Key Takeaways
- • Missouri voters are slated to decide next week on Amendment 7, a constitutional measure to establish a sovereign wealth fund that could support state expenses decades into the future, according to KBIA.
- • Amendment 7 would accept deposits from the General Assembly or bequests from wealthy individuals, and would authorize the state treasurer to invest in exchange-traded funds tracking the S&P 500 or a successor index set by law.
- • Sponsor Rep. Colin Wellenkamp (R-St. Charles) said a $250 million investment could grow large enough by 2125 to cover most of the state's expenses.
- • Amendment 7 has no organized support or opposition campaign, but some Democratic lawmakers voted against placing it on the ballot, arguing that the money is needed for immediate priorities.
- • The measure does not require the legislature to allocate funds, and Wellenkamp floated a possible community investment fee on hyperscale data centers that could feed the fund.
Summary
Missouri voters are scheduled to decide next week on Amendment 7, a ballot measure that would create a sovereign wealth fund designed to help pay state expenses decades into the future, according to KBIA. The fund would accept money appropriated by the General Assembly or bequests from wealthy individuals. It would authorize the state treasurer to invest in exchange-traded funds tracking the Standard & Poor's 500 index, or a comparable successor index to be determined by law.
Rep. Colin Wellenkamp, R-St. Charles, the measure's sponsor, said an initial investment of $250 million could grow large enough by 2125 to cover most of the state's expenses. He said the amendment includes safeguards that prevent the General Assembly from withdrawing money from the fund and bar the legislature or future treasurers from actively trading the market. He described the proposal as a long-term fiscal management tool and "a direct gift to our grandchildren and great grandchildren."
Wellenkamp noted that about 20 states have sovereign wealth funds, including Oklahoma, Alaska and Texas, though those states hold significant oil deposits that Missouri lacks. He pointed to Florida, which has no major natural resource reserves but maintains such a fund. He also suggested that hyperscale data center developers could contribute, proposing a community investment requirement tied to computing capacity, with a small share of those payments directed to the sovereign wealth fund.
Unlike several other ballot initiatives this cycle, Amendment 7 has no organized support or opposition, though it has critics. Some Democratic lawmakers voted against sending it to the ballot, arguing that money should be used for immediate needs rather than set aside for decades. Rep. Keri Ingle, D-Lee's Summit, said, "We need every penny that we possibly can," adding that the benefits may not materialize for more than a century. Wellenkamp responded that the amendment does not require the legislature to fund the account, offering the example of a settlement where only a small portion might be deposited in the fund.
Rep. Colin Wellenkamp, R-St. Charles, the measure's sponsor, said an initial investment of $250 million could grow large enough by 2125 to cover most of the state's expenses. He said the amendment includes safeguards that prevent the General Assembly from withdrawing money from the fund and bar the legislature or future treasurers from actively trading the market. He described the proposal as a long-term fiscal management tool and "a direct gift to our grandchildren and great grandchildren."
Wellenkamp noted that about 20 states have sovereign wealth funds, including Oklahoma, Alaska and Texas, though those states hold significant oil deposits that Missouri lacks. He pointed to Florida, which has no major natural resource reserves but maintains such a fund. He also suggested that hyperscale data center developers could contribute, proposing a community investment requirement tied to computing capacity, with a small share of those payments directed to the sovereign wealth fund.
Unlike several other ballot initiatives this cycle, Amendment 7 has no organized support or opposition, though it has critics. Some Democratic lawmakers voted against sending it to the ballot, arguing that money should be used for immediate needs rather than set aside for decades. Rep. Keri Ingle, D-Lee's Summit, said, "We need every penny that we possibly can," adding that the benefits may not materialize for more than a century. Wellenkamp responded that the amendment does not require the legislature to fund the account, offering the example of a settlement where only a small portion might be deposited in the fund.
Go deeper than the headline
Research every firm in this story, track the ones that matter and get the daily briefing — free for 7 days.