Missouri Times - April 22, 2019

The Missouri Times

1

EMINENT DOMAIN RALLY APRIL 22, 2019

CROWD SUPPORTS PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS HIGH COURT AFFIRMS LT. GOV APPOINTMENT www.missouritimes.com

2

The Missouri Times

GUEST 225 Madison, Jefferson City, MO | (573) 746-2912

tips@themissouritimes.com

@MissouriTimes

Scott Faughn, Publisher | scott@themissouritimes.com | @ScottFaughn Rachael Herndon Dunn, Editor | rachael@themissouritimes.com | @TheRachDunn Alisha Shurr, Reporter | alisha@themissouritimes.com | @AlishaShurr Aaron Basham, Multimedia Producer | aaron@themissouritimes.com Kaden Quinn, Reporting Intern | kaden@themissouritimes.com

GIVING MEDICAL CARE TO ALL BABIES FUNDAMENTAL TO OUR COUNTRY’S ETHICS Congresswoman Ann Wagner

Over the past few months, radical legislators across the country have advocated to overturn commonsense protections relating to late-term abortions. Some states have voted on laws that would allow abortions up to the moment of delivery, even if a perfectly healthy newborn baby could be born into a doctor’s hands just a moment later. And in New York, Virginia, and Washington, D.C., politicians are now even advocating for infanticide if a child is deemed “unwanted.”

As a mother and grandmother, I am horrified by these developments. I believe that life is beautiful and babies should be treasured. And as a legislator, I know that it is the essential role of government to protect the most vulnerable members of our society, not to end their lives.

The reality is that many children in the United States—and across the globe—face neglect, abuse, and the fate of being “unwanted.”

Our goal as legislators must be to empower families, pregnant women, and children. I’m grateful that our country has taken seriously foster care, adoption, and family support services, protecting and supporting children no matter their background. For instance, a Republican Congress last year passed the Family First Prevention Services Act, reforming our foster care system to provide support to struggling families, and reauthorized the Maternal, Infant and Early Childhood Home Visiting Program (MIECHV), which provides support to mothers. I am now working to shine a light on the struggles that young women and families face when they become pregnant.

This is a policy discussion worth having—but deciding whether or not to deny newborn babies lifesaving medical care is not.

To be clear, I am a proud pro-life advocate.

Human life begins at conception, and I believe abortion is a grievous human rights abuse. But discarding and killing babies who have survived a late-term abortion chills me to the core. I could never have imagined that I would have to fight for infants to receive lifesaving medical care.

Yet here we are. Babies are truly the most vulnerable members of our society, and it is our responsibility to make sure they are cared for.

Every year, babies survive late-term abortions and are left to die. This is underreported and too often ignored. But I have met with many adults who have told me their stories. Melissa Ohden from Kansas City survived an abortion and is proof of what happens when a nurse steps in and cares for a baby who has been left to die.

Our world is better because Melissa lived.

To ensure that no child is denied care, I introduced H.R. 962, the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act. This legislation would simply require healthcare providers to exercise skill, care, and diligence to preserve the lives and health of children who survive abortions and then immediately transport and admit them to a hospital.

This commonsense bill makes certain that babies who are born alive receive medical care just like any other infant.

Unfortunately, laws vary state by state, and only 26 states protect these babies, with only six states requiring providers to report on infants who survive abortions. At the federal level, there are no medical care mandates, criminal penalties, or reporting requirements associated with killing a child who survives an abortion.

I KNOW THAT IT IS THE ESSENTIAL ROLE OF GOVERNMENT TO PROTECT THE MOST VULNERABLE MEMBERS OF OUR SOCIETY.

www.missouritimes.com

CONTINUED ON PAGE 13

The Missouri Times

3

HOT LIST CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM Wow, Rep. Dogan. His name is on a bill passed last week by the House that rolled in many popular, in-demand reforms in criminal justice that aren’t only buzzwords and viral, but could change the game for inmates and DOC - and the state’s budget.

LYNDALL FRAKER Fraker kicked off the first of ten rule making committee public hearings on Wednesday, just one step of many in his journey to try to implement the best medical marijuana program in the nation. Fraker also announced at MoCannaCon that METRC won the seed-to-sale contract. Fraker has given the committee reigns to Richard Moore to lead over the next few weeks.

Rulemaking must be finalized by June 4 and Fraker’s team is feeling the sand in the hour glass.

GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT This is one House committee to watch. First in their sights was former DOR Director Joel Walters - now the UMKC Chancellor who issued a statement that led to Sen. Sater calling for his resignation, followed by a resolution from Rep. Justin Hill. What will the committee, led by Rep. Robert Ross, do next?

ST. LOUIS COUNTY NAACP

This group gets more and more relevant every year.

PHOTO OF THE WEEK

Raychel Proudie @RCProudie - Apr 17 Had a busy, busy week this week: chaired my first committe tonight, speaking up for victims of crime, and talking teacher stuff with senior Sen. @RoyBlunt (R-MO)!

Tweets of the Week Highlights in 280 characters or less.

Now under the leadership of John Gaskin, the group made a stance on Better Together that you know will be influential. Previously, Gaskin wrote an editorial about Title IX reform. This group is standing up to lead and taking sensitive issues very seriously.

CRAIG REDMON

The former state representative is back in the Capital City, this time as the director of the division of energy at DNR. This is a newly created division under the

Kurt Erickson @KurtEricksonPD Just got this from @BillEigel: “for clarification the Conservative Caucus was not opposing the underlying FRA extension. We would let that come to a vote. We will not support the new HMO tax that was added to the substitute.” #moleg William Eigel @BillEigel This is correct. We opposed the new tax on HMO plans that would cost up to 70k Missourians up to $86/year on their health insurance. Missourians are taxed enough. #moleg Megan Sanchez @MSanchezKRCG13 Lisa Buhr, a candidate for the city’s Ward 2 alderman seat, requested a special election take place in order to break a tie.

She and her opponent, Chris Redel each received 35 votes in the April 2 election.

Governor’s reorganization of the executive branch.

www.missouritimes.com

4

The Missouri Times

L E G I S L AT U R E

SENATE OFFICIALLY PASSES INFRASTRUCTURE BONDING BILL Kaitlyn Schallhorn After weeks of debate and compromise, the Missouri Senate officially passed a massive infrastructure bonding bill Monday.

The bill creates $301 million in bonds to be paid back over seven years to expedite the repair of hundreds of bridges in Missouri.

That money is contingent upon the Missouri Department of Transportation receiving a highly competitive federal grant. It also includes $50 million allocated from the general revenue to “jump start” certain bridge projects.

The resolution was championed

by Senate President Pro Tem Dave Schatz and is a major legislative priority for Gov. Mike Parson. It passed the Senate in a 26-7 vote and now heads to the House.

“This is the result of extensive conversation with several senators, and I want to thank them for working with us on this,” Schatz said last week.

“We are thrilled to see the Senate take significant action today on our shared priority of infrastructure,” Parson said in a statement Monday.

“Today’s strong bipartisan vote is a result of focused efforts by the legislature as we work together on an infrastructure plan to move Missouri forward.”

The resolution had made it out of the Fiscal Oversight Committee earlier Monday afternoon without much fanfare, although one committee member noted he had never voted for legislation with such a high fiscal note before.

Conservative senators launched

an overnight filibuster against Schatz’s original resolution last week as they expressed a preference for the House “pay as you go” approach which would allocate $100 million from the general revenue with the intention of securing additional funding in future years.

House Budget Chair Cody Smith said the Senate proposal is a “step in the right direction” that he believes “makes a lot of sense in a lot of ways.”

“I certainly think where the Senate is at has the potential for a very good compromise between the House position and what the governor initially proposed earlier this year,” Smith told The Missouri Times Thursday.

Senate stalls on Title IX reform after overnight filibuster Kaitlyn Schallhorn After what became the second overnight filibuster in a week for the Missouri Senate, Title IX reform legislation failed to advance.

The Senate finally took up the Title IX legislation — SB 259 sponsored by Republican Sen. Gary Romine — after a short evening break which resulted in nearly six hours of contentious debate on the floor before the bill was ultimately placed back on the informal calendar early Wednesday morning.

The controversial legislation would drastically change how Missouri’s universities handle sexual assault and harassment cases.

Romine contended Title IX, in its current form, is problematic and in desperate need of reform. Reform proponents, too, stressed the need to protect the due process rights of an accused student in these cases.

“If there is going to be a case handled on [a college] campus, we need to make sure we have the best process in place,” Romine said, also advocating Missouri “take the lead” on this particular issue.

In affirming due process rights for all individuals, the legislation would allow cases to be heard by the three-member Administrative Hearing Commission.

