






































Opponents of MO Abortion Rights Amendment Turn to Anti-Trans Messaging — ProPublica



































Skip to content  Menu Menu  ProPublica  Donate   ProPublica Investigative Journalism in the Public Interest  Menu Menu  Search Search    Donate   Nonprofit Explorer Local Initiatives Newsletters About Us   Mail Email Address:   Arrow Right Sign Up           Menu Menu  ProPublica  Donate   Close Close  ProPublica  Donate   Search ProPublica:  Search Search  Topics  Racial Justice  Racial Justice Healthcare  Health Care Politics  Politics Criminal Justice  Criminal Justice  more…  Browse by Place   Midwest  Northwest  South  Southwest  Texas  Type   Graphics & Data  Newsletters  Series  Videos    Local Reporting Network  Electionland  Data Store  Info   About Us  Impact  Jobs & Fellowships  Contact Us   Follow ProPublica  Bluesky Bluesky   Instagram Instagram   Facebook Facebook   X (Twitter)   YouTube YouTube   Threads Threads   LinkedIn LinkedIn   RSS RSS    








Billboards undermining support for an abortion rights amendment and asking people to “vote no” have popped up around Missouri.

Credit: 
        Photo illustration by ProPublica. Source image: Jeremy Kohler/ProPublica.
    




Health Care

        Opponents of Missouri Abortion Rights Amendment Turn to Anti-Trans Messaging and Misinformation
    
        Facing poll numbers showing support for a proposed amendment that would ensure reproductive rights in the state, abortion opponents have poured more than $1 million into a last-minute campaign to undermine support leading up to the election.
    
 



        by Jeremy Kohler 

Oct. 18, 2024, 5 a.m. EDT



  Share  


 Contrast  Change Appearance  Change Appearance AutoLightDark 

Republish





ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up for Dispatches, a newsletter that spotlights wrongdoing around the country, to receive our stories in your inbox every week.







The billboards have popped up along both Interstates 55 and 170 around St. Louis. They’re along I-70 between Columbia and St. Charles, in central Missouri. And there’s one across from a shopping center in Cape Girardeau, along the Mississippi River in the state’s southeast corner.
In fact, as the Nov. 5 election approaches, motorists can see the billboards all over Missouri.
Each one spreads claims designed to undermine support for an abortion rights amendment that was placed on next month’s ballot through the state’s initiative petition process. Some billboards warn voters to “STOP Child Gender Surgery,” even though the amendment doesn’t mention gender-affirming care. Other billboards say it would permit abortions in the ninth month of pregnancy, though a state appeals court ruling in a case challenging the wording of the amendment’s summary on the ballot said that was not true.
Missouri’s abortion law, which bans nearly all abortions except in cases of medical emergencies, with no exceptions for rape or incest, was put into effect in June 2022 after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. Amendment 3 would enshrine reproductive freedom in the state constitution, nullifying any law that restricts abortion before fetal viability, typically around the 24th week of pregnancy. The amendment would also safeguard other reproductive rights, such as access to in vitro fertilization and birth control. Polls show the measure is likely to pass — a recent survey showed 52% in favor and 34% opposed.



But abortion opponents, saddled with poll numbers that show their argument is losing even with the state’s largely conservative voters, are taking steps to undermine support for the amendment.
“Abortion rights are broadly popular all across the country, even in red states,” said Matthew Harris, an associate professor of political science at Park University, just outside Kansas City. “If you’re going to lose on the substance of that issue, you sort of have to try to make it about something else.”
The opponents have poured about $1 million into a late-hour misinformation campaign that has paid for radio ads and at least some of the billboards. The goal appears to be to sink the effort, or at least to try to redefine what it means to support it. Among the biggest contributors are John Sauer, the Missouri solicitor general from 2017 to 2023 who has served as a lawyer for former President Donald Trump.
Sauer, who has a long history of anti-abortion activism and represented Trump before the U.S. Supreme Court in his immunity case, has put $100,000 into a new political action committee — Vote “No” on 3 — that is funding many of the billboards, according to campaign finance reports. Sauer did not respond to voice and text messages to his cellphone. The PAC’s treasurer, Jim Cole, a longtime official with Missouri Right to Life, declined to comment.
Opponents are trying to capitalize on polls showing that Missourians oppose gender-affirming medical care for minors, which is already illegal for transgender children in the state, and allowing athletes to compete outside their birth gender. By combining the issues, political observers say, opponents are banking on confusing voters and building a broader base against the amendment.
The anti-transgender messaging in Missouri is part of a national trend, where Republicans are leveraging cultural issues like transgender rights to rally conservative voters in the 2024 campaigns.
Opponents are also strategizing about next steps if they lose at the ballot box. They are ready to shift their efforts to a more receptive audience: a state legislature dominated by deeply conservative politicians who have frequently acted against public opinion.



