When voters head to the ballot box on Tuesday, they will face many contentious questions that have been dissected 100 different ways: Kamala Harris or Donald Trump, Lucas Kunce or Josh Hawley, should abortion be legal or illegal? I don’t think I’m very likely to sway anyone one way or another on any of these. Where I do think I can be of some service, though, is in deciphering the lesser-known questions that will also appear on voters’ ballots.

What follows is a look at every proposition and amendment (besides Amendment 3) on the ballot at the state, county, and municipal levels, including how I would vote and why. You can find the full sample ballot here; the items below are listed in order of how they will appear.

Missouri

Gambling

State Constitutional Amendment 2: No

Amendment 2 would allow state-wide sports gambling including on mobile devices, and charge a 10% tax on all revenue minus expenses to fund education. There is substantial evidence to suggest that legalizing sports gambling in a given state is associated with increased rates of personal bankruptcy and lower credit scores amongst the state’s residents. The vast majority of people can gamble responsibly, but it’s a small percentage of compulsive addicts that these companies make the vast majority of their profits from. Getting people addicted by making betting way more convenient is their entire business model. If we want to increase funding to education, the legislature can simply pass a law that does that, but funding education by ruining people’s lives is a terrible idea.

State Constitutional Amendment 5: Probably Yes

Amendment 5 would allow the construction of a casino at the Lake of the Ozarks. Does adding another casino to the state make gambling slightly more convenient? Yes. But not nearly by as much as putting a miniature casino in every person’s pocket. I don’t need a casino at the Lake of the Ozarks, but I don’t really have a problem with it either. Feels like as good a place as any.

Law Enforcement & Criminal Justice

State Constitutional Amendment 6: Probably No

Amendment 6 would make it so that sheriffs’ retirement packages are funded by fees charged to people the sheriff’s office has arrested/prosecuted. I’m not really a fan of the idea of sheriffs financially benefitting from arresting more people because I think it leads to some pretty diverse incentives. The one saving grace is that sheriffs are elected meaning if they act corruptly, they can be voted out. Still, people’s knowledge of their local sheriffs is low, and there’s probably a fair amount of shenanigans they can get away with before facing any sort of electoral consequences.

Electoral Process

State Constitutional Amendment 7: No

As written, this amendment has three parts it 1) takes the already existing law that only citizens can vote and puts it in the state constitution, 2) disallows approval and ranked-choice voting, and 3) disallows jungle-primary systems in which the general election can be between two people of the same party if they were the top vote-getters in a non-partisan primary.

The first issue is purely red-meat to try and get Republicans to vote for the measure as it would change nothing in practice since non-citizens already can’t vote. The other two changes are the main points of the provision. As you’ll recall from the piece I wrote last spring, I’m a big fan of ranked-choice voting and I therefore think this is a terrible change. Competitive elections are the life-blood of democracy and yet it is rare that voters in either ruby-red rural Missouri or sapphire-blue St. Louis where a single party dominates have a real choice in the general election. There are many reforms we can make to improve electoral competition, but this amendment would disallow all of them in favor of locking in those currently in power. Preserve the power of your vote and check “no”.

Minimum Wage

State Proposition A: Toss-up

Prop A asks if we should increase minimum wages to $15 by 2026 and then ensure it keeps pace with inflation thereafter. It also exempts local governments, school districts, and educational institutions. The economic consensus is that 1) increased minimum wages help people currently making the minimum wage, 2) increased minimum wages slightly reduce employment in urban areas while having less of an effect in rural areas, and 3) that the cost to firms of paying increased minimum wages is partially passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices. The more efficient way to increase wages is by running the economy hot (low unemployment, low interest rates, high growth) and letting wages naturally grow/condense, but those factors are determined mostly at the national level and is not really something the state has control over. Overall, it’s probably pretty harmless, but I don’t think it has much of a positive impact either.

St. Louis County

St. Louis County Proposition A: No

Prop A would make it so that vacancies on the county’s Port Authority Board of Commissioners is chosen by the Council Member representing the district that the vacancy occurs in rather than the County Exec, as is currently the case. We want our electoral system to be responsive to the desires of the people, and people are much more likely to know who the County Executive is and render a verdict on how good of a job they’ve done than they are to know who their Council Member is or whether or not they’ve done a good job. Concentrating power in the positions that attract the most scrutiny improves transparency. This measure would do the opposite.

St. Louis County Proposition C: Probably No

Prop C would give the St. Louis County Council its own lawyer separate from the County Executive’s lawyer since the Council believes there are many cases in which their interests are not aligned with the Executive’s. Coming off New York’s congestion pricing fiasco, I’m sympathetic to that argument, but I’m also pretty tired of the Sam Page vs. County Council fight. Two duly elected branches of government constantly engaging each other in legal battles doesn’t do anything to improve people’s lives. Instead of two lawyers fighting over the same financial resources, it would be better to force Page and the Council to agree on one counsel and give each recourse of for removing said counsel if either side stopped believing that they represented their shared interests.

St. Louis County Proposition O: Yes

Prop O cleans up language in the County Charter to clarify that newly elected officials take office on the first Tuesday in January rather than the second. One week probably isn’t going to matter, but in general I’m in favor of shortening the lame-duck period (the post-election period in which defeated officials already know they’re on their way out the door) as much as possible. As we saw with January 6th, when people have power and nothing to lose, the incentives to behave ethically rather than self-serve can be diminished. Reducing the opportunity for politicians with one foot out the door to engage in some light corruption by a week is a solid improvement.

Kirkwood

City of Kirkwood Proposition R: Yes

Prop R would remove the residency requirements for the City Attorney position, allowing them to recruit from lawyers outside of Kirkwood’s boundaries. I think it makes more sense to prioritize getting a good city attorney no matter where they live. A lawyer from somewhere else probably is even going to have fewer conflicts of interest than a lawyer who knows everyone in town. We’re also one of the only munis in St. Louis County to still have residency requirements for the position. We’re only handcuffing ourselves.

City of Kirkwood Proposition T: No

I’ve written fairly extensively about Prop T already including:

• Why I’m against it: Four Reasons I’m Against Prop T
• Some alternative means of funding our streets: Three Alternatives To New Transportation Tax
• And what I think a better use-case for a Transportation Development District might be: Micro-Transit: A Better Use for TDD

So I don’t have a lot to add here, but I do think you should vote against the measure and encourage our leaders to think a little more creatively and act a little more boldly to try and solve our problems.

See You on the Other Side

And that’s it! I’m sure I’ll have more to say in Thursday’s newsletter, but until then, may the odds ever be in your favor!