Constitutional Amendment 3 - Proposed by the 100th General Assembly (Second Regular Session) (SS 3 SJR 38)

Summary

A “yes” vote will amend the Missouri Constitution to reduce the limits on campaign contributions that candidates for state senator can accept from individuals or entities by $100 per election. There is no change for candidates for state representative. The amendment prohibits state legislators and their employees from accepting a gift of any value (which is currently $5) from paid lobbyists or the lobbyists’ clients. The amendment modifies the criteria for redrawing legislative districts and changes the process for redrawing state legislative district boundaries during redistricting by giving redistricting responsibility to a bipartisan commission, renames them, and increases membership to 20 by adding four commissioners appointed by the Governor from nominations by the two major political party''s state committees. A “no” vote will not amend the Missouri Constitution regarding campaign contributions, lobbyist gifts, and the process and criteria for redistricting. If passed, this measure will have no impact on taxes.

A "YES" vote is a vote in favor of amending the Missouri Constitution to: ban gifts from paid lobbyists to legislators and their employees; reduce legislative campaign contribution limits; and change the redistricting process voters approved in 2018.

A "NO" vote is a vote in opposition to amending the Missouri Constitution to: ban gifts from paid lobbyists to legislators and their employees; reduce legislative campaign contribution limits; and change the redistricting process voters approved in 2018.

Arguments

"To ensure that the process is not controlled by one political party or politician, FAIR will create a bipartisan commission of 5 Democrats and 5 Republicans to lead redistricting, which will significantly decrease the chance of corruption.", in support of Constitutional Amendment 3 (Learn more)

"Amendment 3′s most troubling change is that it would put map-drawing in the hands of “bipartisan commissions” rather than a nonpartisan demographer. It’s true, as Amendment 3′s apologists argue, that bipartisanship entails some safeguards against partisan bias, but voters might ask themselves this question: What is the rationale for replacing nonpartisanship with bipartisanship if not to preserve some space for partisan redistricting?" , in opposition to Constitutional Amendment 3 (Learn more)

Measure Details