Did the Missouri AG approve the ballot summary for Damien Johnson's Article III petition 2020-032 on initiative-process reforms?

Plain-English summary

Companion to Op. 47-2019 (which approved the summary statement for the parallel Johnson petition 2020-030). This 2019 opinion is the AG's § 116.334 approval of the Secretary of State's summary statement for Johnson's petition 2020-032, which presented the same five-part package: voter approval required for election law changes, no filing fees on initiatives, no residency or registration requirement for petition circulators, flexible circulator compensation, and a state-built online petition signing system. The fiscal note approval for the same 20-032 petition is at Op. 45-2019.

The summary statement is identical in substance to Op. 47-2019's, with minor differences in capitalization. The AG approved the legal content and form. The opinion contains the standard § 116.334 disclaimer that approval does not endorse the petition or its objectives.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2019. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Common questions

Why two near-identical Johnson summary-statement opinions (47-2019 and 50-2019)?

Because Johnson filed parallel petitions (2020-030 and 2020-032). Each petition gets its own AG-reviewed summary statement, even if the underlying substance is essentially the same. The Secretary of State drafts a separate summary for each filing.

What does this opinion add beyond Op. 47-2019?

Largely the same approval, applied to a different petition number with a parallel substantive content. Treat both opinions as administrative routing of the same Johnson initiative-process reform package through the AG's § 116.334 review track.

Did Johnson's package reach the ballot?

The AG opinions get the petition through form review and summary review. Whether either of the parallel petitions (2020-030, 2020-032) reached the 2020 ballot depended on signature collection and any pre-election litigation. The AG's role is procedural.

Why does the AG keep writing essentially identical opinions for parallel petitions?

Because the AG is statutorily required to. § 116.334 mandates AG review of every summary statement the Secretary of State drafts. The AG cannot consolidate or skip the review just because the parallel petition's analysis would be identical.

Where do these initiative-process reforms come from policy-wise?

The package (no filing fees, no circulator residency requirement, flexible circulator pay, electronic petition signing) tracks a national set of initiative-process advocacy goals. The federal-court line on circulator rules (Buckley v. American Constitutional Law Foundation, 525 U.S. 182 (1999); Meyer v. Grant, 486 U.S. 414 (1988)) provided some of the legal background for the proposals.

Background and statutory framework

Missouri's initiative process runs through Chapter 116. § 116.334 directs AG review of summary statements drafted by the Secretary of State for each initiative petition. Companion reviews cover the fiscal note summary (reviewed in Op. 45-2019) and the petition form. The substantive amendment was directed at Article III; the initiative process is in Mo. Const. art. III, §§ 49 to 53.

Citations

• § 116.334, RSMo (AG review of summary statement)
• Mo. Const. art. III (Legislative Department)
• Mo. Const. art. III, §§ 49 to 53 (initiative and referendum process)
• Initiative Petition 2020-032 (Johnson, Article III initiative-process reforms)
• Op. Mo. Att'y Gen. 45-2019 (Johnson 20-032 fiscal note summary approval)
• Op. Mo. Att'y Gen. 47-2019 (Johnson 2020-030 summary statement approval, parallel)

Source

• Landing page: https://ago.mo.gov/other-resources/ag-opinions/
• Original PDF: https://ago.mo.gov/wp-content/uploads/attachments/50-2019.pdf?sfvrsn=2

Original opinion text

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MISSOURI
ERIC SCHMITT
JEFFERSON CITY
P.O. Box 899
ATTORNEY GENERAL
65102
(573) 751-3321

February 15, 2019

OPINION LETTER NO. 50-2019

The Honorable John R. Ashcroft
Missouri Secretary of State
James C. Kirkpatrick State Information Center
600 West Main Street
Jefferson City, MO 65101

Dear Secretary Ashcroft:

This opinion letter responds to your request dated February 7, 2019, for our review under § 116.334, RSMo, of a proposed summary statement prepared for the petition submitted by Damien Johnson regarding a proposed constitutional amendment to amend Article III of the Missouri Constitution, (2020-032). The proposed summary statement is as follows:

Do you want to amend the Missouri constitution to:

• prohibit any changes to election laws without voter approval;
• prohibit a filing fee for proposed initiative petitions;
• prohibit requiring an initiative petition circulator (signature gatherer) from being a Missouri resident or a registered voter;
• allow signature gatherers to be paid per signature, by the hour or any way agreed to; and
• require the secretary of state's office to establish and operate a web-based application that allows people to sign initiative petitions electronically?

Pursuant to § 116.334, RSMo, we approve the legal content and form of the proposed statement. Because our review of the statement is mandated by statute, no action that we take with respect to such review should be construed as an endorsement of the petition, nor as the expression of any view regarding the objectives of its proponents.

Very truly yours,

ERIC S. SCHMITT
Attorney General

OP-2019-0040