How Act for Missouri Evaluates Legislation

Our Perspective & Core Beliefs

We evaluate bills from a Christian, constitutional, America-First, 100% pro-life, pro-family, limited-government perspective. In practice, that means we assume:

• God is the author of liberty. Legitimate political power comes from the people and exists for the good of the whole—not for special interests or insiders.
• Life begins at conception. Every unborn child is a person who deserves equal protection of the laws, without exceptions written in for convenience or politics.
• The U.S. and Missouri Constitutions still work. When followed according to their original, plain meaning, they provide real limits on government and real protections for citizens.
• Limited, local, transparent government is best. Concentrated, unaccountable power—especially in bureaucracies and unelected boards—is dangerous.
• Parents, not the state, are primarily responsible for children. That includes education, healthcare decisions, and moral formation.

We are skeptical by default. A bill must be proven to protect rights, liberties, and treasure— and to comply with both the Missouri and U.S. Constitutions—before we recommend support.

Step 1: Quick Snapshot of Every Bill

For each bill, we begin with a one-page “snapshot” so busy citizens can see the big picture at a glance. We answer three plain-language questions:

• What does the bill do? In simple terms, not legalese.
• Who does it affect? Families, taxpayers, small businesses, schools, utilities, local governments, etc.
• Why does it matter? What’s at stake if it passes—or fails?

We also make several quick judgments up front:

• Single-subject test: Does the bill truly stick to one clear subject as required by the Missouri Constitution, or has it turned into a “Christmas tree” of unrelated provisions?
• Growth of government: Does it grow agencies, spending, regulations, or permanent bureaucracy—or does it restrain them?
• Impact on Missouri families: Does it help, hurt, or create a mixed picture?
• Alignment with our core beliefs: Does it support or undermine pro-life, pro-family, constitutional, and limited-government principles?
• Recommended stance: Support, Oppose, or Support only with amendments.

Step 2: Mapping What the Bill Actually Does

Next, we walk through the bill section by section and build a “provision map” so you can see what is really in the text—not just the title or talking points.

• Stated purpose: We restate the apparent purpose of the bill in plain English and ask whether the title is accurate, vague, or misleading.
• Major provisions: We list the key pieces of the bill, where they are located, and what they actually do in real-world terms.
• Tags from our perspective: Each major provision is tagged as Good, Neutral, Concern, or Red Flag with a brief explanation.
• Changes to existing law: When a bill amends current statutes, we explain what current law says and what would change—who gains power, who loses protections, and what new duties, penalties, taxes, or programs would exist.

Step 3: Constitutional & Process Checks

We do not treat the Missouri and U.S. Constitutions as suggestions. We specifically test bills against constitutional requirements and procedural safeguards.

Single-Subject & Clear-Title Requirements

• We identify the main subject of the bill in one sentence.
• We list any extra subjects or policy areas that look unrelated—“riders” or “barnacles.”
• We ask whether the title clearly expresses what the bill actually does, or whether major effects are hidden in the fine print.
• We flag bills that appear to violate Article III, Section 23 (single subject and clear title).

Rights in the Missouri & U.S. Constitutions

We look for provisions that could infringe:

• Liberty, due process, and equal protection.
• Free speech, assembly, and religious freedom.
• The right to keep and bear arms.
• Protection against unreasonable searches, including electronic communications and data.
• State sovereignty and Tenth Amendment limits on federal control.

When we find a potential problem, we quote or closely summarize the actual bill language, identify the specific constitutional provision it may violate, and explain how it could invite litigation or abuse in practice.

Delegation & Unelected Power

We pay special attention to how much power a bill hands to agencies, boards, commissions, nonprofit partners, or private corporations.

• Does the bill leave big decisions to regulators who can “fill in the blanks” later through rules?
• Does it condition rights or burdens on future agreements, MOUs, or guidance that the public cannot see yet?
• Does it shift practical law-making power away from your elected legislators and into the hands of unelected bureaucrats or outside groups?

Provisions that create open-ended delegation or empower unelected actors at the expense of citizens are flagged as serious concerns.

Step 4: Impact on Missouri Families

Our analysis is not written for lobbyists or mega-corporations. We ask how each bill will affect ordinary families, churches, local communities, and small businesses.

Economic, Tax, and Utility Impacts

• How will the bill affect household budgets—taxes, fees, fines, utility rates, insurance, tuition, and local costs?
• Does it shift costs from big players (like data centers or major industrial users) onto families and small businesses through cross-subsidies or “economic development” deals?
• We distinguish between short-term effects (1–2 years) and long-term effects (5+ years), including hidden costs and debt.

Parental Rights, Education, and Freedom

• Does the bill strengthen or weaken parental authority over education, healthcare, and moral decisions for children?
• Does it expand DEI/CRT/SEL-type programming, controversial sex/“gender” content, or globalist “citizenship” frameworks in schools?
• Does it pressure homeschool families through new registration, mandatory testing, or oversight schemes?
• Does it protect local control of schools—or centralize power in Jefferson City or Washington, D.C.?

We summarize the net effect on parental rights and family freedom in plain language so you can see whether the bill pushes Missouri toward stronger families—or toward state-driven control.

Moral & Cultural Climate

• Does the bill normalize or subsidize abortion, transgender ideology for minors, or anti-family cultural agendas?
• Does it help restore a culture of life, responsibility, and self-government—or move us in the opposite direction?

We end this section with a short statement: whether, on balance, the bill helps, hurts, or has a mixed impact on Missouri families.

