Skip to content
Subscribe

The Missouri Resolution Designed to Sucker Voters into Banning Ranked Choice Voting

There is a resolution in the Missouri Legislature that if approved by voters would ban the use of ranked choice voting (RCV). However, RCV isn't the sole subject. There is another provision meant to trick voters into supporting it. 

The Missouri Resolution Designed to Sucker Voters into Banning Ranked Choice Voting
Photo credit by Steven Martin on Flickr
Published:

Photo Credit: Steven Martin / Flickr

There is a resolution in the Missouri Legislature that if approved by voters would ban the use of ranked choice voting (RCV). However, RCV isn't the sole subject. There is another provision meant to trick voters into supporting it.

Senate Joint Resolution (SJR) 78, which just recently cleared the state Senate and was introduced by Sen. Ben Brown, aims to amend the Missouri Constitution in two ways:

It stipulates that only citizens of the United States that are over the age of 18 and are residents in Missouri can vote in state elections. And, it prohibits the ranking of candidates in elections.

It's an odd combination of provisions. One has to do with voter eligibility. The other has to do with limiting voting methods. One is also already the law of the land.

Specifically, in Missouri and in the United States, people have to be citizens of the US and over the age of 18 to vote. It is enshrined in the US Constitution and the Missouri Constitution.

There is also a federal law passed in 1996 that stipulates that a noncitizen will face a fine and/or imprisonment for voting illegally.

The Missouri resolution would only change one word in Article VIII, Section 2 of the state constitution as it pertains to voter eligibility. Instead of "All citizens of the United States," it would say "only citizens."

There is no difference between the two. The constitution as well as state and federal law make it clear that citizenship is a requirement to vote.

When he introduced the resolution, Sen. Brown said the purpose of it was "to fortify our elections to make sure that every Missourian’s voice is heard and counted." There is nothing in the resolution that does this.

So, the question is, why is the citizenship requirement part of the resolution if it is already law? Put simply, to prey on the emotions of voters and give them something that is a guaranteed yes vote.

Even if it is for something that would do nothing.

Immigration and illegal crossings into US borders are hot button issues -- especially right now as voters are inundated with headlines about an escalating crisis at the US-Mexico border.

With a rise in illegal border crossings comes a concern among some that noncitizens will vote in and swing US elections. Candidates, particularly those who campaign to Republicans, try to stoke these fears to turnout their base.

There are a few anecdotal cases each election cycle of a noncitizen illegally registering and casting a ballot, but it is so rare that researchers say the number of occurrences is "infinitesimal."

However, this does not stop candidates and others from claiming that it happens in such large numbers that it constitutes a fraud on the elections process.

If SJR 78 clears the Missouri House and is approved to go before voters in November, Missourians can expect campaign ads for the resolution to focus mostly on the citizenship provision.

Of course voters are going to support something that says only citizens can vote. It is already how voter eligibility works in the US.

If Brown only tried to pitch a ranked choice voting ban, there is no guarantee it would pass -- especially in a state where voters have already shown they support comprehensive election reform.

And, there are cities like St. Louis that have already passed nonpartisan primary and voting reform.

Voters taking control over their elections has irked many Missouri lawmakers. There have even been multiple attempts to make it harder to get citizen-driven initiatives on the ballot and passed into law.

This is another issue that could go before voters in November.

RCV is a nonpartisan reform. It is used at the state level in Maine, typically considered a blue state, and Alaska, which typically swings red each election cycle.

It is used in cities with Republican mayors and majorities and cities with Democratic mayors and majorities. It has been used by both major parties for their nomination processes in states like Virginia and Utah.

In total, RCV is used in 60 jurisdictions in the US for party nomination processes, party-run primaries, absentee, overseas, and military voting, special elections, and/or standard elections.

Some cities may decide they want to use it. Others may decide they don't want it. SJR 78 would remove the choice, and supporters of the resolution may never even bring this up because it is not the winning issue.

The winning strategy for Brown and supporters of his resolution is to trick voters.

Adhere to the IVN etiquette

By posting a comment, you agree to adhere to our etiquette rules: No partisan attacks, no personal attacks, substantiate your sources, no self-promotion.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Republish this article

Republishing guidelines

Republish IVN articles for free. Independent Voter News articles may be republished online or in print under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, on these terms:

  1. Credit the author and IVN. Keep the byline ("By Author Name, Independent Voter News") and the attribution note at the end, which links to the original.
  2. Keep the meaning. You may update time and place references and apply your house style. You may trim for length, as long as the cuts don't change the meaning or misrepresent the author. Keep the headline. Mark any additions as your own (for example "Additional reporting by ...").
  3. Translations are welcome. Translate faithfully, add "Translated from English by [your outlet]", and tell us at editor@ivn.us.
  4. Keep the links, including the link to the original article.
  5. Keep the tracking image. The HTML includes a 1-pixel image that counts readers on your page. It collects no personal information.
  6. Photos and illustrations. Images credited to IVN may be used with this article only. Images credited to others (AP, Getty, Unsplash, Wikimedia and so on) stay under their owners' terms. Secure the rights or switch "Include images" off.
  7. Don't sell it. You can't sell our articles or sell ads specifically against them. Your normal site advertising is fine.
  8. No implied endorsement. Don't suggest that IVN or the author endorses you, your candidates or your causes, or that donations to you support IVN.
  9. Keep labels. Opinion or analysis pieces keep that label.
  10. Point search engines to the original. Where your CMS allows, set the canonical URL to the original IVN article.
  11. No bulk or automated republishing, and don't submit our articles to aggregators (Apple News, Google News, MSN) as your own.
  12. Corrections and removals. Update your copy when we correct it, and remove it promptly if we ask. We'll contact you at the email you give us.
  13. Questions or print republication: editor@ivn.us.
Preparing the article

The Missouri Resolution Designed to Sucker Voters into Banning Ranked Choice Voting

Choose a format
  • HTML
  • Email HTML
  • Markdown
  • Formatted (.docx)
  • Plain text
  • WordPress blocks
  • PDF
Choose a platform

Photos credited to others need their owners' permission.

Republishing somewhere else? Questions? editor@ivn.us