Modifies procedures for ballot measures submitted to the voters
The impact of SJR73 primarily affects the process through which voters can engage in direct democracy by proposing laws and amendments. By raising the threshold for the number of signatures required and instituting strict filing deadlines, the bill likely aims to streamline the process and reduce the number of initiatives that reach the ballot. However, these changes could be viewed as barriers to grassroots movements seeking to bring about legislative change. The bill also introduces penalties for misreporting contributions to campaign committees, asserting that foreign governments cannot fund initiative petitions, thus aiming for transparency in the funding of such campaigns.
SJR73 proposes significant changes to the procedures for ballot measures in Missouri by repealing sections 50, 51, and 52(b) of article III of the Constitution. The resolution sets forth new requirements for initiative petitions, demanding that they be signed by a specified percentage of legal voters across two-thirds of congressional districts. It modifies the criteria for determining which ballot measures can be initiated by requiring a clear statement of purpose and limiting the scope of measures that can be proposed in a single petition. Additionally, the bill mandates that initiative petitions be filed at least six months before an election, allowing ample time for review and analysis.
The major points of contention surrounding SJR73 involve the implications for voter access and the ability of citizens to influence legislation directly. Proponents argue that the measures enhance the integrity of ballot initiatives by ensuring that only serious proposals backed by significant local support are considered. In contrast, opponents contend that these changes may undermine public participation in the legislative process, making it more difficult for citizen-led initiatives to emerge. Critics express concern that the granularity of requirements and the penalties involved might stifle engagement, particularly among community organizations that depend on collective grassroots efforts.