Students involved may have an attorney, and the cross-examination of witnesses and parties involved would be allowed during these cases, according to the bill

text.

Although Sen. Bill Eigel admitted he isn’t always in agreement with Romine on education issues, the fellow Republican stressed his support for the legislation Tuesday night. He said he had a “whole folder of people” who have been denied due process rights in these sorts of cases.

Opponents of the reform legislation, on the other hand, spent significant time debating multiple facets of concern, from potential detriments to due process rights for either party to potential inconsistencies with federal guidelines.

Democratic Sen. Jamilah Nasheed offered a bevy of amendments to the reform legislation — including one that would provide for the use of public defenders to students who might not be able to afford an attorney. Ultimately, her amendments were not successful.

Sen. Jason Holsman, also a Democrat, urged the Senate to pause its push for Title IX reform until after the Trump administration hands down its federal guidelines in order for a more uniform standard to be implemented across the board in Missouri. The Education Department unveiled proposed changes to how colleges handle Title IX complaints late last year.

“Tonight we stood and fought for victims of sexual assault on campuses.

And won,” Democratic Sen. Scott Sifton, who spent time pointing out legal issues with the bill, said after the debate.

“Tonight we stood and fought for victims of sexual assault on campuses, and won.”

www.missouritimes.com

5

The Missouri Times

Missouri lawmaker files resolution calling for removal of UMKC chancellor Kaitlyn Schallhorn As the fallout over the response to an on-campus assault at the University of Missouri-Kansas City (UMKC) last week continues, a Republican state representative has filed a resolution calling for the removal of the school’s chancellor.

UMKC Chancellor Mauli Agrawal came under fire for his response to a student who was arrested for allegedly assaulting Michael Knowles, a controversial conservative speaker invited to campus by a student group. The UMKC student was arrested for allegedly spraying a liquid substance at the speaker, who was invited to the public university’s campus by its Young Americans for Freedom (YAF) group, and others.

Filed by Rep. Justin Hill, a Republican, the resolution says the House calls on University of Missouri System President Mun Y. Choi “to exercise his authority” in asking for Agrawal’s resignation.

“Be it further resolved that if [Agrawal] fails to resign from his position as chancellor that we, the members of the Missouri House of Representatives … hereby encourage [Choi] to dismiss [Agrawal] from his position of Chancel-

lor of the University of Missouri Kansas City campus,” HR 2020, provided to The Missouri Times, states.

Agrawal initially praised the students who demonstrated against the guest speaker, saying the “UMKC community responded in the best way — by organizing and conducting a counter-event across campus … that focused on positive messages about diversity and inclusion.”

Agrawal has since apologized for any misconception born from his initial remarks and reaffirmed the university’s commitment to “support freedom of expression for all” and “to rise to the higher principle of promoting a respectful exchange of ideas for our students to form their own views and engage in critical thinking.”

Hill’s resolution was filed Tuesday, and a UMKC representative did not immediately respond to a request for comment from The Missouri Times.

“This resolution rightly calls out UMKC Chancellor Agrawal’s embarrassing and shameful letter that praised protestors and attacked YAF speaker Mi-

chael Knowles,” YAF spokesman Spencer Brown told The Missouri Times. “Refusing to respect the First Amendment rights of all students is unacceptable and unconstitutional on a public campus such as UMKC.” “[YAF] agrees that Chancellor Agrawal has demonstrated his ‘lack of fitness’ for the position of Chancellor and joins these legislators in their call for the resignation or dismissal of Chancellor Agrawal,” he continued.

On Monday, Republican state Sen. David Sater suggested Agrawal resign in the wake of the incident.

“As far as I’m concerned, he should go,” Sater said from the Senate floor.

Democratic state Sen. Jason Holsman, on the other hand, said “anything short of denouncing that violence falls short,” but rejected calls to reduce any funding provided to the university which is in his district. He also encouraged lawmakers to direct any reprimand at the chancellor, not any students who attend the university.

WIELAND MOVES TO ADDRESS AIR AMBULANCE COSTS BILLED TO INSURED PATIENTS Alisha Shurr A bill moving through the Missouri General Assembly aims to reduce the toooften exorbitant costs of air ambulance transportation.

Sen. Paul Wieland’s SB 267 has already gotten the stamp of approval from the Senate, and the House has begun vetting the bill. On Monday, the House General Laws Committee held a public hearing on the proposal.

The issues at hand, according to Wieland, are the thousands of dollars fully-insured Missourians are paying for air medical transportation.

In January, the Missouri Department of Insurance, Financial Institutions, and Professional Registration released a report detailing the high-cost patients are left with after a medical emergency.

According to the report, air ambulance companies billed Missourians nearly $26 million for services in 2017 and — after coinsurance, copays, and deductibles — patients were on the hook for $12.4 million.

Air ambulance services nationwide doubled between 2010 and 2014, from $15,000 to $30,000 per transport, according to a 2017 report. The U.S. Government Accountability Office noted the price index increased by 8.5 percent.

“Right now in Missouri, our fully

insured constituents are left holding large medical bills they cannot afford,” said Wieland.

He wants to fix that.

But the main obstacle to a solution with air ambulance providers is they fall primarily within federal jurisdiction, leaving the state with almost no options.

So, Wieland is looking to give his constituents and all Missourians leverage when it comes to bills.

Current law requires insurance companies pay ambulance services directly to ambulance service providers or emergency medical response agencies. SB 267 modifies that provision and restricts payment to ground ambulance services, which will exclude air ambulances from direct payment requirements.

“The result of this will be that insurance companies will pay our constituents the insurance providers portion of the bill and the constituent will then have leverage to negotiate with the air ambulance company,” said Wieland. “The goal of passing SB 267 and removing the direct pay requirement is to encourage more air ambulance companies to join insurance networks and provide more coverage and protect our constituents.”

The measure is supported by the

American Health Insurance Companies, the Missouri Insurance Coalition, and St. Louis Area Health Coalition.

The measure did receive pushback from those in the air medical transportation business who argued this could actually hurt the patient instead of helping them.

“The purpose of having insurance is for them to negotiate with the air ambulance company on your behalf,” said a representative from Airvac.

He pointed out this bill would allow the insurance company to sign a check for what they think the claim is worth and then leave the insured to deal with the air ambulance company. In doing so “the patient may end up paying more money,” he added.

All air ambulance companies have fixed costs, he stated. They have to have transportation and a pilot ready to fly out on a moments notice — 24 hours a day, seven days a week, and 365 days years — which translates into higher costs for the patient.

One lawmaker raised the possibility of excluding air medical transportation already in an insurance network, like a majority of hospital-based air ambulances. Wieland noted he would be open to the conservation.

www.missouritimes.com

House committee advances sports betting bill with royalty fee Alisha Shurr The committee charged with vetting the differing sports betting bills has advanced the version which includes a fee paid to the sports league.

On Monday, the House General Laws Committee voted 7-3 in favor of Rep. Cody Smith’s HB 119, which would legalize wagering on sporting events in Missouri. The amended version of the bill blends in some aspects from Rep. Robert Ross’ HB 859, the other House bill on the subject, and concerns brought up in the public hearing.

“Essentially this takes into account some of the testimony that was offered by both the casinos and the major leagues. It does a few things that will probably annoy everybody,” said Committee Chair Rep. Dean Plocher. “I think this [bill] offers an avenue for sports gaming to be competitive in the United States to be had in Missouri.”

The amended version prohibits the disclosure of information gathered that otherwise could be sold to third parties, has a data fee to be assessed by the Missouri Gaming Commission, and details who can and cannot gamble.

The bill also includes a 0.6 percent entry and infrastructure fee to be paid to the stadiums housing the game being bet on and a 0.25 percent royalty fee,

also called integrity fee, to be paid to the professional sports league. A wagering tax of 6.25 percent would be imposed on gross receipts received from sports wagering which shall be deposited in the “Gaming Proceeds for Education Fund.”

Some Democrats pushed back on the variety of fees in the bill. Rep. Jon Carpenter noted that the different fees and taxes in the bill amounted to a 25 percent tax — because the fees are off the total amount bet and not casino profits — with more than half of that going to sports entities.

“Just so that everyone understands, the tax assessment here… between the royalty fee and the stadium fee, 0.85 percent would translate to 17 percent tax rate,” said Carpenter.

“I’m willing to support a compromise but this compromise has a 17 percent tax rate that isn’t going to go to the state.”

Carpenter suggested that the fees be smaller.

Plocher noted there was still discussion to be had and the legislation still needs some modifications.

