Missouri Amendment 1, State Treasurer Investment Authority Amendment (2022)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Missouri Amendment 1
Flag of Missouri.png
Election date
November 8, 2022
Topic
State executive official measures
Status
Defeatedd Defeated
Type
Constitutional amendment
Origin
State legislature

Missouri Amendment 1, the State Treasurer Investment Authority Amendment, was on the ballot in Missouri as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment on November 8, 2022.[1] The measure was defeated.

A "yes" vote supported this constitutional amendment to allow the state treasurer to invest state funds in highly rated municipal securities and to authorize the state legislature to pass laws allowing the treasurer to invest in "other reasonable and prudent financial instruments and securities."

A "no" vote opposed this constitutional amendment, thus continuing to prohibit the state treasurer from investing state funds in municipal securities.


Election results

Missouri Amendment 1

Result Votes Percentage
Yes 896,279 45.68%

Defeated No

1,065,773 54.32%
Results are officially certified.
Source


Overview

How would the amendment have changed the state treasurer's authority to invest?

See also: Text of measure

Amendment 1 would have amended the Missouri Constitution to authorize the state treasurer to invest state funds in highly rated municipal securities. Specifically, the state treasurer would have been allowed to invest in municipal securities that possess one of the five highest long term-ratings or short-term ratings issued by a nationally recognized rating agency. The ballot measure would also have allowed the legislature to pass laws allowing the treasurer to invest in "other reasonable and prudent financial instruments and securities."[2]

As of 2022, the state treasurer could invest in federal and agency bonds, time deposits in Missouri banks, repurchase agreements, or short-term unsecured corporate debt.Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; invalid names, e.g. too many

How did the amendment get on the ballot?

See also: Path to the ballot

To put a legislatively referred constitutional amendment before voters, a simple majority vote was required in both the Missouri State Senate and the Missouri House of Representatives.

Amendment 1 was introduced as House Joint Resolution 35 on January 7, 2021. On March 11, 2021, the state House passed HJR 35 in a vote of 156-1, with five absent and one vacancy. Rep. Andrew McDaniel (R) was the sole nay vote. On May 5, 2021, the state Senate voted 32-0, with two members absent, to pass HJR 35.[1]

Text of measure

A lawsuit has been filed against the ballot title and ballot summary by State Treasurer Scott Fitzpatrick (R).

Click here to read more about the lawsuit.

Ballot title

The ballot title for the measure was as follows:[3]

Do you want to amend the Missouri Constitution to:

  • allow the General Assembly to override the current constitutional restrictions of state investments by the state treasurer; and
  • allow state investments in municipal securities possessing one of the top five highest long term ratings or the highest short term rating?

State governmental entities estimate no costs and increased interest revenue of $2 million per year. Local governmental entities estimate no costs and increased interest revenue of at least $34,000 per year.[4]

Ballot summary

The ballot summary for the measure was as follows:[3]

A 'yes' vote will amend the Missouri Constitution to grant the General Assembly statutory authority to invest state funds and also expand the state treasurer's investment options. Currently, the Constitution grants the General Assembly no statutory investment authority and limits the treasurer's investment options. This amendment will allow the General Assembly by statute to determine investment avenues for the state treasurer to invest state funds, as well as allow the state treasurer to invest in municipal securities.

A 'no' vote will not amend the Missouri Constitution and limit the treasurer to investing state funds only in those investment options currently approved by the Constitution.

If passed, this measure will have no impact on taxes.[4]

Constitutional changes

See also: Article IV, Missouri Constitution

Amendment 1 would have amended section 15 of Article IV of the state constitution. The following underlined text would have been added, and struck-through text would have been deleted:[2] Note: Use your mouse to scroll over the text below to see the full text.

