HCR 37: Wait Wait…Don’t Tell Me!

Tags

, , , , , ,

“…WHEREAS, NPR content more frequently addresses topics of interest to liberal listeners than it addresses topics of interest to conservative listeners…”

By all means, proceed.

A House concurrent resolution, introduced on Monday:

HCR 37  
Specifies that no state funds shall go to National Public Radio
Sponsor: DeGroot, Bruce (101)
Proposed Effective Date: Varies
LR Number: 2118H.01I
Last Action: 02/28/2017 – Read Second Time (H)
Bill String: HCR 37
Next Hearing: Hearing not scheduled
Calendar: Bill currently not on a House calendar
[….]

It gets better – the full text:

FIRST REGULAR SESSION
House Concurrent Resolution No. 37 [pdf]
99TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY

INTRODUCED BY REPRESENTATIVE DEGROOT.
2118H.01I D. ADAM CRUMBLISS, Chief Clerk

WHEREAS, National Public Radio (NPR) is a privately and publicly funded nonprofit membership news media organization that serves as a syndicator to over nine hundred public radio stations in the United States; and
WHEREAS, NPR routinely takes sides on issues and topics that, as a news organization, it should report in an unbiased manner; and
WHEREAS, NPR criticizes Republican politicians more frequently than it criticizes Democratic politicians; and
WHEREAS, NPR content more frequently addresses topics of interest to liberal listeners than it addresses topics of interest to conservative listeners; and
WHEREAS, academic studies, including a study co-authored by a University of Missouri – Columbia professor, have found NPR has a liberal bias; and
WHEREAS, under the guise of objective news reporting, NPR is helping advance a liberal political agenda; and
WHEREAS, NPR receives federal grants from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting; and
WHEREAS, NPR receives other public funding from federal, state, and local governments; and
WHEREAS, public funds originate from taxpayers who hold beliefs across the entire political spectrum; and
WHEREAS, a news organization that receives public funds should report content in a strictly unbiased manner so as to equally serve all those who contribute to its funding; and
WHEREAS, NPR fails to meet this standard and reports news with bias:
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the members of the House of Representatives of the Ninety-ninth General Assembly, First Regular Session, the Senate concurring therein, hereby decree that no state funds shall go to the support or benefit of National Public Radio; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Chief Clerk of the Missouri House of Representatives be instructed to prepare a properly inscribed copy of this resolution for members of the budget committee of the Missouri House of Representatives and the appropriations committee of the Missouri Senate.

Oh, and Tinky Winky carries a purse. Oh, wait, sorry, that’s PBS.

Would you like some whine with your radio programmimg?

So much butthurt, so few words.

Ladies and gentlemen, the priorities of your right wingnut controlled Missouri General Assembly.

Missouri Supreme Court: St. Louis can indeed establish a higher minimum wage

Tags

, , , , ,

In 2015 the City of St. Louis, by ordinance, established a higher minimum wage than the state. A few people took exception to that. Today, the Missouri Supreme Court ruled that the city can have a higher minimum wage than the one established by the state:

[SC95401, Cooperative Home Care, Inc., et al. v. City of St. Louis, Missouri, et al. Appeal from the St. Louis circuit court, Judge Steven R. Ohmer Argued and submitted October 6, 2016; opinion issued February 28, 2017]

…This Court also holds that Missouri’s minimum wage law, section 290.502, considered alone or in conjunction with section 71.010, does not occupy the field of minimum wage laws, nor does it prohibit the adoption of local minimum wage ordinances such as Ordinance 70078. Section 290.502 prohibits employers from paying employees a wage lower than the state minimum, and nothing in the statute prevents local governments from adopting locally higher minimum wages…

[….]

…As Ordinance 70078 does not permit the payment of less than the state minimum wage, it is not in conflict with that law. It simply supplements the state law by setting additional local limits on the minimum amount an employer can pay an employee. Its purpose is consistent with that of the state minimum wage law; by its terms, it was enacted “to promote the general welfare, health, and prosperity of the City of St. Louis by ensuring that workers can better support and care for their families and fully participate in the community.” Here, the state established a floor for employee wages, and St. Louis simply raised that floor for local employees based on local conditions. Finding no reason to diverge from well-established precedent, this Court holds Ordinance 70078 does not conflict with Missouri’s minimum wage law…

[….]

Working people catch a break for once.

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): just a slight indication of what an open public town hall in the district would be like

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Only a slight indication.

Friday, via Twitter, from Representative Vicky Hartzler (r):

vickyhartzler022417

Rep. Vicky Hartzler ‏@RepHartzler
We want every American to have access to affordable, quality health insurance that meets their needs. [….]
9:05 AM – 24 Feb 2017

The Faux News Channel? Really, republicans are still beating that dead horse?

A significant (and representative) chunk of the responses:

@RepHartzler 3 generations making America great. Marchers we’re not a “pornographic fringe.” You’re embarrassing.