During the 2018 regular session, a House committee took three differing sports betting under considering, holding a public hearing on them but did not advance the legislation to the floor.

“I’m willing to support a compromise but this compromise has a 17 percent tax rate that isn’t going to go to the state.”

6

The Missouri Times

SATER SUGGESTS UMKC CHANCELLOR RESIGN IN WAKE OF ON-CAMPUS ASSAULT Kaitlyn Schallhorn Citing the handling of an on-campus assault at the University of MissouriKansas City (UMKC) last week, state Sen. David Sater suggested the college’s chancellor step down from his position.

A UMKC student was arrested last week for allegedly assaulting a controversial conservative guest speaker by spraying an unknown substance at him and others, according to reports.

The substance appeared to be a mixture of non-toxic liquids and lavender oil, UMKC officials have said.

Michael Knowles, who was supposed to give a speech entitled “Men are Not Women,” was invited to the public university campus by the school’s Young Americans for Freedom student group.

After the altercation, UMKC Chancellor Mauli Agrawal initially praised the students who protested the guest speaker, particularly the “peaceful protesters [who] stood and expressed disagreement with the speaker’s views.” “[O]ur campus witnessed a collision of two principles that we steadfastly support: the right to free expression and the right to civil protest in response to views we disagree with,” Agrawal said in a statement. “The evening’s events laid bare deep divisions that exist in our society today — divisions that UMKC works diligently to address through education, support, and commitment to our values.”

Agrawal’s response to the incident drew ire from state senators Monday afternoon. Sater, a Republican, suggested the chancellor should resign his position.

“As far as I’m concerned, he should go,” Sater said from the Senate floor.

Agrawal later apologized for any misconception stemming from his original sentiments.

“My original statement may have given an indication that UMKC does not support freedom of expression for all. I apologize if I’ve given that impression, for that was not my intention,” he said. “It is not the university’s role to take sides, but to rise to the higher principle of promoting a respectful exchange of ideas for our students to form their own views and engage in critical thinking.”

CONTINUED ONLINE

Cierpiot lambasts Senate’s Conservative Caucus, cites ‘inconsistencies’ with legislative priorities Kaitlyn Schallhorn Republican state Sen. Mike Cierpiot ruffled feathers with members of his own party after he spent time castigating the so-called Conservative Caucus from the Senate floor Monday afternoon.

Cierpiot spent several minutes Monday afternoon lambasting a series of bills — from one establishing a film tax credit to a bevy of legislation pertaining to gambling — he contended were inconsistent with conservative principles.

He said he would support a number of the bills he mentioned but doesn’t “claim to be pure.”

He said he wanted to point out what he saw as “inconsistencies” with the group of lawmakers calling themselves “conservative.”

Members of the Conservative Caucus include: Sens. Eric Burlison, Bill Eigel, Denny Hoskins, Andrew Koenig, Cindy O’Laughlin, and Bob Onder.

“They might rename themselves an ‘Inconsistent Caucus’ because they certainly are,” Cierpiot said, also suggesting the “‘Kansas Caucus’ … or

‘Chaos Caucus’ because that seems to be what they’re mostly after.”

Those conservative senators unsurprisingly took umbrage with Cierpiot “attacking” members of his own party.

“I have never seen a member of the majority caucus denounce half a dozen members … because he did not get invited to the club,” Eigel, clearly perturbed, said. “I have never seen a member of the majority caucus stand up with a written speech calling out members of his own party, calling out what he calls ‘hypocritical statements.’”

Eigel called Cierpiot’s move “disappointing” and suggested it wouldn’t “help his relationships.” He also castigated Cierpiot for never coming to his office to discuss his issues.

“I can’t get over the timing. The idea [that] after we reached compromise on some of the most difficult issues that this chamber has faced yet this year, [Cierpiot] decides this was the moment we were going to break the chamber,

this was the moment we were going to make it personal,” Eigel said. “It’s pretty disappointing to me.”

Sen. Dave Schatz, the president pro tem, was more diplomatic in his response to Cierpiot’s comments. The Senate passed Monday his massive infrastructure bonding resolution, a major legislative victory for him and Gov. Mike Parson that came to fruition after an overnight filibuster and a bit of compromise last week.

“I believe we’re all here for the purpose of serving our constituents.

To that end, I think it’s in our best interest to remember that. This is a privilege and honor for us to serve here,” Schatz said when pressed by Eigel.

“Hopefully we don’t get lost in that, some of the passion we at times have, the frustrations that sometimes may occur on this floor. Hopefully, we can work our way past that and remember to come back to what’s really important: service to the state of Missouri.”

Hoskins, too, took Cierpiot’s speech to

task Monday and repeatedly grilled his colleague on the particular bills Cierpiot referenced; Cierpiot, however, continued to deflect the inquiries because he said he didn’t have the specific bill numbers in front of him.

“So you’re saying we should all be

“I HAVE NEVER SEEN A MEMBER OF THE MAJORITY CAUCUS DENOUNCE HALF A DOZEN MEMBERS … BECAUSE HE DID NOT GET INVITED TO THE CLUB.”

clones and not have our own ideas. Is that what you’re saying?” Hoskins said.

He argued if that’s the position Cierpiot took, then there shouldn’t be 24 different Republican state senators in the legislature and would just vote as “one.”

At its inception, the Conservative Caucus listed abortion, gun rights, and health care, regulatory, and tort reform as its main priorities.

CIERPIOT, CONSERVATIVE CAUCUS FIGHT SPILLS INTO SECOND DAY Kaitlyn Schallhorn The kerfuffle among some Senate Republicans following Sen. Mike Cierpiot’s public criticisms of the socalled Conservative Caucus continued Tuesday afternoon from the floor.

For the second day in the row, the bickering between Cierpiot and the Conservative Caucus continued in a public forum, with Republican Sen. Bill Eigel castigating his colleague for not coming to the group of lawmakers privately with his concerns.

“When you stand up and make personal attacks in a … speech you’ve clearly been planning for some time, it’s very difficult to believe that you’re interested in a relationship with this chamber when you cavalierly call your

before many in here knew what that word meant.”

Aside from Eigel, members of the Conservative Caucus include: Sens.

Eric Burlison, Denny Hoskins, Andrew Koenig, Cindy O’Laughlin, and Bob Onder. At its inception, the group listed abortion, gun rights, and health care, regulatory reform, and tort reform as its main priorities.

Cierpiot gave an impassioned soliloquy from the Senate floor Monday after decrying what he saw as “inconsistencies” among the legislative priorities of the Conservative Caucus.

He suggested the group of six lawmakers change its name to the “Inconsistent Caucus” or even the “Chaos Caucus.”

Hoskins took umbrage with Cierpiot’s move Monday — but by Tuesday afternoon he expressed a willingness to move on from the dispute. He said the two attended the same barbecue event Monday evening after the Senate adjourned — sans any awkwardness.

“I know we have four and a half weeks left, and I hope that we can continue to try and work together and move forward from this,” Hoskins told The Missouri Times, noting Cierpiot is a friend and roommate. He called for more “open communication,” particularly if Cierpiot

“I DON’T NEED A GROUP TO TELL ME I’M A CONSERVATIVE.” colleagues names,” Eigel said.

“All this comes back to your objection of words certain senators are using to describe themselves and not you,” Eigel contended.

Cierpiot shot back: “I don’t need a group to tell me I’m a conservative. I know I am. I was a conservative long

www.missouritimes.com

has a “particular concern” with his legislation in the future.

“As a legislator you learn that you’re going to have many disagreements, especially out on the Senate floor, and that’s tough to do, but you definitely learn to do is what happens on the floor stays on the floor, and Sen. Cierpiot is going to be here for a number of years, I plan on being here another five years, so we’re going to have to find ways to work together,” he added.

However, Hoskins said he was not aware Cierpiot planned to make his speech Monday, much less that he had such strong concerns to begin with.

“Senator Cierpiot had not discussed with me some of his concerns beforehand, and so I was surprised when he read his statement on the floor denouncing the Conservative Caucus and conservative fiscal policies,” he said.

Cierpiot’s castigation of the group came after the Senate passed a massive infrastructure bonding resolution, a major legislative victory for Senate President Pro Tem Dave Schatz and Gov. Mike Parson that came to fruition after an overnight filibuster and a bit of compromise.

7

The Missouri Times

Committee approves seven questions for dispensary applications Rachael Herndon Dunn

HOUSE MOVES FORWARD WITH BILL LIMITING USE OF EMINENT DOMAIN Alisha Shurr The Missouri House has given initial approval to a bill that would prevent private companies from using eminent domain.

The chamber spent the majority of an hour stating the importance of protecting private property rights and lambasting the use of eminent domain by private companies.