Text of Section 15: State Treasurer--Duties--Custody, Investment and Deposit of State Funds--Duties Limited--Nonstate Funds to Be in Custody and Invested by Department of Revenue--Nonstate Funds Defined

The state treasurer shall be custodian of all state funds and funds received from the United States government. The department of revenue shall take custody of and invest nonstate funds as defined herein, and other moneys authorized to be held by the department of revenue. All revenue collected and moneys received by the state which are state funds or funds received from the United States government shall go promptly into the state treasury. All revenue collected and moneys received by the department of revenue which are nonstate funds as defined herein shall be promptly credited to the fund provided by law for that type of money. Immediately upon receipt of state or United States funds the state treasurer shall deposit all moneys in the state treasury in banking institutions selected by him and approved by the governor and state auditor, and he shall hold them for the benefit of the respective funds to which they belong and disburse them as provided by law. Unless otherwise provided by law, all interest received on nonstate funds shall be credited to such funds. The state treasurer shall determine by the exercise of his best judgment the amount of moneys in his custody that are not needed for current expenses and shall place all such moneys on time deposit, bearing interest, in banking institutions in this state selected by the state treasurer and approved by the governor and state auditor or in obligations of the United States government or any agency or instrumentality thereof maturing and becoming payable not more than five seven years from the date of purchase. In addition the treasurer may enter into repurchase agreements maturing and becoming payable within ninety days secured by United States Treasury obligations or obligations of United States government agencies or instrumentalities of any maturity, as provided by law. The treasurer may also invest in banker’s acceptances issued by domestic commercial banks possessing the highest rating issued by a nationally recognized rating agency and in commercial paper issued by domestic corporations which has received the highest rating issued by a nationally recognized rating agency. The treasurer may also invest in municipal securities possessing one of the five highest long term ratings or the highest short term rating issued by a nationally recognized rating agency and maturing and becoming payable not more than five years from the date of purchase. The treasurer may also invest in other reasonable and prudent financial instruments and securities as otherwise provided by law. Investments in banker’s acceptances and commercial paper shall mature and become payable not more than one hundred eighty days from the date of purchase, maintain the highest rating throughout the duration of the investment and meet any other requirements provided by law. The state treasurer shall prepare, maintain and adhere to a written investment policy which shall include an asset allocation plan limiting the total amount of state money which may be invested in each investment category authorized by this section. The investment and deposit of state, United States and nonstate funds shall be subject to such restrictions and requirements as may be prescribed by law. Banking institutions in which state and United States funds are deposited by the state treasurer shall give security satisfactory to the governor, state auditor and state treasurer for the safekeeping and payment of the deposits and interest thereon pursuant to deposit agreements made with the state treasurer pursuant to law. No duty shall be imposed on the state treasurer by law which is not related to the receipt, investment, custody and disbursement of state funds and funds received from the United States government. As used in the section, the term “banking institutions” shall include banks, trust companies, savings and loan associations, credit unions, production credit associations authorized by act of the United States Congress, and other financial institutions which are authorized by law to accept funds for deposit or which in the case of production credit associations, issues securities. As used in this section, the term “nonstate funds” shall include all taxes and fees imposed by political subdivisions and collected by the department of revenue; all taxes which are imposed by the state, collected by the department of revenue and distributed by the department of revenue to political subdivisions; and all other moneys which are hereafter designated as “nonstate funds” to be administered by the department of revenue.[4]

Full text

The full text of the amendment can be read here.

Readability score

See also: Ballot measure readability scores, 2022

Using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) formulas, Ballotpedia scored the readability of the ballot title and summary for this measure. Readability scores are designed to indicate the reading difficulty of text. The Flesch-Kincaid formulas account for the number of words, syllables, and sentences in a text; they do not account for the difficulty of the ideas in the text. The state legislature wrote the ballot language for this measure.

The FKGL for the ballot title is grade level 12, and the FRE is 35. The word count for the ballot title is 78.

The FKGL for the ballot summary is grade level 15, and the FRE is 26. The word count for the ballot summary is 114.


