Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Texas are holding elections next week. Find out what's on your ballot in our latest report.

Missouri House Bill 228 (2009)

From Ballotpedia
Revision as of 19:47, 31 October 2013 by JaimeB (Talk | contribs)

Jump to: navigation, search
BallotLaw final.png This ballot law article needs to be updated.

Missouri House Bill 228 is a bill sponsored by Missouri State House of Representative Michael Parson. It aims to make stricter laws regarding the circulation of petitions.


In the official text of the bill, it says its purpose is:

"To repeal sections 116.080 and 116.090, RSMo, and to enact in lieu thereof two new sections relating to petition circulators, with penalty provisions." [1]

Specific Requirements

In its main provisions, the bill:

  • Requires a petition circulator to be a United States citizen and a Missouri resident;[1]
  • Specifies that petition circulators cannot have been convicted of, found guilty of, or pled guilty to any offense involving forgery;[1]
  • Prohibits the payment of petition circulators on a per-signature basis;[1]
  • Prohibits petition circulators from soliciting or receiving signatures for two or more petitions simultaneously;[1]
  • Requires petition circulators to supply information to the Office of the Secretary of State verifying their eligibility and to swear by affidavit that they will comply with the conditions of the bill;[1]
  • Specifies that anyone violating the provisions of the bill will be guilty of a class A misdemeanor;[1]
  • Specifies that signatures collected by unregistered circulators will not be counted; and[1]
  • Specifies that anyone who knowingly signs any name other than his or her own to any petition will be guilty of a class one election offense.[1]


The primary sponsor of the bill is Missouri State Representative Michael Parson, R-133.



Unconstitutionality of bill

In the past case of Meyer v. Grant restricting payment of circulators was struck down as a violation of political speech. There has also been a recent backlash on the residency requirements proposed by Parson under the same reasoning, including the following cases: Yes on Term Limits v. Savage (Oklahoma), Bogaert v. Land (Michigan), and Nader v. Brewer (Arizona).

See also

External links