PubDef has some pretty good coverage of the ongoing special session (here, here, and here.) Essentially, the House GOP defeated a motion by State Rep. Jamilah Nasheed (D-St. Louis) to vote on the Land Assemblage Tax Credit (the one that’s basically tailored to one man – Paul McKee in North St. Louis) separately from the rest of the bill. Strangely, the House leadership then ruled out of order an amendment offered by Jeannette Mott Oxford to reduce the acreage requirement from 75 to 30, which would allow smaller developers access to the credit. House Speaker Rod Jetton ruled that it was beyond the scope of Matt Blunt’s call for special session. Jetton used the same logic when Rep. John Burnett (D- KC) tried to amend the anti-scalping repeal to limit scalpers to a 20% markup.
In other words, Matt Blunt gets to tell legislators exactly what to legislate, and they have the privilege of being able to vote on it. That ought to be fun when Jay Nixon becomes governor in a year.
If Jay Nixon tried to get that kind of lemming-like devotion from a Republican legislature, the lemmings would turn into lions. They are masters of the double standard.
How on earth can any amendment on the bill that is before the legislature be “beyond the scope” of the call for a special session. They are just supposed to give up or down votes? That makes no sense.
It might make sense that you couldn’t tack on an amendment calling, say, for universal health insurance.
I know next to nothing about the Mo. House Rules. Once the leadership rules on something is there no appeal? Or is it just that the Dems are so outnumbered that they wouldn’t succeed on any protest? It sounds crazy on its face but it would be interesting to hear exactly how this fits into the house rules.
I can’t see Dems trying to get it struck down because of Blunt’s usurpation of power. They’re divided as it is–mainly because the money is going to help revive the inner city.