Missouri · individual fact

Missouri health

Insurance coverage, personal healthcare spending, longevity, mortality, health risks, and provider shortages.

Uninsured rate · all ages7.7%2024 · #22 of 50 · highest first
Uninsured rate · under age 659.4%2024 · #20 of 50 · highest first
Private coverage · under age 6572.7%2024 · #24 of 50 · highest first

Missouri over time

Explore Missouri readings, major events and reviewed actions on the same date scale. Missouri officeholders appear in separate lanes. National event evidence describes national context; it does not measure a Missouri effect.

Major events & context · A curated selection, including uncertain effects. Milestone dates do not establish that an event caused a Missouri change.

Enacted / issuedDid not proceedPending / in progressStatus unclear

Colors show the latest recorded status. Passing one chamber is not enactment. A number groups actions with the same date, body and status.

Uninsured rate · all ages Missouri · source units
MissouriPublished U.S. benchmark

Move across the chart to inspect the nearest observation. Click or tap to keep a reading selected, or focus the chart and use the arrow keys. Hover over or focus a marker to explore; click or tap to pin. Press Escape to clear.

Uninsured rate · all ages2024: 7.7%6.5%9.6%12.7%Missouri, 2014: 11.7%Missouri, 2015: 9.8%Missouri, 2016: 8.9%Missouri, 2017: 9.1%Missouri, 2018: 9.4%Missouri, 2019: 10%Missouri, 2021: 9.4%Missouri, 2022: 8.6%Missouri, 2023: 7.5%Missouri, 2024: 7.7%201420192024
✦ Major events & context · 21National context · Affordable Care Act signed · 2010-03-23ACA signedNational context · Supreme Court makes ACA Medicaid expansion optional for states · 2012-06-28Medicaid expansion rulingNational context · ACA Marketplace coverage and main Medicaid expansion begin · 2014-01-01ACA coverage beginsNational context · Opioid crisis declared a national public-health emergency · 2017-10-26Opioid emergencyNational context · COVID-19 characterized as a pandemic · 2020-03-11COVID-19 pandemicNational context · Pandemic Medicaid continuous-enrollment condition enacted · 2020-03-18Medicaid coverage protectionNational context · FDA authorizes the first COVID-19 vaccine for emergency use · 2020-12-11First COVID vaccine EUANational context · American Rescue Plan expands Marketplace premium assistance · 2021-03-11Marketplace aid expandedNational context · No Surprises Act billing protections begin · 2022-01-01Surprise-billing protectionsNational context · Supreme Court overturns Roe and Casey in Dobbs · 2022-06-24Dobbs abortion rulingNational context · 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline launches nationwide · 2022-07-16988 crisis line launchesNational context · Inflation Reduction Act signed · 2022-08-16Prescription-drug lawNational context · Medicare Part D insulin cost-sharing cap takes effect · 2023-01-01Part D insulin $35 capNational context · Medicaid coverage terminations can resume · 2023-04-01Medicaid terminations resumeNational context · Federal COVID-19 public-health emergency ends · 2023-05-11COVID health emergency endsNational context · Medicare Part D out-of-pocket cap begins · 2025-01-01Part D $2,000 cap (2025)National context · 2025 reconciliation law changes Medicaid and funds rural care · 2025-07-04Medicaid and rural-care lawNational context · Rural Health Transformation awards announced for all 50 states · 2025-12-29Rural health awardsNational context · Temporary enhanced Marketplace premium tax credits end · 2026-01-01Enhanced ACA credits endNational context · First negotiated Medicare drug prices take effect · 2026-01-01Negotiated drug prices beginNational context · CMS issues Medicaid community-engagement implementation rule · 2026-06-01Medicaid eligibility rule● Missouri Legislature · 4322263222148212234227532222621326123225222497483222347● U.S. Congress · Missouri delegation · 11◆ Governor · 3■ Missouri agencies · 42010-03-012026-08-31

450 of 450 reviewed Missouri actions match · 136 date markers shown. 21 major events shown separately.

Missouri · 2024: 7.7% · Rank #22 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 8.2%

FactVote uses the Census Bureau's HIC-4_ACS historical table. Rates and 90% confidence margins of error are the published ACS 1-year estimates for the civilian noninstitutionalized population. ACS annual estimates, all ages. Standard ACS 2020 one-year data were not released; the chart leaves a gap. Survey ranks describe point estimates and do not establish significant differences. Annual observations use December 31; monthly observations use the first of the month. Lines connect consecutive readings and do not supply values between them. Missing observations break the lines.

View observations and export data
Missouri Uninsured rate · all ages · source units
PeriodMissouriRankU.S. benchmark
20247.7%#22 of 508.2%
20237.5%#21 of 50Not available
20228.6%#14 of 50Not available
20219.4%#16 of 50Not available
2020Not availableUnavailableNot available
201910%#15 of 50Not available
20189.4%#17 of 50Not available
20179.1%#16 of 50Not available
20168.9%#17 of 50Not available
20159.8%#20 of 50Not available
201411.7%#22 of 50Not available
How major events are selected

The timeline combines the corresponding national fact’s reviewed event catalog, labeled National context, with individually reviewed state milestones. State events use primary sources and distinguish signing, effective and filing dates. Each milestone keeps its source-check date, geographical limits and evidence limits. This curated selection is not a complete history.

Date ranges affect events and actions. Action type, status and official-name search affect government records only. Events remain separate from action counts. An event after the latest observation extends context without creating a new reading.

Missouri · state comparison

Who has health coverage?

Compare ACS annual estimates for all ages or people under 65. Coverage categories can overlap and do not sum to the insured share.

Missouri · 20247.7%
Missouri rank#22among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark8.2%Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Uninsured rate · all ages

FactVote uses the Census Bureau's HIC-4_ACS historical table. Rates and 90% confidence margins of error are the published ACS 1-year estimates for the civilian noninstitutionalized population.

ACS annual estimates, all ages. Standard ACS 2020 one-year data were not released; the chart leaves a gap. Survey ranks describe point estimates and do not establish significant differences.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Missouri
Uninsured rate · all ages history in Missouri6.9%9.6%12.3%20142024
2024 · Missouri: 7.7% · Rank #22 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 8.2% · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Missouri Uninsured rate · all ages history
PeriodMissouriCompare
201411.7%
20159.8%
20168.9%
20179.1%
20189.4%
201910%
2020Not available
20219.4%
20228.6%
20237.5%
20247.7%

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Missouri stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Missouri has a dark outline.

Lower value · 2.8%Higher value · 16.7%Striped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Missouri · 7.7%2024 · Rank #22 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Missouri with every state · 50 ranked
Uninsured rate · all ages · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Texas16.7%—
#2Georgia12%—
#3Oklahoma11.5%—
#4Nevada11.4%—
#5Alaska11%—
#6Florida10.9%—
#7Arizona10.3%—
#7Wyoming10.3%—
#9New Mexico10.1%—
#10Mississippi9.7%—
#10Tennessee9.7%—
#12Arkansas9.4%—
#13Idaho9.2%—
#14South Carolina9%—
#15Montana8.8%—
#16North Carolina8.6%—
#17Kansas8.5%—
#18Utah8.3%—
#19Alabama8.2%—
#20South Dakota8.1%—
#21Colorado7.9%—
#22Louisiana7.7%—
#22Missouri · your comparison7.7%—
#22New Jersey7.7%—
#25Indiana7.5%—
#26Nebraska7.1%—
#27Delaware6.9%—
#27Illinois6.9%—
#27Virginia6.9%—
#30Kentucky6.8%—
#31Ohio6.7%—
#32Washington6.5%—
#33Maryland6.3%—
#34North Dakota6.1%—
#35California5.9%—
#36Connecticut5.8%—
#36Pennsylvania5.8%—
#36West Virginia5.8%—
#39Maine5.5%—
#40Iowa5.4%—
#41Wisconsin5.3%—
#42Oregon5.2%—
#43Michigan5.1%—
#43Minnesota5.1%—
#45New York5%—
#46Rhode Island4.6%—
#47New Hampshire4.5%—
#48Vermont4.2%—
#49Hawaii3.5%—
#50Massachusetts2.8%—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

People under 65 without health insurance

9.4%2024 ACS annual estimate

Share of Missouri’s civilian noninstitutionalized residents under age 65 who lacked comprehensive health-insurance coverage at the time of the ACS survey.

This source snapshot keeps its own definition and period. A rank shown elsewhere applies only to that comparison’s measure and period.

Method and limitations

U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts, sourced from the 2024 American Community Survey 1-year estimate.

  • This is a survey estimate for people under 65 and does not describe coverage type or continuity of coverage.
  • Insurance status alone does not measure affordability, access, quality, or health outcomes.
Missouri · state comparison

Where do healthcare dollars go?

State spending is reported for 2020, the latest year available in this CMS state series. Choose a service to compare Missouri with every state.

Missouri · 2020$9,921
Missouri rank#29among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$10,191Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Personal healthcare spending per resident

Personal health care expenditure per resident, assigned to the state where the patient resides.

2020 is the last year in this CMS state series. Personal health care excludes administration, public health, and investment included in national health expenditures. This is spending by all payers, not a household bill.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Missouri
Personal healthcare spending per resident history in Missouri$7.47K$9.01K$10.55K20142020
2020 · Missouri: $9,921 · Rank #29 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $10,191 · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Missouri Personal healthcare spending per resident history
PeriodMissouriCompare
2014$7,828
2015$8,261
2016$8,608
2017$8,824
2018$9,032
2019$9,431
2020$9,921

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Missouri stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Missouri has a dark outline.