The bill that sparked the discussion, HB 1062, sponsored by Rep. Jim Hansen, proposes that no private entity has the power of eminent domain for the purposes of constructing above-ground merchant lines.

“I am not opposed to green energy,” Hansen said. “I’m so opposed to a private company saying ‘I’m gonna do this and you’re gonna like it, or else.’”

The measure is in direct response to the Missouri Public Service Commission approving the construction of high voltage power line intent to move wind energy from Kansas to Indiana and east, with a portion being dropped off in Missouri.

The project contends it would deliver about 4,000 megawatts of renewable power and clean energy to about 1.6 million homes per year and create new jobs — including both permanent and temporary construction work.

In March, the PSC granted the Green Belt Express Clean Line a certificate of convenience and necessity to construct and manage a new transmission line that will develop renewable energy and facilitate economic growth in the state.

The line, transferring 4,000 megawatts of wind energy, will extend throughout eight Missouri counties: Buchanan, Clinton, Caldwell, Carroll, Chariton, Randolph, Monroe, and Ralls. The line will pass through the property of 739

Missourians.

Since the PSC deemed a need of service and that the line was in the public interest, it enables them to expropriate private property for public use, with payment of compensation.

However, lawmakers in the House see the company as a private entity that is not in the benefit of the state of Missouri.

“That’s like putting lipstick on a pig, it’s still a pig,” said Hansen. He added that at the end of the day, it is a private entity taking Missourians’ land for private profit and benefit.

“The whole problem of using eminent domain for the purpose economic development is it striped away rights and making a mockery of eminent domain,” said Rep. Jeff Shawan.

The sentiments were echoed by lawmakers on both sides of the aisle.

However, a few representatives took issue with the narrow focus of the bill.

“I think we are starting to go in the direction of picking winning and losers,” said Rep. Tracy McCreery. “For the first time ever, the General Assembly is attempting to meddle in this.”

“If it was about reforming eminent domain, I might be be in support of this,” Rep. Peter Merideth said. “I don’t like eminent domain.”

He went to say the bill is narrowly focused to apply to a single company.

Merideth said he would support limiting private companies in general profiting off the use of eminent domain, or raising the bar to prove public benefit in order to use eminent domain, or increase the landowners compensate.

“Don’t just respond to one project we may or may not like,” said Merideth.

““I am not opposed to green energy... I’m so opposed to a private company saying ‘I’m gonna do this and you’re gonna like it.”

The Advisory Committee on Dispensary Facility Experience for the Medical Marijuana Division of the Department of Health and Senior Services met Wednesday afternoon to approve questions on the dispensary application. The committee unanimously approved the seven questions.

About a dozen from the public came to witness the committee’s brief 17-minute review, slight discussion, and approval of the application questions for those interested in obtaining a license to open a medical marijuana dispensary.

Andy Fechtel of Fechtel Beverage, DHSS Division of Community and Public Health Deputy Ken Palermo, and state Rep. Jim Neely comprised the committee, moderated by Medical Marijuana Division counsel Richard Moore.

Questions are to be rated by committees between 1 and 4, with 1

being slightly important and 4 being critically important, in the hearings so far. The seven featured questions for this committee were rated as either slightly important (1), important (2), or highly important (3).

The questions are as follows, with the question number in parentheses before and the rating in parentheses following: (127) Describe how the proposed location will be suitable for the facility.

(3) (128) Will you have an employee training program for providing education and/or counseling on how your product(s) may interact with a qualified patient’s condition? If yes, describe. (3) (129) Describe how the dispensary will be accessible to patients, including but not limited to, patient access to parking and public transportation. (2) (130) Describe any plans you have to deliver medical marijuana to patients

offsite. (1) (131) Provide a schedule of proposed hours of operation. (2) (132) Do you have experience in healthcare as it relates to the dispensing of medicinal or therapeutic products?

(3) (133) Will the facility have a physician or pharmacist retained for consultation by their clients, if needed? (3) This was the second hearing of the 10 hearing series covering 144 questions.

No new questions were posed to be added for dispensary applications, nor were any questions amended.

All rules must be finalized by June 4. The department will begin accepting facility license applications on August 3. Dispensaries require a non-refundable $6,000 application fee.

Those dispensaries whose applications are approved will have a $10,000 annual license fee.

COMMITTEE UNANIMOUSLY APPROVES AMENDED QUESTIONS FOR CULTIVATOR APPLICATIONS Rachael Herndon Dunn

The Advisory Committee on Cultivation Facility Experience met Wednesday morning to approve application questions for cultivation licenses, ultimately unanimously approving question deletions and additions.

The committee consisted of Department of Agriculture Division Director of Plant Industries Paul Bailey, former state representative and educator Lyle Rowland, and Lincoln University Associate Professor of Plant and Environmental Science Hwei Ying Johnson.

Department of Health and Senior Services Medical Marijuana Program Division Director Lyndall Fraker opened the public hearing of about 20 in attendance, with program counsel Richard Moore moderating.

“We are trying to ask questions in a way that applicants are judged based on the responses,” Moore said. “The Constitution puts requirements on the

www.missouritimes.com

rule makers.”

Moore explained some questions will not be asked because of the minimum requirements laid out in the amendment.

Moore noted public comment for rules will be left open until the very last moment, with the comment period open until mid-May. Public comment deadlines for the questions are staggered ahead of each advisory committee public hearings, which are staggered from Wednesday through May 1. The full list of hearings is available at the DHSS website.

Rules must be finalized by the Department by June 4.

For cultivation applications, members were asked to rank the importance of questions from 1-4, with 4 being “critical.” From the ranking system, members deleted application questions related to capacity or experience in retaining a physician or pharmacist during cultivation

establishment (119), the retention of a physician or pharmacist after cultivation processes are established (120), in plant cultivation for human consumption as food or medicine (121), and genetic modification or breeding (122).

Four rules were amended and accepted, including: Describe your experience with maintaining a sanitary grow facility, from seed or clone through packaging.

Describe your experience with product coding/traceability.

Describe your experience with recalls and any proposed plan to recall medical marijuana Describe any existing or future plans for utility provider (Electric and Water) agreements The committee added questions regarding facility size, technology use, certifications (such as food handling), and quality control plan. In all, the hearing lasted just over 30 minutes.

8

Crowd backs private property rights

The Missouri Times

Alisha Shurr A fired-up crowd cheered as political heavy weights vowed to protect private property rights and vowed to protect Missouri farms.

“I want to make sure we protect the number one industry in this state: agriculture,” Senate President Pro Tem David Schatz told the crowd.

“I want to stand with you, to support your right to personal property…Tell the government to leave you the heck alone,” said Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft.

“Private property right is a principle that dates back to the founding of our country,” said State Treasurer Scott Fitzpatrick. “Property rights are sacred in our country and should be defended at every turn.”

The rally, held Tuesday in the Capitol Rotunda, was packed with farmers, ranchers, property owners, and elected officials. In the lead up to the event, members of Missouri Farmers Care, a coalition of more the 40 agricultural groups, visited with their respective representatives and argued their case on a bill set to be debate in the Missouri House.

The focal point of the rally is Rep. Jim Hansen’s HB 1062, which proposes that no private entity has the power of eminent domain for the purposes of constructing above-ground merchant lines.

Essentially, the bill is a rebuttal to the Public Service Commission approval the Green Belt Express Line which would carry power from Kansas to the east, dropping off roughly 500 megawatts of wind energy in Missouri. The line would pass through eight Missouri counties and the property of 739 Missourians.

One of the farmers in the crowd was opposed to the line because if would force him and his wife to move. His wife is a two-time cancer survivor and the proposed line would go close enough their house, her doctor recommends they move — leaving behind the land he cultivated for years.

Hansen’s bill would prevent private lines from being built by using eminent domain. The crowd at the rally gave Hansen three standing ovations.

“This is a critical issue to our state,” said Hansen. “I have been fighting this issue every since I first got elected…a private company wanting to use private land for private profit.”

House Speaker Elijah Haahr noticed a handmade sign in the crowd, that stated “Unjust, Unreasonable, Unlawful” and made a vow to those at the rally.

“We know this is unjust. We know this is unreasonable. And in 45 minutes we will go upstairs and make it unlawful,” stated Haahr.

www.missouritimes.com

The Missouri Times

9

E M I N E N T D O M A I N R A L LY

www.missouritimes.com

10

The Missouri Times

ONE YEAR AFTER LEGISLATION, HAIR BRAIDING VIDEO, CERTIFICATE BECOME AVAILABLE Alisha Shurr As of the beginning of the month — nearly a year following the passage of legislation — Missourians can simply watch a four-hour video to complete the necessary training to become a legal hair braider.