@RepHartzler I have a question about the “pornographic signs” at Women’s March & other demonstrations. Were they more offensive than this? [Donald Trump audio quote]

@RepHartzler “Having access to” doesn’t mean “having” #healthcare – nice buzzwords, though.#GOPFail #SaveACA #DoYourJob #Resistance

@RepHartzler and you claim this with a giant Fox News logo? Seriously? How about finding out what your Constituents really want?

@RepHartzler do your job! Represent the people not special interests! Investigate AND impeach the Putin puppet. or are you in on coverup?

@RepHartzler You care so much about healthcare that you didn’t show up at the Healthcare #Townhall constituents invited you to. #WheresVicky

@RepHartzler Why don’t you actually talk to your constituents about health care instead of calling us names?

@RepHartzler Why not fix the problems with the system and move on? #affordablecareact #norepeal

@RepHartzler the radical fringe is Bannon-45 & you!

@RepHartzler as soon as you mention Fox News , you are disqualified from having any credibility. ps. DO YOUR JOB HOLD TOWNHALL MEETINGS!

@RepHartzler Are you with your people at CPAC today and waving your Russian Trump flag?

@RepHartzler so glad to hear you will protect Americans’ rights to affordable health care and keep the ACA in place! Thank you.

That may have been sarcasm. These days it can be difficult to tell the difference.

@RepHartzler Then repair ACA and leave it alone.

@RepHartzler “What’s not been reported” is your delusion. @womensmarch signs varied. Some cheeky, some provocative, ALL you should read.

@RepHartzler instead of doing a town hall and facing your constituents you write an opinion piece? Horrendous. More to follow.

@RepHartzler Key word being access. Still trying to reach your office with my concerns but your mail full now for 3 days. Do your job!

Yeah, funny that.

@RepHartzler called ur office EVERY DAY 4 2 weeks no answer on why no town hall & now banned press…I vow to see u OUT OF OFFICE

@RepHartzler IF that were true you would demand a better plan than Better Way which only benefits insurance companies & others.

We can’t wait for the next open public town hall in the district. If something like that will ever happen again.

Previously:

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): just checking (February 20, 2017)

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): Well, you asked. (February 21, 2017)

You think Sen. Claire McCaskill (D) has been smiling a lot this week? (February 23, 2017)

SCR 15: Wrong date, it already happened on May 6, 2014.

Tags

, , , ,

Comes the darkness.

Comes the darkness.

A Senate Concurrent Resolution:

SCR 15 Designates August 21, 2017, as “Total Eclipse Day” in the state of Missouri
Sponsor: Hoskins
LR Number: 1818S.01I
Committee: Rules, Joint Rules, Resolutions and Ethics
Last Action: 2/14/2017 – Referred S Rules, Joint Rules, Resolutions and Ethics Committee
Journal Page: S261
[….]

A celebration of darkness. How apropos.

Previously:

SB 509: the moment when all hope for the future of Missouri died (May 6, 2014)

Conservative morality

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

Nancy LeTourneau of the Political Animal Blog recently wrote a provocative article on the issue of morality in a pluralistic society. The gist of her argument is that conservative Christians, by making their deal with the devil, i.e. Donald Trump, have not only abrogated their claim to superior morality, but opened the door to a discussion of morality that is more in harmony with liberal pluralistic values. LeTourneau implicitly suggests the existence of a gap between the moral universe inhabited by liberals and that of conservatives. It strikes me that this gap is both more substantive and coarser than LeTourneau in her effort to be fair, suggests.

The difference between the two points of view was clear when the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) revoked an invitation for Breitbart provocateur, Milo Yiannopoulos, to speak at their annual meeting after tapes surfaced in which he seemed to speak approvingly of pedophilia. Just a few weeks earlier conservatives professed to be horrified when he was similarly disinvited to speak by UC Berkeley. The difference? The Berkeley protestors whose actions precipitated the cancellation of Yiannopoulos talk were disturbed by his “free” exercise of “hate speech, racism, misogyny and transphobia.” CPAC couldn’t handle Yiannopoulos speaking “freely” about sexual practices that they consider especially taboo.

Time and again, it seems that the only behavior that can get conservative morality roiling is sexual. Here in Missouri we have a legislature that is all but openly selling influence when they’re not busy slurping the swill ladled out by lobbyists. But it took a sex scandal – legislators hustling interns – to provoke a backlash and, temporarily at least, lend some force to discussions about the need for ethical oversight. The results were rules governing interns (including a widely ridiculed proposal to keep those young sluts from dressing provocatively – our state legislators, it seems, shouldn’t be expected to resist temptation all on their own), and a few limp efforts to address legislative corruption.

Get the picture? If it involves sex, conservatives get worried about morality. Bullying, vicious slurs directed toward groups that conservatives view askance, along with financial and political corruption, not so much.