Lower value · $7.52KHigher value · $14.01KStriped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Missouri · $9,9212020 · Rank #29 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Missouri with every state · 50 ranked
Personal healthcare spending per resident · 2020 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1New York$14,007—
#2Alaska$13,642—
#3Massachusetts$13,319—
#4Delaware$12,899—
#5West Virginia$12,769—
#6Vermont$12,756—
#7South Dakota$12,495—
#8Connecticut$12,489—
#9Maine$12,077—
#10New Jersey$11,868—
#11New Hampshire$11,793—
#12Rhode Island$11,694—
#13Pennsylvania$11,603—
#14North Dakota$11,301—
#15Wyoming$10,989—
#16Minnesota$10,846—
#17Maryland$10,839—
#18Indiana$10,517—
#19Louisiana$10,515—
#20Nebraska$10,514—
#21Ohio$10,478—
#22California$10,299—
#23Hawaii$10,291—
#24Kentucky$10,257—
#25Montana$10,212—
#26Illinois$10,190—
#27Oregon$10,071—
#28Wisconsin$9,982—
#29Missouri · your comparison$9,921—
#30Michigan$9,897—
#31Florida$9,865—
#32Iowa$9,789—
#33Oklahoma$9,444—
#34Kansas$9,408—
#35Mississippi$9,394—
#36Arkansas$9,338—
#37Tennessee$9,336—
#38Alabama$9,280—
#39Washington$9,265—
#40Virginia$9,195—
#41North Carolina$8,917—
#42New Mexico$8,902—
#43South Carolina$8,766—
#44Georgia$8,758—
#45Arizona$8,756—
#46Colorado$8,583—
#47Texas$8,406—
#48Nevada$8,348—
#49Idaho$8,148—
#50Utah$7,522—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Missouri · state comparison

Health outcomes

Use age-adjusted mortality to account for different age distributions; life expectancy summarizes period death rates.

Missouri · 202275.2 years
Missouri rank#40among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark77.5 yearsSame measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Life expectancy at birth

FactVote uses CDC National Center for Health Statistics annual complete life-table estimates for the total Missouri population. Values are rounded to the published tenth of a year.

The latest published comparable state series ends in 2022, even though newer national life-expectancy estimates may be available. Period life expectancy summarizes current mortality rates; it is not a forecast of how long a particular person will live. The 2020 and 2021 estimates reflect the mortality shock during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Missouri
Life expectancy at birth history in Missouri74.2 years76.1 years77.9 years20182022
2022 · Missouri: 75.2 years · Rank #40 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 77.5 years · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Missouri Life expectancy at birth history
PeriodMissouriCompare
201876.6 years
201976.9 years
202075.1 years
202174.6 years
202275.2 years

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Missouri stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Missouri has a dark outline.

Lower value · 72.2 yearsHigher value · 80 yearsStriped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Missouri · 75.2 years2022 · Rank #40 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Missouri with every state · 50 ranked
Life expectancy at birth · 2022 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Hawaii80 years—
#2Massachusetts79.8 years—
#3New Jersey79.6 years—
#4New York79.5 years—
#5Connecticut79.4 years—
#6California79.3 years—
#6Minnesota79.3 years—
#8Rhode Island79.2 years—
#9Utah79 years—
#10New Hampshire78.7 years—
#11Colorado78.5 years—
#12Idaho78.4 years—
#12Washington78.4 years—
#14Nebraska78.3 years—
#14Vermont78.3 years—
#16Wisconsin78.1 years—
#17Florida77.9 years—
#17Iowa77.9 years—
#17North Dakota77.9 years—
#20Maryland77.8 years—
#21Oregon77.7 years—
#22Illinois77.5 years—
#22Virginia77.5 years—
#24Montana77.3 years—
#24Pennsylvania77.3 years—
#24South Dakota77.3 years—
#27Texas77.1 years—
#28Michigan76.8 years—
#28Wyoming76.8 years—
#30Arizona76.7 years—
#31Maine76.6 years—
#32Delaware76.5 years—
#32Kansas76.5 years—
#34Nevada76.4 years—
#35Georgia75.9 years—
#35North Carolina75.9 years—
#37Alaska75.8 years—
#38Ohio75.6 years—
#39Indiana75.4 years—
#40Missouri · your comparison75.2 years—
#41South Carolina75.1 years—
#42New Mexico74.5 years—
#43Arkansas73.9 years—
#44Alabama73.8 years—
#44Louisiana73.8 years—
#44Oklahoma73.8 years—
#44Tennessee73.8 years—
#48Kentucky73.6 years—
#49Mississippi72.6 years—
#50West Virginia72.2 years—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Missouri · state comparison

Chronic illness and health risks

Compare age-adjusted adult prevalence using the same survey year and definition.

Missouri · 202310.7%
Missouri rank#20among 48 states with data
U.S. benchmark10.7%Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Diagnosed diabetes · age adjusted

Adult self-reported prevalence, age-adjusted to a common population.

Published CDC 2019–2023 series. Missing or suppressed estimates remain unranked. Confidence intervals describe sampling uncertainty; point ranks are not significance tests.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Missouri
Diagnosed diabetes · age adjusted history in Missouri8.8%10%11.1%20192023
2023 · Missouri: 10.7% · Rank #20 of 48, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 10.7% · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Missouri Diagnosed diabetes · age adjusted history
PeriodMissouriCompare
20199.1%
20209.5%
202110%
202210.2%
202310.7%

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Missouri stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Missouri has a dark outline.

Lower value · 7.8%Higher value · 15.1%Striped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Missouri · 10.7%2023 · Rank #20 of 48, highest first95% confidence interval: 9.9% – 11.7%Selected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Missouri with every state · 48 ranked, 2 unavailable
Diagnosed diabetes · age adjusted · 2023 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Mississippi15.1%95% CI: 13.7–16.6
#1West Virginia15.1%95% CI: 13.9–16.3
#3Louisiana14.6%95% CI: 13.4–15.8
#4Alabama14%95% CI: 12.7–15.3
#5Arkansas13.1%95% CI: 12–14.3
#6South Carolina12.7%95% CI: 11.9–13.6
#6Tennessee12.7%95% CI: 11.7–13.8
#8Texas12.1%95% CI: 11–13.3
#9Indiana11.7%95% CI: 11.1–12.4
#10Georgia11.5%95% CI: 10.7–12.3
#10Ohio11.5%95% CI: 10.8–12.2
#12Oklahoma11.3%95% CI: 10.5–12.1
#13Delaware11.1%95% CI: 9.8–12.6
#14North Carolina11%95% CI: 9.8–12.3
#15Illinois10.9%95% CI: 9.9–12.1
#15Maryland10.9%95% CI: 10.2–11.7
#15Michigan10.9%95% CI: 10.1–11.8
#18Nevada10.8%95% CI: 8.9–13
#18New Mexico10.8%95% CI: 9.3–12.6
#20Missouri · your comparison10.7%95% CI: 9.9–11.7
#20South Dakota10.7%95% CI: 8.9–12.8
#22California10.6%95% CI: 9.8–11.4
#23Kansas10.5%95% CI: 9.7–11.3
#24Virginia10.4%95% CI: 9.5–11.4
#25Florida10.1%95% CI: 9.1–11.1
#26Rhode Island10%95% CI: 9.1–11
#27Arizona9.9%95% CI: 9.2–10.7
#27Iowa9.9%95% CI: 9.2–10.7
#29Nebraska9.7%95% CI: 9–10.3
#30Wisconsin9.6%95% CI: 9–10.2
#31Hawaii9.5%95% CI: 8.7–10.5
#31New York9.5%95% CI: 8.9–10.1
#31Oregon9.5%95% CI: 8.7–10.5
#34Wyoming9.4%95% CI: 8.5–10.5
#35Minnesota9.3%95% CI: 8.6–10
#36New Jersey9.1%95% CI: 8.4–9.9
#37Maine9%95% CI: 8.4–9.7
#38North Dakota8.9%95% CI: 8.1–9.7
#39Idaho8.7%95% CI: 7.9–9.6
#40Washington8.6%95% CI: 8.2–9
#41Massachusetts8.5%95% CI: 7.8–9.4
#42Connecticut8.4%95% CI: 7.6–9.3
#43Alaska8.2%95% CI: 7.4–9.2
#44Utah8.1%95% CI: 7.5–8.7
#45Colorado8%95% CI: 7.3–8.7
#46Montana7.9%95% CI: 7.2–8.7
#46New Hampshire7.9%95% CI: 7.1–8.8
#48Vermont7.8%95% CI: 7–8.7
—KentuckyNot availableNo comparable published observation for this period; excluded from rank.
—PennsylvaniaNot availableNo comparable published observation for this period; excluded from rank.

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Missouri · state comparison

Where are healthcare workers in short supply?

Compare coverage of need, practitioners needed, or affected population for each discipline.

Missouri · June 30, 202623.7%
Missouri rank#49among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark47.4%Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Primary care · need met

HRSA-designated shortage areas; measures describe need within those areas, not the entire state population.

National report totals can include territories. Designation rules and populations differ by discipline; do not add disciplines. Absolute population and practitioner ranks also reflect state size.

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Missouri stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Missouri has a dark outline.

Lower value · 11.2%Higher value · 83.2%Striped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Missouri · 23.7%June 30, 2026 · Rank #49 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Missouri with every state · 50 ranked
Primary care · need met · June 30, 2026 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1New Jersey83.2%—
#2Vermont82.6%—
#3South Carolina79.4%—
#4New Hampshire74.8%—
#5Rhode Island74.3%—
#6Louisiana72.1%—
#7Hawaii67.1%—
#8Utah65.4%—
#9Wisconsin65.2%—
#10Alabama63%—
#11Connecticut60.3%—
#12Massachusetts58%—
#13Tennessee58%—
#14Virginia57.2%—
#15Pennsylvania56.7%—
#16Maine56%—
#17Minnesota55.4%—
#18Wyoming54.4%—
#19Indiana54.2%—
#20California53.2%—
#21Arkansas52.6%—
#22Texas49.8%—
#23Ohio49.7%—
#24Nebraska49.1%—
#25Alaska48.9%—
#26North Carolina48.1%—
#27Colorado47.5%—
#28Michigan44.9%—
#29Oregon43.9%—
#30Idaho43.9%—
#31Washington42.4%—
#32Illinois41.5%—
#33Nevada41.5%—
#34Arizona41.2%—
#35Kansas41.1%—
#36Iowa40.5%—
#37Florida39.7%—
#38Georgia39.1%—
#39Montana38.5%—
#40West Virginia38.3%—
#41North Dakota36.5%—
#42New York35.3%—
#43South Dakota34.6%—
#44Mississippi34.1%—
#45Maryland31.6%—
#46New Mexico31.4%—
#47Kentucky30.8%—
#48Oklahoma28.6%—
#49Missouri · your comparison23.7%—
#50Delaware11.2%—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Missouri · state comparison

Employer coverage costs

Premium comparisons use a published historical all-state employer survey. Total premiums combine employer and employee payments.

Missouri · 2020$7,179
Missouri rank#23among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$7,149Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Single coverage premium · all firms

Average total annual employer-plan premium per enrolled employee at private-sector establishments offering coverage.