Step 5: Core Principles Checklist

Every bill is also run through a set of core principle “checks.” For each area below, we note whether the bill Supports, Undermines, is Mixed, or is Not implicated, and we give a brief explanation with citations to the bill.

• 100% Pro-Life: Protecting life from conception to natural death; rejecting “exceptions” that deny equal protection to some unborn children.
• Christian & Biblical Values: Protecting religious liberty and conscience; resisting pressure on churches, ministries, or believers to violate biblical convictions.
• Property Taxes & Economic Freedom: Resisting policies that can cost families their homes through property-tax burdens or new enforcement tools.
• Literal / Original-Intent Constitutionalism: Respecting clear constitutional limits instead of trying to work around them with vague language or broad delegations.
• Right to Bear Arms: Identifying any direct or indirect restrictions on ownership, carry, storage, or training.
• State Sovereignty & Tenth Amendment: Guarding against federal strings, mandates, and “guidance” that override Missouri’s authority.
• Nuclear Family & Parental Rights: Strengthening, not weakening, the authority of parents to raise children in line with biblical values.
• Homeschool Protection: Watching for new registration, testing, curriculum, or data-sharing requirements that target homeschoolers.
• Currency & Financial Control: Flagging moves toward central-bank digital currency (CBDC)-style control or real-time financial surveillance, and noting where bills protect the use of cash, gold, or silver.
• Election Integrity: Evaluating impacts on paper ballots, hand counting, single-day in-person voting, absentee controls, local control of voter rolls, and voting-machine use.
• Government Transparency: Protecting Sunshine Law access, public records, open meetings, and citizens’ ability to see what government is doing.

Step 6: Special Priority Screens (2025–2026)

Certain topics are especially important in the current season. When a bill touches one of these areas, we apply extra scrutiny.

Amendment 3, Personhood, and Equal Protection

For bills dealing with abortion, “reproductive freedom,” contraception, IVF, or related constitutional language, we ask:

• Does it move Missouri toward true personhood (every human with unique DNA is a legal “person”)?
• Does it reinforce the 2024 “reproductive freedom” framework—or introduce new so-called “compromises” that bake abortion exceptions into law?
• Would it require Christians to support abortion “in some cases” in the text of Missouri law?

Any provision that undermines equal protection for unborn children or normalizes abortion in statute or constitutional language is treated as a major red flag.

Surveillance, Digital ID, and Data Hubs

For bills dealing with law enforcement, schools, health data, IDs, or technology, we ask whether they:

• Create or expand digital IDs, biometric systems, or statewide identity databases.
• Build multi-agency or multi-state data hubs for law-enforcement or administrative data.
• Grow large-scale camera networks (ALPR/Flock, facial recognition, smart-city sensors) or always-on monitoring.
• Weaken protections for electronic communications and data or expand warrantless access.

We also ask how this infrastructure could be repurposed later to tie identity to financial access, track “unapproved” behavior, or enable social-credit-style control.

Utilities, Energy Policy, and Big-User/Data-Center Deals

When a bill touches utilities, energy, water, major industrial loads, or data centers, we ask:

• Does it authorize special discounts or tariffs for large users—and who pays the difference?
• Does it encourage 24/7 high-load facilities whose grid and water demands will raise costs or risks for families?
• Does it use accounting tricks that defer costs now but lock in higher bills later?
• Does it protect local communities’ say over land use, noise, and water—or override them in favor of corporate interests?
• Does it require large users to build and pay for their own dedicated infrastructure rather than tapping the shared grid?

We conclude whether a bill privatizes gains and socializes costs—or aligns incentives with the long-term interests of Missouri families, schools, and local services.

Federal Money & Strings; Globalist Model Legislation

• Does the bill accept or depend on federal funding, with ongoing conditions and reporting?
• Would Missouri become structurally dependent on that funding in a way that is hard to reverse?
• Does the language mirror model legislation or Agenda 21/2030-style frameworks (“sustainable development,” “resilient infrastructure,” “equity,” etc.)?

Where those global or federal agendas appear to drive policy in Missouri, we highlight that clearly.

Step 7: Red Flags, Fixes, and Final Recommendation

Finally, we gather up the most serious concerns and state our bottom line.

• Red-Flag List: We list the top issues (single-subject violations, growth of bureaucracy, surveillance infrastructure, data-center cross-subsidies, parental-rights or pro-life concerns, etc.) with specific bill citations.
• Possible Amendments: Where realistic, we suggest concrete fixes—sections to strike, protective language to add, or ways to narrow vague delegations.
• Final Recommendation: We end with a clear stance—Support, Oppose, or Support only with major amendments—summarizing constitutional compliance, impact on government size and power, and the overall effect on Missouri families.

What Our Ratings Mean

• Support: The bill generally advances liberty, respects the Constitution, protects life and families, and does not contain serious hidden dangers.
• Support Only with Amendments: The bill has some good goals or provisions but also significant concerns that must be fixed for us to fully support it.
• Oppose: The bill clearly grows government power, threatens constitutional rights, burdens Missouri families, or undermines pro-life and pro-family principles.

How You Can Use Our Reviews

Our legislative reviews are designed to help you:

• Quickly understand what a bill really does—without reading 40+ pages of legal text.
• See how it lines up with biblical values, constitutional protections, and the long-term interests of Missouri families.
• Contact your legislators armed with specific sections, concerns, and amendment ideas.
• Share clear, accurate information with your church, local groups, neighbors, and friends.

We invite you to read our bill analyses, pray for wisdom, and then act—by calling, emailing, and visiting your legislators, and by helping fellow Missourians see what is really happening in Jefferson City.