Today, thanks to a front-page story in St. Louis Post-Dispatch, I learned that State Senator Jane Cunningham, in a fit of spite, is willing to gut a program that affects 4000 preschool children. She wants to yank $11.8 million from the Missouri Preschool Project because she thinks that Kathy Thornberg of the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (with the backing, incidentally, of the Commissioner of Education and the State Board of Education) has “defied” the legislature and, more to the point I suspect, the rampageous Senator Cunningham herself.

What did Thornberg do to fan Cunningham’s fury? She applied for federal preschool funding that would require the use of a Quality Rating System, or QRS, which the doctrinaire Ms. Cunningham claims is tantamount to “‘social engineering’ on children,” and would force “a ‘Kathy Thornburg one-size-fits-all’ mentality on child-rearing in Missouri.”

According to Cunningham, by applying for a federal Early Learning Challenge grant, “the state Board of Education has slapped us across the face, and we have nowhere else to go but the money.” Don’t you just feel the heat from her white-hot ego? Don’t dare defy crazy Queen Jane or it’ll be to hell with the kids. And all because a federal grant requires evaluative criteria based on what more impartial observers describe as “documented best-practice standards.”

Cunningham, of course, is all for evaluating performance when the criteria reflects her own personal prejudices. Witness the teacher evaluation mandates in her anti-tenure legislative efforts if you want to talk about imposing external, one-size-fits-all criteria. Take, for instance, this year’s effort to punish teachers and hobble teacher unions, SB806:

The bill also includes numerous mandates regarding teacher evaluation systems, such as requiring at least fifty percent of evaluations to be based on student test scores and prohibiting districts and employees from designing evaluation systems within collective bargaining negotiations.  The also repeals the minimum salary law for all teachers.

So standards are okay when they’re used to enforce Cunningham’s prejudices, but professionally developed educational benchmarks are a problem?

Do you maybe think somebody has a few control issues? Maybe little Janey needs to take a time out until she learns to play well with others.

Fortunately for us all, that’s just what’s going to happen. Cunningham has been redistricted out of office and will be gone after November (although I’m sure she’ll do whatever she can to regain some kind of fiefdom, elective or otherwise, from which she can meddle in Missourians’ lives). It does, however, seem like  even some fellow GOPers in the Senate might be getting tired of her high-handed approach:

Springfield Senator Bob Dixon strongly criticized Cunningham for running the bill [SB806] through her own general laws committee instead of it going to the education committee … “To try to bypass a committee that deals specifically with educations when we’re talking about an education bill … I just think that is … not unlike the substance that is referenced in the book of Nehemiah that was placed in a special part of the city after it is expelled from the back end of a camel,” he said.

The payday loan folks go all in.

Today, at the Missouri Ethics Commission:

C111153 04/25/2012 MISSOURIANS FOR EQUAL CREDIT OPPORTUNITY Missourians for Responsible Government P O Box 45571 Kansas City MO 64171 4/25/2012 $321,400.00

[emphasis added]

You read that right, it ain’t a typo.

So far in April that’s a total of $682,400.00. Why, that would be almost enough to run for governor if corporations were people. Oh, wait…

Previously:

Campaign Finance: Orwell would be so proud – part 2 (April 23, 2012)

Campaign Finance: Orwell would be so proud (April 12, 2012)

Campaign Finance: pouring even more money into defending payday loans (March 22, 2012)

Campaign Finance: if your name was Payday Loans you’d be in the money (March 2, 2012)

Campaign Finance: the payday loan campaign contribution broken record continues… (January 6, 2012)

Campaign Finance: Payday loans get the big bucks, again – part 2 (November 10, 2011)

Campaign Finance: Payday loans get the big bucks, again (September 27, 2011)

Campaign Finance: Isn’t that interest(ing)? (August 24, 2011)

Campaign Finance: big bucks for a payday loan PAC (August 20, 2011)

Today, in west central Missouri, in the same parking lot:

The cult of the lost cause (left) and triumphalism (right) – never the twain shall meet.

In case you haven’t already read about Akin’s latest forray into lands so extreme they’re yet unmapped, the DailyKos reports on Akin’s response to the GOP hesitation to renew legislation that would keep interest on student financial rates low. Akin, in all due seriousness, opined apropos student loans that:

America has got the equivalent of the stage three cancer of socialism because the federal government is tampering in all kinds of stuff it has no business tampering in.

