The Johnson County Democratic Central Committee sponsored their third annual James C. Kirkpatrick Heritage Dinner at the Johnson County fairgrounds near Warrensburg on Saturday night. Johnson County Auditor Kay Dolan Reynolds (D) was presented the James Kirkpatrick Award, honoring her public service in the tradition of the legendary Secretary of State. Former Senator Jean Carnahan was the keynote speaker.

Senator Jean Carnahan greets a fellow Democrat before the start of the Kirkpatrick dinner in Warrensburg on Saturday night.

Johnson County Auditor Kay Dolan Reynolds (D) was presented with the James C. Kirkpatrick Award.

Senator Carnahan’s remarks:

Jean Carnahan: …I’m engaged more fully in what I’m doing than ever before because I believe that we need to be right now. It’s important. It’s the time, and I feel very strongly about a number of things. So I’ve been doing some writing and speaking. I have a blog called firedupmissouri dot com. Do any of you ever go over and read that? I hope you do. [applause] Every day we expose the hypocrisy of Republicans. And believe me, that takes up a lot of space. [laughter] And we highlight the good works of true public servants….

….This mid-year election, as it shapes up, Republicans are already telling us what they’re going to do, aren’t they? They’re telling us their intention. They tell us they’re going to run on the repeal of health care. Well, if you recall from your history, back in nineteen thirty-six, Alf Landon ran against Roosevelt on the platform of repealing health care. That worked so well. [laughter] And just imagine now one of your local Republican candidates, he’s got the Republican platform in his pocket and he’s going door to door and he goes up and he knocks on the door and an elderly man comes to the door and he says, ” I will tell you about the Republican platform and what we’re gonna do for you.” The man says, “Okay.” He says, “We’re going to reinstate the donut hole in Medicare so that you have to pay more.” The man looks a little confused. He says, “And, and we’re going to take our adult children from ages eighteen to twenty-six and we’re gonna take them off your health care policy. What’s more, you know that pre-existing condition clause that used to be in your insurance contract? We’re gonna put that back in again.” And the man’s really becoming more and more confused. And finally he says, “What’s more, we’re gonna do away with tax credits for small businesses so they can get health care. And best of all, we’re going to take health care coverage away from thirty-two million people.” Well, with that, the man at the door thinks he is talking to an absolute idiot. He slams the door in his face. And I tell you friends, I believe this is what Missourians are gonna do for the Republicans come November. [applause]…

Approximately two hundred people attended the event at the Johnson County fairgrounds.

…You know, Missouri is a swing state, [inaudible] we have a fight on our hands for the United States Senate.  But let’s put this thing in perspective. As my daughter often says, “I’m not running against George Washington or Abraham Lincoln, I’m running against Roy Blunt.” [laughter] And in doing so, she is running against the ultimate Washington insider, someone who has been living on the shores of the Potomac for thirteen years, someone who could be the poster child for the way things are doing, going wrong in Washington.  He was the right hand man for Tom DeLay, directly involved in the reckless spending and the earmarks and most recently, the Wall Street bailout.

What we want is somebody who will fight for us for a change, somebody who will stand up for Main Street, not rollover for Wall Street, somebody who wants to fix Washington, and not just add to its brokenness.

Well, Robin has the experience to fight back.  I think maybe growing up with three brothers had something to do with that. But, when she went to the Secretary of State’s office she discovered that being a fighter could make a difference. She found that there were thousands of Missourians who had been cheated out of their money by fraudulent investment schemes. And she went after those companies, no matter how big they were, or how important they were…

…What many people don’t know is that, uh, in two thousand, uh, since two thousand she’s been running the family cattle farm. And having that background I really think is gonna come in kind of handy for her in Washington because, as she says, she’s learned to recognize bull. [laughter]

Well, voters told Robin what they thought of her when she ran for reelection. They gave her more votes than they have ever given anyone in Missouri history. So I think with that kind of support she can win. And with that fighting spirit she can make a difference in Washington.

