Citizens in Charge

While the state ranked high on our grading scale, Missouri’s strange signature distribution requirement results in only two-thirds of a the state having a petition process, but an amendment pending in the Senate may change that.

Requirements that petition signatures come from certain areas of a state result in some voters’ signatures counting more than others. Unlike most states with such requirements, that typically set a statewide requirement with a portion distributed over certain areas of the state, Missouri law bases the number of signatures required on a percentage of voters in six out of the state’s nine congressional districts. Petition sponsors are forced to conduct six separate petition drives, one in each district they are qualifying in, while turning away volunteers and voters from one-third of the state. The practical effect is that voters in the remaining three districts are guaranteed to be left out of the process.

House Joint Resolution 16, which was perfected in the House and moved on for consideration in the state Senate yesterday, would open up the state’s petition process to all Missouri voters regardless of their address. The amendment would require petitions for a state statute to obtain signatures of three and one-fourth percent of the legal voters in each congressional district. Those seeking to qualify a state constitutional amendment would be required to obtain signatures of five and one-fourth percent of the legal voters in each congressional district. Current requirements are five percent (for a statute) and eight percent (for an amendment) of voters in six out of nine congressional districts.

On their face, the lower percentages make it look like the net number of signatures would be reduced by HJR 16. However, the new requirements have been calculated so that roughly the same number of net signatures will be needed: because signatures are being collected in more districts, the amount needed in each will be lower.

Some initiative rights supporters argue requiring all congressional districts at lower percentages (as would be done by HJR 16) is better, as groups organizing aren’t encouraged or forced to ignore much of the state, while others might prefer to have to qualify fewer districts (as the current system requires). Both sides of the disagreement have merit, but the decision will ultimately come down to Missouri voters.

No matter which side initiative rights supporters fall on when it comes to what system is best, the current version of HJR 16 is far better than what was introduced. In its original form HJR 16 increased the number of districts needed to qualify an initiative without lowering the percentage required, a change that would have substantially increased the net number of signatures needed to qualify. Educational efforts in the legislature, especially the efforts of long-time activist Ron Calzone, convinced the House to pass HJR 16 with no increase in the total signature requirement. In itself, the amended resolution is a victory for petition rights.