MO Opinion No. 343-2025 December 29, 2025

What ballot summary did Missouri approve for Mark Johnson's electoral-vote petition 2026-121?

Short answer: The Attorney General approved the legal content and form of a summary stating that petition 2026-121 would replace Missouri's winner-take-all presidential electoral-vote system with a proportional system beginning in 2028 and lessen Missouri's influence in presidential elections.

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 2025. Ezel answers yours: what it means for your facts, under current Missouri law, with citations.

Disclaimer: This is an official Missouri Attorney General opinion. AG opinions are persuasive authority but not binding precedent. This summary is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice. Consult a licensed Missouri attorney for advice on your specific situation.
About this page: The plain-English summary, reader guidance, and Q&A below were written by Ezel based on the official AG opinion. The original opinion (linked on this page as a PDF) is the authoritative source for any reliance.
View original AG opinion (PDF)

Plain-English summary

Missouri Attorney General Catherine L. Hanaway approved the legal content and form of the proposed ballot summary for Mark Johnson's initiative petition 2026-121, version 9 of an Article VIII amendment.

The approved summary said the proposal would replace Missouri's winner-take-all system for presidential electoral votes with a proportional system beginning in 2028. It also said the proposal would lessen Missouri's influence in determining presidential election outcomes.

The Attorney General's review under § 116.334, RSMo was limited to legal content and form and did not endorse the proposal.

What this means for you

Voters and ballot-measure researchers

Opinion 343-2025 records the approved wording for petition 2026-121 concerning how Missouri awards presidential electoral votes.

Initiative petition proponents

The proposed summary passed legal-content and form review. The opinion did not take a position on the petition's objectives.

Common questions

Q: What electoral-vote change did the summary describe?
A: Replacing Missouri's winner-take-all system with a proportional system beginning in 2028.

Q: What election consequence did the summary state?
A: It said the proposal would lessen Missouri's influence in determining presidential election outcomes.

Q: Did the Attorney General endorse the proposal?
A: No. The opinion expressly disclaimed endorsement and any view on the proponents' objectives.

Background and statutory framework

The Secretary of State requested review on December 23, 2025. The proposed summary concerned Mark Johnson's petition 2026-121, version 9, to amend Article VIII of the Missouri Constitution.

The Attorney General issued Opinion 343-2025 on December 29, 2025 and approved the summary's legal content and form under § 116.334, RSMo.

Citations and references

  • § 116.334, RSMo

Source

Original opinion text

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MISSOURI
CATHERINE L. HANAWAY

December 29, 2025

OPINION LETTER NO. 343-2025

The Honorable Denny Hoskins, CPA
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 December 23, 2025, for our review under § 116.334, RSMo, of a revised proposed summary statement prepared for the petition submitted by Mark Johnson (2026-121) regarding a proposed amendment to amend Article VIII, version 9, of the Missouri Constitution. The proposed summary statement is as follows:

Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to:

  • Replace Missouri's winner-take-all system of awarding electoral votes in presidential elections with a proportional system beginning in 2028; and

  • Lessen Missouri's influence in determining the outcome of presidential elections?

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,

CATHERINE L. HANAWAY
Attorney General

OP-2025-361

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

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read a 2025 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current Missouri statutes and case law and answers your specific situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the law it relies on.