Historical 2020 published all-state table; not a current quote. Includes both employer and employee contributions, rather than just a worker’s payment. Survey estimates and small firm samples carry uncertainty. Missing estimates remain unavailable.

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Missouri stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Missouri has a dark outline.

Lower value · $6.39KHigher value · $8.64KStriped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Missouri · $7,1792020 · Rank #23 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Missouri with every state · 50 ranked
Single coverage premium · all firms · 2020 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Alaska$8,635—
#2New York$8,177—
#3New Hampshire$7,991—
#4Vermont$7,868—
#5Wyoming$7,743—
#6Nebraska$7,611—
#7South Carolina$7,516—
#8Connecticut$7,501—
#9Maine$7,496—
#10Massachusetts$7,452—
#11Washington$7,440—
#12New Mexico$7,424—
#13Illinois$7,376—
#14New Jersey$7,373—
#15Maryland$7,352—
#16Rhode Island$7,326—
#17Indiana$7,319—
#18Delaware$7,280—
#19Wisconsin$7,250—
#20Pennsylvania$7,246—
#21North Dakota$7,216—
#22Colorado$7,206—
#23Missouri · your comparison$7,179—
#24California$7,173—
#25Florida$7,078—
#26South Dakota$7,070—
#27Oklahoma$7,058—
#28Hawaii$7,040—
#29North Carolina$7,036—
#30Texas$7,017—
#31West Virginia$6,993—
#32Ohio$6,989—
#33Kentucky$6,949—
#34Iowa$6,932—
#35Virginia$6,928—
#36Oregon$6,917—
#37Minnesota$6,910—
#38Georgia$6,876—
#39Montana$6,860—
#40Idaho$6,744—
#41Louisiana$6,713—
#42Michigan$6,683—
#43Kansas$6,675—
#44Arizona$6,612—
#45Utah$6,593—
#46Mississippi$6,561—
#47Nevada$6,493—
#48Tennessee$6,485—
#49Arkansas$6,414—
#50Alabama$6,393—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Missouri · state comparison

Mental health and treatment

Adult statewide estimates use the same SAMHSA model and survey period. Treatment use is a share of all adults, not a share of adults with mental illness.

Missouri · 2023–202425.7%
Missouri rank#12among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark23.1%Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Any Mental Illness · adults 18+

Civilian noninstitutionalized adults age 18+, past-year prevalence or treatment use, estimated by small-area survey models.

Mental illness and depression estimates pool 2023–2024; treatment use covers 2024 only. Definitions and model-based uncertainty differ from the national page’s annual 2025 survey estimates. Point-estimate ranks do not establish significant differences. Serious mental illness is a subset of any mental illness, so their percentages must not be added.

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Missouri stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Missouri has a dark outline.

Lower value · 18.1%Higher value · 31.6%Striped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Missouri · 25.7%2023–2024 · Rank #12 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Missouri with every state · 50 ranked
Any Mental Illness · adults 18+ · 2023–2024 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Oregon31.6%—
#2Vermont29.1%—
#3West Virginia28.1%—
#4Washington27.9%—
#5New Hampshire27.7%—
#6Tennessee27%—
#7Utah26.7%—
#8Maine26.7%—
#9Arkansas26.6%—
#10Colorado26.4%—
#11Rhode Island25.8%—
#12Missouri · your comparison25.7%—
#13Montana25.6%—
#14Indiana25.3%—
#15Kentucky25.3%—
#16Georgia25.2%—
#17Iowa25%—
#18Massachusetts24.9%—
#19Wyoming24.7%—
#20Nevada24.6%—
#21Arizona24.6%—
#22Wisconsin24.6%—
#23Idaho24.5%—
#24Nebraska24.1%—
#25Louisiana24.1%—
#26Alaska24%—
#27Pennsylvania23.9%—
#28New Mexico23.9%—
#28Ohio23.9%—
#30Connecticut23.7%—
#31Kansas23.7%—
#32Michigan23.6%—
#33Virginia23.1%—
#34Alabama23%—
#35North Dakota23%—
#36Maryland22.7%—
#37Oklahoma22.6%—
#38Minnesota22.6%—
#39Illinois22.2%—
#40Delaware22.1%—
#41New York21.9%—
#42South Dakota21.8%—
#43California21.6%—
#44North Carolina21.4%—
#45Florida20.8%—
#46Texas20.7%—
#47Mississippi20.5%—
#48Hawaii19.8%—
#49South Carolina19.8%—
#50New Jersey18.1%—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

What candidates are saying

Explore statements about health coverage, healthcare costs, access to care and public health from FactVote’s Missouri candidate profiles. Compare candidates within each recorded race, with each person’s matching statements kept together. These are candidate and campaign statements, not verified outcomes.

63 statements from 12 candidates

2026 Missouri U.S. House — District 1 — General Election

2 candidates with matching statements · 9 statements

Tom Schmitz

1 statement

Libertarian · U.S. House District 1 · MO

Health coverage

Republicans and Democrats agree that government should have all-encompassing authoritarian control over our healthcare system including a massive regulatory apparatus, the FDA, medicare, medicaid, endless subsidies, and ever-expanding control over health insurance companies.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: The Republican/Democrat uniparty has grown our government into an out of control, oppressive system, destroyed our currency, wrecked our healthcare industry, and executed a foreign policy of endless wars, bombings, death, and destruction. The Libertarian Party is the true opposition to the uniparty war machine, the only bulwark against the uniparty's spiral ever further into forced collectivism. The real debate in America is not left vs. right, but liberty vs. tyranny. Libertarians are fighting for a free society, where individuals are allowed to pursue their goals and dreams without interference from government, where the power is taken out of the hands of the monolithic state and returned to individual choice, and where values of self-ownership and freedom of conscience triumph over coercion and tyranny. I will never stop fighting for individualism and peace, and against the darkness of forced collectivism and endless war. Thank you for visiting my website and for having an open mind, I hope to earn your vote this November. -Tom Schmitz, Libertarian Party Candidate for Congress in Missouri's 1st Congressional District

Candidate campaign source

Republicans and Democrats agree that government should have all-encompassing authoritarian control over our healthcare system including a massive regulatory apparatus, the FDA, medicare, medicaid, endless subsidies, and ever-expanding control over health insurance companies.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Tom Schmitz — candidate-owned primary source 1 ↗

Wesley Bell

8 statements

Democratic · U.S. House District 1 · MO

Health coverage

No family should have to choose between keeping their health insurance and paying their bills. But MAGA Republicans let Affordable Care Act subsidies expire, causing premiums to jump as much as 75% for working families in MO-01, and resulting in a devastating blow to people who are already stretched…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Health care

Candidate campaign source

No family should have to choose between keeping their health insurance and paying their bills. But MAGA Republicans let Affordable Care Act subsidies expire, causing premiums to jump as much as 75% for working families in MO-01, and resulting in a devastating blow to people who are already stretched thin. Wesley has fought at every turn to extend these subsidies and keep health care affordable for the people of St. Louis.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Wesley Bell — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
View 7 more statements from Wesley Bell
Healthcare costs

No one should have to ration their medication or skip a doctor's visit because they can't afford it. Drug companies are making record profits while families in MO-01 struggle to afford the medications they need to survive. Wesley has been a consistent voice for capping drug prices, taking on Big Pha…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Health care

Candidate campaign source

No one should have to ration their medication or skip a doctor's visit because they can't afford it. Drug companies are making record profits while families in MO-01 struggle to afford the medications they need to survive. Wesley has been a consistent voice for capping drug prices, taking on Big Pharma, and ensuring that life-saving medications are affordable for every family in St. Louis.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Wesley Bell — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Care & public health

Real public safety means addressing the root causes of crime. As Prosecuting Attorney in the largest county in Missouri, Wesley overhauled how the office approached public safety: he created a Community Outreach Division to build trust between residents and law enforcement, hired social workers to a…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Reforming Our Criminal Justice System.

Candidate campaign source

Real public safety means addressing the root causes of crime. As Prosecuting Attorney in the largest county in Missouri, Wesley overhauled how the office approached public safety: he created a Community Outreach Division to build trust between residents and law enforcement, hired social workers to address mental health and behavioral issues, and diverted over 2,500 non-violent offenders struggling with addiction and mental illness into treatment programs, with a 96% success rate. He built a Violence Reduction Strategy, launched a restorative justice center, and worked alongside 55 police departments to make St. Louis County safer for everyone. In Congress, Wesley has continued that work, introducing major reforms to the pretrial detention system, launching the Congressional Diversion and Rehabilitation Caucus, and fighting for a justice system that prioritizes prevention and rehabilitation over punishment.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Wesley Bell — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Care & public health

Government should work for everyone, not just those at the top. But Donald Trump and MAGA Republicans are slashing health care and food assistance programs, and giving even more tax breaks to billionaires and big corporations. Trump used ICE as his own unaccountable paramilitary to terrorize immigra…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Government accountability, health care, food assistance, and immigration

Candidate campaign source

Government should work for everyone, not just those at the top. But Donald Trump and MAGA Republicans are slashing health care and food assistance programs, and giving even more tax breaks to billionaires and big corporations. Trump used ICE as his own unaccountable paramilitary to terrorize immigrants and separate families. And when Congress passed bipartisan legislation to release files exposing Jeffrey Epstein's criminal network, this administration fought transparency every step of the way. In Congress, Wesley Bell is standing up to this reckless and dangerous administration at every step.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Wesley Bell — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Healthcare costs

Now, Wesley is running for reelection to continue fighting for his constituents in Washington: holding the Trump administration and MAGA Republicans accountable, expanding access to affordable health care and prescription drugs, lowering energy costs, bringing down the price of groceries, protecting…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: A strong leader for common-sense solutions. Learn more about Wesley Bell here.

Candidate campaign source

Now, Wesley is running for reelection to continue fighting for his constituents in Washington: holding the Trump administration and MAGA Republicans accountable, expanding access to affordable health care and prescription drugs, lowering energy costs, bringing down the price of groceries, protecting our rights and freedoms, and creating good-paying jobs right here in St. Louis.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Wesley Bell — candidate-owned primary source 3 ↗
Care & public health

For decades, families in North St. Louis County suffered cancers and illness from radioactive contamination linked to the federal government's own actions. Wesley fought to expand the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act to finally deliver the compensation and health care that all affected families d…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Delivering Justice for Coldwater Creek Families.

