ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

Republicans returned to the legislation nearly a month after . At the time, Democrats blocked a vote on the plan, and Republicans set it aside without action.

The bill was set aside for a second time shortly after 8:15 p.m. Wednesday, as Senate Democrats successfully blocked action again.

Legislation that has already cleared the House would raise the threshold needed to amend the constitution to 60% from a simple majority.

On Wednesday, Sen. Sandy Crawford, R-Buffalo, proposed a different plan: about 57% of voters would need to approve an amendment; or a simple majority as well as a simple majority in at least five congressional districts, would be needed to enact a constitutional amendment.

Senators were debating the plan Wednesday evening, with Democrats holding the floor and blocking a vote through a filibuster.

Proponents argue constitutional changes should enjoy wide support from the public and say special interests have too much influence in the process.

But opponents have characterized the effort as an anti-democratic power grab by Republicans who oppose many citizen-led initiative petitions.

If the 60% threshold had been in effect in previous elections, constitutional amendments to expand Medicaid and legalize recreational marijuana would’ve failed despite winning clear majorities at the ballot box.

If approved by lawmakers, the issue would be placed on the November 2024 ballot, unless Gov. Mike Parson opts to call a special election on the question.

The Missouri effort comes as abortion rights advocates are pursuing an initiative petition that would enshrine reproductive rights in the state constitution, undoing the state’s near-total abortion ban.

A similar move to limit voter power in Arkansas failed last year by a wide margin.

Crawford’s proposal would also give the lawmakers “exclusive authority to enact laws enforcing provisions in this constitution relating to ballot measures.�

The proposal touches several issues including voter qualifications and foreign influence in the initiative process.

In addition to the higher threshold for passage, Crawford’s proposed ballot summary would also ask voters if only U.S. citizens should be allowed to vote on initiatives and if foreign countries should be barred from the initiative process.

Voters would also be asked if legislators should be restricted from reversing laws that voters pass. Lawmakers can’t repeal a constitutional amendment, but can alter statutory changes that voters make.

The U.S. citizen requirement, included in the House plan, has drawn charges from opponents that Republicans were inserting “ballot candy� into the measure to deceive voters.

“This is what entices a person to go in, and the first thing they see is ‘non-citizens are voting? What?’� said former state Sen. Robert Johnson, R-Lee’s Summit, on Wednesday. “I can’t be for that. So, yes, it’s ballot candy; it’s a sweetener. It’s not relevant.�

U.S. citizenship to vote in Missouri.

Johnson, who in the Missouri Senate between 1979 and 1993, appeared at the Capitol on Wednesday to speak out against the plan.

“It’s very difficult to get a petition, and to make this more restrictive against the citizens, to discourage the citizens from participating in placing an issue on the ballot, is just simply wrong,� he said.

The legislation is .

Editor’s note: An earlier version misstated how many congressional districts would need to approve an amendment for it to take effect under Crawford’s plan, and it also inaccurately described her ballot summary.