Well, last week I, uh, I watched that historic health care vote and I thought at the times of the words that Robert Frost wrote when he said, we have promises to keep. And as Democrats we have promises to keep.  With the American people who count on us, who believe in us, and have no other place to turn. Over seventy-five years ago a woman by the name of Francis Perkins was picked by President Roosevelt to be the Secretary of Labor, the first woman to ever be picked to hold a cabinet level job. She told the president, she said, don’t call me to Washington unless you intend to turn me loose. And the president did. And she arrived in Washington with a hand written list of things she wanted to accomplish. And when we look at that list we think, gosh, those seem so commonplace. And yet those were really radical things in that day. On that list was the forty hour work week, minimum wage, child labor laws, work place safety regulations, and social security. It was a messy fight but Democrats endured and they won the victory. And with that victory Democrats changed what it means to be a worker in America. They changed what it means to grow old in this country. We now have hope and we now have health.

So what did the republicans do? They denounced these accomplishments every step of the way, saying they were going to put us on the road to socialism. They made the same claim when Truman tried to get through a health care program and increase minimum wage and give tax breaks to middle class families. Doesn’t this all sound very, very familiar?

When Truman was dealing with that idiot Congress, Senator Robert Taft said, we’re not giving him anything. Doesn’t that sound familiar? But that year Truman ran against the do nothing eightieth Congress and he won a stunning victory. And since then Democratic Congresses have given us the GI Bill, Peace Corps, the Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act, Medicare, the school lunch program, Head Start, family and medical leave, and Title 9….And soon we will give America health care reform and wall Street reform. [applause]….

….So, what should you and I do as democrats during these next seven months? Too many voters think it doesn’t make any difference what we do. But in Missouri grass roots activity makes a big difference because elections here are decided by the narrowest margins. Obama lost Missouri by thirty-nine hundred votes out of three million cast. That was one tenth of one percent of the vote that was cast. Keep in mind these votes, these, uh, these numbers as well during the coming months. Forty-five percent of Missourians will vote Democratic, no matter what happens. You can take that to the bank, foty-five percent of them will do it. Forty-Five percent will vote Republican, you can count on that. That leaves that little sliver of ten percent and we will spend millions of dollars and fight very hard for that ten percent, a group that often bases its vote on who talks to them last. And all the while we will be trying to get out our base vote and in an off year election where there’ll be hundreds of thousands of fewer votes. What you do here in Johnson County can and will make a difference….That we realize that what you do when talking to friends and neighbors and getting them to register makes a difference in Missouri. We win by very small amounts. And we lose by very small amounts….

….Everybody needs you. Now, imagine living your life realizing that everybody really needs you. Jimmy Kirkpatrick understood that. Francis Perkins, that early labor leader, understood that. Robin Carnahan understands that. Mel Carnahan understood it. Democrats understand that we need to be there for each other. Our country needs you, our party needs you, and these candidates need you.

And since I’ve been far too serious with you tonight, I’ll conclude with the words of the humorist H.L. Mencken who once said with a straight face, “In this life of sin and sorrow there’s always something to be thankful for. I’m thankful I’m not a Republican.” [laughter][applause]

At the Senate Ag Committee hearing on HJR 86 last Wednesday, one savvy observer of Missouri politics who was sitting next to me told me that the big divide in this state isn’t between Republicans and Democrats but between rural and urban Missourians. As a suburbanite, I’m only vaguely aware of that conflict and our bloggers–city folk all except for one who grew up in a small town–focus almost solely on the enmity between political parties, usually oblivious to the other divide. But as I sat through that hearing, everything I heard bore out what the gentleman sitting next to me had said: these rural senators feel their way of life endangered by policies that city people try to impose on them.

So the Ag Committee senators from both parties–all of them farmers as far as I could tell–support a constitutional amendment that would eliminate the initiative petition process when it comes to those who raise livestock. In other words, they don’t want city dwellers to pass initiatives that tell them how to run their business. They’ve narrowed the bill to focus on animals and not mention crops. The relevant portion (in the last version I saw) said:

[N]o state law criminalizing or otherwise regulating the welfare or breeding of any domesticated animals shall be valid unless it has been enacted by the general assembly or promulgated by administrative rule….

[emphasis mine]

Which is a roundabout way of saying ‘keep your  damned initiative petitions out of our face and off our land.’

