at all.
Regardless of where you stand, it's important to understand exactly what the amendment does—and what it does not do.
Bottom Line
- Amendment 2 affects Jackson County only.
- Every Missouri voter must vote on it because it is a constitutional amendment.
- It requires the Jackson County Assessor to be elected.
- It includes assessor training requirements that already exist in Missouri law.
Read the full resolution:
https://documents.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bills251/hlrbillspdf/1465H.02T.pdf
https://documents.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bills251/hlrbillspdf/1465H.02T.pdf
Learn more about all of the 2026 ballot measures:
https://senatorjoenicola.com/page/2026-elections
https://senatorjoenicola.com/page/2026-elections
Here is a marked-up version of Amendment 2:
Amendment 4 ~ Changes to Missouri's Initiative Petition Process
One of the most significant constitutional amendments on the 2026 ballot is Amendment 4, which would change how citizen-initiated constitutional amendments are approved in Missouri.
This proposal does not change the process for statutory initiative petitions or referendum petitions. It applies only to constitutional amendments proposed through Missouri's initiative petition process.
Missouri's Initiative Petition (IP) process allows citizens to place proposed laws or constitutional amendments directly before voters without approval from the General Assembly.
It was created to give citizens a way to act when they believe the legislature has not addressed an important issue.
In practice, however, qualifying a measure for the ballot is a lengthy and expensive process. Collecting the required number of signatures state wide requires a great deal of organization. Once signatures are collected they must be verified. If the initiative gets to the ballot it will cost millions of dollars to advertise for it and defend it from opposition. This makes it difficult for ordinary citizens to use. The last time this was used successfully by citizens was in 1980. As a result, initiative petitions are more commonly funded by large organizations and well-financed interest groups inside and outside of Missouri.
Currently, a proposed constitutional amendment placed on the ballot through the initiative petition process passes with a simple majority of votes statewide.
That means if more than 50% of Missouri voters vote "Yes," the Missouri Constitution is amended.
If approved, Amendment 4 would create a new, two-part approval requirement for citizen-initiated constitutional amendments.
Instead of requiring only a statewide majority, an amendment would have to receive:
- A majority vote statewide, and
- A majority vote in each of Missouri's eight congressional districts.
In other words, both statewide support and support across every congressional district would be required before the Missouri Constitution could be amended through the initiative petition process.
Amendment 4 also includes several other provisions designed to increase transparency and strengthen the initiative petition process.
If approved, it would:
- Prohibit foreign nationals and foreign adversaries from contributing money to support or oppose statewide ballot measures.
- Create criminal penalties for initiative petition signature fraud.
- Require public hearings before initiative petitions are placed on the ballot.
- Require the full text of initiative petitions to be made available to voters when ballots are provided.
Supporters argue these changes would make it more difficult to amend Missouri's Constitution without broad statewide agreement while increasing transparency and election integrity protections.
Others argue the new approval threshold would make it significantly more difficult for citizen-led constitutional amendments to succeed, even when they receive a statewide majority of the vote.
Bottom Line
Amendment 4 would make substantial changes to Missouri's constitutional initiative petition process.
A "Yes" vote would require future citizen-proposed constitutional amendments to receive:
- A statewide majority of voters, and
- A majority of voters in each of Missouri's eight congressional districts.
A "NO" vote would result in no change.
Read the full resolution:
https://documents.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bills254/hlrbillspdf/3353H.03T.pdf
https://documents.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bills254/hlrbillspdf/3353H.03T.pdf
Learn more about all of the 2026 ballot measures:
https://senatorjoenicola.com/page/2026-elections
https://senatorjoenicola.com/page/2026-elections
Here is a marked-up version of Amendment 4:
During interim, connecting with constituents is one of my highest priorities. This year, I'm getting started by hosting Coffee & Conversation events. We had a wonderfully successful event in Independence at Rae's Cafe to kick things off.
Coming up soon, I'll be in Grain Valley, Oak Grove and Buckner. Come join me at one of these locations for a cup of coffee, a legislative update and I'll be taking your questions, too.
