C121489 01/29/2013 CITIZENS FOR SAFE AND ACCESSIBLE ARCH AND PUBLIC PARKS INITIATIVE IN COLLABORATION WITH CIVIC PROGRESS ACTION COMMITTEE Civic Progress Action Committee 211 North Broadway, Suite 3600 Saint Louis MO 63102 1/29/2013 $150,000.00
“Citizens For Safe And Accessible Arch And Public Parks Initiative In Collaboration With Civic Progress Action Committee” is my new favorite committee name.
C121489: Citizens For Safe And Accessible Arch And Public Parks Initiative In Collaboration With Civic Progress Action Committee
C/O Danie White 211 North Broadway Suite 3600 Committee Type: Campaign
St Louis Mo 63102
[….] Established Date: 12/24/2012
Sales Tax To Support Arch Grounds & Parks 04/02/2013 Sales Tax To Support Arch & Parks In St Louis City & County & St Charles County Support
That committee name is gonna take up a lot of space on their mailings.
INTRODUCED BY REPRESENTATIVES FREDERICK (Sponsor), CURTMAN, RIDDLE, HIGDON, HOUGHTON, DAVIS, SCHATZ, FUNDERBURK, RICHARDSON, MCCAHERTY, SMITH (120), KORMAN, ELMER, NEELY, BRATTIN, LICHTENEGGER, LYNCH, SCHIEBER, BERRY AND BROWN (Co-sponsors).
1071L.01I D. ADAM CRUMBLISS, Chief Clerk
To amend chapter 571, RSMo, by adding thereto two new sections relating to firearms owners, with a penalty provision.
Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the state of Missouri, as follows:
Section A. Chapter 571, RSMo, is amended by adding thereto two new sections, to be known as sections 571.011 and 571.012, to read as follows:
571.011. 1. No person or entity shall publish the name, address, or other identifying information of any individual who owns a firearm or who is an applicant for or holder of any license, certificate, permit, or endorsement which allows such individual to own, acquire, possess, or carry a firearm.
2. For purposes of this section, “publish” means to issue information or material in printed or electronic form for distribution or sale to the public.
3. Any person or entity who violates the provisions of this section by publishing identifying information protected under this section is guilty of a class A misdemeanor.
571.012. 1. No health care professional licensed in this state shall be required by law to:
(1) Inquire as to whether a patient owns a firearm;
(2) Document or maintain in a patient’s medical records whether such patient owns a firearm; or
(3) Notify any governmental entity of the identity of a patient based solely on the patient’s status as an owner of a firearm.
2. Nothing in this section shall be construed as prohibiting or otherwise restricting a health care professional from inquiring, documenting, or otherwise disclosing a patient’s status as an owner of a firearm if such inquiry, documentation, or disclosure is necessitated or medically indicated by the health care professional’s scope of practice and such inquiry, documentation, or disclosure does not violate any other state or federal law.
[emphasis in the original]
“…No person or entity shall publish the name, address, or other identifying information of any individual who owns a firearm or who is an applicant for or holder of any license, certificate, permit, or endorsement which allows such individual to own, acquire, possess, or carry a firearm…”
What would have to happen when a newspaper reports on a story about gun violence?
The suspect walked into the building with his rubber ducky and took out fifteen bystanders before law enforcement could arrive on the scene…
Think Progress points out today that of the 36 GOP senators who opposed the long-delayed aid to the parts of the East Coast affected by Hurricane Sandy, 31 had lobbied for disaster aid to their own states in the past. Among them, Missouri’s Roy Blunt. In fact, according to Think Progress‘ Josh Israel, Blunt:
… demanded the Senate be called back from recess to pass disaster aid during a drought and boasts: “When a disaster surpasses the ability of states and communities to rebuild, Senator Blunt believes the federal government should prioritize spending to help the people whose lives and livelihoods are impacted. During his time in the Senate, he has fought tirelessly to ensure that Missouri gets its fair share of those federal resources specifically dedicated to disaster recovery.”