Candidate campaign source

For decades, families in North St. Louis County suffered cancers and illness from radioactive contamination linked to the federal government's own actions. Wesley fought to expand the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act to finally deliver the compensation and health care that all affected families deserve, and he'll keep pushing until every eligible family gets what they're owed.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Wesley Bell — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Care & public health

The decision to have an abortion should be between a woman and her doctor, not the government or politicians. Missouri has one of the most extreme abortion bans in the country, with no exceptions for rape or incest. Meanwhile, the Trump administration continues to roll back reproductive rights, putt…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Protecting Abortion Rights.

Candidate campaign source

The decision to have an abortion should be between a woman and her doctor, not the government or politicians. Missouri has one of the most extreme abortion bans in the country, with no exceptions for rape or incest. Meanwhile, the Trump administration continues to roll back reproductive rights, putting women as well as their families in danger. After Roe v. Wade was struck down, Wesley was one of the first prosecutors in the country to pledge not to prosecute those who seek or provide abortions. Wesley supports codifying abortion rights at the federal level, so that everyone, regardless of what state they live in, can access necessary and life-saving health care.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Wesley Bell — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Care & public health

When devastating tornadoes destroyed over 5,000 structures in our community, Wesley pressed for a federal disaster declaration and fought to make sure families got the housing assistance, health care, and rebuilding support they urgently needed. While there’s more work to do, these resources are alr…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Supporting St. Louis After the 2025 Tornadoes.

Candidate campaign source

When devastating tornadoes destroyed over 5,000 structures in our community, Wesley pressed for a federal disaster declaration and fought to make sure families got the housing assistance, health care, and rebuilding support they urgently needed. While there’s more work to do, these resources are already helping our region recover stronger and faster.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Wesley Bell — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗

2026 Missouri U.S. House — District 2 — General Election

1 candidate with matching statements · 10 statements

Fred Wellman

10 statements

Democratic · U.S. House District 2 · MO

Health coverage

I support the Leveling the Playing Field approach and immediate reforms that can pass and help people now: restoring ACA subsidies, reversing damaging Medicaid cuts, lowering the Medicare eligibility age, and creating a strong public option.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Retiring with Dignity

Candidate campaign source

I support the Leveling the Playing Field approach and immediate reforms that can pass and help people now: restoring ACA subsidies, reversing damaging Medicaid cuts, lowering the Medicare eligibility age, and creating a strong public option.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Fred Wellman — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
View 9 more statements from Fred Wellman
Health coverage

After a lifetime of hard work, every Missourian should be able to retire with dignity and security. No one should have to choose between paying for medicine, housing, or heat in their later years. We must protect Social Security and Medicare, defend pensions, and strengthen retirement benefits so th…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Retiring with Dignity

Candidate campaign source

After a lifetime of hard work, every Missourian should be able to retire with dignity and security. No one should have to choose between paying for medicine, housing, or heat in their later years. We must protect Social Security and Medicare, defend pensions, and strengthen retirement benefits so that those who built this country can live their final years with stability and respect.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Fred Wellman — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Health coverage

We should keep working toward a system where everyone is covered. But I am going to Congress to deliver real progress, not make promises that leave more than 20,000 uninsured people in this district waiting for help.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Health care

Candidate campaign source

We should keep working toward a system where everyone is covered. But I am going to Congress to deliver real progress, not make promises that leave more than 20,000 uninsured people in this district waiting for help.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Fred Wellman — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Care & public health

Missourians deserve a fair shot at a good life. That starts with affordable healthcare, lower costs, and the freedom to build a secure future. Every family should be able to see a doctor when they are sick, afford the medicine they need, and keep a roof over their heads without being buried in debt.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Claim your free yard sign

Candidate campaign source

Missourians deserve a fair shot at a good life. That starts with affordable healthcare, lower costs, and the freedom to build a secure future. Every family should be able to see a doctor when they are sick, afford the medicine they need, and keep a roof over their heads without being buried in debt.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Fred Wellman — candidate-owned primary source 1 ↗
Care & public health

I will relentlessly focus on protecting Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care from privatization, while expanding mental health and suicide prevention resources, and safeguarding mandatory funding for earned benefits against budget cuts. I oppose the current Taking Care of America’s Vetera…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Veterans and Military

Candidate campaign source

I will relentlessly focus on protecting Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care from privatization, while expanding mental health and suicide prevention resources, and safeguarding mandatory funding for earned benefits against budget cuts. I oppose the current Taking Care of America’s Veterans Act (TCAVA) as written, with Section 108 taking away benefits from future veterans. The idea that the only people being required to adhere to ‘Pay-Go’ rules are veterans while the Department of Defense gets a blank check to wage wars is unacceptable.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Fred Wellman — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Care & public health

Every Missourian deserves the freedom to build a good life without being burdened by rising costs. Families are working harder than ever but falling further behind because the price of housing, healthcare, childcare, and groceries keeps climbing while wages stay flat. We must put working families fi…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Affordability

Candidate campaign source

Every Missourian deserves the freedom to build a good life without being burdened by rising costs. Families are working harder than ever but falling further behind because the price of housing, healthcare, childcare, and groceries keeps climbing while wages stay flat. We must put working families first by lowering costs, expanding access to good-paying jobs, and making sure every family can afford the basics — not just to survive, but to thrive.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Fred Wellman — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Care & public health

The government should not be tracking medical records, overruling parents and doctors, or denying medically appropriate care because of political ideology. I will defend every Missourian’s right to privacy and oppose efforts to punish patients, families, or healthcare professionals for making deeply…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Personal Medical Freedom

Candidate campaign source

The government should not be tracking medical records, overruling parents and doctors, or denying medically appropriate care because of political ideology. I will defend every Missourian’s right to privacy and oppose efforts to punish patients, families, or healthcare professionals for making deeply personal medical decisions.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Fred Wellman — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Healthcare costs

No one should have to choose between paying for medicine and paying the bills. We need to finally bring down drug prices by standing up to the big corporations that put profits ahead of patients. It’s time to hold them accountable and make sure every family can afford the care they need.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Health care

Candidate campaign source

No one should have to choose between paying for medicine and paying the bills. We need to finally bring down drug prices by standing up to the big corporations that put profits ahead of patients. It’s time to hold them accountable and make sure every family can afford the care they need.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Fred Wellman — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Care & public health

While career politicians enrich themselves and put special interests ahead of working families, Fred is focused on lowering costs, protecting health care, defending the Constitution, and making government work for the people it serves.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: A lifetime of service. A fighter for Missouri.

Candidate campaign source

While career politicians enrich themselves and put special interests ahead of working families, Fred is focused on lowering costs, protecting health care, defending the Constitution, and making government work for the people it serves.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Fred Wellman — candidate-owned primary source 1 ↗
Care & public health

Our economy should reward hard work, not connections or special interests. I believe in a strong floor and no ceiling: everyone should have the security to build a good life and the freedom to rise as far as their talent and hard work can take them. Families are working harder than ever but struggli…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Missourians deserve a fair shot at a good life. That starts with affordable healthcare, lower costs, and the freedom to build a secure future. Every family should be able to see a doctor when they are sick, afford the medicine they need, and keep a roof over their heads without being buried in debt.

Candidate campaign source

Our economy should reward hard work, not connections or special interests. I believe in a strong floor and no ceiling: everyone should have the security to build a good life and the freedom to rise as far as their talent and hard work can take them. Families are working harder than ever but struggling to keep up with the cost of housing, childcare, healthcare, and groceries. It should not take two jobs to make ends meet or a lifetime of work to retire in dignity and stability.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Fred Wellman — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗

2026 Missouri U.S. House — District 3 — General Election

2 candidates with matching statements · 5 statements

Bethany E Mann

4 statements

Democratic · U.S. House District 3 · MO

Health coverage

Abortion is healthcare. Access to healthcare saves lives. Equitable access to healthcare is a human right, and no one should experience discrimination because of their gender. I support the Women’s Health Protection Act, ratifying the Equal Rights Amendment, Medicare For All, and expanding access to…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Reproductive Rights

Candidate campaign source

Abortion is healthcare. Access to healthcare saves lives. Equitable access to healthcare is a human right, and no one should experience discrimination because of their gender. I support the Women’s Health Protection Act, ratifying the Equal Rights Amendment, Medicare For All, and expanding access to virtual and telehealth services.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Bethany E Mann — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
View 3 more statements from Bethany E Mann
Care & public health

Missourians deserve access to quality, affordable healthcare services to support their physical and mental well-being. It's a matter of personal freedom and financial security.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: The Issues That Matter

Candidate campaign source

Missourians deserve access to quality, affordable healthcare services to support their physical and mental well-being. It's a matter of personal freedom and financial security.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Bethany E Mann — candidate-owned primary source 1 ↗
Care & public health

Missourians deserve access to quality, affordable healthcare services to support their physical and mental well-being and to have financial security. During the pandemic, thousands across the state have died from Covid complications, and thousands more have been temporarily or permanently disabled. …

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Infrastructure

Candidate campaign source

Missourians deserve access to quality, affordable healthcare services to support their physical and mental well-being and to have financial security. During the pandemic, thousands across the state have died from Covid complications, and thousands more have been temporarily or permanently disabled. The mental health impact of Covid and the stress of the pandemic continue to affect nearly every community from the patient to the first responders, overwhelmed with short staff and unbearably long hours and support.​

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Bethany E Mann — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Care & public health

During the pandemic, thousands across our state died from Covid complications, and thousands more have been temporarily or permanently disabled. The mental health impact of COVID and the stress of the pandemic continue to affect nearly every community from the patient to the first responders, overwh…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: The Issues That Matter

Candidate campaign source

During the pandemic, thousands across our state died from Covid complications, and thousands more have been temporarily or permanently disabled. The mental health impact of COVID and the stress of the pandemic continue to affect nearly every community from the patient to the first responders, overwhelmed with short staff and unbearably long hours and support.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Bethany E Mann — candidate-owned primary source 1 ↗

Bob Onder

1 statement

Republican · U.S. House District 3 · MO

Health coverage

Dr. Onder led successful fights against Obamacare Medicaid Expansion in 2021, and against Bidencare Medicaid Expansion in 2022. Also in 2022, Dr. Onder fought a Democrat-sponsored plan, SB 798, that would have allowed food stamps to be used for restaurant meals and fast food.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Supports Welfare Reform

Candidate campaign source

Dr. Onder led successful fights against Obamacare Medicaid Expansion in 2021, and against Bidencare Medicaid Expansion in 2022. Also in 2022, Dr. Onder fought a Democrat-sponsored plan, SB 798, that would have allowed food stamps to be used for restaurant meals and fast food.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 17, 2026

Bob Onder — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Race groups · Page 1 of 3
How statements are selected

This section matches specific health coverage, healthcare costs, access to care and public health terms in retained, attributed source text from published Missouri candidate profiles. A profile heading or biography alone does not qualify. The Florida geography is fixed; saved state preferences cannot change these results. A mention can concern a community or group rather than Florida’s statewide measure.

