Proposition A: Voters Decide the Congressional Map
Proposition A puts the congressional map at the center of Missouri’s recent court battles before voters. The dispute reached the U.S. Supreme Court three times in September. The legislature’s 2025 map divides Kansas City among three congressional districts, aiming to give Republicans another seat.
Citizen petitions secured this referendum. The November 2026 election will use the 2022 map regardless of the outcome; this vote determines whether the 2025 map can take effect for future elections.
Yes: Approves the 2025 map for use beginning with the 2028 congressional election.
No: Rejects that map and keeps the 2022 boundaries, unless another map is subsequently enacted.
Amendment 6: Making It Harder to Undo Citizens’ Votes
Amendment 6 would prohibit elected representatives from directly amending or changing any law enacted through the citizen initiative process. Instead, at least 80% of the members of both legislative chambers would have to agree and send proposed changes back to voters.
Paid sick leave shows why that matters. Voters approved it in 2024, but lawmakers repealed it without another public vote. Under Amendment 6, voters would have the final say on a repeal. But the General Assembly could only send the proposed repeal back to voters if at least 80% of the members of each legislative chamber voted to do so.
The protection also covers citizen-approved constitutional amendments. The abortion repeal appearing on this November’s ballot received only about two-thirds support in the House and Senate. If Amendment 6’s rules had already been in place, lawmakers would not have had enough votes to put that repeal on the ballot. www.sos.mo.gov
Yes: Adds these protections for citizen-approved measures.
No: Keeps the current rules.
Amendment 7: A Long-Term Investment to Replace State Taxes
Amendment 7 would create the “Show-Me Prosperity Fund,” a permanent state investment fund intended to grow until its earnings could replace state taxes.
It would not immediately cut taxes. Its sponsor, Sen. Adam Schnelting, has suggested reaching that goal could take 100 to 125 years.
Alaska has a similar permanent fund, built with oil revenue. Missouri’s proposal has no dedicated, ongoing revenue source. Instead, it could receive money appropriated by lawmakers, along with donations and grants, to invest in funds tracking the S&P 500.
The principal would be protected, and eventual annual withdrawals would be limited. The challenge is finding enough money to build the fund while paying for today’s government services.
Yes: Establishes the fund and its constitutional rules.
No: Leaves the constitution unchanged.
Amendment 8: Constitutional Protection for Elected Sheriffs
Amendment 8 would put sheriffs’ four-year elected terms and specified duties into Missouri’s constitution. Those provisions currently exist in state law. But the amendment would also give the attorney general control over initiating the court process to remove a sheriff—making that official a gatekeeper when problems arise between elections.
Supporters emphasize protecting voters’ control over the office; but the removal provision raises questions about accountability between elections.
St. Louis City, St. Louis County and St. Charles County are exempt.
Yes: Adds constitutional protections and removal requirements.
No: Keeps existing laws in place, including elected sheriffs.
