August 1, 2026
Missouri Republican lawmakers defy their oaths to support the Constitution. Instead, they turn to democratic majorities of Missouri voters to shut down good initiatives, eliminate the only revenue source that can make liberty secure, support abortion, and fund government using socialism.
In state-government spending per capita, Missouri ranks #44-helpfully lower than all but Texas, Florida, Idaho, New Hampshire, Nevada, and North Carolina. Adjusted for purchasing power, Missouri ranks #41-still helpfully low.
In federal funding as a percentage of state-government spending, Missouri ranks #26-not helpfully low, instead run-of-the-mill median.
In Freedom Index scores, the percentages of Missouri state representatives and state senators who score 80% or higher are dismal-respectively 2% and 12%.
Further, none of these legislators scored above 83%. Lately, under Trump, even these scores are too low. The only national legislators who voted against the One Big Beautiful Bill inflationary spending increase for constitutionalist reasons had scores of 97% and 100%.
Selecting and electing Republican Progressive majorities has consequences. Missouri voters can't have nice things. Republican Progressive legislators pass trash.
August 4 Primary Election
Amendment 4: Good Petitions Prevented
Amendment 4 would bring good process reforms only while simultaneously requiring that measures favored by people in Missouri's rural congressional districts would need to also be favored by people in Missouri's urban congressional districts.
This would shut down crony initiatives, but this would also shut down popular initiatives like those that have worked in California.
Cronies would still get their way, by going directly to legislators to pass their priorities onto ballots.
Amendment 5: The Only Potentially-Fair Revenue Source Eliminated
Amendment 5 would replace income taxes with sales taxes.
From a constitutionalist standpoint, fully flat taxes on labor income are the only revenue source that takes from each person the same proportion of his liberty. So then with Amendment 5, the only way to not unduly deprive persons of liberty, which the Constitution requires, would get eliminated in Missouri according to the Missouri Constitution.
In practice, most voters pay relatively less income tax now but would pay relatively more sales tax under Amendment 5. Later voter remorse might produce pushback. But voters would find it hard to organize, after they have been sold out and then ill-advised by the best-organized, supposedly conservative Republicans.
November 3 General Election
Amendment 3: Abortion Supported
Amendment 3 would support abortion in cases of medical emergency, fetal anomaly, or up to 12 weeks after a child was formed by rape or incest.
Life begins at fertilization, and abortion unduly deprives a person of life. This violates the most-fundamental rule in the Constitution.
A fertilized egg growing in the fallopian tubes can't live to be born and meanwhile threatens the mother's life. Other medical emergencies can threaten a mother's life. To protect a mother's life in various clear, relatively rare cases, what's needed isn't legislation but merely adequate common sense somewhere along the line-whether from police, prosecutors, judges, jurors, jailers, media, or governors.
But meanwhile a child with a fetal anomaly, or a child of rape or incest, is a person who the Constitution's most-fundamental rule requires must not be unduly deprived of life.
This right of these most-helpless minorities is not being protected by national government people or by Missouri government people when they don't make people secure from abortion. The right of these minorities was not protected by Missouri's initiative petition process and by Missouri's urban voters in 2024 when they enacted support for abortion into the Missouri Constitution. By the Constitution, the duty to protect the right of these minorities is not to be shirked by government people and left in the hands of democratic majorities.
But abject shirking is rampant among government people nowadays, so here we are, with the government people having punted their prime responsibility to democratic majorities. In these circumstances, voters, at least, would do better to restore some protections by voting yes to Amendment 3.
But voters should also recognize that this approach is a workaround that only falls to them because national and state government legislative majorities, executives, and judicial majorities have in all cases been shirking their jobs of supporting the Constitution. Voters should recognize that having government officials support the Constitution is how the Constitution is designed to work, and is what would the best to protect minorities' rights. Voters would do best to select and elect representatives who support the Constitution.
Amendment 7: Socialism-Funded Government
Amendment 7 would create an endowment fund that would be invested in companies to generate revenue to support the state government. This would be government ownership of the means of production-a fundamental form of socialism.
Government ownership of production would be installed by taking private property for public purposes without just compensation, violating the Constitution.
Creating an unaccountable self-funded state government that would be able to use government force to further block cronies' competitors, further crowd out voluntary charities, and crowd out voluntary businesses would make Progressives' socialism all the more dominant. The state government would become even more difficult to severely limit and eventually make obsolete to make individuals' rights more secure from this government.
Republican Progressives keep refusing to take real action to reduce inflationary spending. They keep instead picking up lesser issues and shirking harder. Always vote instead for constitutionalists, in every Republican primary and in every general election.