Matching is automatic and does not establish a candidate’s stance, the accuracy of a claim, or an effect on the measured result. Results are grouped by recorded race, then by candidate name. Within each candidate, the matching issue mentions appear first. Only candidates with matching retained statements are shown; this is not a complete race roster. Repeated identical text for the same candidate is shown once. Coverage follows the existing state profiles and is not a complete record of all candidates or everything they have said. Review dates are not statement dates.

Missouri incumbents

What incumbents are proposing

Explore reviewed bills sponsored by current Missouri legislators and Missouri’s congressional delegation, plus retained proposals from Missouri’s governor and agencies. Each record keeps its latest recorded status and official evidence.

443 matching sponsorships or proposals · 108 Missouri incumbents. These filters apply only to this section.

Rep. Adrian Plank

Missouri House of Representatives, District 47 · D–MO

4 proposals
View proposals from Rep. Adrian Plank
Missouri Legislature · HB 3130

Modifies provisions relating to constitutional liberties

May 15, 2026 · Did not pass

Rep. Adrian Plank · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

FINDINGS AND DECLARATIONS (Section 1.411) This bill states certain findings about the duties, powers, and the role of both the Federal and State governments, as described in the bill, including the right to bear arms and the right to assess the legality of searches and seizures. LIMITATION OF POWERS (Section 1.451) This bill further states that no public officer or employee of this State or of a political subdivision has the authority to enforce any Federal laws or regulations regarding firearms or firearm accessories or that allow peace officers acting within the borders of this State to use facial coverings or refuse to identify themselves or the authority under which the officers act.…

This measure did not pass before the 2026 session ended. Final recorded action on 2026-05-15: Referred: Emerging Issues(H).

Why this record is included

The record addresses access to firearms, firearm safety, or prevention of firearm injury. Missouri’s firearm-death count includes suicides, homicides, and other intents; the policy’s target may cover only part of that total. This relationship does not establish an effect on the displayed statistic; actions after its measurement period cannot explain the earlier value.

Retained Missouri evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

FINDINGS AND DECLARATIONS (Section 1.411) This bill states certain findings about the duties, powers, and the role of both the Federal and State governments, as described in the bill, including the right to bear arms and the right to assess the legality of searches and seizures. LIMITATION OF POWERS (Section 1.451) This bill further states that no public officer or employee of this State or of a political subdivision has the authority to enforce any Federal laws or regulations regarding firearms or firearm accessories or that allow peace officers acting within the borders of this State to use facial coverings or refuse to identify themselves or the authority under which the officers act. Nothing in the bill prohibits Missouri officials from accepting aid from Federal officials in an effort to enforce Missouri laws.
Review official supporting evidence ↗
Missouri Legislature · HB 550

Modifies provisions relating to firearms

May 15, 2025 · Did not pass

Rep. Adrian Plank · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

HB 550 -- FIREARMS SPONSOR: Plank This bill repeals the Second Amendment Preservation Act; the General Assembly's preemption of all firearm laws; justification as an absolute defense; and statutes authorizing concealed carry permits. The bill also repeals certain provisions dealing with the use of force: that the use of deadly force can be justified if used against a person who unlawfully enters private property; and that a person does not have a duty to retreat before using deadly force if the person is in a location he or she has a right to be. The bill establishes that a person commits the offense of transfer of a concealable firearm if the person receives or delivers any concealable…

This measure did not pass before the 2025 session ended. Final recorded action on 2025-05-15: Referred: Emerging Issues(H).

Why this record is included

The record addresses access to firearms, firearm safety, or prevention of firearm injury. Missouri’s firearm-death count includes suicides, homicides, and other intents; the policy’s target may cover only part of that total. This relationship does not establish an effect on the displayed statistic; actions after its measurement period cannot explain the earlier value.

Retained Missouri evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

HB 550 -- FIREARMS SPONSOR: Plank This bill repeals the Second Amendment Preservation Act; the General Assembly's preemption of all firearm laws; justification as an absolute defense; and statutes authorizing concealed carry permits. The bill also repeals certain provisions dealing with the use of force: that the use of deadly force can be justified if used against a person who unlawfully enters private property; and that a person does not have a duty to retreat before using deadly force if the person is in a location he or she has a right to be. The bill establishes that a person commits the offense of transfer of a concealable firearm if the person receives or delivers any concealable firearm without a valid permit; or the person violates the federal code provided in the bill. A person does not commit the offense of transfer of a concealable firearm if the acquisition or transfer of the firearm is between manufacturers, wholesalers, or retailers of firearms for commercial purposes. Antique firearms or curio or relic firearms are not considered under this offense. The offense of transfer of a concealable results in a class A misdemeanor. The bill establishes that a permit to acquire a concealable firearm will be issued by the sheriff of the county where the applicant resides if the statements made within the permit application are true and the applicant is over 21, a U.S. Citizen, and has been a resident of the State for at least six months; has not plead guilty to or been convicted of a crime other than a misdemeanor punishable as specified in the bill; is not a fugitive or charged with the commission of a crime punishable as specified in the bill; has not been dishonorably discharged; is not mentally incompetent; and has not been committed to a mental health facility. The bill specifies the content of the permit. A permit to acquire a concealable firearm is valid for 30 days. The sheriff must be notified, and will keep a record of, when the permit is used as well as the details of the transaction for which the permit was used.
Review official supporting evidence ↗
Missouri Legislature · HJR 145

Proposes a constitutional amendment relating to firearms

May 17, 2024 · Did not pass

Rep. Adrian Plank · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

HJR 145 -- FIREARMS SPONSOR: Plank Currently, the Missouri Constitution guarantees every State citizen the right to keep and bear arms. Upon voter approval, this resolution would amend the Constitution to allow any county, the city of St. Louis, and the city of Kansas City to regulate the possession, carrying, or transfer of firearms within city or county limits. The resolution authorizes the city or county to, by ordinance, issue a permit or certificate and charge a fee, as specified. For any nonresident, a city or county must recognize as valid any permit or certificate authorizing the possession or carrying of firearms issued by the individual's county of residence. The resolution also…

This measure did not pass before the 2024 session ended. Final recorded action on 2024-05-17: Referred: General Laws(H).

Why this record is included

The record addresses access to firearms, firearm safety, or prevention of firearm injury. Missouri’s firearm-death count includes suicides, homicides, and other intents; the policy’s target may cover only part of that total. This relationship does not establish an effect on the displayed statistic; actions after its measurement period cannot explain the earlier value.

Retained Missouri evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

HJR 145 -- FIREARMS SPONSOR: Plank Currently, the Missouri Constitution guarantees every State citizen the right to keep and bear arms. Upon voter approval, this resolution would amend the Constitution to allow any county, the city of St. Louis, and the city of Kansas City to regulate the possession, carrying, or transfer of firearms within city or county limits. The resolution authorizes the city or county to, by ordinance, issue a permit or certificate and charge a fee, as specified. For any nonresident, a city or county must recognize as valid any permit or certificate authorizing the possession or carrying of firearms issued by the individual's county of residence. The resolution also lists individuals who must be exempt from any such ordinance.
Review official supporting evidence ↗
Missouri Legislature · HB 1866

Modifies provisions relating to firearms

May 17, 2024 · Did not pass

Rep. Adrian Plank · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

HB 1866 -- TRANSFER OF A CONCEALABLE FIREARM SPONSOR: Plank This bill repeals the Second Amendment Preservation Act; the General Assembly's preemption of all firearm laws; justification as an absolute defense; and statutes authorizing concealed carry permits. The bill also repeals certain provisions dealing with the use of force: that the use of deadly force can be justified if used against a person who unlawfully enters private property; and that a person does not have a duty to retreat before using deadly force if the person is in a location he or she has a right to be. The bill establishes that a person commits the offense of transfer of a concealable firearm if such person receives or…

This measure did not pass before the 2024 session ended. Final recorded action on 2024-05-17: Referred: General Laws(H).

Why this record is included

The record addresses access to firearms, firearm safety, or prevention of firearm injury. Missouri’s firearm-death count includes suicides, homicides, and other intents; the policy’s target may cover only part of that total. This relationship does not establish an effect on the displayed statistic; actions after its measurement period cannot explain the earlier value.

Retained Missouri evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

HB 1866 -- TRANSFER OF A CONCEALABLE FIREARM SPONSOR: Plank This bill repeals the Second Amendment Preservation Act; the General Assembly's preemption of all firearm laws; justification as an absolute defense; and statutes authorizing concealed carry permits. The bill also repeals certain provisions dealing with the use of force: that the use of deadly force can be justified if used against a person who unlawfully enters private property; and that a person does not have a duty to retreat before using deadly force if the person is in a location he or she has a right to be. The bill establishes that a person commits the offense of transfer of a concealable firearm if such person receives or delivers any concealable firearm without a valid permit; or such person violates the federal code listed in the bill. A permit to acquire a concealable firearm is valid for 30 days. A person does not commit the offense of transfer of a concealable firearm if the acquisition or transfer of the firearm is between manufacturers, wholesalers, or retailers of firearms for commercial purposes. Antique firearms or curio or relic firearms are not considered under this offense. The offense of transfer of a concealable results in a class A misdemeanor. Violation of any of the following constitutes a class A misdemeanor. The bill establishes that a permit to acquire a concealable firearm shall be issued by the sheriff of the county where the applicant resides if the statements made within the permit application are true and the applicant is over 21, a U.S. Citizen, and has been a resident of the State for at least six months; has not plead guilty to or been convicted of a crime other than a misdemeanor punishable as listed in the bill; is not a fugitive or charged with the commission of a crime punishable as listed in the bill; has not been dishonorably discharged; is not mentally incompetent and has not been committed to a mental health facility.
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Alex Riley

Missouri House of Representatives, District 134 · R–MO

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Alex Riley
Missouri Legislature · HB 719

Modifies provisions relating to public assistance

May 1, 2023 · Did not pass

Rep. Alex Riley · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

This bill makes the unlawful receipt by sale or transfer by sale of public assistance benefits or electronic benefits transfer (EBT) cards illegal by modifying existing provisions relating to the offenses of unlawful receipt or unlawful transfer of public assistance benefits or EBT cards. MEDICAID SERVICES FOR PREGNANT WOMEN (208.151, 208.186, 208.239, and 208.662) Currently, low-income pregnant and postpartum women receiving benefits through MO HealthNet for Pregnant Women or Show-Me Healthy Babies are eligible for pregnancy-related coverage throughout the pregnancy and for 60 days following the end of the pregnancy. Under this bill, MO HealthNet coverage for these low-income women will…

This measure did not pass before the 2023 session ended. Final recorded action on 2023-05-01: Placed on the Informal Third Reading Calendar (H).