“It means that hair braiders finally have the ability to go and earn an honest living without having to obtain extensive cosmetology licenses and [pay] a lot of money in tuition that didn’t teach them anything about hair braiding,” said Rep. Shamed Dogan.

As part of a successful effort to loosen “unnecessary” licensing restrictions, the 2018 Missouri General Assembly rolled back the requirement that those seeking to braid hair obtain a cosmetology license and undergo hundreds of hours of schooling.

With the legislation, Dogan’s HB 1500, having passed last year and signed into law, those seeking to braid hair only need to complete an online instructional video to obtain a certificate of registration.

Now, roughly a year later, the online

training course and certificate are available on the Division of Professional Registrations webpage. The course consists of a four-hour video hosted through the Cosmetology Education Group, a multi-state approved and accredited online training and recertification site.

Following the completion of the video, Missourians can apply for a certificate of registration to braid hair.

“It is going to help create jobs and help open up small businesses,” said Dogan. “It is something a lot of people in the African American community have wanted for a long time because government puts too many burdens on everyone, and particularly people of color, who want to start small businesses. And this is just one step in eliminating some of those barriers.”

Dogan credited numerous individuals before him, from Sen. Jamilah Nasheed to Tameka Stigers to Connie Johnson, for the work they put into the passage of the legislation.

GRAIN BELT FIGHT Kaitlyn Schallhorn

It’s clean energy versus eminent domain in the Missouri Capitol Tuesday as the House is set to proceed with legislation that could make a multi-billion dollar project difficult.

Missouri farmers and ranchers who oppose the Grain Belt Express Clean Line project — which would extend through eight Missouri counties — plan to rally at the Capitol Tuesday afternoon. The House is also set to perfect a bill regarding eminent domain that could hinder the project.

Read on for a look at what to know about the project and the arguments for and against it.

What is the project?

The Grain Belt Express Clean Line project would develop an overhead and direct transmission line of approximately 780 miles delivering wind energy from western Kansas to utilities and consumers in Missouri and other states, according to its website. It would extend through eight Missouri counties: Buchanan, Clinton, Caldwell, Carroll, Chariton, Monroe, Randolph, and Ralls.

The project contends it would deliver about 4,000 megawatts of renewable power and clean energy to about 1.6 million homes per year and create new jobs — including both permanent and temporary construction work.

In March, the Public Service Commission (PSC) approved a certificate of convenience and necessity for the project, giving it the green light to construct and manage a new transmission line in the state.

What do proponents say?

“The Grain Belt Express project represents a nearly $500 million direct investment in Missouri,” Beth Conley, a spokesperson for Ivenergy, told The Missouri Times. “It will pay Missouri landowners $32 million and pay $7 million in property taxes in the first year of operation alone. The project will also create 1,500 construction jobs.”

Members of the Missouri Public Utility Alliance (MPUA) have expressed unwavering support for a new transmission line, arguing it would result in millions of dollars in savings to consumers across the state.

“I think this project is very worth the effort, and I think it would be wellneeded in the state of Missouri,” said Dennis Klusmeyer, superintendent of the city of Shelbina. “We are in need of infrastructure improvement across the state and across the country. On our electrical infrastructure, this would help support that.”

What about those opposed?

One main opposition to the Grain Belt hinges on eminent domain — an issue the state House has tackled this year and is expected to perfect this week.

Missouri Farm Bureau President Blake Hurst lambasted the PSC’s eventual approval of the project, saying it “sets precedent for private companies to buy land on the cheap and profit at the expense of Missouri citizens.”

“Allowing the project to proceed places hundreds of Missouri landowners at risk of having their land

taken for a project that may never be completed,” he said.

What is the legislature doing about it?

Sponsored by Rep. Jim Hansen, HB 1062 would prohibit private entities from using eminent domain for the purposes of constructing aboveground merchant lines — a direct blow to the Grain Belt project if it passes.

Hansen represents some areas that would be impacted by the construction of the Grain Belt.

House Speaker Elijah Haahr vowed the General Assembly “will act to protect Missourians from private companies trying to seize their land through eminent domain” earlier this year.

“The legislation the House is moving forward is vital for many Missourians who otherwise would be forced to allow unreasonable restrictions on their family farms, damaging the value of their land, and taking away their private property rights,” he said.

James Owen, executive director of Renew Missouri, dismissed the eminent domain legislation as a tactic that will only “add to the litigation that’s been attempting to halt this jobcreating project for five years.”

“Ultimately, it won’t stop it for many reasons, but leaders think this frivolous legislation will score points with some noisy constituents,” Owen told The Missouri Times. “So it’s another hurdle to creating jobs and bringing low-cost energy to Missouri. Disappointing, but misguided.”

Schmitt reiterates commitment to testing rape kits at crime victims event Kaitlyn Schallhorn For Attorney Gen. Eric Schmitt, tackling the thousands of untested rape kits in the state is a way to “honor the courage” of victims who reported the heinous crimes.

Schmitt and Gov. Mike Parson were on hand for an event at the Capitol Wednesday afternoon as part of the state’s Crime Victims’ Rights Week. The two Missouri leaders reiterated their commitment to reducing crime in the

state and ensuring the rights of victims are protected.

Schmitt’s office, in particular, has made tackling the more than 5,000 untested rape kits in the state — as well as creating a statewide protocol for how they are handled — a priority for his tenure. With federal grant money, Schmitt said his office is first focused on collecting an “inventory” of the untested kits before creating a tracking system and

ultimately testing the kits. He also picked Judge M. Keithley Williams to lead the SAFE Kit Initiative.

“I think it’s just really important for us to honor the courage of the victims who have come forward to make sure those kits don’t sit on a shelf somewhere,” Schmitt said in an interview with The Missouri Times.

Sexual assault victims “need to know that law enforcement, including the

www.missouritimes.com

attorney general prosecutors, are going to go after the people who have victimized them, who have caused great physical and emotional pain,” Schmitt said. “I want them to know there’s an attorney general who is very committed to this effort and in making sure we are bringing people to justice.”

Parson said he was “proud” of the changes that have occurred in Missouri when it comes to the rights of victims.

“In Missouri, we continue to strive to improve how our criminal justice system treats and supports crime victims,” Parson said in a statement.

Parson had declared April 7-13 as Crime Victims’ Rights Week in the state.

The theme for Wednesday’s event was “Honoring our Past. Creating Hope for the Future.”

11

The Missouri Times

Alisha Shurr

Missouri’s high court has determined Gov. Mike Parson acted within his constitutional authority when appointing then-Sen. Mike Kehoe as lieutenant governor.

“Further, the constitution is clear, the Governor may fill all vacancies in public offices unless the law provides an alternative method…

Therefore, article IV, § 4 controls the authority of the Governor to appoint a Lieutenant Governor, and Governor Parson was within his constitutional authority when he appointed Kehoe to the office of Lieutenant Governor,” the majority opinion, written by Chief Justice Zel Fischer, states.

On Tuesday, the Missouri Supreme Court handed down the opinion, affirming the lower court’s decision in part and reversing it in part.

The high court split from the Cole County Circuit Court, determining that Darrell Cope does have legal standing to bringing the lawsuit.

At issue is Parson’s appointment of Kehoe to the position of lieutenant governor. The job was left vacant when Parson stepped up to lead the Show-Me State following the resignation of Eric Greitens as Missouri’s

governor.

On June 18, 2018, Parson appointed the former-Senate majority floor leader to fill the vacant position. A move was challenged in court within hours.

The Missouri Democratic Party, along with Darrell Cope, filed a lawsuit in an attempt to send the issue to the voters claiming the governor doesn’t have the authority to appoint a person to lieutenant governor.

In July 2018, the lawsuit was dismissed by Cole County Circuit Judge Jon Beetem who ruled, not only did Cope lack standing to bring the case but the governor has the authority to appoint a lieutenant governor under the Missouri Constitution.

Cope and the Missouri Democratic Party appealed the decision and argued the case before the Supreme Court in November 2018. The high court’s rule was handed down on April 16, 2019.

The core of the argument against the appointment, which was the argument in dissenting opinion, was the Missouri statute explicitly states the governor does not have the power.

State law states, “Whenever any vacancy, caused in any

manner or by any means whatsoever, occurs or exists in any state or county office originally filled by election of the people, other than in the office[] of lieutenant governor…the vacancy shall be filled by appointment by the governor…”

While the majority opinion does recognized that statute, it points to the Missouri Constitution, which states, “The governor shall fill all vacancies in public offices unless otherwise provided by law, and his [or her] appointees shall serve until their successors are duly elected or appointed and qualified.”