Oak Grove
Ground Roots Coffee
507 S Broadway
Saturday, June 20th @ 10:00 am
Grain Valley
Grain Valley Historical Society
506 N Main St
Saturday, June 20th @ 2:00 pm
Buckner
The Hudson Room
323 S Hudson Street
Saturday, June 27th @ 2:00 pm
Please share the information with your friends and bring someone with you!
If you would like to host a gathering for a group of your neighbors or friends, please reach out to my office.
If you are unable to attend one of our Coffee & Conversations events, please feel free to contact me with your questions or concerns by clicking the link above. For future events, be sure to check our Event page to see what's coming up.
The 2026 legislative session is now finished. We made real progress in some areas, fell short in others, and on a few important votes I know people may have questions.
One bill I was proud to carry was SB 1011, which was combined with SB 977 and included the No Foreign Laws Act. This says Missouri courts should not apply foreign law when doing so would deny a person's fundamental rights under the Missouri Constitution or the United States Constitution.
Missouri should be governed by our Constitution, our laws, and the statutes passed by the United States Congress and the Missouri General Assembly. Foreign legal systems, including religious law used as a substitute for state or federal law should not override the rights of Missourians.
Another major win was language from SB 1086, which was included in SB 878. This provision allows pharmacists to dispense ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine without requiring a prescription from a licensed health care practitioner, once a warning label and pharmacy procedures are in place. Missourians should not have to deal with unnecessary red tape to access safe medicines.
We also had a win for small businesses with my SB 1154, which was combined into SB 907. This bill addresses ADA-compliant websites and abusive website accessibility lawsuits. Too often, these lawsuits are not about fixing access problems. They are about targeting small businesses and trying to extract a settlement.
The bill gives businesses a safe harbor when they receive notice and take substantial steps to orrect the problem within 90 days. The goal should be real accessibility and a fair process, not predatory shakedown tactics.
We also moved forward on public safety. My SB 1294 passed as an amendment inside another bill. Tis language dealt with criminal offenses and penalties, including sex-related crimes and sentencing clarity. Victims matter, and criminals need to be held acountable. We need clear law, consistent sentencing and stronger consequences for serious crimes.
I also want to address two bills where I voted no, even though many in my party supported them.
The first was SB 999, known as the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act. In 2002, the federal government passed the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, which made clear that a child born alive at any stage of development, including after an attempted abortion has the same legal protections as any other person.
I am pro-life. I believe life is valuable and must be protected. I also believe the original bill was not completely necessary because federal law already provides protections and Missouri already has laws prohibiting the murder of any person at any age. Even so, I supported the original bill because it sent a strong message that in Missouri we would hold medical professionals accountable in those situations, should they arise.
But the final version of the bill changed. Amendments added other subjects, including cyberstalking, protective orders, and technology-related abuse. The bill also included a non-severability clause, meaning if one part is struck down the whole bill would be at risk.
Some added language was too broad, and I believe it will likely be deemed unconstitutional by the courts. I did not want to vote for a bill with a good headline but bad language that would be struck down. On the final version, I believed a no vote was the correct vote.
The second bill was HJR 173, dealing with STATE income tax. I support phasing out the state personal income tax. However, this resolution would amend Article X of the Missouri Constitution. It directs the General Assembly to reduce and eventually eliminate the individual income tax but it also allows the sales and use tax base to be expanded to goods and services in order to replace the revenue.
That is a major change. My concern is simple: voters are being asked to give the Legislature broad authority to rewrite the tax system without seeing the full plan first. I do not believe we should remove constitutional protections and hope the details work out later. My constituents are more concerned about property tax reform than phasing out the state income tax right now.
My job is not to vote with the crowd. My job is to read the bill, understand what it really does and vote the way I believe best protects Missourians.
I am grateful for the wins we had this session. I am disappointed in the areas where we did not get enough done. But I remain hopeful and I will keep working for freedom and liberty, transparency, small businesses, public safety, and the constitutional protections Missourians deserve.
As always, reach out to our office with questions or concerns. We are here to serve you.
Join Us For Coffee & Conversations
Please join us at one of our community events! I want to hear your concerns and answer your questions. If you are unable to attend any of these, please be sure to subscribe and we'll let you know about future dates.