Why this record is included

The record addresses eligibility, enrollment, or affordability of health coverage, relevant to the share of people under 65 without insurance. A service-specific benefit or provider-payment rule alone is not a change in insured status. This relationship does not establish an effect on the displayed statistic; actions after its measurement period cannot explain the earlier value.

Retained Missouri evidence context: People under 65 without health insurance. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

This bill makes the unlawful receipt by sale or transfer by sale of public assistance benefits or electronic benefits transfer (EBT) cards illegal by modifying existing provisions relating to the offenses of unlawful receipt or unlawful transfer of public assistance benefits or EBT cards. MEDICAID SERVICES FOR PREGNANT WOMEN (208.151, 208.186, 208.239, and 208.662) Currently, low-income pregnant and postpartum women receiving benefits through MO HealthNet for Pregnant Women or Show-Me Healthy Babies are eligible for pregnancy-related coverage throughout the pregnancy and for 60 days following the end of the pregnancy. Under this bill, MO HealthNet coverage for these low-income women will include full Medicaid benefits for the duration of the pregnancy and for one year following the end of the pregnancy. The Department shall submit any necessary state plan amendments or waivers, as described in the bill.
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Ann Kelley

Missouri House of Representatives, District 127 · R–MO

3 proposals
View proposals from Rep. Ann Kelley
Missouri Legislature · HJR 30

Proposes a constitutional amendment that prohibits abortion after fetal viability, except in cases of medical emergency

May 15, 2025 · Did not pass

Rep. Ann Kelley · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

HJR 30 -- ABORTION SPONSOR: Kelley Upon voter approval, this proposed amendment to the Constitution, repeals the provisions of Article I, Section 36, known as "The Right to Reproductive Freedom Initiative". Additionally, it prohibits abortion of a viable unborn child unless such abortion is necessary to save the life of the pregnant woman whose life is endangered.

This measure did not pass before the 2025 session ended. Final recorded action on 2025-05-15: Referred: Emerging Issues(H).

Why this record is included

The record addresses abortion access, regulation, or reporting, the subject of Missouri’s reported resident-abortion count. That count includes reported care outside Missouri and has reporting gaps. This relationship does not establish an effect on the displayed statistic; actions after its measurement period cannot explain the earlier value.

Retained Missouri evidence context: Resident abortions reported. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

HJR 30 -- ABORTION SPONSOR: Kelley Upon voter approval, this proposed amendment to the Constitution, repeals the provisions of Article I, Section 36, known as "The Right to Reproductive Freedom Initiative". Additionally, it prohibits abortion of a viable unborn child unless such abortion is necessary to save the life of the pregnant woman whose life is endangered.
Review official supporting evidence ↗
Missouri Legislature · HJR 31

Proposes a constitutional amendment that prohibits abortions following the detection of a fetal heartbeat and establishes rights of unborn children

May 15, 2025 · Did not pass

Rep. Ann Kelley · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

HJR 31 -- ABORTION SPONSOR: Kelley This amendment to the State Constitution, if approved by voters, repeals the provisions of Article I, Section 36, known as “The Right to Reproductive Freedom Initiative”. Additionally, this amendment requires a physician to perform a fetal heartbeat detection test prior to performing or inducing an abortion, except in cases of medical emergency. A physician must not perform or induce an abortion if a fetal heartbeat has been detected. The physician must record in the pregnant woman's medical record the estimated gestational age of the unborn child, the method used to estimate the gestational age, the test used to detect the fetal heartbeat, and the date,…

This measure did not pass before the 2025 session ended. Final recorded action on 2025-05-15: Referred: Emerging Issues(H).

Why this record is included

The record addresses abortion access, regulation, or reporting, the subject of Missouri’s reported resident-abortion count. That count includes reported care outside Missouri and has reporting gaps. This relationship does not establish an effect on the displayed statistic; actions after its measurement period cannot explain the earlier value.

Retained Missouri evidence context: Resident abortions reported. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

HJR 31 -- ABORTION SPONSOR: Kelley This amendment to the State Constitution, if approved by voters, repeals the provisions of Article I, Section 36, known as “The Right to Reproductive Freedom Initiative”. Additionally, this amendment requires a physician to perform a fetal heartbeat detection test prior to performing or inducing an abortion, except in cases of medical emergency. A physician must not perform or induce an abortion if a fetal heartbeat has been detected. The physician must record in the pregnant woman's medical record the estimated gestational age of the unborn child, the method used to estimate the gestational age, the test used to detect the fetal heartbeat, and the date, time, and results of the test. If an abortion is performed or induced without first performing the test because of a medical emergency, the physician must record that information in the pregnant woman's medical record and in the abortion report submitted to the Department of Health and Senior Services. The provisions of this amendment must be exclusively enforced through private civil action, as described in the amendment, and will not be enforced through the State, any political subdivision of the State, a prosecuting or circuit attorney, or an executive or administrative officer of a political subdivision. Any other person may bring a civil action against any person who: (1) Performs or induces an abortion in violation of this amendment; (2) Knowingly engages in conduct that aids or abets in the performance or induction of an abortion in violation of this amendment, including reimbursing the costs of the abortion through insurance or otherwise; or (3) Intends to engage in any of the above conduct. If a claimant prevails, the court must award injunctive relief, damages of not less than $10,000 for each abortion performed or induced in violation of this amendment, and costs and attorney's fees. A court will not award attorney's fees to the defendant.
Review official supporting evidence ↗
Missouri Legislature · HB 1563

Prohibits public funds from being expended to any abortion facility, or affiliate or associate thereof, including for MO HealthNet reimbursement, and modifies provisions relating to MO HealthNet providers

May 2, 2024 · Did not pass

Rep. Ann Kelley · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

Any taxpayer shall have standing to bring a cause of action in any court or administrative agency of competent jurisdiction to enforce these provisions. This bill prohibits any public funding from being expended to any abortion facility, or associate or affiliate thereof, including for MO HealthNet reimbursement. This bill modifies existing statute permitting any MO HealthNet participant to obtain services from any provider of such services in a MO HealthNet provider agreement with the state by requiring such provider to not be disqualified or excluded from serving as a MO HealthNet provider. Additionally, this bill requires the Department of Social Services to suspend, revoke, or cancel any…

This measure did not pass before the 2024 session ended. Final recorded action on 2024-05-02: Placed Back on Formal Perfection Calendar (H).

Why this record is included

The record addresses abortion access, regulation, or reporting, the subject of Missouri’s reported resident-abortion count. That count includes reported care outside Missouri and has reporting gaps. This relationship does not establish an effect on the displayed statistic; actions after its measurement period cannot explain the earlier value.

Retained Missouri evidence context: Resident abortions reported. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

Any taxpayer shall have standing to bring a cause of action in any court or administrative agency of competent jurisdiction to enforce these provisions. This bill prohibits any public funding from being expended to any abortion facility, or associate or affiliate thereof, including for MO HealthNet reimbursement. This bill modifies existing statute permitting any MO HealthNet participant to obtain services from any provider of such services in a MO HealthNet provider agreement with the state by requiring such provider to not be disqualified or excluded from serving as a MO HealthNet provider. Additionally, this bill requires the Department of Social Services to suspend, revoke, or cancel any contract or provider agreement, or refuse to enter into a new contract or provider agreement, with any provider when it is determined that the provider is not qualified to perform the required services because such provider has committed certain offenses, as specified in the bill, or because the provider is an abortion facility, or an affiliate or associate thereof. Lastly, this bill prohibits reimbursement to abortion facilities, or associates or affiliates thereof, under the "Uninsured Women's Health Program". This bill is similar to SB 160 (2023).
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Anthony Ealy

Missouri House of Representatives, District 36 · D–MO

6 proposals
View proposals from Rep. Anthony Ealy
Missouri Legislature · HB 2401

Establishes provisions related to the safe storage of firearms

May 15, 2026 · Did not pass

Rep. Anthony Ealy · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

HB 2401 -- STORAGE OF FIREARMS SPONSOR: Ealy This bill specifies that a person commits the offense of unlawful storage of a firearm if the person fails to responsibly and securely store a firearm upon any premises that the person owns or controls and the person knows or reasonably should know a child can gain access to the firearm without the permission of the child's parent or guardian, or knows or reasonably should know a co-tenant is ineligible to possess a firearm under law. Responsible and secure storage includes, with the exception of a concealed or openly carried firearm in as secured holster, firearms: (1) Kept unloaded until ready to use; (2) Securely stored in a manner that ensures…

This measure did not pass before the 2026 session ended. Final recorded action on 2026-05-15: Referred: Emerging Issues(H).

Why this record is included

The record addresses access to firearms, firearm safety, or prevention of firearm injury. Missouri’s firearm-death count includes suicides, homicides, and other intents; the policy’s target may cover only part of that total. This relationship does not establish an effect on the displayed statistic; actions after its measurement period cannot explain the earlier value.