The Missouri General Assembly has a history of using “ballot candy,” where lawmakers add politically charged language they support to amendments to undo voter-approved measures that they don’t like. Some legislators have vowed to keep on fighting the abortion-rights amendment if it passes.
In 2018, for instance, voters overwhelmingly approved the Clean Missouri initiative, which aimed to reform some of the worst abuses of legislative redistricting. Two years later, Republican lawmakers introduced new ballot language that reframed the issue, focusing on minor ethics reforms while quietly seeking to reverse many of the changes in the Clean Missouri initiative. That repeal effort narrowly passed.
A similar tactic is evident in Missouri’s Amendment 7, which the legislature placed on this year’s ballot. While it is dressed up as a measure to ensure that only U.S. citizens can vote, something already required by law, its real impact would be to ban ranked-choice voting in the state, a move strongly supported by Republicans in the General Assembly.
Benjamin Singer, the former communications director for the Clean Missouri campaign, called the legislature’s action to undo Clean Missouri “brazen” and said the effort on Amendment 7 is part of a pattern. Singer, now chief executive officer of Show Me Integrity, a group focused on promoting democracy reforms in Missouri, said voters shouldn’t underestimate the lengths legislators will go to reverse popular measures.
“Think of the dirtiest trick in Missouri political history,” Singer said, “and plan for worse.”
State Rep. Brian Seitz, a Republican from Branson, said abortion-rights proponents were the ones playing tricks by trying to protect transgender men playing women’s sports and sex changes for minors. “What is Amendment 3 actually talking about? I say it’s a multisubject amendment that should not even be on the ballot. So might we look at those individual subjects? Of course, we will.”
Seitz said that if conservative lawmakers weren’t adequately representing the will of the people, “Why are we continuously elected?”
But while Missouri voters tend to elect conservative leaders into a legislative majority, many of the issues that resonate with voters tell a different story. Voters have rejected a law that would have allowed employees to opt out of paying union dues, legalized recreational marijuana and expanded Medicaid — policies at odds with the priorities those lawmakers have championed.
Those leaders this year tried to limit the ability of citizens to file amendments to directly change the constitution. Republicans wanted to include ballot candy in the measure that would have added unrelated issues about immigrants voting and foreign fundraising. But that measure went down to defeat after an all-night Democratic filibuster.
“Missouri voters don’t love the idea of government interference generally, but at the same time, they support conservative principles,” said Beth Vonnahme, associate dean in the School of Humanities and Social Sciences and professor at University of Missouri-Kansas City. “So when you have a candidate who’s advocating conservative principles, they win. But when you have amendments that are progressive but focus on government interference, they also tend to do pretty well.”
Before the abortion amendment made it on the ballot, it survived a number of legal challenges. In September, the Missouri Supreme Court ruled 4-3 to keep Amendment 3 on the ballot, rejecting claims that the initiative failed to list all laws it might affect.
Still, state Sen. Mary Elizabeth Coleman, a Republican from Jefferson County and an architect of the Missouri abortion ban — and one of the plaintiffs in the state Supreme Court case — said amendment proponents are lying “by saying it won’t do some things that it very obviously will do.” She said that if Amendment 3 passes, the only way for lawmakers to undo the damage would be to put a new amendment on the ballot to overturn it.