There were lots of polite observations from the senators and those testifying about how urban people fail to grasp basic facts about raising animals. The bill’s sponsor, Republican Representative Tom Loehner, reminded listeners that lambs are born with eight inch tails that need to be docked. City people think that’s cruel. Rural people know that 40-50 percent of the lambs will die if their tails aren’t docked. Republican Senator Chuck Purgason responded that farmers just want to be able to raise animals and survive at it. They don’t go into farming to get rich; they go into it because they want to feed people. Then he mentioned that California had had an initiative petition to allow hunting of mountain lions. It passed in every county except Orange County. (Translation: ignorant city folk kept livestock breeders from protecting their animals.)

Democratic Senators Frank Barnitz and Wes Shoemyer concurred with those ideas. In fact, returning to Purgason’s comment that farmers just want to be able to survive, not get rich, Shoemyer (pictured at left) offered the notion that he does know how to make a small fortune at farming: start with a big fortune. Then Shoemyer took the argument one step further. He’s upset that the Humane Society (HSUS) is pushing an initiative petition to rein in Missouri’s puppy mill industry. He believes they’re doing it basically because dog breeders are the easiest target for interfering city folk to go after. He further believes that rural Missourians must unite, must be like a herd protecting a calf from a predator. “Once we whup ’em on this fight, they’ll go elsewhere,” said Shoemyer. There was much nodding of heads.

His attitude about dog breeders is that many farmers were forced into that business because the factory farms made it virtually impossible for independent livestock breeders to make a living raising hogs or chickens. Like Leslie Holloway, a witness from the Farm Bureau, he insisted that he doesn’t condone mistreating dogs. He and Holloway want more state regulators on the job finding and eliminating the bad actors. But the contempt for HSUS in that room was palpable. They believe that the initiative petition campaign is nothing more than a way for HSUS to raise money. Witness Dale Ludwig of the MO Soybean Assn. asserted that HSUS raises $100 million a year with campaigns such as this and that only $1 out of every $200 raised actually goes to pet care.

On the other side of this question about dog breeders is the Better Business Bureau’s recent scathing report. It says that one third of the federally licensed dog breeders in the country (as well as many unlicensed facilities) are in Missouri and that half of the complaints made to BBB nationwide are about puppies bought from Missouri breeders. Horror stories about abominable conditions in some facilities have surfaced, as well as many complaints about sick puppies who die soon after they are bought. But our cash strapped state has only 13 regulators to oversee all this.

Rather than a constitutional amendment to forbid initiative petitions that would restrict the puppy mill industry–in fact, rather than supporting an initiative petition–BBB has different ideas about how to alleviate the problems. It suggests:

• That both the U.S. and Missouri Departments of Agriculture more aggressively pursue penalties against repeat offenders.
• That Missouri consider raising annual licensing fees which have remained the same since the program of regulating dog breeders and sellers began 17 years ago.
• That in seeking a puppy, consumers also consider “adopting” a pet from an animal shelter.
• That Missouri consider legislation, if necessary, to streamline the process for penalizing repeat offenders, while still allowing for due process.

BBB’s solutions, however, may be coming too late. The Humane Society’s initiative petition campaign is gaining steam. Eighty-five percent of those polled support it. And so, senators on the Ag Committee see no way to stop further interference in their business than to negate the petition with a constitutional amendment that would void its results.

I’m not without sympathy for their viewpoint, but there are major problems with such a bill. First, it voids the results of initiative petitions only if they are aimed at livestock breeders. Anybody can start an initiative petition on any other subject. Whoa. That’s not exactly equal treatment to all Missourians, and it’s likely to be unconstitutional.

Furthermore, consider this wording in the bill:

No state law criminalizing or otherwise regulating the welfare or breeding of any domesticated animals shall be valid … unless it is consistent with scientific and economic standards generally accepted within the agricultural community.

Really? Who gets to decide what scientific standards are “generally accepted”? The Farm Bureau with some bogus study that supports the notion that CAFOs do no harm? No, this wording virtually guarantees that disagreements will frequently end up in court. Much as the Missouri legislature drives me crazy with many of its decisions, at least legislators are subject to pressure from the voters. Remember, those very voters pressured legislators to remove the “no local control of CAFOs” provision from this amendment. Try calling a judge before he rules on one of these issues and see how far you get.  