It’s no accident that conservative and ostentatiously Christian Rep. Vicky Hartzler (R-MO4) objected to the Women’s march as much because of the signs, which she characterized as “very pornographic,”as anything else. I saw lots of signs about the ACA, Social Security and the full range of economic justice issues. To be fair, I also saw signs that would have shocked my very sedate grandmother. Words like “uterus” and Hartzler’s avowed president, Donald Trump’s, favorite, “pussy,” were visible, along with statements that the organs in question were the property of the women holding the signs, and, consequently, not subject to the control of the patriarchs.

Hartzler had much less to say about the issues that brought all those the men, women and children with the “pornographic” signs out. She doesn’t, for example, give a tinker’s you-know-what about healthcare, an issue that motivated many of the marchers – that’s why she’s voted some fifty or sixty times to repeal the ACA – but she’s worried that people who do care about it showed their concern with what she believes to be pornographic signs. It’s all about sex with these folks.

Even the issue that represents one of the most persistent areas of moral disagreement between conservatives and progressives/liberals, abortion, hinges on differences between the way the two camps respond to female sexual behavior. Despite the hysterical evocation of “baby-killilng” and silly labels like “pre-born,” the relationship between abortion and the fear of unfettered female sexuality is, as Sara Erdreich, argues obvious when one considers the prevalence of arguments about whether or not victims of rape or incest “deserve” to get an abortion, but women whose sexual behavior is voluntary don’t. And don’t get me started on Catholicism, female sexuality, and abortion.

Progressives are frequently advised to frame issues in moral terms if we want them to have wide resonance. However, if our concept of what is morally most important differs so radically from the “other” guy, it leaves us with one simple question: How do we talk about the full spectrum of moral issues – which are often life and death issues – with people whose concept of what can be considered moral or immoral seems to be so limited?

SB 466: maybe if we just ignore him he’ll stop filing lunatic fringe right wingnut alternate universe successionist fantasy bills

Tags

, , , ,

No, that doesn’t work now. Everyone else already ignores him.

Oh, and tenther drivel, too.

SB 466 Adopts the Prosperity States Compact
[….]
SB 466 – This act adopts the Prosperity States Compact, an interstate agreement for the creation of political subdivisions (“districts”) which are exempt from state and federal laws not otherwise made continually applicable by the Prosperity States Compact or by federal supremacy. The Compact also places certain limits to districts’ authority to govern and raise public funds, in addition to those limitations that are ordinarily placed on political subdivisions, including a ban on the taxation of district residents.

Districts are municipal corporations with the power to form contracts and be party to lawsuits. Districts are led by a board of seven administrators who serve four year terms. A process is created for the board to create and administer district bylaws, ordinances, policies, and procedures. All of the board’s meetings and records are open.

The authority of the district government is limited to certain law enforcement activities, the furnishing of transportation, utility, and transmission infrastructure, the operation of a municipal court, the borrowing of money in accordance with other limitations placed upon borrowing by this act, the power to accept certain gifts of real and personal property, and other incidental activities that are necessary for government as determined by the board. The district government is prohibited from exercising any government function of taxation, eminent domain, civil property forfeiture unless the forfeiture is based in a criminal violation and the forfeiting party has been convicted of that violation, establishing or enforcing any monopoly or cartel, accepting certain gifts, delegating all or any portion of its authority in any manner other than which it is permitted to do so by the act, or permitting any other unit of government to exercise authority within the district, except as permitted to do so by the act.
[….]

You’ve just got to love some of the particulars:

[….]
(c) Governing Authority. The governing authority of every Prosperity District is strictly limited to the following powers, which shall be exclusive of the exercise of the same or like powers by any other governmental unit within the district’s boundaries, as they exist from time to time, and no other governmental unit shall within such boundaries exercise the same or like powers as are granted to the district under this subsection, except as expressly contemplated in this Compact:
(1) police power consisting solely of: (i) enforcing the Malum in Se Criminal Law, Common Law and Regulation adopted in its formation petition as contemplated…
[….]

By my reading of the bill spitting on sidewalks would be out.

[….]
Section 7. Preservation of Person Status for Artificial Persons. A corporation, trust, company, association, organization or other non-natural person entity (“artificial person”) that enjoys or is capable of enjoying certain duties, rights and powers of a natural person under law existing outside of the boundaries of a Prosperity District, such as the right to sue or be sued, contract or own property in its own name, shall be recognized as enjoying the corresponding duties, rights and powers, if any, of a natural person within the boundaries of a Prosperity District upon giving notice in such form and with such content as may be specified in the district’s bylaws to the managing board of the district of its intent to conduct operations, do business or establish a place of business or domicile within the Prosperity District.
[….]

Can you abort an artificial person? Just asking.

Read the whole thing. It’ll be worth the waste of your time, if only for the mocking laughter.

Ed Emery (r) sponsored this bill. As if it could be anyone else.