ProPublica





Read More







Three Months After Missouri Voted to Make Abortion Legal, Access Is Still Being Blocked



Marcia McCormick, a Saint Louis University law professor who specializes in sexuality and the law, called the billboard claims highly misleading “straw man” arguments. She emphasized that while Amendment 3 ensures reproductive freedom, it is narrowly focused on fertility and childbirth.



Michael Wolff, a retired chief justice of the Missouri Supreme Court, said he was confident anti-abortion lobbyists are already working with legislators on a new amendment. Wolff, who helped advise the Amendment 3 proponents on ballot language, said he anticipated that the effort would lead with the transgender medical care issue, as the billboards have done.
He said lawmakers might lead a new amendment “the same way they started out with Clean Missouri — they started out with something that people would agree with,” adding, “Everybody with any resources that puts together ballot propositions is going to poll on what the voters will find attractive.”



Filed under —


Health Care


Abortion


Politics








Jeremy Kohler





X





 

Jeremy Kohler is a St. Louis-based reporter covering issues in Missouri and the Midwest.


More Stories



  Contact Me  


 
 
 
 







More in Health Care


Caret














                                    Three Months After Missouri Voted to Make Abortion Legal, Access Is Still Being Blocked
                            


                            Reproductive rights are now enshrined in the state constitution, but Missouri’s main abortion provider is fighting legal hurdles to resume offering the procedure. Meanwhile, anti-abortion lawmakers strategize to prevent a return of abortion services.
                    

            by Jeremy Kohler,             Feb. 5, 2025, 4:40 p.m. EST












                                    Dozens of People Died in Arizona Sober Living Homes as State Officials Fumbled Medicaid Fraud Response
                            


                            Arizona officials acknowledged that a fraud scheme targeting Indigenous people with addictions cost taxpayers $2.5 billion. But they haven’t accounted publicly for the number of deaths tied to the scheme.
                    

            by Mary Hudetz, ProPublica, and Hannah Bassett, Arizona Center for Investigative Reporting,             Jan. 27, 2025, 7 a.m. EST










Committed to Jail


                                    Is a New Mississippi Law Decreasing Jailings of People Awaiting Mental Health Treatment? The State Doesn’t Know.
                            


                            Community mental health centers, counties and a state agency have reported vastly different numbers of people who spent time in jail while waiting to be treated for serious mental illness.
                    

            by Gwen Dilworth, Mississippi Today,             Jan. 23, 2025, 5 a.m. EST

Local Reporting Network









America’s Mental Barrier


                                    Her Mental Health Treatment Was Helping. That’s Why Insurance Cut Off Her Coverage.
                            


                            Providers, patients and even some federal judges say progress-based insurance denials harm patients at key moments of mental health treatment.
                    

            by Maya Miller and Duaa Eldeib,             Dec. 31, 2024, 5 a.m. EST










America’s Mental Barrier


                                    Insurers Continue to Rely on Doctors Whose Judgments Have Been Criticized by Courts
                            


                            In dozens of cases ProPublica reviewed, judges found that some doctors working for these companies engaged in “selective readings” of medical evidence and “shut their eyes” to medical opinions opposing their conclusions.
                    

            by Duaa Eldeib and Maya Miller, with research by Kirsten Berg,             Dec. 30, 2024, 6 a.m. EST










Life of the Mother


                                    The CDC Hasn’t Asked States to Track Deaths Linked to Abortion Bans
                            


                            The Biden administration hasn’t delivered on its goals of measuring the public health impact of abortion bans. Experts say it’s a missed opportunity to study how the laws may lead to deaths and long-term injuries.
                    

            by Kavitha Surana, Robin Fields and Ziva Branstetter,             Dec. 20, 2024, 5 a.m. EST






Most Read











                                    “People Will Die”: The Trump Administration Said It Lifted Its Ban on Lifesaving Humanitarian Aid. That’s Not True.
                            