In general, I oppose state constitutional amendments anyway. The ones that are proposed–including this one–seldom merit being enshrined in the state constitution, and it’s relatively easy to get them passed. (Think of the unnecessary, because it was already illegal, ban on gay marriage.) BBB’s suggestions for solving the problem of inhumane dog breeders, if taken to heart, would solve the problem–and a helluva lot better than this amendment would. This constitutional amendment would do nothing to alleviate those problems. All it does is say, “Hands off.”

That’s not a solution. It’s just a way of dodging an issue that needs to be dealt with.

Ideally–and I’m dreaming, I suppose–senators on the Ag Committee would propose the legislation that BBB suggests. It is sensible. But if that’s not going to happen, I sincerely hope this amendment dies a slow death from several more revisions. Whether it dies or it doesn’t, though, the other problem remains: that the initiative petition to rein in puppy mills is likely, as the gentleman in the seat next to me warned, to create a culture clash in this state like no other we’ve witnessed.

One republican member of the House appears to have an affinity for introducing, shall we say, interesting bills. Previously: HB 2139, et al: Rep. Chuck Gatschenberger (r) takes it for a spin…

This time, it’s random drug testing for a very narrow demographic:

HB 2326 Requires public institutions of higher education within the state to adopt policies for the random and for-cause drug testing of faculty, staff, other employees, and applicants for employment

Sponsor: Gatschenberger, Chuck (13) Proposed Effective Date: 08/28/2010

CoSponsor: Kingery, Gayle (154) ……….etal. LR Number: 4029L.01I

Last Action: 03/17/2010 – Read Second Time (H)

HB2326

Next Hearing: Hearing not scheduled

Calendar: Bill currently not on a calendar

With apologies to Atrios

Think of the economic stimulus possibilities if this bill were extended to every person in Missouri. The testing supplies, the lab personnel, the secondary “pee” market…

The bill:

SECOND REGULAR SESSION

HOUSE BILL NO. 2326

95TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY

INTRODUCED BY REPRESENTATIVES GATSCHENBERGER (Sponsor), KINGERY AND BIVINS (Co-sponsors).

4029L.01I                                                                                                                                                  D. ADAM CRUMBLISS, Chief Clerk

AN ACT

To amend chapter 173, RSMo, by adding thereto one new section relating to drug testing of faculty and employees of public institutions of higher education.

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the state of Missouri, as follows:

           Section A. Chapter 173, RSMo, is amended by adding thereto one new section, to be known as section 173.1165, to read as follows:

           173.1165. 1. The governing board of any public institution of higher education in the state shall adopt a policy for the random and for-cause testing of the institution’s professors, faculty, staff, and other employees, and for the testing of potential new employees as a condition of employment, for the unlawful use of controlled substances, as that term is defined in section 195.010.

           2. Any policy adopted under subsection 1 of this section shall provide for a three-step process:

           (1) For a first offense, suspension without pay for one week;

           (2) For a second offense, suspension without pay while undergoing a substance abuse program, which may be provided under an employee assistance program. Refusal to participate in a substance abuse program shall be grounds for termination; and

           (3) For a third offense, termination.

           3. The department of higher education shall implement rules to carry out the provisions of this section. Any rule or portion of a rule, as that term is defined in section 536.010, that is created under the authority delegated in this section shall become effective only if it complies with and is subject to all of the provisions of chapter and, if applicable, section 536.028. This section and chapter 536 are nonseverable and if any of the powers vested with the general assembly pursuant to chapter 536 to review, to delay the effective date, or to disapprove and annul a rule are subsequently held unconstitutional, then the grant of rulemaking authority and any rule proposed or adopted after August 28, 2010, shall be invalid and void.

Does this bill include members of governing boards? Just asking.

OBAMA ANNOUNCES 15 RECESS APPOINTMENTS, SCOLDS GOP

…..union lawyer Craig Becker to the National Labor Relations Board. Republicans had blocked his nomination on grounds he would bring a radical pro-union agenda to the job, and they called on Obama not to appoint Becker over the recess.

On Becker, Republicans have held up his confirmation for months, saying they fear he would circumvent Congress to make labor laws more union-friendly.

