Missouri Republicans are taking a second shot at passing legislation that gives the Secretary of State greater authority over ballot summaries and limits how much a court can intervene.
The legislation would give the Secretary of State three chances to rewrite challenged proposed ballot language that courts deem insufficient. After those three chances, the court can rewrite the language themselves.
Current state law gives that ability to the courts during litigation.
Rep. John Simmons, R-Washington, who presented the bill Tuesday in the House Elections Committee, said legislators got to see the process in action last year over the proposed ballot language for the new Amendment 3, which would ban most abortions.
"I thought it worked beautifully, because it was a couple of back and forth that did take place between the (Secretary of State) and the court, but then they finally came to an agreement," Simmons said.
However, Secretary of State Denny Hoskins' second attempt to rewrite the ballot language for Amendment 3 was overturned and rewritten by an appeals court.
House Democrats, including Rep. Eric Woods, D-Kansas City, said this legislation encourages bad behavior from the Secretary of State's office.
"It incentivizes the Secretary of State to write the most wild, argumentative ballot language as possible and then shoot it back and forth three times to see what sticks," Woods said.
Woods also brought up Hoskins admitting in early January that the language he wrote for an anti-redistricting ballot measure was flawed.
Meanwhile Republicans on the committee were happy to see the bill's return.
"Since I've gotten into the General Assembly, it's not just frustrating, it's almost impossible for us as a legislature to properly produce a summary statement, because we know they're going to challenge it, no matter what we produce," said Rep. Brad Banderman, R-St. Clair.
Lawmakers successfully passed a nearly identical law last year with Senate Bill 22. However, it also included an additional policy allowing the Attorney General to appeal preliminary injunctions against state laws or constitutional provisions.
The Missouri Supreme Court cited that additional provision as why the court struck down the entirety of the law, saying it "is not germane with the original title and contents of Senate Bill 22."
The unanimous ruling sparked ire from Republicans, including leading to the cancellation of the scheduled State of the Judiciary speech in late January.
Simmons said that attorney general language is not included within this new bill.
More people criticized the legislation than backed it in committee, including representatives of the Missouri Voter Protection Coalition and the League of Women Voters.
Jennie Loomis from Jefferson City spoke against the legislation. She said this bill feels like another effort to "muddy the waters for the public and skew voting towards the current party in power."
"I would just say, vote no and stop working against the voters of Missouri and have a little trust in the people that you're supposed to represent," Loomis said.
Rep. Jeff Coleman, R-Grain Valley, said he loved the bill and he was disappointed when the Supreme Court overturned Senate Bill 22.
"The courts are an important piece of this, but they're not there to create the language and to push the legislation. They're there to make sure that the legislation works. And I think that they're overstepping their bounds," Coleman said.
The bill requires challenges for all measures, except initiative petitions, to be brought to Cole County Circuit Court no later than the 22nd Tuesday prior to the election where it will be presented to voters.
If the court deems the language unfair, then the Secretary of State would have those three chances to change the language. The court can give suggestions, but the secretary will be responsible for the new summary, unless they run out of chances.
House Democrats also expressed concerns over the timeline this legislation creates.
The bill moves up the date when all actions challenging ballot titles for statewide ballot measures should be completed from 56 days prior to the election where the issue will be on the ballot to 70 days.
"I don't think this works practically, because the court isn't under any type of timetable to do this," Rep. David Tyson Smith, D-Columbia, said.
The legislation also expands the ballot summary word limit for measures proposed by the General Assembly from 50 to 100 words.
Simmons said this expansion is even more important because there are summaries, like Amendment 3's that go over the 50-word limit and face challenges.
"That ballot summary took advantage of that 100 words and so if we don't reinstate something like this bill, that process is going to have to be redone altogether," Simmons said.
Amanda Bell with the Secretary of State's office spoke in favor of the bill. She said last year, the office came to speak for informational purposes only because they were unsure how the process would work.
"After having some time using this process, we do find that the timeline does work, and the courts have worked well with us," Bell said. "What it does do is it gives us some open conversation with the courts, more transparency with the voters to make sure the ballot measures are meeting the requirements that are needed."
The legislation is HB3146.
Copyright 2026 St. Louis Public Radio