“Cope’s argument — that this statute shows an intent for the listed offices to remain vacant should a vacancy occur — ignores that the law provides a way to fill every office expressly mentioned in the statute apart from Lieutenant Governor,” the majority opinion states.

In response to the ruling, Parson released the following statement: “Missouri’s constitution is clear regarding the authority to make gubernatorial appointments. It’s important that Missouri have all of the statewide offices filled, which

work to provide stability and to ensure that all Missourians are being served appropriately.

The Lieutenant Governor is an important office for this State, and I applaud the Missouri Supreme Court’s decision today which confirms the position, as well as the position of previous Governors from both parties, that the Governor has the authority to appoint a Lieutenant Governor in the event of a vacancy.”

Lauren Gepford on behalf of the Missouri Democratic Party told the Missouri Times: “We respect the Court’s decision, which clears up a grey area within the law.

This question needed to be addressed in the fallout from the explosive and brief tenure of Governor Eric Greitens. Governor Parson has won the power to appoint the state government of his choosing, which he has done by appointing his own Lieutenant Governor, Attorney General, and Treasurer. We look forward to holding him accountable for his own performance in office, as well as the performance of his appointees.”

DOR drafting emergency amendment, revised regulation for withholding tax calculation Alisha Shurr The Missouri Department of Revenue has moved to ensure changes to the state’s withholding calculation formula are in line with state law.

According to a letter sent to the State Auditor’s Office, the department is finalizing drafts of an emergency amendment and amended regulation regarding the withholding tax calculation.

“Upon my approval this week, both documents will be provided to the Governor’s Office for his final approval, pursuant to Executive Order 17-03. Once the Governor approves the emergency amendment and the amended regulation, they will be filed with the Secretary of State’s Office, as required by law,” Acting Director Ken Zeller

wrote on April 11, 2019.

The issues at play are changes DOR made to the withholding formula in January 2019 without going through the traditional rulemaking process. A review conducted by the State Auditor’s Office determined the changes were made “unlawfully.”

“Amending the withholding formula regulation through the rulemaking process mandated by Chapter 536, RSMo, is necessary to inform the General Assembly of any changes in the rules through notice to the Joint Committee on Rules,” stated the audit.

CONTINUED ONLINE

MEC DISMISSES MULTIPLE COMPLAINTS Alisha Shurr The Missouri Ethics Commission dismissed four cases in April, one of which in part because state statute does not require “paid-for-by” disclosures on digital media.

The MEC dismissed a complaint alleging Anthony McDonald and the St. Louis Guardian failed to file an expenditure report related to Facebook advertisements and didn’t include “paid-for-by” disclosures.

The commission determined the advertisements did not meet the monetary threshold nor did evidence support they were campaign expenditures.

“Similarly, Missouri statutes do not require ‘paid-for-by’ disclosures on digital media, such as FaceBook or the St. Louis Guardian,” the dismissal order states.

Also dismissed was a complaint involving a Lee’s Summit School Board candidate and a bag of candy. The allegation was that Mike Allen and

www.missouritimes.com

EXECUTIVE

Missouri high court affirms governor’s ability to appoint lieutenant governor

Mike Allen for LSR7 failed to include a “paid-for-by” disclosure.

“Missouri’s campaign finance laws contain an exception: the paid-for-by disclosure is not required to be placed on personal items, such as a bag of candy,” the dismissal order states.

Additionally, the commission dismissed a complaint alleging Lewis Reed coordinated with an individual and/or entity to disseminate campaign materials and messaging.

Dismissed by the commission was the allegation of nepotism and conflict of interest against Joe Aughinbaugh, an official in Washington Township in DeKalb County. Aughinbaugh’s son voluntarily operated the road grader during a snow emergency.

The MEC issued a fine of $1,000 to Firefighters for Progress for failing to amend its Statement of Committee Organization within the necessary days. If it cuts a check within 45 days, the group is only on the hook for $100.

OPINION

12

The Missouri Times

THE ONLY THING Proposed bonding TO FEAR IS THE plan is first step to funding MEDIOCRITY WE solution for state’s roads and ALREADY HAVE bridges Douglas Thaman, Ed.D

Sen. Dave Schatz

A few weeks ago, I wrote about how improving Missouri’s infrastructure is my top priority this legislative session. All across our state, our roads and bridges are crumbling, and we must find both long and short-term solutions to fix this problem.

Infrastructure improvement is vital to our state’s success because it affects our economy and how goods are moved across our state. It also affects our vehicles; bad roads often lead to costly vehicle repairs, which impact every Missouri family.

Earlier this year, the governor announced his $351 million bonding plan to repair or replace over 250 bridges on the State Transportation Improvement Plan. I believe this is the correct way to address our transportation issues because it will make our state competitive for federal transportation dollars. In addition, these funds will be specifically allocated for transportation projects and not subject to appropriation by the General Assembly. There is no way that MODOT can plan for future projects if they don’t know what money is going to be allocated to them.

Since the Senate is considered the “deliberative” body of the Missouri General Assembly,

there was thorough debate on a proposal intended to address our state’s transportation funding needs. After 10 hours of debate on Tuesday, we finally agreed on a compromise for Senate Concurrent Resolution 14. Our compromise lowers the bond amount to $301 million, to be paid over seven years. It also reduces the number of bridges included in the proposal from 250 to 215, with the remaining 35 bridges being paid for through a one-time $50 million appropriation.

Finally, our compromise includes language that delays the effective date of SCR 14 until MODOT accepts a federal grant for the replacement of the Interstate 70 bridge at Rocheport. This bridge is an example of a vital piece of our transportation infrastructure that needs to be replaced. The cost of replacing this bridge is $238 million, and if we neglect this project, there will be sixto-eight-hour traffic delays on Interstate 70.

I will continue to lead the fight to improve infrastructure in our state. This proposed bonding proposal is just the first step to finding a funding solution for our state’s roads and bridges.

I very much respect Senator Libla, his contribution to his community and our state. But, I respectfully disagree with his views on charter schools and their impact on public education. Charter schools are a different kind of public education model that puts students at the center of everything: finance, buildings, public policy and above all learning. So, we believe as we make important decisions, we should consider primarily how they are going to impact students and their parents, and secondarily how they are going to impact school districts and their employees.

The senator and I agree that a “stir is going on at the State Capitol.” We might disagree on the cause. The stir is legislators responding to the needs, wishes and desires of a growing number of parents who want to make their own decisions about what is best for their children, rather than having those decisions foisted on them by the government; parents who care more about the quality of the education of their children than bureaucratic efficiency. What does it matter if we lower the per pupil costs, if our kids get a bad education that leaves them ill-prepared to enter the workforce and become good citizens?

Charter schools are delivering improving results in Kansas City.

Consider these 2018 state assessment results for the charter schools in Kansas City: 75% of the charter school students are in schools with a higher Annual Performance Report rating than the local district; 70% of the charter school students are in schools outperforming the local district in English Language Arts; 70% of the charter school students are in schools outperforming the local district in Mathematics.

75% of the top twenty performing public schools in English Language Arts

www.missouritimes.com

and Mathematics are charter schools.

What’s even more impressive is that the charter schools are showing these results while their students each receive $2,500 LESS in local tax support than the students in the school district. Imagine the results if the charter school students were equitably funded, which is only right given that ALL public school students have a right to be treated the same.

The senator also expressed concern about poor performing charter schools closing. While there have been some charter closings, the schools that did close should have closed— as should some of the poor performing district schools. If a public school is failing, its leadership should change. If it continues to fail, it should be closed. Why would anyone want their son or daughter to go to a school that has no chance of meeting minimal standards, nonetheless the high standards we should expect from all schools. It’s even worse when the government forces parents to send their kids to a failing school by eliminating alternatives, like charter schools. As a father, I would much rather my daughter’s school close, rather than her leaving high school unable to go to college, learn a trade, or get an hourly job that required basic math and reading skills.

Let’s forget for a moment the impact on students and their parents. A mediocre or terrible education is a waste of money.

About 400,000 Missouri public school students cannot even pass the most basic tests. I did the math. That means that every year, we are spending around $4 billion on schools whose students are not proficient in English, math or both.

Now, that is a waste of taxpayers’ dollars.

Keeping open bad public schools of any kind for any reason is bad public policy.

The Senator expressed concern about efficiency, intimating that the per pupil costs in Kansas City would decrease if the

charter schools were to go away. There are several economic flaws to the argument.

