Did Missouri approve ballot wording protecting past and future initiatives and rejected referendum measures?

Plain-English summary

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey approved the legal content and form of the proposed summary statement for Jamie Howard's initiative petition 2026-063. The statement described prohibiting legislative repeal or amendment of citizen-initiated measures, or enactment of laws similar to those rejected by referendum, unless 80% of legislators referred the change to voters. It expressly included past and future measures.

It also described preventing legislatively referred constitutional amendments from impairing initiative or referendum powers, general-election placement for most measures unless 80% of legislators and the governor approved a special election, court rewriting of misleading ballot titles, and preservation of current signature and vote requirements. The opinion did not endorse the petition.

What this means for you

Missouri voters and initiative proponents

The reviewed statement expressly included past and future citizen measures and described preserving current signature and vote requirements.

State legislators and election officials

The statement described an 80% legislative referral threshold and general-election placement for most measures unless the stated special-election threshold was met.

Courts, citizens, and election lawyers

The statement described requiring courts to rewrite misleading ballot titles to be unbiased, clear, and accurate.

Common questions

Q: What measures did the statement protect?
A: Citizen-initiated measures and laws similar to those rejected by referendum, including past and future measures.

Q: What threshold did it identify for legislative changes?
A: Eighty percent of legislators to refer the change to voters.

Q: What did it say about ballot titles?
A: It described court rewriting of misleading titles to be unbiased, clear, and accurate.

Q: What petition rules would remain?
A: Current signature and vote requirements.

Background and statutory framework

The Missouri Secretary of State requested review on July 2, 2025. The attorney general reviewed the proposed summary statement under § 116.334, RSMo and approved it on July 11, 2025.

The proposal was identified as Jamie Howard's petition 2026-063. The opinion reproduced the statement's five provisions concerning citizen measures, legislative thresholds, elections, ballot titles, and petition requirements.

Citations and references

Statute: § 116.334, RSMo.

Source

• Landing page: https://ago.mo.gov/other-resources/ag-opinions/
• Original PDF: https://ago.mo.gov/wp-content/uploads/124-2025.pdf

Original opinion text

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MISSOURI
ANDREW BAILEY

July 11, 2025

OPINION LETTER NO. 124-2025

The Honorable Denny Hoskins
Missouri Secretary of State
James C. Kirkpatrick State Information Center
600 West Main Street
Jefferson City, MO 65101

Dear Secretary Hoskins:

This opinion letter responds to your request dated July 2, 2025 for our review under § 116.334, RSMo of a proposed summary statement prepared for the petition submitted by Jamie Howard, 2026-063. The proposed summary statement is as follows:

Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to:

• Prohibit the legislature from repealing or amending measures enacted by citizen initiative or enacting laws similar to those rejected by referendum, unless 80% of legislators refer the change to voters, including both past and future measures;

• Prevent legislatively referred constitutional amendments from impairing initiative or referendum powers;

• Require most ballot measures to appear at general elections unless a special election is approved by 80% of legislators and the governor;

• Require courts to rewrite misleading ballot titles to be unbiased, clear, and accurate; and

• Preserve current signature and vote requirements?

Pursuant to § 116.334, RSMo, we approve the legal content and form of the proposed statement. Because our review of the statement is mandated by statute, no action that we take with respect to such review should be construed as an endorsement of the petition, nor as the expression of any view regarding the objectives of its proponents.

Very truly yours,

ANDREW BAILEY
Attorney General

OP-2025-136

Supreme Court Building
207 W. High Street
P.O. Box 899
Jefferson City, MO 65102
Phone: (573) 751-3321
Fax: (573) 751-0774
www.ago.mo.gov