                            Organizations that provide vital care for desperate and vulnerable people around the world have been forced to halt operations, turn away patients and lay off staff. “I’ve never seen anything that scares me as much as this,” one doctor said.
                    

            by Brett Murphy and Anna Maria Barry-Jester,             Jan. 31, 2025, 3 p.m. EST














                                    To Pay for Trump Tax Cuts, House GOP Floats Plan to Slash Benefits for the Poor and Working Class
                            


                            A menu of options being circulated by congressional Republicans also includes new tax cuts for corporations and the ultrawealthy.
                    

            by Robert Faturechi and Justin Elliott,             Jan. 30, 2025, 6 a.m. EST














                                    Gun Lobbyists and Cambridge Analytica Weaponized Gun Owners’ Private Details for Political Gain
                            


                            Documents and interviews reveal how the now-disgraced political firm targeted potential voters by combining its cache of confidential consumer data with information secretly collected from millions of gun buyers, sporting goods shoppers and others.
                    

            by Corey G. Johnson and Byard Duncan,             Feb. 5, 2025, 6 a.m. EST














                                    The Militia and the Mole
                            


                            Outraged by the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, a wilderness survival trainer spent years undercover climbing the ranks of right-wing militias. 

He didn’t tell police or the FBI. He didn’t tell family or friends. The one person he told was a ProPublica reporter.
                    

            by Joshua Kaplan,             Jan. 4, 2025, 5 a.m. EST












Power Hungry


                                    Washington Governor Orders Team to Study Data Centers’ Impact on Energy Use, Job Creation and Tax Revenue
                            


                            Last year, The Seattle Times and ProPublica reported on how the state created a massive tax break for data centers, encouraging the growth of an industry whose energy use conflicts with a goal for utilities to go carbon neutral by 2030.
                    

            by Lulu Ramadan and Sydney Brownstone, The Seattle Times,             Feb. 5, 2025, 10:20 a.m. EST

Local Reporting Network



 
 


Stay informed with the Daily Digest.  Mail Email Address:   Arrow Right Sign Up            ProPublica Investigative Journalism in the Public Interest © Copyright 2025 Pro Publica Inc.   Sites ProPublica Local Reporting Network Texas Tribune Partnership The Data Store Electionland    Sections Topics Series Videos News Apps Get Involved The Nerd Blog @ProPublica Events    Info About Board and Advisors Officers and Staff Diversity Jobs and Fellowships Media Center Reports Impact Awards Corrections    Policies Code of Ethics Advertising Policy Privacy Policy    Follow Newsletters iOS and Android RSS Feed    More Send Us Tips Steal Our Stories Browse via Tor Contact Us Donate More Ways to Give     







Close




Close this dialogue






Republish This Story for Free
Creative Commons License (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0)

Thank you for your interest in republishing this story. You are free to republish it so long as you do the following:

You have to credit ProPublica and any co-reporting partners. In the byline, we prefer “Author Name, Publication(s).” At the top of the text of your story, include a line that reads: “This story was originally published by ProPublica.” You must link the word “ProPublica” to the original URL of the story.
If you’re republishing online, you must link to the URL of this story on propublica.org, include all of the links from our story, including our newsletter sign up language and link, and use our PixelPing tag.
If you use canonical metadata, please use the ProPublica URL. For more information about canonical metadata, refer to this Google SEO link.
You can’t edit our material, except to reflect relative changes in time, location and editorial style. (For example, “yesterday” can be changed to “last week,” and “Portland, Ore.” to “Portland” or “here.”)
You cannot republish our photographs or illustrations without specific permission. Please contact [email protected].
It’s okay to put our stories on pages with ads, but not ads specifically sold against our stories. You can’t state or imply that donations to your organization support ProPublica’s work.
You can’t sell our material separately or syndicate it. This includes publishing or syndicating our work on platforms or apps such as Apple News, Google News, etc.
You can’t republish our material wholesale, or automatically; you need to select stories to be republished individually. (To inquire about syndication or licensing opportunities, contact [email protected].)
You can’t use our work to populate a website designed to improve rankings on search engines or solely to gain revenue from network-based advertisements.
We do not generally permit translation of our stories into another language.
Any website our stories appear on must include a prominent and effective way to contact you.




Copy HTML







 undefined undefined    





















I live in Missouri. Amendment 3 has literally ZERO to do with:

1) transgender issues 

2) sex trafficking 

3) medical malpractice 

4) "future state tax revenue"

It's *egregious* what the GOP is putting out about it. If you're in MO, vote YES on Amendment 3!!