Retained Missouri evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

HB 2401 -- STORAGE OF FIREARMS SPONSOR: Ealy This bill specifies that a person commits the offense of unlawful storage of a firearm if the person fails to responsibly and securely store a firearm upon any premises that the person owns or controls and the person knows or reasonably should know a child can gain access to the firearm without the permission of the child's parent or guardian, or knows or reasonably should know a co-tenant is ineligible to possess a firearm under law. Responsible and secure storage includes, with the exception of a concealed or openly carried firearm in as secured holster, firearms: (1) Kept unloaded until ready to use; (2) Securely stored in a manner that ensures the firearms are not accessible to unauthorized persons and unauthorized persons do not have access to any unlocking mechanism necessary for accessibility; and (3) That have a personalized firearm's safety characteristics activated. The requirement for the responsible and secured storage of a firearm, as specified in the bill, will not apply to the storing of an antique firearm, as defined under 18 U.S.C. Section 921, or a curio or relic, as defined under 27 CFR 478.11. The offense of unlawful storage of a firearm is punishable by a $500 fine for a first violation and punishable as a class B misdemeanor for a second or any subsequent violation. It is a defense to the offense of unlawful storage of a firearm if a child gained possession of and used the firearm in a lawful act of self-defense, defense of others, or defense of livestock. Any firearms dealer must post in a conspicuous location on their premises a written notice as illustrated in the bill and to be made publicly available by the Department of Public Safety. A firearm dealer in violation of this provision may be punished by a warning for a first violation and punishable by a fine of not more than $500 for a second or subsequent violation. The Department must publish on its website, in both English and Spanish, information relating to the offense of unlawful storage of a firearm and related penalties. This bill is similar to HB 2113 (2026);
Review official supporting evidence ↗
Missouri Legislature · HB 94

Prohibits persons from carrying firearms into parade zones

May 15, 2025 · Did not pass

Rep. Anthony Ealy · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

HB 94 -- FIREARMS IN PARADE ZONES SPONSOR: Ealy This bill specifies that a person commits the offense of unlawful use of weapons if he or she knowingly carries a firearm or any other weapon readily capable of lethal use into any parade zone during parade hours, as defined in the bill. The bill specifies that no valid concealed carry permit of any type will authorize any person to carry concealed firearms into any parade zone during parade hours. Only a peace officer, may carry a firearm into a parade zone during parade hours. The bill requires a parade host to ensure that all parade attendees go through a checkpoint to enter the parade zone. At the checkpoint, attendees will pass through a…

This measure did not pass before the 2025 session ended. Final recorded action on 2025-05-15: Referred: Emerging Issues(H).

Why this record is included

The record addresses access to firearms, firearm safety, or prevention of firearm injury. Missouri’s firearm-death count includes suicides, homicides, and other intents; the policy’s target may cover only part of that total. This relationship does not establish an effect on the displayed statistic; actions after its measurement period cannot explain the earlier value.

Retained Missouri evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

HB 94 -- FIREARMS IN PARADE ZONES SPONSOR: Ealy This bill specifies that a person commits the offense of unlawful use of weapons if he or she knowingly carries a firearm or any other weapon readily capable of lethal use into any parade zone during parade hours, as defined in the bill. The bill specifies that no valid concealed carry permit of any type will authorize any person to carry concealed firearms into any parade zone during parade hours. Only a peace officer, may carry a firearm into a parade zone during parade hours. The bill requires a parade host to ensure that all parade attendees go through a checkpoint to enter the parade zone. At the checkpoint, attendees will pass through a metal detector or be scanned by security. Any attendee found to be in possession of a firearm must be denied entrance into the parade zone. This bill is the same as HB 2708 (2024).
Review official supporting evidence ↗
Missouri Legislature · HB 104

Establishes provisions related to the safe storage of firearms

May 15, 2025 · Did not pass

Rep. Anthony Ealy · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

HB 104 -- SAFE STORAGE OF FIREARMS SPONSOR: Ealy This bill specifies that a person commits the offense of unlawful storage of a firearm if the person fails to responsibly and securely store a firearm upon any premises that the person owns or controls and the person knows or reasonably should know a child can gain access to the firearm without the permission of the child's parent or guardian, or knows or reasonably should know a cotenant is ineligible to possess a firearm under law. Such responsible and secure storage includes, with the exception of a concealed or openly carried firearm in as secured holster, firearms that: (1) Are kept unloaded until ready to use; (2) Are securely stored in…

This measure did not pass before the 2025 session ended. Final recorded action on 2025-05-15: Referred: Emerging Issues(H).

Why this record is included

The record addresses access to firearms, firearm safety, or prevention of firearm injury. Missouri’s firearm-death count includes suicides, homicides, and other intents; the policy’s target may cover only part of that total. This relationship does not establish an effect on the displayed statistic; actions after its measurement period cannot explain the earlier value.

Retained Missouri evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

HB 104 -- SAFE STORAGE OF FIREARMS SPONSOR: Ealy This bill specifies that a person commits the offense of unlawful storage of a firearm if the person fails to responsibly and securely store a firearm upon any premises that the person owns or controls and the person knows or reasonably should know a child can gain access to the firearm without the permission of the child's parent or guardian, or knows or reasonably should know a cotenant is ineligible to possess a firearm under law. Such responsible and secure storage includes, with the exception of a concealed or openly carried firearm in as secured holster, firearms that: (1) Are kept unloaded until ready to use; (2) Are securely stored in a manner that ensures the firearms are not accessible to unauthorized persons and unauthorized persons do not have access to any unlocking mechanism necessary for accessibility; and (3) Have a personalized firearm's safety characteristics activated. The requirement for the responsible and secured storage of a firearm as specified in this bill will not apply to the storing of an antique firearm, as defined under 18 U.S.C. Section 921, or a curio or relic, as defined under 27 CFR 478.11. The offense of unlawful storage of a firearm under the provisions of this bill is punishable by a $500 fine for a first violation and punishable as a class B misdemeanor for a second or any subsequent violation. It is a defense to the offense of unlawful storage of a firearm if a child or cotenant gained possession of and used the firearm in a lawful act of self-defense, defense of others, or defense of livestock. All firearms dealers must post in a conspicuous location on their premises a written notice that unlawful storage of a firearm may result in imprisonment or fine. A firearm dealer in violation of this provision may be punished by a warning for a first violation and a fine of not more than $500 for a second or subsequent violation. The Department of Public Safety must publish on its website, in both English and Spanish, information relating to the offense of unlawful storage of a firearm as specified in this bill and related penalties. This bill is the same as HB 2884 and HB 2577 (2024).
Review official supporting evidence ↗
Missouri Legislature · HB 2708

Prohibits persons from carrying firearms into parade zones

May 17, 2024 · Did not pass

Rep. Anthony Ealy · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

HB 2708 -- PARADE SECURITY SPONSOR: Ealy This bill specifies that a person commits the offense of unlawful use of weapons if he or she knowingly carries a firearm or any other weapon readily capable of lethal use into any parade zone during parade hours, as defined in the bill. The bill specifies that no valid concealed carry permit of any type will authorize any person to carry concealed firearms into any parade zone during parade hours. Only a peace officer, may carry a firearm into a parade zone during parade hours. This bill requires a parade host to ensure that all parade attendees go through a checkpoint to enter the parade zone. At the checkpoint, attendees will pass through a metal…

This measure did not pass before the 2024 session ended. Final recorded action on 2024-05-17: Referred: General Laws(H).

Why this record is included

The record addresses access to firearms, firearm safety, or prevention of firearm injury. Missouri’s firearm-death count includes suicides, homicides, and other intents; the policy’s target may cover only part of that total. This relationship does not establish an effect on the displayed statistic; actions after its measurement period cannot explain the earlier value.

Retained Missouri evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

HB 2708 -- PARADE SECURITY SPONSOR: Ealy This bill specifies that a person commits the offense of unlawful use of weapons if he or she knowingly carries a firearm or any other weapon readily capable of lethal use into any parade zone during parade hours, as defined in the bill. The bill specifies that no valid concealed carry permit of any type will authorize any person to carry concealed firearms into any parade zone during parade hours. Only a peace officer, may carry a firearm into a parade zone during parade hours. This bill requires a parade host to ensure that all parade attendees go through a checkpoint to enter the parade zone. At the checkpoint, attendees will pass through a metal detector or be scanned by security. Any attendee found to be in possession of a firearm will be denied entrance into the parade zone.
Review official supporting evidence ↗
Missouri Legislature · HJR 170

Proposes a constitutional amendment relating to firearms

May 17, 2024 · Did not pass

Rep. Anthony Ealy · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

HJR 170 -- FIREARMS SPONSOR: Ealy Currently, the Missouri Constitution guarantees every State citizen the right to keep and bear arms. Upon voter approval, this resolution would amend the Constitution to allow any county, the city of St. Louis, and the city of Kansas City to regulate the possession, carrying, or transfer of firearms within city or county limits. The resolution authorizes the city or county to, by ordinance, issue a permit or certificate and charge a fee, as specified. For any nonresident, a city or county must recognize as valid any permit or certificate authorizing the possession or carrying of firearms issued by the individual's county of residence. The resolution also…

This measure did not pass before the 2024 session ended. Final recorded action on 2024-05-17: Referred: General Laws(H).

Why this record is included

The record addresses access to firearms, firearm safety, or prevention of firearm injury. Missouri’s firearm-death count includes suicides, homicides, and other intents; the policy’s target may cover only part of that total. This relationship does not establish an effect on the displayed statistic; actions after its measurement period cannot explain the earlier value.

Retained Missouri evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

HJR 170 -- FIREARMS SPONSOR: Ealy Currently, the Missouri Constitution guarantees every State citizen the right to keep and bear arms. Upon voter approval, this resolution would amend the Constitution to allow any county, the city of St. Louis, and the city of Kansas City to regulate the possession, carrying, or transfer of firearms within city or county limits. The resolution authorizes the city or county to, by ordinance, issue a permit or certificate and charge a fee, as specified. For any nonresident, a city or county must recognize as valid any permit or certificate authorizing the possession or carrying of firearms issued by the individual's county of residence. The resolution also lists individuals who must be exempt from any such ordinance.
Review official supporting evidence ↗
Missouri Legislature · HB 2884

Establishes provisions related to the safe storage of firearms

May 17, 2024 · Did not pass

Rep. Anthony Ealy · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

HB 2884 -- STORAGE OF FIREARMS SPONSOR: Ealy This bill provides that a person commits the offense of unlawful storage of a firearm if the person fails to responsibly and securely store a firearm upon any premises that the person owns or controls and the person knows or reasonably should know a child can gain access to the firearm without the permission of the child's parent or guardian, or knows or reasonably should know a cotenant is ineligible to possess a firearm under law. Such responsible and secure storage includes, with the exception of a concealed or openly carried firearm in as secured holster, firearms that: (1) Are kept unloaded until ready to use; (2) Are securely stored in a…

This measure did not pass before the 2024 session ended. Final recorded action on 2024-05-17: Referred: General Laws(H).