Labor unions were especially keen on getting Becker installed on the board that is responsible for certifying union elections and addressing unfair labor practices. Under a Democratic majority, the labor board could decide cases or make new rules that would make it easier for unions to organize workers. The board could allow speeded-up union elections that give employers less time to counter organizing drives

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/201…

Ah, a process story. Meta, even.

It appears that Representative Denny Hoskins (r – noun, verb, CPA) is a clueless pilgrim in the land of republican false equivalence. Here’s a recent Facebook post from our intrepid pilgrim, taking on the corporate media powerhouse which is Show Me Progress:

Denny Hoskins  IRONIC – I guess that is the best word I can use to describe my opponent. Her Treasurer’s husband is a blogger for a Pro-Dem Ultra Liberal website and likes to follow me around and takes pictures and record my speeches. Numerous people at the County Courthouse also state that a young lady has been going through my personal and business financial records/history at the courthouse.

Did I whine and cry to the media when this happened to me? NO! It’s a free country, I will always protect Freedom of Speech and our freedoms to be on PUBLIC land.

If she doesn’t like having her picture taken, then maybe being an elected official is not a good fit for her. – HOW IRONIC!

He’s also had a rough couple of weeks:

Uh, Representative Hoskins (r), you didn’t send the Senate a “balanced budget” (March 27, 2010)

There’s no accounting for such a legislative pummeling (March 25, 2010)

Representative Denny Hoskins (r): tracker, what tracker? (March 22, 2010)

Campaign Tracker: the worst job in politics and you still have to wear a suit (March 17, 2010)

Back to the Facebook post. Where to start?

Using all caps is the Internets equivalent of shouting.

You’ve got to be paying way too much for shoddy opposition research (or maybe it’s free). Your information is out of date.

I don’t necessarily like or dislike covering Denny Hoskins at public events, that just goes with the turf of blogging. I will say that it can sometimes be interesting. That’s what we do, we cover politics and government in Missouri. We’ve been granted media credentials at campaign, political, presidential, and vice-presidential events.

“…Numerous people at the County Courthouse also state that a young lady has been going through my personal and business financial records/history at the courthouse…”

We didn’t ask for the records that broke that story. Thanks for the suggestion, though, we’ll file it for future reference. That’s why they’re called public records. Is Denny Hoskins saying that he’s never been apprised of the public records concerning Jim Jackson or Courtney Cole? Just asking.

“…Did I whine and cry to the media when this happened to me?…”

Really, did you want to go so boldly on the record with that statement? Just asking.

To recap:

At Show Me Progress we cover campaign, public, and government events. We sometimes cover fundraisers when we get an invitation to do so. We either wear ID in the form of a photo credential or we present a business card with our contact information, clearly identifying our affiliation with this blog. Our identification informs those at the events that we cover that what they say to us is on the record. We utilize the public record, the Missouri Sunshine Law, as well as other public resources to access public information. Further, there’s nothing keeping Representative Hoskins from signing up on this blog and participating consistent with our user guidelines.  

A tracker, on the other hand, is a paid political operative who may or may not identify his or her associations/affiliations.

Show Me Progress: How are you doing?

Tracker: Hello. How are you?

SMP: Good, good. So, are you a tracker or something?

Tracker: Uh, you could say that I guess.

SMP: Yeah. I’m with Show Me Progress. [I handed him my business card. He took it.]

Tracker: Oh!

SMP: Yeah. So, so, where are you from?

Tracker: Uh, I’d rather not say.

SMP: Oh, okay, that’s cool. [sound of camera shutter]

Tracker: You like the license plate? [In response to me photographing the back of the car.]

SMP: Actually? Interesting.

Tracker: Um, hm.

SMP: Yeah, so, uh, so have you been doing this for long or working in, in politics and stuff like that? [crosstalk]

Tracker: Uh, yeah, I’ve been working in politics for a while. [crosstalk]

SMP: Yeah. Good, good. Uh, where are you from, just in, are you from Missouri or just?

Tracker: I’d rather not say.

SMP: Okay, that’s cool. Well, listen, have a good evening, all right?

Clear enough for you now? Or is that irony definition thing still a little fuzzy for you?