First, just because we take away charter schools as a choice doesn’t mean parents won’t still try to find the best education for their kids. That happened in Kansas City. Even before charter schools, Kansas City was losing enrollment as parents moved their families to better districts in the suburbs. Second, the number of students is only one factor in efficiency.

The senator suggests that bigger is more efficient than smaller. Does he believe that when it comes to state government?

Given the senator’s legendary common sense, he probably knows that bigger sometimes means more bureaucratic waste.

I know members of the Missouri General Assembly, in almost every aspect of life, trust their constituents— rather than the government— to decide what is best for them. For some reason, that doesn’t always hold true with public education. Let’s not fear choice. Let’s trust parents.

Most importantly, let’s decide education public policy with the students at the center, not institutions. Kids who cannot read and count at grade level IN AREAS WITHOUT CHARTERS pay the cost of losing the ‘American Dream’.

They cost our communities the loss of their civic engagement because they are less likely to vote, work and contribute.

They cannot serve their country in the Armed Forces. In real dollars they cost our communities the loss of tax dollars, extra expenses for prisons, health care, the impact of drugs, and the cost of government assistance. We owe our children and families better than allowing the next generation to be forced into a never-ending cycle of poverty.

We welcome all members of the General Assembly to visit any of Missouri’s current charter schools and see the great things that are possible!

Giving Medical Care to All Babies Fundamental to our Country’s Ethics Congresswoman Ann Wagner CONTINUED But Speaker Nancy Pelosi has a stranglehold on her caucus. Since late February, she has rejected Republican requests to bring this legislation to a vote 29 times. I have talked to some Democrats who have voiced their support for this legislation but are cowed by possible repercussions from Democratic leadership and partisan groups berating my legislation for depriving abortionists of their “choice” to end the life of a baby who is born alive. But our founding fathers clearly did not put age limits on who is entitled to life, nor does our Constitution enable adults to end the lives of children simply because they are inconvenient.

Fortunately, Speaker Pelosi does not have the support of the American people or her own party. In recent polling, almost 70% of Democrats support legislation that would ensure a

baby who survives an abortion receives the same medical treatment as any other baby born prematurely.

That is why I have joined with Republican Whip Steve Scalise to file a discharge petition that would force a vote on this bill in the House of Representatives when signed by a majority of Member of Congress. Every single Member of Congress should be able to go on the record and vote against infanticide—or let the American people know that they support infanticide.

It is rare we have a chance to save lives; this is an urgent moment for our nation.

So far over 190 of my colleagues— including some Democrats—have signed the petition. All it takes is 218 signatures, and I can promise you that I will never stop fighting until depriving a baby of lifesaving care is not just illegal but unthinkable.

13

The Missouri Times

ON TITLE IX, I’M WITH TRUMP Rep. Jeff Shawan

The Obama Presidency offered no shortage of bad ideas. Attacks on our rural values, job creators, farmers and families were all too common. Among the flurry of misguided policies, the Obama “guidance” on campus Title IX misconduct investigations received minimal attention compared to many of the other disastrous policies.

Here’s what it did: it eliminated due process rights for students accused of misconduct. Under the Obama rules, the accused have been too often presumed guilty and if not, their rights are ignored in the process. In fact, under the Obama rules, students at our colleges have no right to be represented by an attorney, know the accusations that have been made against them, view evidence or cross-examine witnesses. These policies are unconstitutional, un-American and unconscionable.

That is why, both the Trump Administration and the conservative

leadership of the Missouri legislature have been working to repeal these disastrous policies and restore due process rights on college campuses. Under our Constitution, we are presumed innocent and we have a right to representation. But these rights were trampled by the Obama Administration, particularly in campus misconduct investigations.

As a result of these attacks on Constitutional due process, hundreds of students all across the country have sued colleges and universities for denying their due process rights in these Title IX proceedings. Huge legal bills and even bigger settlements have been paid by public and private universities for denying due process. In many states, taxpayers are stuck with paying the bill.

In Missouri, where our state provides millions to public and private colleges, we could be forced to bailout college settlements and lawsuits with taxpayer money. That is why we must act now.

While many colleges, universities and liberal groups like Planned Parenthood have come out in opposition of restoring due process, Missouri conservatives are united in support of these important measures. The liberal opponents have called on the legislature to wait until federal rules are finalized before acting.

But we all know that the obstructionist liberals in Washington D.C. will stop and nothing to block the Trump agenda at every turn. We cannot let them.

The Election of President Trump helped end many disastrous policies but there is more that must be done.

I’m proud to join President Trump and conservative colleagues in support of restoring campus due process at Missouri’s public and private universities.

By restoring Camus due process, we can join President Trump in ending, yet another unconstitutional policy of the Obama Administration.

LACK OF DUE PROCESS CONTINUES TO IMPACT AFRICAN-AMERICANS John C.E. Gaskin III - St. Louis County NAACP President The lack of due process on college campuses has been widely discussed during this session of the Missouri General Assembly. Campus due process proposals have been considered in, both, the House and Senate. The current bills seek to ensure that students have rights to legal representation, to review evidence against them, and to present their own evidence. Additionally, College and University students would also have the right to challenge or cross-examine the testimony of witnesses and to reject any decision-makers who have exhibited bias or a conflict of interest.

Much of the debate has been centered on balancing the rights and interests of, both, the accused and the accuser. On behalf of the St. Louis County NAACP, we do not feel that these worthy goals are mutually exclusive. We believe a process that protects confidentiality and due process for all parties is possible and we believe the proposals in the Missouri legislature successfully achieve each of

www.missouritimes.com

these goals.

The fact of the matter is this: the lack of due process anywhere disparately impacts minority communities. That is particularly true on college campuses where the accused are more often than not African-Americans. Even worse, minority students on college campuses are far less likely to possess the financial resources to successfully navigate the bureaucracy and resources of the universities that are investigating them. Any imbalance of power is where injustice is likely to occur. That is particularly true in these campus cases.

In fact, a recent story in The Atlantic showed that an investigation at Colgate University found that while just 4.2 percent of Colgate students we’re black, they were accused of 50 percent of sexual violations and 40 percent of students formally adjudicated. This imbalance of power and the lack of due process on campuses across the county has led to hundreds of lawsuits. Students

whose rights are deprived are seeking, and securing, legal settlements from institutions that deprive them of their Constitutional rights. However, as we are far too aware, African American students are less likely to have the resources to seek this justified support. Instead, their education is more likely to be ruined and their opportunities more likely to be diminished.

Additionally, these proposals add an appeal process, outside of the university system where an impartial commission will review the facts and hear from the parties involve. This system will remove biases and politics and ensure that justice is served for all parties.

Restoring the due process rights of students will lead to a better system. It will eliminate the need for lengthy and costly legal battles that favor the wealthy.

It will ensure impartiality in the process.

Most importantly, it will preserve justice for every student on every campus.

14

Missouri Times Ad 2.pdf 1 1/23/2019 3:41:28 PM

The Missouri Times

CHECK ANY TIME AND SIGN UP TO RECEIVE THE CALENDAR IN YOUR EMAIL WEEKLY AT THEMISSOURITIMES.COM/CALENDAR Sent events for included to calendar@themissouritimes.com.

23 Legislature reconvenes – 4:00 p.m.

23 Missouri Bicycle & Pedestrian Federation Lobby Day

C

M

Y

CM

MY

ALS IMPACTS FAMILIES.

CY

CMY

K

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a progressive neuromuscular disease that robs a person of their ability to talk, walk, move and eventually breathe. There is no cure.

=

29 Standing with Children Luncheon – 11:30 a.m.1p.m.

17 Last day of session

29 Women in Policy Discussion 11:30 a.m.-12:30 p.m.

8 Cattlemen’s Steak Fry – State Fairgrounds – Social Hour at 5:00 p.m., Dinner at 6:00 p.m.

23 House Crab Boil – Day Solutions Foundation Event/Fundraiser

30 Lake of the Ozarks/ Tri-County Lodging Association Ice Cream Social

24 Missouri Electric Cooperative’s Fish Fry Luncheon

30 Concerned Women for America of Missouri (CWA of MO) Day at the Missouri Capitol

24 Missouri REALTORS Capitol Conference – 100 E. High St. Jefferson City 25 Missouri Vietnam Veterans Recognition Day 26 Lafayette County Republican 2019 Lincoln Dinner

Because of it’s debalitating and relentless nature, ALS exacts an enormous toll on

May 2 National Day of Prayer and Salute to our Military and Vets – Rotunda – Noon

June

July 14 Last Day for Governor to Veto Bills 19 Missouri Soybean Association PAC Golf Tournament – Richmond August

7 Moms Demand

2 Missouri Soybean Association PAC Golf Tournament – Dexter

10 Last day for floor action on appropriations bills

28 Passed Legislation Goes Into Effect

families.