- Saturday, June 20th @ 10:00 am - Ground Roots Coffee, 507 S Broadway, Oak Grove
- Saturday, June 20th @ 2:00 pm - Historical Society, 506 N Main St., Grain Valley
- Saturday, June 27th @ 2:00 pm - The Hudson Room, 323 S Hudson St., Buckner
As we move into the final week of session, the Missouri Senate has been working through some of the most important decisions of the year. This week brought a major win for Missouri businesses as the Governor signed our abusive website litigation bill into law, real progress on our artificial intelligence bill, passing the state budget, and a difficult vote on a pro-life bill that was changed in a way I believe created serious constitutional concerns.
There is still more work to do, but I am proud of what this office has accomplished. We came to Jefferson City to protect liberty, promote accountability, and serve the people of Missouri with honesty and transparency.
Stopping Abusive Website Lawsuits
This week brought a major win for Missouri small businesses.
Governor Kehoe signed SB 907/1154/1272, creating the Act Against Abusive Website or Web Content Access Litigation. I filed SB 1154 because honest businesses should not be targeted by predatory lawsuits over alleged website or web content access violations.
This issue matters because many small businesses want to do the right thing, but they should be given a fair chance to correct a problem instead of being forced into quick settlements because going to court is too expensive.
The bill was combined with two other bills that were nearly identical and with broad support from both sides of the aisle in the House and the Senate, we were able to get it across the finish line.
Our Ai Bill Moves Forward
I'm also pleased to report that SB 1012, our artificial intelligence bill has passed the Senate floor and has been referred to a House committee.
We've worked hard on this bill over the past few months. There were a couple of minor changes made on the Senate floor, but we are pleased with the protections the bill would offer for Missouri.
Artificial intelligence is moving quickly, and our laws need to draw some clear lines. Ai is not a person, should not be treated like a person under the law and should not be used as a way for human beings to avoid responsibility.
My Bill Would Make It Clear That
1. Ai can not be treated as a legal person
2. Human beings remain accountable when Ai is used
3. Transparency and protections for users are required for chatbots
4. Transparency is required when Ai is used to create campaign materials
To learn more about the hazards of Ai and why we need these protections in place and to stay updated about this legislation, go to our Ai page here.
Ai is a powerful tool - but it should remain just that - a tool. Humans must remain accountable for decisions that affect people's lives, health, property, finances and rights.
I was invited to speak about the bill on War Room with Steve Bannon. Watch below.
A Better Budget, With More Work Ahead
This week, the General Assembly passed the FY 2027 state budget. The overall budget was reduced which is progress in the right direction.
I've been clear that Missouri still spends too much, and there is more spending that needs to be cut. Government should live within its means, just like Missouri families and small businesses are expected to do every day.
I voted yes on the budget bills because I believe this budget is a significant improvement over recent years. It does not do everything I would like to see, but it takes a step toward a more responsible and sustainable path.
A Difficult Vote on the Born-Alive Bill
This week also brought a difficult vote on the Born-Alive bill.
I am pro-life, and I believe life is valuable and must be protected. That conviction has not changed.
However, after the Democrat caucus successfully added several amendments to the bill, I believed the bill had been changed in a way that created serious constitutional concerns. That made the vote difficult.
When we pass laws, especially on issues as important as life, we have a responsibility to make sure those laws are written in a way that can stand. Protecting life and respecting the Constitution are not competing duties. Both matter.
I do not take votes like this lightly. My goal is to always defend life, protect liberty, and uphold the rule of law.
One Week Left to Serve Well
There is only one week left in this legislative session.
I am proud of the work this office has accomplished, and I am grateful for the opportunity to serve the people of Missouri's 11th Senate District. We remain committed to protecting liberty, promoting accountability and standing up for hardworking Missourians.
As always, you can see my votes by clicking "My Votes" on the menu at the top of the page. If you need help with a state issue, have a question, or want to share your thoughts, please reach out to our office. We are here to serve you.
Interim Events
The work doesn't stop after session is over. During the interim, I'll be hosting events and meeting with constituents in District 11. I want to hear your concerns and answer your questions. Please subscribe to The Digest, check the website or FaceBook to learn more. The first event will be on May 23rd at Rae's Cafe in Independence. Come join us!