Besides, Missouri republican political blogs that aren’t a part and parcel to the top down hierarchical republican political establishment are a dime a dozen…oh, wait, sorry about that. My mistake.

State Representative Denny Hoskins (r – noun, verb, CPA) issued a video “capitol report” on the state budget via YouTube. The first term state representative is being challenged in the 2010 race for the seat in the 121st Legislative District by Democratic Party candidate Courtney Cole.

In the video Representative Hoskins (r) confirms that the republican majority in the House essentially punted to the Senate when it comes to making sufficient cuts or revenue enhancements to balance the state budget:

The transcript:

Representative Denny Hoskins (r): Hi, this is State Representative Denny Hoskins, proudly representing the citizens of the one hundred twenty-first district, as well as other citizens of Missouri. I’m standing before you in the House chamber where, where we’ve spent numerous hours this week debating on the House version of the budget.

When the governor submitted his budget in January of this year he submitted an unbalanced budget. And what we’ve had to do is go back and try and cut around five hundred million dollars in order to have a balanced budget for the next fiscal year which starts July first.

As I mentioned in previous capitol reports the budget has been the main focus and will continue to be the main focus until it is delivered to the, on, to the, on the governor’s desk on May seventh.

Uh, some of the cuts that we were, that we had to make in order to have a balanced budget this year. We cut our own expense accounts, uh, for House members. We also cut five hundred thousand dollars out of the House, um, overhead account for some of our administration, um, personnel.

We ended up only cutting about two hundred and twenty-four million, but like what I’ve said, the budget process is, is a marathon, not a sprint. So we, between the House Budget Committee, which I served on, and out on the House floor we’ve cut about two hundred and twenty-four million out of the five hundred million that we, uh, need to cut in order to have a balanced budget.

After we third read and vote out the budget bills today, they will go over to the Senate Appropriations Committee, of which Senator Pearce is a member of, for debate in committee and out on their, and out on the floor. Uh, the Senate is going to have to make some cuts as well. And I believe that they have a duty and I, I know that they realize their duty in order to pa, uh, make those cuts in order to send, make those further cuts in order to send a balanced budget back to us where we both, both, the House and the Senate can vote those out.

You know in these tough economic times we here at state government, like I mentioned, you know we cut our own expense accounts, we cut five hundred thousand dollars out of administration. There’s no easy cuts. We have trimmed around the edges all that we can. Um, I am happy to report that at least, as far as pre, pre-K through, uh, twelve education we were able to hold funding at, at the same amount that we were for last year. Unfortunately we were not able to fully fund the additional one hundred and five million to the foundation formula this year. But, when, in order to have a balanced budget and in order to make sure that we didn’t have to close a prison or some other drastic measures that’s one of the cuts that we had to make.

Well, I’ve told you all before, I’m a proud supporter of education and I think that it just seems, it was prudent and appropriate in this time to maintain the same amount of funding that we had last year for this next fiscal year.

If, as always, if you have any ideas or concerns, especially if you have any ideas on how to generate revenue and maintain a balanced budget, or if you do see some, um, fat in the budget where you think that we could make some cuts, please give myself a call, uh, or shoot me an e-mail.

There’s are tough, like I said, it’s tough economic times we’re tightening our belts and there’s no, there’s no easy cuts right now. But, I was elected by you all in order to serve here and make those tough decisions and I’m proud to serve the one hundred twenty-first district. It’s an honor to be your state representative and feel free to stop and say hi this weekend when I’m at home. Thanks a lot, have a great day.

Let’s parse the video, shall we?:

“…We ended up only cutting about two hundred and twenty-four million, but like what I’ve said, the budget process is, is a marathon, not a sprint. So we, between the House Budget Committee, which I served on, and out on the House floor we’ve cut about two hundred and twenty-four million out of the five hundred million that we, uh, need to cut in order to have a balanced budget…”

Uh, so the republican controlled House punted its responsibility to make two hundred seventy-six million dollars in cuts or revenue enhancements for the next state budget to the Senate?

“…Uh, the Senate is going to have to make some cuts as well…”

That’s what we thought you said.

