In 2026, Missouri lawmakers mounted their most organised campaign yet to ban geoengineering and weather modification by introducing four coordinated bills, marking a new peak in legislative efforts after several failed attempts led by Senator Mike Moon.

This article reviews how Missouri’s approach has evolved: from past failed attempts and the political fights behind them to this year’s new, higher-stakes tactics.

The First Three Attempts Failed Because of... Hog Farms?

These early stumbles reveal the unexpected hurdles that have shaped Missouri’s legislative attempts, beginning with a surprising link to the state’s farming politics.

The push to protect industrial hog farms from lawsuits deepened rural political divisions. Opponents argued the bills favoured big agribusiness over small farmers and homeowners.

For three consecutive years, the geoengineering ban stalled due to this division: supporters favoured CAFO protections, while a populist base against geoengineering opposed them. Each year, the bill died in committee, caught in this broader political impasse.

A Daring (But Doomed) Special Session Ploy

After the "Freedom to Farm Act" failed during the 2025 regular session, Senator Mike Moon tried a new approach in the subsequent special session called by the governor. In this session, he introduced SB 15, a geoengineering ban that excluded the controversial CAFO language, marking the first time the proposal stood on its own.

The timing of this introduction was deliberate. The governor had convened the special session to address disaster relief after severe weather events. By introducing his bill during this period, Senator Moon aimed to connect the current need for disaster relief directly with the weather modification activities he sought to ban.

Despite the legislature's strategy, the committee immediately dismissed the bill. The Missouri Constitution restricts the legislature to consider only topics listed in the governor's call for a special session, and weather modification was not among them. Therefore, Senate leaders ruled SB 15 out of order. This procedural issue, not a rejection of the bill itself, highlights that even straightforward initiatives can fail if they are not properly timed or aligned with procedural constraints.

A Sophisticated, Four-Pronged Attack

After the high-profile failure in the special session, lawmakers entered 2026 determined to avoid the pitfalls of their previous approach, this time unveiling a coordinated, multi-bill strategy.

The Administrative Takeover: Senator Moon's SB 860

Senator Mike Moon, a strong conservative who, according to The Missouri Times, often clashes with GOP leadership, is leading this bill. Its impact would be to limit or deter most geoengineering activities by imposing disclosure requirements, high financial barriers, and ensuring commission seats go to those with specific expertise on weather modification.

• It requires any entity that deploys chemicals into the atmosphere to disclose their contents fully.
• It requires a $25 million bond for any such activity, making it too expensive for most projects to proceed.
• The bill expands the Air Conservation Commission and the Clean Water Commission from seven to eight members. It mandates that each commission's new member possess 'knowledge in weather modification,' a requirement designed to place supporters of the ban within state agencies.

The Criminalisation Route: Representative Steve Jordan’s HB 2388

This bill, called the "Clean Skies Act," would strictly criminalise geoengineering, creating significant legal and financial risks for violators. By involving multiple law enforcement agencies, compliance would become essential for anyone considering weather modification, increasing the likelihood of prosecution and deterrence.

The Infrastructure Weapon: Senator Joe Nicola's SB 1368

Senator Joe Nicola sponsored a bill that leverages airport funding to target cities operating public airports. By blocking state funding for any airport that permits weather-modification aircraft, the legislation forces municipal leaders to choose between receiving essential funding and allowing these activities.

The Direct Ban: Representative Steve Jordan’s HB 2389

This bill would make all forms of weather modification illegal in Missouri, allowing the Department of Natural Resources to take civil action, including fines, against violators. By creating a public reporting platform, it empowers citizens to influence enforcement directly, increasing monitoring and compliance pressure.

The Path to Passage is Clearer, But New Hurdles Emerge

By separating the geoengineering ban from CAFO protections, lawmakers addressed the most significant obstacle that caused previous bills to fail.

However, the stricter ban may still face hurdles. While the bill explicitly exempts standard pesticide use to protect farming operations, it prohibits cloud seeding, a technique used in some agricultural regions to mitigate drought. The prohibition on cloud seeding could create friction with agribusiness groups, even as the University of Missouri may raise concerns about language that could affect legitimate atmospheric research.

As of now, the bill faces an uncertain future. Governor Mike Kehoe and Senate leadership have identified their primary 2026 priorities as eliminating the state income tax, expanding childcare access, and advancing "Safer Missouri 2.0" public safety legislation. With these major shifts taking centre stage, the passage of niche measures like SB 860 remains unresolved.

A Battle for Atmospheric Sovereignty

What began as a minor farm bill provision has evolved into a focused legislative campaign for "atmospheric sovereignty." Over time, the strategy sharpened, previous political disputes subsided, and the main issue became central.

In 2026, the debate is no longer about hog farms. The real question now is whether lawmakers believe Missouri should regulate its own skies.