Cancer of socialism”? How about GOP efforts to starve the middle class? Much higher kill rate I bet.

Um, it’s a little too early, don’t you think?

A roadside campaign sign in eastern Jackson County for Jacob Turk (r), biennial candidate in Missouri’s 5th Congressional District.

Representative Emanuel Cleaver (D) filed his first quarter report with the FEC on April 15th:

FEC FORM 3

REPORT OF RECEIPTS AND DISBURSEMENTS

For An Authorized Committee

FILING FEC-778416

1. CLEAVER FOR CONGRESS

   4801 Main Street, Stuite 1000

   Kansas City, Missouri 64112

   NOTE: Address IS Different than previously reported

   State is Missouri in District: 5

2. FEC Committee ID #: C00395848

3. This report is NOT an AMENDMENT

4. Report Type = APR QUARTERLY

Filed 04/15/2012

Here’s the summary:

6. (c) Net Contributions (6(a) – 6(b)) [$]165,444.20

7.(c) Net Operating Expenditures [$]62,572.14

8. Cash on Hand at Close of Reporting Period [$]440,708.49

[emphasis added]

That’s a healthy cash on hand amount.

Jacob Turk (r), one of the challengers, filed his first quarter report with the FEC on April 14th:

FEC FORM 3

REPORT OF RECEIPTS AND DISBURSEMENTS

For An Authorized Committee

FILING FEC-777553

1. Jacob Turk for Congress

   417 SE Annette Street

   Lees Summit, Missouri 640633403

   State is Missouri in District: 5

2. FEC Committee ID #: C00425983

3. This report is NOT an AMENDMENT

4. Report Type = APR QUARTERLY

For election on 08/07/2012 in the State of Missouri

Filed 04/14/2012

The summary:

6. (c) Net Contributions (6(a) – 6(b)) [$]38,290.99

7.(c) Net Operating Expenditures [$]42,082.27

8. Cash on Hand at Close of Reporting Period [$]91,920.60

[emphasis added]

It’s way too early in the cycle to have a burn rate greater than your fundraising. This would be considered a bad sign for any campaign.

Let’s take a look at where some of the money went:

SCHEDULE B

ITEMIZED DISBURSEMENTS

All Listed Line Numbers

Committee: JACOB TURK FOR CONGRESS

M and M Graphics

105 N Chestnut Street Suite C

Belton, Missouri 640122087

02/02/2012

Paraphernalia: t shirts [$]300.00

SQ *Nancy Bocskor Company

3323 Washington Boulevard

Arlington, Virginia 222014505

02/02/2012

fundraising consulting [$]2500.00

Holly Robichaud, Tuesday Associates

60 New Driftway Unit 18

Scituate, Massachusetts 020664547

02/09/2012

General Political Consulting S [$]1586.80

CBS Outdoor

2459 Summit Street

Kansas City, Missouri 641082424

02/14/2012

Advertising: Signage [$]750.00

M and M Graphics

105 N Chestnut Street Suite C

Belton, Missouri 640122087

02/15/2012

Paraphernalia: t shirts [$]274.13

Holly Robichaud, Tuesday Associates

60 New Driftway Unit 18

Scituate, Massachusetts 020664547

02/23/2012

General Political Consulting S [$]1000.00

Holly Robichaud, Tuesday Associates

60 New Driftway Unit 18

Scituate, Massachusetts 020664547

02/23/2012

General Political Consulting S [$]1151.60

SQ *Nancy Bocskor Company

3323 Washington Boulevard

Arlington, Virginia 222014505

03/01/2012

fundraising consulting [$]32.00  

James O’Brien

138 Sanborn Place

Alexandria, Virginia 223052672

03/18/2012

General Political Consultant [$]2750.00

T-shirts! Interesting fundraising return on investment there. Consulting! Signage!

The republican candidates who have filed in the 5th Congressional District:

U.S. Representative – District 5

Republican

Jason Greene 6222 RAYTOWN TRFY 175

RAYTOWN MO 64133 618 2/28/2012

Jacob Turk PO BOX 2097

LEE’S SUMMIT MO 64063 672 2/28/2012

Jerry Nolte PO BOX 10703

GLADSTONE MO 64188 984 2/28/2012

Ron Paul Shawd 1451 SW STATE ROUTE 150

LEES SUMMIT MO 64082 3/2/2012

As far as we can tell Jason Greene (r) and Ron Paul (seriously?) Shawd (r) did not file quarterly reports with the FEC which are accessible online.