“…Um, I am happy to report that at least, as far as pre, pre-K through, uh, twelve education we were able to hold funding at, at the same amount that we were for last year…”

Here’s a logic problem for you. If you didn’t cut education (and you didn’t enhance the foundation formula) and the Senate still has to make two hundred and seventy-six million dollars in cuts, didn’t you effectively invite them to do your work for you and cut education funding? Just asking.

Is there another way?

“…especially if you have any ideas on how to generate revenue..”

Did we just hear a republican in the Missouri General Assembly state that he was open to raising taxes? Nah, couldn’t be, could it?

By the way, the capitol press corps let you up in the press gallery? Don’t tell them you’re a blogger.

Reps get spit on, windows broken, mysterious powder–and Palin blames the “lame-stream media”.

House Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA) excoriated DNC Chair Tim Kaine and DCCC Chair Rep. Chris Van Hollen, for “dangerously fanning the flames” in using recent acts of violence and intimidation by anti-health-care reform opponents, “as a political weapon.”

Was there spittle? Or, was there not?

There is so much spin going on all over the place it’s a wonder the number of car-wrecks don’t go up due to a permanent condition of dizziness afflicting the populace.

A friend of mine I play B-ball with said, “Don ‘t complain about Glenn Beck, the left’s got Keith Olbermann–the Republicans, Bill O’Reilly–and Democrats, Chris Matthews.”

It’s clear television news today is not your father’s nor mother’s fav journalist broadcaster. The days of Howard K. Smith or Walter Cronkite are gone.

So we have these ratings machines — FOX News, CNN, MSNBC — stoking reactionary stimulus throughout the neural networks of many a head, whipping folks up in their respective corners only to meet in the real world with shouting, disconnects, and yes, even acts of violence.

What are the solutions? I mean, quite possibly, there’s as much wrong with American media appetites as there is with our real eating habits of sugar, salt, carbs.

Maybe we’re just in the dark ages of the information revolution. Does that make sense?

I just finished a mentorship program with sixth grade students in Wellston, Missouri. We were helping students with projects for a Science Fair, and teaching them what the scientific method is. You come up with an idea–you test it–and appreciate knowing if you were right or wrong.

Teaching the method in simple terms gave me a clue as to what might be going on as the nation further fractures, polarizes and chasms, politically.

Scientific evidence shows that people like to be “right” and actually get a chemical lift from the experience, kinda like what a Ding-Dong and Coke’ll do to ya.

In fact, people like to be right so bad, that they will actually rearrange and distort facts to reach emotionally satisfying conclusions, as opposed to accurate ones. This is the filter of an addiction to the false sense of security in knowing you’ve got it all figured out; a comfortable and safe place, to be sure. Media venues pump a light-and-sound show that tweak this addiction to be “right”, and profit off of being pushers of self-reinforcing arrogance.

What I shared with my students was the fact that, as scientists, we have to lean against this propensity to always want to be right, and to embrace revealing facts and statistics that might–god forbid–actually disprove our theories, ideas or concepts. After all, as the story goes, Thomas Edison did not invent the light bulb as much as found thousands of light bulbs that didn’t last until they discovered a carbonized bamboo filament that lasted lit-up for over a thousand hours. The point is, objective evidence may not feel good all the time, but an individual or community or nation that celebrates it, will be less prone to ego-satisfying folly or self-destructive cultural battles.

The problem with our political system resembling more of a sporting contest than a thoughtful democracy is that a sort of “March-Madness” begins to creep in (nothing against the beautiful B-ball we’ve been witness to recently). A large portion of folks are just hell-bent upon winning–delivering “Waterloos” to the other side at any cost–including damaging the better interests of the American people.

To think that not a single Republican voted for health-care reform is emblematic of the Napoleon-like mentality that has polluted our political universe.

Our nation is 233 years old, a youngster as compared to other cultures; adolescence can be difficult.  As America grows up, let’s make sure her citizens have access to the liberating mindset of the scientist seeking solutions, and move past the “I’m right, you’re wrong” political theatre that plays out more like a Greek tragedy, than the story of a modern, mature and manifest leader in the world.

This is why education is the investment in our future like no other. And making sure the education for future generations is the best we can deliver.