The ALS Association St. Louis Regional Chapter helps families manage the emotional and

BROUGHT TO YOU BY THE MISSOURI SOYBEAN ASSOCIATION.

physical strain brought on by an ALS diagnosis, with free programs and services for patients, caregivers and children.

Learn more at

www.alsa-stl.org.

www.missouritimes.com

The Missouri Times

Activity Date Lobbyist Name Principal From To 04/17/2019 Bardgett, Jacqueline Tellus Health Corp.

04/15/2019 04/17/2019 Bardgett, Jacqueline Gregory Germano 04/15/2019 04/17/2019 Bardgett, John E Tellus Health Corp.

04/15/2019 04/17/2019 Bardgett, John E Gregory Germano 04/15/2019 04/17/2019 Biswell, George ‘Cannevangelist TM’ Everett George E Biswell 04/17/2019 04/17/2019 Leonard, Erika Tellus Health Corp.

04/15/2019 04/17/2019 Leonard, Erika Gregory Germano 04/15/2019 04/17/2019 Luckey, Nicole Invenergy 04/17/2019 04/17/2019 Roepe, Christopher ‘Chris’ Tellus Health Corp.

04/15/2019 04/17/2019 Roepe, Christopher ‘Chris’ Gregory Germano 04/15/2019 04/16/2019 Boyd, Rodney US Capital Development 04/16/2019 04/16/2019 Burch, Jerry Donald Hermann on behalf of Missouri Son Inc 04/01/2019 04/16/2019 Burch, Jerry Donald Herman on behalf of Cryptic River Management 04/01/2019 04/16/2019 Casas, Kate US Capital Development 04/16/2019 04/16/2019 Christie, Lisa Donald Hermann on behalf of Missouri Son Inc 04/01/2019 04/16/2019 Christie, Lisa Donald Herman on behalf of Cryptic River Management 04/01/2019 04/16/2019 Grace, Brian US Capital Development 04/16/2019 04/16/2019 Grote, Michael Independent Colleges & Universities of Missouri 04/15/2019 04/16/2019 Simmons, Kelvin US Capital Development 04/16/2019 04/16/2019 Winter, Michael G Independent Colleges & Universities of Missouri 04/15/2019 04/15/2019 Thelemaque, Henrio Independent Colleges & Universities of Missouri 04/15/2019 04/14/2019 Lau-

ber, Elizabeth Wings of Hope 04/13/2019 04/14/2019 Thampy, Eapen Students for Cannabis Agriculture 04/14/2019 04/13/2019 Thampy, Eapen UMKC Young Americans for Freedom 04/13/2019 04/12/2019 Danielson, Jeff American Wind Energy Association 04/12/2019 04/12/2019 Kinne, Shane Missouri Corn Growers Association 05/24/2011 04/12/2019 04/11/2019 Baker, Aaron Winter Group 04/10/2019 04/11/2019 Beers, Hannah Winter Group 04/10/2019 04/11/2019 Hammann, Christopher Scott Great State Strategies, LLC 04/11/2019 04/11/2019 Henning, Dane Aaron Lori Porter 04/11/2019 04/10/2019 Eaton, Alex Thomas Show Me Spin Gaming 04/10/2019 04/10/2019 Lohmann, Rebecca Show Me Spin Gaming 04/10/2019 04/10/2019 McMahon, Tom Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International 04/10/2019 04/10/2019 Pfeifer, Daniel Show Me Spin Gaming 04/10/2019 04/10/2019 Porter, Gregory ‘Greg’ D Show Me Spin Gaming 04/10/2019 04/10/2019 Rabineau, Brian Todd Port KC (Port Authority of Kansas City, Missouri) 04/08/2019 04/10/2019 Robbins, Thomas Protection Plus, LLC 04/10/2019 04/10/2019 Tilley, Steven Protection Plus, LLC 04/10/2019 04/10/2019 Tilley, Steven Protect Pluc, LLC 04/10/2019 04/10/2019 04/10/2019 Watson, Trent EDF Renewables 04/10/2019 04/10/2019 Willis, David Show Me Spin Gaming 04/10/2019 04/10/2019 Wittenauer, Kurt Spencer Rockwood Asset Management 05/24/2017 04/10/2019 04/09/2019 Dugger, Tony United Surety Agents of Missouri 04/09/2019

JCAR ACTS AS ‘QUASIJUDICIAL’ OVERSIGHT ON AGENCY RULEMAKING Alisha Shurr

The closely watched rulemaking process for medical marijuana will include “quasi-judicial” oversight by a bipartisan committee of elected officials.

The little-talked-about committee, consisting of 10 current lawmakers, is charged with reviewing rules and regulations filed by state agencies for compliance with Missouri law.

The bipartisan Joint Committee on Administrative Rules (JCAR) — with five state senators and five state representatives as members — receives, on average, more than 1,800 rule filings per year to review.

“I think [JCAR] serves a good function: holding the state accountable,” Committee Vice Chair Sen. Wayne Wallingford told the Missouri Times.

“It is very different than any other committee that people are aware of, and this is a committee that is largely unknown. But it has a lot of power in terms of allowing or denying certain rules going into effect that are going to ultimately impact industries and the people of Missouri,” Committee Chair Rep. Nick Schroer told the Missouri Times.

A notable difference from most committees, members of JCAR only look at the legality of the rules and what the law states — not the intent behind the law, but the actual wording. Schroer noted the committee has to look at what is actually in the law.

The committee has the ability to invalidate a rule in the event there is an absence of statutory authority to promulgate the rule; the rule is in conflict with state law; or the rule is arbitrary and capricious. Any rule the committee rejects needs to ratified by the General Assembly and approved up by the governor.

“I am not tasked with whether or not

I think the rule is something I would agree with on a policy level but does this agency have the authority to make this rule,” said Schroer. “I see JCAR as a quasi-judicial committee. Whereas other committees are dealing with policy and different pieces of legislation that aren’t necessarily going to make it across the finish line, JCAR is dealing with more of a procedural aspect of the law.”

Unlike committees that meet regularly or at sets times, JCAR only meets and hold hearings when necessary.

Wallingford recalls the committee meeting only a couple of times in 2018.

“We meet as required depending upon the rules that state agencies promulgate…if they don’t meet the standards then the committee would gather together,” said Wallingford, who chaired the committee in 2018. “We don’t have too many [hearings] that come before the committee.”

In the coming months, JCAR will be looking at rules on a few hot topics.

According to Schroer, it will be looking at the implementation of prevailing wage modifications and medical marijuana rules.

The Department of Labor is instituting new rules pursuant to a measure passed by the General Assembly in 2018. The committee is set to hold a hearing to determine if those new rules are within the authority of the department.

The Department of Health and Public Service is working on drafting rules in correspondence with the voterapproved constitutional amendment legalizing medical marijuana. Once those rules have been finalized, they will be submitted to JCAR for review.

“Probably the most notable topic that we will be dealing with in the next few months is medical marijuana,” said Schroer.

www.missouritimes.com

Alisha Shurr Missouri agriculturalists stepped away from tilling, planting, and calving to advocate their state lawmakers on issues they see as vital.

Members from Missouri Farmers Care, the Missouri Farm Bureau, Missouri Cattlemen’s Association, Missouri Corn Growers Association, the Missouri Pork Association, and other agricultural groups joined forces in Jefferson City.

“This is an important day, and we got a great turn out,” said Missouri Farm Bureau President Blake Hurst.

The issues they are focusing on? Legislation dealing with property rights.

The group is focusing on two topics set to come in the chambers on Tuesday. The House is set to take up HB 1062, which would bar private

transmission lines from utilizing eminent domain. The Senate is set to take up SB 391, which would require county regulations on concentrated animal feeding operations to be no more stringent than state law and regulations.

“Those are what we are concentrating on today because those are ones going to be worked on,” said Hurst.

“We got groups all around the building…people are really engaging. It’s been fun to walk these halls and see them interacting with senators and representatives.”

He added that is was a “good day for democracy” with people interacting with their representatives and sharing their views and stances on issues.

PEOPLE

Lobbyist Moves

Missouri farmers, ranchers join together to advocate lawmakers

15

16

The Missouri Times

SUNDAY MORNINGS KANSAS CITY - 38 THE SPOT AT 10:00 A.M. ST. LOUIS - ABC 30 KDNL AT 11:00 A.M. MID-MO - CONNECTIONS 22 AT 11:00 A.M. SWMO - CONNECTIONS 22 AT 11:00 A.M.

STREAM ONLINE AT TWMP.TV

www.missouritimes.com