Missouri
Abortion-rights coalition launches campaign to put amendment on Missouri ballot • Missouri Independent
After months of court battles and internal squabbles, a coalition of Missouri abortion-rights organizations plan to officially launch an effort Thursday to put a constitutional amendment on the 2024 ballot to legalize abortion up until the point of fetal viability.
Despite reports of discord within the coalition, the campaign has the support of Abortion Action Missouri, the ACLU of Missouri and Planned Parenthood affiliates in Kansas City and St. Louis.
Missouri has one of the most restrictive laws in the country, banning all abortions except in the case of medical emergencies. A political action committee called Missourians for Constitutional Freedom announced Thursday it would begin to gather signatures to put an initiative petition on the statewide ballot rolling back that ban.
Missouri abortion-rights amendments face ‘torturous’ process to make it to 2024 ballot
The organization has settled on a version of its 11 initiative petitions that would allow the legislature to “regulate the provision of abortion after fetal viability provided that under no circumstance shall the government deny, interfere with, delay or otherwise restrict an abortion that in the good faith judgment of a treating health care professional is needed to protect the life or physical or mental health of the pregnant person.”
The proposed constitutional amendment won out over other versions, including one that would have sought to make abortion legal up to 24 weeks of pregnancy and another that would have removed any gestational limits on abortion completely.
“Missouri’s cruel and restrictive ban on abortion is tying the hands of doctors and preventing necessary care,” Dr. Iman Alsaden, advisor to Missourians for Constitutional Freedom and chief medical officer for Planned Parenthood Great Plains, said in a statement. “Missourians are taking a critical step to make their own medical decisions and kick politicians out of the exam room.”
The coalition has until May 5 to gather more than 171,000 valid signatures from across the state. If they succeed in this expensive endeavor, the amendment will appear on the statewide ballot.
A competing Republican-led ballot initiative, which started collecting signatures in November, is seeking to enshrine abortion rights in the constitution up to 12 weeks. It would also allow exceptions for rape and incest.
Dr. Selina Sandoval, who works as a full-time abortion provider in Kansas, said that practically every day she sees patients traveling from Missouri to Kansas for care. She said after the “devastating” news that the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, she’s hopeful change may be on the horizon.
“We’re very optimistic. We know that the majority of Americans and the majority of Missourians feel that abortion should be legal and accessible,” said Sandoval, who is also associate medical director at Planned Parenthood Great Plains. “They are risking financial security, they’re having to travel across state lines. And it’s just a very unnecessary, cruel, very unjust ban that we’re facing.”
Viability language
In the nearly 19 months since the June 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision put abortion laws in state’s hands, voters in seven states have approved ballot measures to preserve or expand abortion access.
Abortion-rights advocates have said they are confident an attempt to expand access would also pass in Missouri. But they were less sure of just how far to go in a state that has veered from a swing state to staunchly Republican over the last two decades.
Proponents settled on viability language, defined in the initiative petition as the point in pregnancy when “there is a significant likelihood of the fetus’s sustained survival outside the uterus without the application of extraordinary medical measures.”
Viability language is also drafted into proposed ballot measures this year in Arizona, Florida, Nebraska and Nevada. Last fall, Ohioans voted to legalize abortion up to the point of viability.
Viability can be difficult to define, though it’s usually determined to be between 20 and 25 weeks gestation. Despite the language being somewhat common in state laws, it’s also controversial. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has dissuaded the use of viability limits in legislation, as there is no single clinical definition of viability.
“Legislative bans on abortion care often overlook unique patient needs, medical evidence, individual facts in a given case, and the inherent uncertainty of outcomes in favor of defining viability solely by gestational ages,” the college wrote in a statement online. “Therefore, ACOG strongly opposes policy makers defining viability or using viability as a basis to limit access to evidence-based care.”
Mallory Schwarz, executive director of Abortion Action Missouri, said the coalition believes the viability language meets most Missourians where they are.