Support

Supporters

Officials

Arguments

  • State Treasurer Scott Fitzpatrick (R): "It would allow the treasurer's office to invest in municipal securities. It would also give the General Assembly the power to add to the current investment options by passing a statute." He said what prompted his office to pursue the amendment was "the huge influx of cash" from tax revenue and COVID-19 stimulus money from the federal government and the low interest rate environment.

Opposition

If you are aware of any opponents or opposing arguments, please send an email with a link to [email protected].

Campaign finance

See also: Campaign finance requirements for Missouri ballot measures

If you are aware of a committee registered to support or oppose this amendment, please email [email protected].

   .sbtotaltable {
   width: 50%;
   }
   .sbtotaltable th {
    font-size:1.2em;
   }
   .sbtotaltable td {
       text-align:center;
      }
   .sbtotalheader {
       background-color: black !important;
       color:white !important;
       font-size:1.0em;
       font-weight:bold;
   }
   .sbtotaltotal {
       font-weight:bold;
   }
   

    
Cash Contributions In-Kind Contributions Total Contributions Cash Expenditures Total Expenditures
Support $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Oppose $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Media editorials

See also: 2022 ballot measure media endorsements

Support

The following media editorial boards published an editorial supporting the ballot measure:

  • St. Louis Post-Dispatch Editorial Board: This amendment would broaden the list of options for the state treasurer to invest funds in higher interest-bearing securities. Currently the constitution limits the treasurer to investments in federal or agency bonds. They’re stable but not always the highest earners. Broadening the treasurer’s options to include highly rated municipal securities or federal treasury bills gives the treasurer a greater ability to maximize taxpayer benefits.
  • St. Louis Post-Dispatch Editorial Board: "This amendment would broaden the list of options for the state treasurer to invest funds in higher interest-bearing securities. Currently the constitution limits the treasurer to investments in federal or agency bonds. They’re stable but not always the highest earners. Broadening the treasurer’s options to include highly rated municipal securities or federal treasury bills gives the treasurer a greater ability to maximize taxpayer benefits."
  • St. Joseph News-Press Editorial Board: "Amendment 1 would allow the state treasurer to utilize more options in the investment of state funds. It gives the legislature authority to pass laws allowing the treasurer to invest in “reasonable and prudent financial instruments and securities.” This should give voters pause, given some of the legislature’s decisions on past fiscal matters, but those concerns are outweighed by a provision in Amendment 1 that allows investments in municipal securities. This move is long overdue because munis are a reliable and safe investment vehicle for state funds."


Opposition

You can share campaign information or arguments, along with source links for this information, at [email protected]


Background

Missouri Treasurer's investment authority

See also: Missouri Treasurer

The state treasurer is the chief financial officer of the government of Missouri. The treasurer is responsible for maintaining the state funds by investing and maintaining the state budget. The department is divided into separate divisions, unclaimed property, savings programs, and investments. The treasurer's office manages taxpayer funds, safeguards unclaimed property, and oversees economic development programs. The treasurer is elected every four years.[5]

As of 2022, the state treasurer was authorized to invest in federal and agency bonds, time deposits in Missouri banks, repurchase agreements, banker's acceptance, or short-term unsecured corporate debt. On average, the state treasurer has $3.6 billion invested daily.Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; invalid names, e.g. too many

State investments

In fiscal year 2020, the state treasurer invested $5.9 billion. Of that total, $3.5 billion was invested in U.S. government securities, $1.7 billion was invested in repurchase agreements, $399.3 million was invested in commercial paper, $366.7 million was invested in time deposits, and $5,130 was invested in other investments. The chart below shows the percentage breakdown by asset class:

Ballot measures related to the state treasurer's investment authority

Ballotpedia has tracked the following ballot measures related to the state treasurer's investment authority outlined in section 15 of Article IV of the Missouri Constitution:

  • Approveda Amendment 3 (1956): Authorized the investment of state funds not needed for current operating expenses in short term U.S. obligations or interest-bearing time deposits
  • Approveda Amendment 6 (1986): Authorized non-state funds to be invested for the benefit of those particular funds and authorized investments in longer-term federal obligations and in other financial institutions
  • Approveda Amendment 5 (1998): Required the state treasurer to prepare a written investment policy for state funds and authorized additional categories of permitted investments to include banker's acceptances and commercial paper

Path to the ballot

See also: Amending the Missouri Constitution

To put a legislatively referred constitutional amendment before voters, a simple majority vote is required in both the Missouri State Senate and the Missouri House of Representatives.

Amendment 1 was introduced as House Joint Resolution 35 on January 7, 2021. On March 11, 2021, the state House passed HJR 35 in a vote of 156-1, with five absent and one vacancy. Rep. Andrew McDaniel (R) was the sole nay vote. On May 5, 2021, the state Senate voted 32-0, with two members absent, to pass HJR 35.[1]

Vote in the Missouri House of Representatives
March 11, 2021
Requirement: Simple majority vote of all members in each chamber
Number of yes votes required: 82  Approveda
YesNoNot voting
Total15615
Total percent96.30%0.60%3.10%
Democrat4602
Republican11013

Vote in the Missouri State Senate
May 4, 2021
Requirement: Simple majority vote of all members in each chamber
Number of yes votes required: 18  Approveda
YesNoNot voting
Total3202
Total percent94.12%0.00%5.88%
Democrat901
Republican2301

Lawsuit

  
Lawsuit overview
Issue: Whether the ballot language and the summary statement is accurate
Court: Filed in Cole County Circuit Court; appealed to Missouri Court of Appeals Western District
Ruling: Ruled in favor of defendants; the ballot language and summary are fair and sufficiently summarize Amendment 1; appeal rejected
Plaintiff(s): Missouri State Treasurer Scott Fitzpatrick (R)Defendant(s): Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft (R)
Plaintiff argument:
The ballot language and summary is misleading and unfair
Defendant argument:
The ballot language and summary accurately describes the amendment

  Source: St. Louis Post-Dispatch

On July 19, 2021, State Treasurer Scott Fitzpatrick (R) filed a lawsuit in Cole County Circuit Court arguing that the ballot language drafted by the secretary of state's office was misleading and flawed. The lawsuit states, "The Secretary of State’s summary statement of Amendment 1 is not a true and impartial statement of the purpose of the proposed measure. ... The erroneous and biased summary statement and fair ballot language should be vacated and replaced with corrected language that provides voters with true and impartial information about the amendment proposed by the joint resolution." Fitzpatrick said the use of the word "override" is argumentative and likely to create prejudice against the amendment.[6]

Fitzpatrick proposed replacing the ballot title and ballot summary with the following:[7]

Ballot title

Do you want to amend the Missouri Constitution to:

  • Allow state investments in municipal securities possessing one of the top five highest long term ratings or the highest short term rating; and
  • Allow the state treasurer to invest in other reasonable and prudent financial instructions and securities as authorized by the General Assembly?[4]


Ballot summary

A 'yes' vote will amend the Missouri Constitution to allow the state treasurer to invest in municipal securities, as well as allow the General Assembly to authorize by statute additional investment avenues for the state treasurer to invest state funds. Currently, the Constitution limits the treasurer’s investment options and grants the General Assembly no statutory authority to determine the treasurer’s investment options.