Jerry Nolte (r) did so on April 15th:

FEC FORM 3

REPORT OF RECEIPTS AND DISBURSEMENTS

For An Authorized Committee

FILING FEC-777871

1. JERRY NOLTE FOR CONGRESS

   1304 NE 64TH STREET

   GLADSTONE, Missouri 64118

   State is Missouri in District: 6

2. FEC Committee ID #: C00492777

3. This report is NOT an AMENDMENT

4. Report Type = APR QUARTERLY

Filed 04/15/2012

The summary:

6. (c) Net Contributions (6(a) – 6(b)) [$]16,878.43

7.(c) Net Operating Expenditures [$]11,178.86

8. Cash on Hand at Close of Reporting Period [$]11,075.15

10. Debts and Obligations Owed BY the Committee [$]6,500.00

[emphasis added]

Some of the expenditures:

SCHEDULE B

ITEMIZED DISBURSEMENTS

All Listed Line Numbers

Committee: JERRY NOLTE FOR CONGRESS

All Star Awards

P.O. Box 10703

Gladstone, Missouri 64116

02/10/2012

Tee Shirt Order [$]291.93

[emphasis added]

T-shirts!

This could turn out to be one of those old fashioned republican t-shirt primaries. You know, the kind where the candidates flood the local summer parades with friends and relatives wearing their campaign t-shirts.

I whole-heartedly support Claire McCaskill for re-election. I say this although, as regular readers of the blog may know, I’ve been disappointed with her careful adherence to that perceived sweet spot that the GOP’s careening lurch to the far right has allowed many to designate the new center of our political spectrum. She’s certainly had her good moments; on women’s and union issues, for instance, she’s been really fine. But, her failures and her virtues aside, I support her for  three reasons: Todd Akin, Sarah Steelman, and Jon Brunner, not to mention the absolute need to deny control of the Senate to the lock-step-marching GOP which is more than capable of neutralizing its own more moderate members.

However, if Greg Sargent is correct, McCaskill may want to put her sensitive finger to the wind once again – it might just be shifting direction, albeit slightly. Noting the defeat of two blue dog Democrats in yesterday’s primaries, he observes:

The question here is how these results, and any other moderate setbacks in other primaries this year, will be interpreted by Democratic politicians. Will they see it as just a couple of redistricting-inspired flukes? Or as a warning shot to Democratic elected officials who care more about avoiding the “liberal” label than they do about supporting policies that primary voters prefer?

Of course, Sargent also argues that liberal  Democratic primary victories will not provide the desired exemplar if progressives fail to engage in the inevitable “spin” war. But if we progressives do our part, the rewards could be big:

If liberals want to duplicate this from the left, and make these two wins matter beyond the district lines, their work is cut out for them. They need to win the spin, and they need to keep it going in other districts this year and in future election cycles. The stakes are certainly high enough.

Imagine a scenario in which Democrats again win unified control of government – and instead of having to deal with dozens of Members who are terrified of voting for the mainstream liberal agenda, there are dozens of Members who are terrified of opposing it. Compared with 1993 or even 2009, that would be whole ‘nother ballgame.

Note the emphasis on “future election cycles.” We’re not going to win this fight this year. I’m sure it’s not necessary to remind you that that conserdems like McCaskill should only be called to account in primaries – and only then when we’ve got a smart plan and a smart candidate – not in general elections when the alternatives are part of a putsch aimed at upsetting the New Deal and taking us back to the bad old days of  economic laissez faire policies and the social Darwinism  of the corrupt, gilded age when the rich got richer and the poor …. well, you know the rest.  

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) has identified Teresa Henley’s (D) campaign challenging Vicky Hartzler (r) in the 4th Congressional District as an “Emerging Race”:

Emerging Races highlights candidates and districts that are making themselves competitive by running smart campaigns which are becoming increasingly competitive.

The DCCC smells fear…:

Campaign Finance: Vicky Hartzler (r) in the 4th Congressional District – FEC First Quarter Report (April 16, 2012)

…and recognizes a hard working candidate and campaign:

Teresa Hensley Speaks at James Kirkpatrick Heritage Dinner (April 15, 2012)

Campaign Finance: Teresa Hensley (D) in the 4th Congressional District – FEC First Quarter Report (April 12, 2012)

The Institute for Economics and Peace’s second annual United States Peace Index ranks Missouri number 45 in terms of its five measures of violence: number of homicides, number of violent crimes, incarceration rate, number of police, and the availability of small arms.