“Many members of our coalition are out talking about abortion with Missourians every day, and we know that Missourians often have complex or nuanced positions on abortion, but there is one thing that they are aligned in, and it’s that they want to end the abortion ban,” Schwarz said. “That they do not support the abortion ban we are living under today, and we are confident this is our best path forward.”
Race to gather signatures
Abortion-rights groups around the state have blamed Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft for the delay in getting a petition off the ground.
In November, Missourians for Constitutional Freedom, backed by the Missouri ACLU, won a legal battle over the ballot summary language, giving the coalition the green light to move ahead with signature gathering.
“Any campaign that would move forward is left to contend with a myriad of challenges, including a severely constricted timeline,” Schwarz said following a November court ruling. “At the same time there is incredible opportunity and there’s hope here because we continue to see abortion rights and access remain a top priority for voters across the country.”
Now Schwarz said she is confident they can raise the money to get the signatures they need despite the short timeline, though she didn’t provide clarity on how much money has been raised, or how soon signature gathering will begin.
In Ohio, more than $70 million was spent on both sides in the fight over enshrining abortion rights in the state constitution, the Associated Press reported. This included several million in donations toward the pro-abortion movement from national funders.
The question remains for both of Missouri’s coalitions: Is there enough time and financial support to successfully gather the necessary signatures by May?
As of their January quarterly fundraising report filed to the Missouri Ethics Commission on Tuesday, the group had no cash on hand. They raised just shy of $13,500 in 2023, mostly in in-kind donations from the ACLU of Missouri for legal representation.
In mid-November, Jamie Corley, a longtime GOP Congressional staffer, launched a campaign effort for an initiative petition that would add rape and incest exceptions to Missouri’s abortion ban and legalize the procedure up to 12 weeks.
Like Missourians for Constitutional Freedom, Corley’s initiative also seeks to protect doctors and pregnant patients from prosecution. Currently, any health care providers who violate the law can have their medical licenses suspended or revoked and face a class B felony, and five to 15 years in prison.
As of Tuesday, Corley had raised more than $61,000, and had spent little of it, according to the Missouri Ethics Commission. The majority of the donations were given by Corley herself.
Experts have called Missouri’s signature gathering process costly and “tortuous.”
Jack Cardetti, who helped run a number of successful initiative petition campaigns in Missouri, previously told The Independent that high dollar donations can be an indicator of success as the deadline to collect signatures from six of Missouri’s eight congressional districts draws near.
Anti abortion group mobilizes against ballot efforts
Last week, a political action committee called Missouri Stands with Women was launched to “push back against the Big Abortion Industry.”
The committee, whose president is veteran anti-abortion activist Sam Lee, was formed to fight any abortion initiative petitions that make it to the ballot.
“Out-of-state extremists pushing Big Abortion’s agenda are intent on using the initiative petition process to reverse all the pro-life work our state has undertaken to protect the dignity of life, safety of women and parental rights,” Stephanie Bell, a spokeswoman for Missouri Stands with Women and a lawyer based out of Jefferson City, said in a news release Tuesday.
As of Thursday morning, the group had received one donation of just over $5,000, from the Missouri Catholic Conference.
In the December issue of The Messenger, a publication by the Missouri Catholic Conference, a letter from Missouri bishops encouraged Missourians to vote against any abortion initiatives that make it to the ballot.
“Even with legal protections for the unborn, as we have in our state today, more can still be done to build a culture of life,” the bishops wrote.
Missouri has long been a national example of what a state might look like post-Roe.
Since 2018, Missouri was already down to just one abortion clinic. Prior to the trigger law, abortion was banned after eight weeks in Missouri.
Missouri anti-abortion lawmakers for years have been making abortion access more difficult.
Before abortion became illegal, Missouri law required doctors to have admitting privileges at close hospitals before performing abortions. Patients sought abortions first had to receive state-mandated counseling from the doctor which discouraged abortion. If the woman still wanted to proceed, she then had to wait 72 hours to get the procedure, which had to be done by the same doctor who issued the counseling.
As a result, the number of abortions performed in Missouri dropped dramatically. In 2021, only 150 abortions were performed in Missouri, according to state health department data.
