Missouri Personhood Amendment (2010)
|Not on Ballot|
| This measure did not or |
will not appear on a ballot
Following the November 2, 2010 general elections Steven Ertelt, founder and editor of LifeNews.com, a Christian anti-abortion news site, wrote in a December 21, 2010, article on RedState.com that, "In order to defeat Obama and ultimately stop abortions, personhood amendments must be put aside in 2012 so the pro-life community can focus on the number one goal: installing a pro-life president who will put the nation in a position to legally protect unborn children. ... Without putting amendments aside and putting the focus on the 2012 elections, abortion on demand could remain in place for another 37 years."
Text of measure
Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to define the term “person” to be from the beginning of biological development and grant such person constitutional rights and access to courts under the equal protection, due process, and open courts provisions of the Missouri Constitution?
According to the secretary of state's office, "Most state and local governmental entities estimate no costs or savings. However, depending on the legal interpretation of the proposal, some state and local governmental entities may incur unknown costs related to court actions, program benefits for the unborn, health services to pregnant women, and the possible prohibition of certain research activities."
- Eagle Forum, a conservative, pro-life interest group led by Phyllis Schlafly, publicly announced its opposition to the Missouri Personhood Amendment and personhood amendments in Florida, Nevada and Montana. On November 30, 2009, the group posted the following a statement on its website that read in part: "The ‘personhood’ initiative lost by a landslide of 73% to 27% in Colorado in 2008, and its unpopular coattails hurt good pro-life candidates there. This poorly designed initiative would not prevent a single abortion even it if became law, and its vague language would enable more mischief by judges." The full statement can be found here.
- Missouri Right to Life also expressed opposition, announcing in December 2009 that "the proposed amendment to the Missouri constitution would not stop a single abortion." The group's online statement continued: "[I]f the amendment is meant to be a direct attack on Roe v. Wade, it is poorly advised. Direct attacks in law, as in war, lead to defeat if they are mounted in the wrong circumstances."
- Pam Fichter, president of Missouri Right to Life, reiterated the group's position in a December 23, 2009, story at OneNewsNow.com: "[I]f the Personhood Amendment is meant to be a direct attack on Roe, it's not going to have any impact. ... Sometimes direct attacks can lead to defeat, and that can be pretty devastating."
- Gregory Thompson, sponsor of the Missouri Personhood Amendment, said on the December 25, 2009 broadcast of Bob Enyart Live that three other pro-life groups also opposed his amendment: the Missouri Catholic Conference; Concerned Women for America; and the Missouri Family Policy Council, an affiliate of Focus on the Family.
- On April 19, 2010, Missouri’s five Roman Catholic bishops issued a joint statement noting that "court rulings affirm that an unborn child is already considered a person under Missouri law." The bishops asked Missouri Catholics to support instead legislative efforts aimed at reducing the number of abortions in the state. The statement read, in part:
"Through the Missouri Catholic Conference, and in our day-to-day ministry, we work tirelessly to promote human life from conception to natural death. This legislative session, the MCC is working to pass pro-life legislation strengthening Missouri’s informed consent laws, and assuring that abortion is not provided through the health insurance exchanges established under the new healthcare reform law."
Opponents challenge measure
- The lawsuit argued that the ballot title would mislead voters and did not disclose the possible impact of the measure. Supporters of the measure disagreed. Keith Mason of Personhood USA said, "the legal and constitutional 'fallout' of a Missouri Personhood amendment, is that all humans in the state of Missouri have human rights...All humans are people, and must be protected." Since the ballot title was approved by the Missouri Secretary of State's office, the ballot title lawsuit was filed against that office.
- The lawsuit argued that the measure, as filed, violated Missouri's single-subject rule.
Dr. Gregory Thompson
P.O. Box 14560
Springfield, MO 65814
Path to the ballot
- See also: Missouri signature requirements
To qualify for the ballot, the initiative required signatures from registered voters equal to 8% of the total votes cast in the 2008 governor's election from six of the state's nine congressional districts. Petition signatures are due by May 2, 2010.
According to a May 4, 2010, article on LifeNews.com, "Those spearheading the amendment in Missouri received 'only a fraction' of the 150,000 signatures required to get it before voters this Fall."
- Full Text for Personhood Amendment
- Eagle Forum Opposes Personhood Amendment
- Missouri Right to Life Statement on "Personhood" Initiative Petition
- Joint Statement of the Missouri Catholic Bishops on the Personhood Amendment Petition Drive
- Pioneer Press,"New anti-abortion tactic: Redefine 'personhood'," April 11, 2010
- World Magazine,"2010 Preview: Ballot initiatives are a way for citizens to settle an issue directly without state legislatures," January 16, 2010
- Amendment won't change much
- ↑ "Put Personhood Amendments Aside to Defeat Obama, Stop Abortion," retrieved December 22, 2010
- ↑ Missouri Secretary of State,"Constitutional Amendment to Article I, Relating to the Definition of "Person" 2010-068," retrieved November 23, 2009
- ↑ "Eagle Forum Opposes Personhood Amendment," retrieved December 30, 2009
- ↑ Missouri Right to Life, "Missouri Right to Life Statement on "Personhood" Initiative Petition," retrieved December 11, 2009
- ↑ OneNewsNow.com, "Amendment won't change much," retrieved December 29, 2009
- ↑ Bob Enyart Live, "Talking to Palin & Personhood MO," retrieved December 29, 2009
- ↑ 7.0 7.1 "Joint Statement of the Missouri Catholic Bishops on the Personhood Amendment Petition Drive," retrieved April 20, 2010
- ↑ One News Now,"Planned Parenthood pauses personhood effort," November 27, 2009
- ↑ 9.0 9.1 LifeSiteNews,"Planned Parenthood Attempts to Strangle Personhood Ballot in Missouri," November 4, 2009
- ↑ LifeNews.com, "Missouri Personhood Amendment on Abortion Fails to Qualify for November Ballot," retrieved May 12, 2010
- ↑ Colorado Statesman, "Personhood amendment revised and revived", July 3, 2009
State of Missouri
Jefferson City (capital)
|State executive officers||
Governor | Lieutenant Governor | Attorney General | Secretary of State | Treasurer | State Auditor | Commissioner of Education | Director of Insurance | Director of Agriculture | Director of Natural Resources | Director of Labor & Industrial Relations | Chairman of Public Service Commission |
Sunshine Law | Transparency Checklist | Government corruption reports | Transparency Legislation | Open Records procedures | Transparency Advocates | Transparency blogs | State budget | Taxpayer-funded lobbying associations |