So what’s going on in Missouri that would account for this dismal status?  USA Today notes that:

The survey, once again, notes a strong correlation between peace and economic opportunity, health, education and social capital.

As I remember, Missouri ranks low in most of those correlates – but it does have low corporate taxes and a legislature determined to lower them even more while gutting education, social services and worker protections. Do you think that the Index just might indicate that kissing up to “job creators” at all costs isn’t really the way to go.

Actually, violence costs all of us – not just the victims – and in dollar and cents terms as well:

According to the Index, if all the states in the U.S. had the same level of peacefulness as the most peaceful state of Maine, $274 billion worth of extra economic activity could be generated. This additional economic activity would be enough to generate over 1.7 million jobs.

But don’t worry – our leaders in Jefferson City are on the case. They’ve given us concealed carry – in spite of our wishes to the contrary – and, last year, lowered the age at which one can pack heat from 23 to 21.  Now they’re working on getting us St. Louisians to carry our guns on the Metro. Nothing like a state full of armed vigilantes to forestall violence.

Afterthought:  In case you’re wondering, out of 61 metro areas in the rankings, Kansas City ranks 46 and St. Louis ranks 37. In Missouri the big population areas aren’t the whole story – outstate areas must be doing their part as well.

Someone has to pay those television ad bills.

Today, at the Missouri Ethics Commission:

C111205 04/24/2012 SPENCE FOR GOVERNOR Daniel Creston 415 Sheffield Estate Dr. Creve Coeur MO 63141 Alpha Packaging COO 4/24/2012 $25,000.00

[emphasis added]

Previously: Campaign Finance: it’s still not enough to pay for all those television commercials… (April 18, 2012)

Some time ago conservative radio personality Mark Reardon characterized current GOP Senatorial contender Sarah Steelman as “not the sharpest fork in the drawer.” While his comments were replete with good old boy sexism – he also felt the need to note that she was “hot” (dumb blonds, anyone?) – he may have been onto something.

Yesterday, Steelman revealed that despite dabbling in GOP politics for the past several years, she had no idea about what the Violence Against Women Act was. Even more surprising, given the recent news reports, she was also unaware that there was any controversy about renewing the Act, which dates from 1993.

Steelman’s ever-alert campaign staffers quickly responded that, of course, she is “open to the Republican version of the law’s reauthorization.” That’s the version that denies protection to LGBT people, immigrants, and Native American women on reservations. But not to worry – assurances to the contrary aside, there’s no real guarantee that she really knows much about either version of the legislation.

This sort of lapse is something of a pattern with Steelman – just for fun, let’s just do a quick and dirty compilation of the things she doesn’t know that have made the news:

— Most recently, she, (admittedly, along with the rest of the GOP gubernatorial primary candidates) had to admit she didn’t know what the minimum wage was set at in Missouri, although she was pretty sure that she was against it. Bear in mind that Steelman, purportedly, has a degree in economics.

— In a fundraising appeal at the beginning of her senatorial campaign last year, she begged “1000 friends to contribute $100 each to raise $10,000 by midnight … .” Gee, when I do the math, $100 multiplied by 1000 friends equals just a little bit more than Sarah thinks. And I can figure that out without a degree in economics.

— During her 2008 gubernatorial campaign, Steelman tried to capitalize on anti-immigrant fervor in the GOP base, emphasizing the burden that undocumented workers place on Missourians. Sadly, she completely misinterpreted the findings of a report on immigration and got her facts all wrong in an effort to magnify what is basically a non-problem in Missouri:

Steelman’s report overstated the estimate of illegal workers in Missouri by 5,800 to 10,800 workers. It overstated the unemployment rate among illegal workers by more than two-thirds. It also assumed that not a single illegal immigrant living in Missouri works for an employer who withholds and pays payroll taxes….

— Our own Michael Bersin participated in a twitter exchange where this holder of an advanced economics degree displayed major ignorance of current economic thought.

Given the economic nature of so many of Steelman’s public faux pas, it’s tempting to question her vaunted academic background. But of course, committed to equality of opportunity though we may be, we know that not everybody brings the same equipment to the game. We’ve all seen those students who sit with their mouths hanging open at the back of the class – they aren’t always the sharpest forks in the drawer either. Nevertheless, some of them manage to get degrees.

Slightly edited for clarity.