But many thousands of Missouri women are still getting abortions. In 2020, more than 3,200 Missourians received abortions in Kansas, according to the state health department. The same year, more than 6,500 Missourians received abortions in Illinois.
Thursday’s news release from the coalition also highlighted Missouri’s alarming rates of maternal mortality and morbidity, in part due to pregnancy complications.
“OBGYNs and maternity practices are packing up and moving away to avoid political harassment and criminalization,” the release read. “We don’t have time to wait. Together, we are going to end Missouri’s cruel abortion ban.”
Missouri
Boone Health files lawsuit against Missouri Heart Center, alleging contract breaches, data misuse
COLUMBIA, Mo. (KMIZ)
Boone Health is suing a Columbia-based cardiology group, alleging breaches of contract, misuse of confidential information and plans to engage in unlawful competition.
The lawsuit, filed in Boone County Circuit Court, targets Missouri Cardiovascular Specialists LLP, also known as the Missouri Heart Center or MO Heart, which has provided cardiology services to Boone Health for more than a decade. According to court documents, a renewed agreement was signed in 2021 covering professional services and management of Boone Health’s cardiology operations.
Boone Health alleges it paid the cardiology group millions of dollars under those agreements for staffing, administrative oversight and revenue cycle management, which included access to sensitive financial and patient-related data. In return, MO Heart and its physicians agreed to noncompete and confidentiality provisions designed to protect Boone Health’s business interests.
The health system claims MO Heart violated those agreements by preparing to launch a competing cardiology practice in the Columbia area, potentially as soon as the contracts expire on May 6, 2026. The lawsuit alleges the new venture would fall within a restricted geographic area and time frame outlined in the noncompete clause, which Boone Health argues is enforceable under Missouri law.
Boone Health also accuses MO Heart of disclosing or misusing confidential information, including billing rates, reimbursement data and strategic business details during its transition to new partnerships with outside organizations. Boone Health alleges in the lawsuit those actions could cause “severe and irreparable injury.”
In addition, Boone Health claims MO Heart obstructed access to critical systems and data. The lawsuit alleges the cardiology group cut off Boone Health’s access to a key billing and patient information platform and stopped sharing necessary data, raising concerns about continuity of patient care.
Boone Health alleged that MO Heart indicated that it intends to operate independently and has taken the position that the noncompete provisions are unenforceable, according to the filing.
Boone Health is asking a judge to rule the noncompete agreements that MO Heart signed are valid, as well as having MO Heart return or destroy confidential information, and delay starting a competing practice until May 2027.
A jury trial has been requested.
A spokesperson for Boone Health told ABC 17 News that it would provide additional details early next week.
Dr. James T. Elliott of MO Heart disagreed with allegations in the lawsuit through a written statement.
“For months, we have tried to meet with leadership team at Boone Health to work constructively towards a new, collaborative arrangement that would preserve access to and expand high‑quality care for our patients and for the entire community. Unfortunately, Boone refused to engage with us in any meaningful way. Instead, we have been met with a series of escalating legal threats, culminating in today’s filing,” the statement reads.
“Earlier today Boone Health filed a lawsuit against Missouri Heart Center. We disagree with the lawsuit’s allegations and believe those claims are both legally and factually incorrect. This litigation does not change our commitment to caring for patients.”
Missouri
Missouri bill that would split Jackson County and Kansas City gets little support from lawmakers
A Missouri House committee had its first hearing this week on a proposed constitutional amendment that would split Kansas City and Jackson County upon approval by voters.
The legislation is nicknamed “Jackxit,” a nod to Brexit, the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union in 2020.
Republican state Rep. Mike Steinmeyer is sponsoring the bill. He said eastern Jackson County voters feel underrepresented in the county government, and this legislation would give them the power to change that.
At the hearing, committee members listened to Steinmeyer’s presentation of the bill before asking questions and sharing their thoughts.
Democratic state Rep. Bridget Walsh Moore compared what the bill proposes to “The Great Divorce” that saw the legal separation of the city of St. Louis from St. Louis County in 1876.
