A cleaner Missouri: the argument for Amendment 1

A cleaner Missouri: the argument for Amendment 1

Editorial Comments Off 92

The following editorial is an edition of Fireside Chats with Ryan, a political editorial column. All views, thoughts and opinions belong solely to the author and do not represent those of The Drury Mirror. 

This fall an important measure will be voted on that, if passed, could help clean up Missouri’s politics. The measure, known as CLEAN Missouri or Amendment 1, focuses on working to create a more partisan state government. Because of the implications that the bill could hold, people with more conservative ideology believe that the best course of action would be to vote the proposition down.

Amendment 1 would put harsh restrictions on state officials and regulate how officials accept money while they are campaigning for re-election, changing the current campaign finance laws. Amendment 1 would forbid candidates from accepting unlimited funds through campaigning; an individual could only donate a maximum of $2,500 to a single candidate, and this donation could only be made once per election. Amendment 1 would also limit the amount that lobbyists can use to buy gifts for legislators, totaling out at just $5.

A measure like this would help fix many of the problems that we have with financing here in Missouri. Just like with most states, many of our representatives have their hands deep in the pockets of the Koch brothers, a pair of Kansas-based men infamous for donating to conservative candidates. This measure would limit the amount of donations they give candidates to subdue their influence, along with the influences of many others, in our state legislature.

Photo above and logo via CLEAN Missouri.

The second part of the measure addresses Missouri’s redistricting laws. Currently, Missouri law states that two boards are created every time the districts are redrawn. Each board is composed of half Republican and half Democrat seats. In order for a proposal to succeed, the map must win 70 percent of the votes from a board.

The problem with this law is that it can create uneven districts; there doesn’t need to be a unanimous vote to approve the redistricting. The party in power can just bribe a few of the other party’s members by guaranteeing they won’t bury their district in a gerrymandered mess.

The new law would create the position of State Demographer, a non-partisan position filled by an individual selected by the State Auditor, the State Senate Majority Leader and the State Senate Minority Leader, just to name a few individuals involved.

Whenever the redistricting process comes around, the demographer would then create the map and pass it on to the two aforementioned boards, who would then make amendments to the map. If the amended map gets 70 percent of the two boards votes, it passes; however, if the amended map cannot pass then the demographer’s original map is passed.

Amendment 1 may be getting a lot of pushback from conservative voices and for good reason. The amendment would fight against unfair elections and redistricting, as well as make sure that we keep money from influencing our representatives. To me, the amendment may not be a perfect one, and in some places, it doesn’t go far enough, but it’s definitely a step in the right direction.

Article written by Ryan Smith.

Author

Search

Back to Top