A 'no' vote will not amend the Missouri Constitution and limit the treasurer to investing state funds only in those securities currently listed in the Constitution.[4]

Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft (R) said Fitzpatrick and the state Legislature had the opportunity to draft their own ballot language but deferred to the secretary of state's office. He said, "I believe the ballot language my office prepared, and then subsequently approved by the Missouri Attorney General’s office, to be fair, unbiased and clear to Missouri voters when they head to the polls to consider this constitutional amendment."[6]

On December 13, 2021, Cole County Circuit Judge Daniel Green ruled that the secretary of state's ballot language and summary “fairly and sufficiently summarizes Amendment 1.” Judge Green did alter the "no" statement to read: "A ‘no’ vote will not amend the Missouri Constitution and limit the treasurer to investing state funds only in those investment options currently approved by the Constitution."[8]

Secretary Ashcroft's office released a statement saying, "We are pleased that the court ruled in our favor and that the Fair Ballot Language is certified to be used at all polling places. ... This was ridiculous from the beginning. It was a complete waste of taxpayer funds in an attempt to force a specific voter outcome on the amendment. I am pleased that the court affirmed that our summary of what the amendment would do was fair and sufficient."[8]

A spokesperson for State Treasurer Fitzpatrick said that they planned on appealing the ruling. His office said, "While the Treasurer is pleased the order made necessary changes to the fair ballot language that at least made it intelligible, we still believe the summary statement is unfair and will create a prejudice against the proposed amendment and the fair ballot language contains a plainly incorrect statement. As was always likely regardless of the initial outcome, this issue will be decided upon appeal."[8]

Treasurer Fitzpatrick appealed the ruling to the Missouri Court of Appeals Western District. On January 13, 2022, the court ruled against the state treasurer's appeal. Judge Cynthia Martin wrote in the opinion that the section in controversy is not "intentionally argumentative or likely to create prejudice or confusion for voters."[9]

How to cast a vote

See also: Voting in Missouri

Click "Show" to learn more about voter registration, identification requirements, and poll times in Missouri.

See also

External links

Footnotes

  1. 1.0 1.1 1.2 Missouri State Legislature, "HJR 35 Overview," accessed March 12, 2021
  2. 2.0 2.1 Missouri State Legislature, "House Joint Resolution 35," accessed March 10, 2021
  3. 3.0 3.1 Missouri Secretary of State, "2022 Ballot Questions," accessed July 9, 2021
  4. 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "quotedisclaimer" defined multiple times with different content Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "quotedisclaimer" defined multiple times with different content Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "quotedisclaimer" defined multiple times with different content
  5. Missouri Treasurer, "About the office," accessed January 26, 2021
  6. 6.0 6.1 St. Louis Today, "Top Missouri Republicans heading to court in dispute over ballot language," accessed July 20, 2021
  7. The Missouri Times, "Fitzpatrick sues Ashcroft over ballot measure language," accessed July 20, 2021
  8. 8.0 8.1 8.2 The Missouri Times, "Ashcroft prevails in treasurer’s legal challenge over ballot language," accessed December 15, 2021
  9. St. Louis Today, "Court rejects Missouri treasurer’s appeal against Ashcroft," accessed January 13, 2022
  10. Missouri Secretary of State - Elections and Voting, "Frequently Asked Questions," accessed April 4, 2023
  11. 11.0 11.1 11.2 Missouri Secretary of State, "Register to Vote," accessed April 4, 2023
  12. 12.0 12.1 12.2 NCSL, "State Profiles: Elections," accessed August 27, 2024
  13. BillTrack50, "MO HB1878," accessed April 4, 2023
  14. Missouri Secretary of State, "FAQs Voter Registration," accessed August 27, 2024
  15. Under federal law, the national mail voter registration application (a version of which is in use in all states with voter registration systems) requires applicants to indicate that they are U.S. citizens in order to complete an application to vote in state or federal elections, but does not require voters to provide documentary proof of citizenship. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, the application "may require only the minimum amount of information necessary to prevent duplicate voter registrations and permit State officials both to determine the eligibility of the applicant to vote and to administer the voting process."
  16. Missouri Secretary of State, "How To Vote," accessed August 27, 2024
  17. Missouri Secretary of State, "Do I need an ID to vote?" accessed April 3, 2023