Several committee members criticized a part of the bill that says if it’s signed into law, the question of whether to split the county in two would appear on the Missouri ballot every 10 years.
Moore called it a “never-ending clause.”
“There’s a provision that says every 10 years this has to go back on the ballot, whether you like it or not,” Moore said. “And we’re going to keep voting on it, until you vote the way we think you should.”
Democratic state Rep. Jeff Hales said the bill’s language suggests the question would reappear on the ballot every 10 years until it’s approved by voters.
“Why does it end when it’s approved if the importance and the value here is giving the voters of Jackson County a right to weigh in on their charter and their government?” Hales said.
Steinmeyer said that clause exists to give Jackson County voters the opportunity to weigh in on their form of government.
“It gives them the right to speak and say we want change, or we want to abolish and start over,” Steinmeyer said. “That’s all we’re asking for.”
Democratic state Rep. Ashley Aune questioned how the ballot question would protect the right of voters. Steinmeyer said it protects their right to vote and be heard, specifically on their governance.
Lobbyist Shannon Cooper testified on behalf of the city of Kansas City, the Greater Kansas City Chamber of Commerce and the Civic Council of Greater Kansas City. He said during a public comment period that the bill was “the most befuddling piece of legislation” that he’s had to testify for or against.
Cooper brought up the historic recall election of County Executive Frank White Jr. and said the recall showed the system Steinmeyer is trying to fix with this bill can work.
“If the voters are not happy, they can deal with their problems,” Cooper said. “They’ve proven that in the last year.”
No action was taken on the bill, and it is not yet scheduled for a future hearing.
Missouri
Kansas City, Missouri, City Council voted Thursday to approve the city’s $2.6 billion budget for 2026-27
KANSAS CITY, Mo. — The Kansas City, Missouri, City Council voted Thursday to approve a $2.6 billion budget for the city’s fiscal year of 2026-27.
The budget includes $744 million in spending for public safety, including $26.3 million for a new Department of Community Safety and $4.2 million to hire 50 new KCMO Police Department officers, along with 10 call takers and 10 dispatchers.
“Our budget respects the strong fiscal foundation the taxpayers have helped Kansas City build, maintaining a rainy-day fund of over $200 million, increasing road resurfacing, hiring more public safety and city workers, and investing in all Kansas City neighborhoods,” Mayor Quinton Lucas said in a news release from the city. “In a city that can walk and chew gum, we are proud to welcome the world while delivering strong basic services for Kansas City’s families.”
The council voted to spend $83.8 million for the Kansas City Area Transportation Authority to provide bus services, but the KCATA may have to make cuts in bus services even with a $6 million boost in funding from the city.
In addition, the council approved spending $39.4 million for citywide street resurfacing and $1.5 million for tearing down dangerous buildings.
“This budget reflects a collaborative effort across the city, and provides a clear path for Kansas City to keep moving forward with discipline, accountability and a focus on service,” City Manager Mario Vasquez said in the news release. “Thank you to the council for its thoughtful deliberation and input in crafting this budget.”
More information on the fiscal year 2026-27 budget can be found on the city’s website.
—
-
Detroit, MI1 week agoDrummer Brian Pastoria, longtime Detroit music advocate, dies at 68
-
Movie Reviews1 week ago‘Youth’ Twitter review: Ken Karunaas impresses audiences; Suraj Venjaramoodu adds charm; music wins praise | – The Times of India
-
Sports7 days agoIOC addresses execution of 19-year-old Iranian wrestler Saleh Mohammadi
-
New Mexico5 days agoClovis shooting leaves one dead, four injured
-
Business1 week agoDisney’s new CEO says his focus is on storytelling and creativity
-
Technology6 days agoYouTube job scam text: How to spot it fast
-
Tennessee4 days agoTennessee Police Investigating Alleged Assault Involving ‘Reacher’ Star Alan Ritchson
-
Texas1 week agoHow to buy Houston vs. Texas A&M 2026 March Madness tickets