HJR 86, the brainchild of Rep. Tom Loehner, R-Koeltztown, (pictured testifying at Senate hearing) had been rewritten nine times, that’s a 9, as of Wednesday morning before the public Senate hearing on the proposed constitutional amendment. But what HJR 86 really needed was to be eighty-sixed. It was godawful on more than one level, but especially because the perfected language in the House–and I use the term “perfected” ironically–tells anti-CAFO activists that they can kiss any local control over factory farms good-bye. Only the (currently in the pocket of the Farm Bureau) state legislature can do any regulating:

[N]o law criminalizing or regulating crops or the welfare of domesticated animals will be valid unless based upon generally accepted scientific principles and enacted by the General Assembly.

[emphasis mine]

But that language is gone from the Senate version. Senators, especially those on the Ag Committee, thought better of it when they found themselves bombarded with phone calls and e-mails from irate rural Missourians. (This is not the first time those folks have–please forgive the pun–saved our bacon on this issue.) The Senate version, as of Wednesday morning, read:

[N]o state law criminalizing or otherwise regulating the welfare or breeding of any domesticated animals shall be valied unless it has been enacted by the general assembly or promulgated by administrative rule and unless it is consistent with scientific and economic standards generally accepted within the agricultural community.

[emphasis mine]

“Administrative rule” is a fancy-schmancy term granting some local control.

That change in wording means that there is one serious flaw in this bill that’s now unlikely to survive the legislative process. Leaving only two others. Of course, if the senators eliminate the other two, the whole bill would evaporate. Which would be the best possible solution.

And what would those other problems with HJR 86 be?  See if you can figure it out. Because I’m not explaining it until my next posting on this bill.

Update: I was wrong about the House bill eliminating local control. If I had paid better attention, I’d have noticed that the beginning of the sentence I quoted from the perfected bill specifies such control:

Notwithstanding that this section shall in no way prohibit or limit the right of any county or city to enact ordinances, no state law criminalizing or otherwise regulating crops or the welfare of any domesticated animals shall be valid unless based upon generally accepted scientific principles and enacted by the general assembly.

[emphasis mine]

Rep. Chris Kelly, D-Columbia, called me to point out that he had that language added to the House bill. Good for him! (And a raspberry for me.) Thanks, Chris.

(Even with local control intact in both the House and Senate versions, though, the bill is still a turkey.)

Seven candidates filed for the US House, State Senate or State House today. It must have been too nice to cause any more of a rush to Jeff City.

Republican Rusty Wallace of House Springs filed in the 3rd Congressional district. Will Ed Martin have enough in his gas tank to outrun a candidate who shares a name with a NASCAR driver? We’ll see. (Added bonus: the famous Rusty Wallace is from South STL County in the 3rd. The potential for the most hilarious primary result ever is still out there) John Wayne Tucker of Arnold is also running in the Republican primary. Russ Carnahan has 3 primary opponents.

Republican Eric James McElroy of Tunas filed in the 4th Congressional district. For those of you unfamilar, Tunas is an unincorporated community in Dallas County, northeast of Springfield. McElroy faces Vicky Hartzler, Bill Stouffer and 5 dwarfs in the Republican primary. Ike Skelton faces an opponent in the Democratic primary.

Republican Jerry Fowler of Richmond filed in the 5th Congressional district. No word on why a 4th district resident is running in the 5th district, aside from contrariness. Fowler faces the increasingly perennial Jacob Turk and 2 other Republicans. The winner of the Republican primary will lose decisively to Emanuel Cleaver and like it, dad-gummit.

Democrat Jim Lepper filed to face Senator Jolie Justus in the 10th district for some reason. The only info on him involves him trying to get tea partiers to give a damn about a Democratic primary. Republican Lindell Shumake of Hannibal filed in the 6th State House district. Republican Bill Birkes of Joplin filed in the 128th state house district creating a contested primary with Charlie Davis of Webb City. Lastly, Republican Bernie Mowinski of Sunrise Beach filed in the 155th state house district and he has two opponents in the primary. No word on if he has ever operated a lawn-mowing business. Also, State Rep Roman Lee LeBlanc is apparently going to end his re-election candidacy on Monday.

Filing ends at 5pm on Tuesday. Sam Graves, Todd Akin, and Blaine Luetkemeyer need Democratic Challengers. Just Saying.