MO Republicans trying to sneak abortion ban past voters in murky language | Opinion
Everything you need to know about the latest effort to ban abortion in Missouri comes down to this: Republicans don’t actually want voters to know they’re going to ban abortion. Again.
They’re trying to sneak it past you.
Show-Me State voters next year will be asked to approve a state constitutional amendment repealing the abortion protections they approved just last November. It’s a big deal. But the latest ballot language — submitted last week by Secretary of State Denny Hoskins — doesn’t declare the measure’s purpose so directly.
Instead, it seems designed to confuse voters at the polls.
According to Hoskins’ ballot language, the proposed amendment guarantees women medical care “for emergencies, ectopic pregnancies, and miscarriages,” while ensuring “women’s safety during abortions” and “parental consent for minors.” It also amends the Missouri Constitution to allow abortions for “medical emergencies, fetal anomalies, rape, and incest.” And — by the way — it also prohibits “same-sex procedures for children.”
If you saw those words in the voting booth, you might think that the proposed amendment protects the abortion rights of Missouri women.
It doesn’t. Again — it can’t be said often or loudly enough — it paves the way largely to reimpose the abortion ban that Missouri voters knocked down last year.
Back to the drawing board
Seems sneaky, right? Not according to the secretary of state.
“My office remains dedicated to ensuring voters are presented with clear and accurate information as they consider this important measure,” Hoskins said in a Friday statement.
Maybe. Maybe not. It’s worth noting that the proposed ballot description was a second bite at the apple.
His first submission of ballot language — made just a week prior, using verbiage approved by lawmakers — was rejected by Circuit Judge Daniel Green, who said it was “insufficient and unfair” because it failed to alert voters to the measure’s actual intent: banning abortion.
If clarity is the standard, Green should probably send Hoskins back to the drawing board again.
To be fair to Hoskins, he is working with the material given to him by the Missouri General Assembly. As The Star’s Kacen Bayless and Jonathan Shorman pointed out in May, the proposed amendment “does not mention an abortion ban” and instead uses the language of guaranteeing “access to care.”
If the language is murky, though, the intent is clear.
The language of last November’s pro-choice Amendment 3 was admirably direct: “The Government shall not deny or infringe upon a person’s fundamental right to reproductive freedom,” it declared at the outset, noting that such freedom included the right to make decisions about “abortion care” among other options. Missourians knew what they were voting for.
The proposed new amendment quite literally crosses that language out of the state constitution. Instead, it says that because of “grave moral and ethical concerns,” the General Assembly can pass laws that “regulate the provision of abortions, abortion facilities, and abortion providers” and that those laws can “include, but not be limited to” a range of regulations involving abortion.
It’s that language — saying the assembly’s powers will to regulate abortion “not be limited” to a few rules involving the cleanliness of abortion facilities — that point the way to a new ban.
After all, Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the anti-abortion rights group Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, in May applauded Missouri legislators for “passing this pro-life amendment” and putting it on next year’s ballot.
At least she is being forthright.
‘Missouri values’ hiding the ball
The reason for all this linguistic slipperiness seems obvious enough: Missouri Republicans don’t think they can win the abortion issue if they state their plain intent.
After all: They lost once already.
It’s the same reason they are trying to pass a different ballot measure that would make it all but impossible to pass future ballot measures. And it’s why they passed a new gerrymandered congressional map to take away the seat of Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, the Kansas City Democrat, and give it to a Republican candidate. They don’t trust voters to make the right decisions, and they get to decide which decisions are right.
Self-governance is woke and outdated, apparently.
Gov. Mike Kehoe, a Republican, has referred to these efforts to mislead, silence and bypass voters as an expression of “Missouri values,” as if the voters who approved abortion protections and made Cleaver their congressman weren’t also Missourians expressing the fullness of their own values.
You have to ask, though: What kind of values are best advanced by hiding the ball? What kind of values must be enforced by fooling voters? Shouldn’t “Missouri values” involve truthfulness and plain-speaking instead of trickery?
For the moment, though, the most important question is this: Why won’t Missouri Republicans simply tell the truth about their anti-abortion rights crusade?
This story was originally published September 29, 2025 at 1:21 PM.