Why this record is included

The record addresses access to firearms, firearm safety, or prevention of firearm injury. Missouri’s firearm-death count includes suicides, homicides, and other intents; the policy’s target may cover only part of that total. This relationship does not establish an effect on the displayed statistic; actions after its measurement period cannot explain the earlier value.

Retained Missouri evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

HB 2884 -- STORAGE OF FIREARMS SPONSOR: Ealy This bill provides that a person commits the offense of unlawful storage of a firearm if the person fails to responsibly and securely store a firearm upon any premises that the person owns or controls and the person knows or reasonably should know a child can gain access to the firearm without the permission of the child's parent or guardian, or knows or reasonably should know a cotenant is ineligible to possess a firearm under law. Such responsible and secure storage includes, with the exception of a concealed or openly carried firearm in as secured holster, firearms that: (1) Are kept unloaded until ready to use; (2) Are securely stored in a manner that ensures the firearms are not accessible to unauthorized persons and unauthorized persons do not have access to any unlocking mechanism necessary for accessibility; and (3) Have a personalized firearm's safety characteristics activated. The requirement for the responsible and secured storage of a firearm as specified in this bill will not apply to the storing of an antique firearm, as defined under 18 U.S.C. Section 921, or a curio or relic, as defined under 27 CFR 478.11. The offense of unlawful storage of a firearm under the provisions of this bill is punishable by a $500 fine for a first violation and punishable as a class B misdemeanor for a second or any subsequent violation. It is a defense to the offense of unlawful storage of a firearm if a child gained possession of and used the firearm in a lawful act of self-defense, defense of others, or defense of livestock. Any firearms dealer must post in a conspicuous location on their premises a written notice that unlawful storage of a firearm may result in imprisonment or fine. A firearm dealer in violation of this provision may be punished by a warning for a first violation and punishable by a fine of not more than $500 for a second or subsequent violation. The Department must publish on their website, in both English and Spanish, information relating to the offense of unlawful storage of a firearm as specified in this bill and related penalties. This bill is the same as HB 2577 (2024).
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Ashley Aune

Missouri House of Representatives, District 14 · D–MO

3 proposals
View proposals from Rep. Ashley Aune
Missouri Legislature · HB 1304

Modifies provisions relating to abortion

May 15, 2025 · Did not pass

Rep. Ashley Aune · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

HB 1304 -- ABORTION SPONSOR: Aune This bil modifies definitions and repeals the terms "Down Syndrome", "unborn child", and "viability", "viable", or "viable pregnancy" as those terms pertain to Chapter 188, RSMo, governing the regulation of abortions. It also repeals the term "abortion facility" throughout various sections of statute governing provisions including, but not limited to, data submissions by certain health care providers, licensing requirements for facilities, inspections, and the scope of practice for health care providers.

This measure did not pass before the 2025 session ended. Final recorded action on 2025-05-15: Referred: Emerging Issues(H).

Why this record is included

The record addresses abortion access, regulation, or reporting, the subject of Missouri’s reported resident-abortion count. That count includes reported care outside Missouri and has reporting gaps. This relationship does not establish an effect on the displayed statistic; actions after its measurement period cannot explain the earlier value.

Retained Missouri evidence context: Resident abortions reported. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

HB 1304 -- ABORTION SPONSOR: Aune This bil modifies definitions and repeals the terms "Down Syndrome", "unborn child", and "viability", "viable", or "viable pregnancy" as those terms pertain to Chapter 188, RSMo, governing the regulation of abortions. It also repeals the term "abortion facility" throughout various sections of statute governing provisions including, but not limited to, data submissions by certain health care providers, licensing requirements for facilities, inspections, and the scope of practice for health care providers. This bill also repeals several sections of statute relating to abortion, including, but not limited to, the "Right to Life of the Unborn Child Act", which prohibits abortions from being performed or induced in this state except for medical emergencies, administration requirements of mifepristone, the prohibition of abortions being performed of viable unborn children, the 72-hour required waiting period prior to the performance of an abortion, physician reporting requirements following the performance of an abortion, and the prohibitions of abortions after eight, 14, and 18 weeks of pregnancy.
Review official supporting evidence ↗
Missouri Legislature · HJR 137

Proposes a constitutional amendment relating to firearms

May 17, 2024 · Did not pass

Rep. Ashley Aune · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

HJR 137 -- FIREARMS SPONSOR: Aune Currently, the Missouri Constitution guarantees every State citizen the right to keep and bear arms. Upon voter approval, this resolution would amend the Constitution to allow any county, the city of St. Louis, and the city of Kansas City to regulate the possession, carrying, or transfer of firearms within city or county limits. The resolution authorizes the city or county to, by ordinance, issue a permit or certificate and charge a fee, as specified. For any nonresident, a city or county must recognize as valid any permit or certificate authorizing the possession or carrying of firearms issued by the individual's county of residence. The resolution also…

This measure did not pass before the 2024 session ended. Final recorded action on 2024-05-17: Referred: General Laws(H).

Why this record is included

The record addresses access to firearms, firearm safety, or prevention of firearm injury. Missouri’s firearm-death count includes suicides, homicides, and other intents; the policy’s target may cover only part of that total. This relationship does not establish an effect on the displayed statistic; actions after its measurement period cannot explain the earlier value.

Retained Missouri evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

HJR 137 -- FIREARMS SPONSOR: Aune Currently, the Missouri Constitution guarantees every State citizen the right to keep and bear arms. Upon voter approval, this resolution would amend the Constitution to allow any county, the city of St. Louis, and the city of Kansas City to regulate the possession, carrying, or transfer of firearms within city or county limits. The resolution authorizes the city or county to, by ordinance, issue a permit or certificate and charge a fee, as specified. For any nonresident, a city or county must recognize as valid any permit or certificate authorizing the possession or carrying of firearms issued by the individual's county of residence. The resolution also lists individuals who must be exempt from any such ordinance.
Review official supporting evidence ↗
Missouri Legislature · HB 2806

Modifies provisions relating to firearms

May 17, 2024 · Did not pass

Rep. Ashley Aune · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

HB 2806 -- FIREARMS SPONSOR: Aune This bill makes the carrying of a concealed knife, firearm, or blackjack, without a concealed carry permit, an offense punishable as a class B misdemeanor. Currently, the process for obtaining a concealed carry permit or lifetime or extended concealed carry permit requires an affidavit attesting certain requirements are met. This bill instead requires proof that the applicant has satisfied the requirements of Section 571.111, RSMo.

This measure did not pass before the 2024 session ended. Final recorded action on 2024-05-17: Referred: General Laws(H).

Why this record is included

The record addresses access to firearms, firearm safety, or prevention of firearm injury. Missouri’s firearm-death count includes suicides, homicides, and other intents; the policy’s target may cover only part of that total. This relationship does not establish an effect on the displayed statistic; actions after its measurement period cannot explain the earlier value.

Retained Missouri evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

HB 2806 -- FIREARMS SPONSOR: Aune This bill makes the carrying of a concealed knife, firearm, or blackjack, without a concealed carry permit, an offense punishable as a class B misdemeanor. Currently, the process for obtaining a concealed carry permit or lifetime or extended concealed carry permit requires an affidavit attesting certain requirements are met. This bill instead requires proof that the applicant has satisfied the requirements of Section 571.111, RSMo.
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Barry Hovis

Missouri House of Representatives, District 146 · R–MO

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Barry Hovis
Missouri Legislature · HB 1386

Modifies provisions relating to firearms

May 12, 2023 · Did not pass

Rep. Barry Hovis · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

HB 1386 -- TEMPORARY SEIZURE OF FIREARM SPONSOR: Hovis Currently, political subdivisions may enact an ordinance regulating the open carrying of a firearm, provided that such ordinance conforms exactly with state law, with appropriate penalty provisions as designated under state law. This bill provides that such ordinance may establish that the open carrying of a firearm by a minor in violation of the ordinance shall subject the firearm to temporary seizure by a law enforcement officer. The officer shall issue the minor a receipt for each seized firearm. The parent or legal guardian of the minor may claim the seized firearm upon production of the receipt within 30 days. This bill also repeals…

This measure did not pass before the 2023 session ended. Final recorded action on 2023-05-12: Referred: Emerging Issues(H).

Why this record is included

The record addresses access to firearms, firearm safety, or prevention of firearm injury. Missouri’s firearm-death count includes suicides, homicides, and other intents; the policy’s target may cover only part of that total. This relationship does not establish an effect on the displayed statistic; actions after its measurement period cannot explain the earlier value.

Retained Missouri evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

HB 1386 -- TEMPORARY SEIZURE OF FIREARM SPONSOR: Hovis Currently, political subdivisions may enact an ordinance regulating the open carrying of a firearm, provided that such ordinance conforms exactly with state law, with appropriate penalty provisions as designated under state law. This bill provides that such ordinance may establish that the open carrying of a firearm by a minor in violation of the ordinance shall subject the firearm to temporary seizure by a law enforcement officer. The officer shall issue the minor a receipt for each seized firearm. The parent or legal guardian of the minor may claim the seized firearm upon production of the receipt within 30 days. This bill also repeals the requirement that a law enforcement officer may disarm or physically restrain a person carrying a firearm only upon a reasonable and articulable suspicion of criminal activity.
Review official supporting evidence ↗
What sponsorship and proposal counts tell us

Only current Missouri officeholders retained in the reviewed collection qualify. Bills require a recorded primary sponsorship; cosponsors and signing officials are excluded from sponsorship counts. An official introducer recorded as acting by request is labeled “Introduced by request”; that procedural role does not establish personal policy endorsement. Governor and agency records qualify when recorded as proposed. A separately verified governor transmittal can also establish an original proposal whose latest status reflects its later outcome. Signing an enacted law alone does not establish a proposal. A record appearing under several facts is counted once per officeholder. A bill with multiple primary sponsors appears under each recorded sponsor.

Enacted bills, adopted resolutions and unsuccessful measures remain visible as proposal history. Passing one chamber is not enactment. These counts do not measure effectiveness or prove that an action changed a Missouri statistic. Collection reviewed Sep 16, 2026.