It’s worth noting that Blunt joins Sam Graves (R-6) in the state’s GOP hyprocrites hall of fame with this vote. Graves who “begged” for flood relief for his constituents, also voted against Hurricane Sandy relief.
Israel also notes:
While opponents complained that the bill contained too much unrelated “pork,” each of the 30 of them who had been present earlier this month when the Senate passed the much-smaller $9 billion Sandy relief bill also voted no. All five top members of the Senate Republican leadership voted no on both.
Let’s see, Senate republican leadership, eh? That would include Blunt, the Republican Conference Vice Chair. I wonder if any of Blunt’s big donors had been in line to realize some advantage from the so-called “pork” in the Hurricane Sandy bill (mostly infrastructure rebuilding initiatives that would prepare the East Coast for future Sandy-like storm surges) he might have reconsidered his vote?
What we’re seeing, in other words, is a fundamental shift in how GOP policymakers respond to communities struggling after a natural disaster.
For generations, these votes were not politicized or considered particularly controversial — Americans could count on their elected representatives to step up if a natural disaster struck. It wasn’t partisan and it wasn’t ideological; this is just what the country did. It was a reflection of who we are.
And those days are over. As the Sandy votes demonstrate, it is now effectively the standard position of congressional Republicans to reject disaster relief unless the funding is offset by other spending cuts. So long, compassionate conservatism, we hardly knew you.
In other words, yell deficit and while folks are distracted by the fiscal dust they’re attempting to throw in our faces, leave vulnerable Americans to shift for themselves. Goes right along with privatizing Social Security, gutting Medicare and Medicaid.
ST. LOUIS (KMOX) – Missouri Senator Roy Blunt says he’s asking the federal government to reimburse 100 percent of the cost to local governments dealing with the Joplin tornado aftermath….
….In a phone conference with reporters Thursday, Blunt says he has asked Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to do more.
“I’m asking for 100 percent federal reimbursement to local governments,” Blunt said, “They’ve agreed to 75. I think they have to come to a better number than that, and the right number, I think, would be 100 percent….”
Senator Roy Blunt (r) at the Governor’s Ham Breakfast at the Missouri State Fair in Sedalia, Missouri, August 2012.
The U.S. Senate vote on Hurricane/Super Storm Sandy relief:
Question: On Passage of the Bill (H.R. 152 )
Vote Number: 4 Vote Date: January 28, 2013, 06:09 PM
Required For Majority: 3/5 Vote Result: Bill Passed
WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Roy Blunt (Mo.) issued the following statement today after the Senate’s vote on a $50.5 billion disaster supplemental bill:
“When a disaster exceeds the ability of communities and states, I believe the federal government has a responsibility to help people rebuild. Federal aid is an important tool to help get people back on their feet by restoring the infrastructure that was in place before a disaster – not a chance for Congress to attach stimulus-type spending or fundamentally alter the way we respond to future tragedies.
“In Missouri, we’ve had our fair share of disasters over the past two years during major flooding events, drought, and several tornadoes – including a deadly EF-5 tornado that devastated the City of Joplin in 2011. Following these tragic events, Congress provided targeted disaster funding through a regular appropriations process.
“Unfortunately, we did not follow the same process after Superstorm Sandy. I voted against this bill because it rewrites the Stafford Act and moves us farther away from a viable, long-term solution for funding national disasters.”
# # #
Ah, it’s all about “the process”. Right. Tell that to the people in the Northeast.
Attributable to: Deron Smith, Director of Public Relations
“For more than 100 years, Scouting’s focus has been on working together to deliver the nation’s foremost youth program of character development and values-based leadership training. Scouting has always been in an ongoing dialogue with the Scouting family to determine what is in the best interest of the organization and the young people we serve.
“Currently, the BSA is discussing potentially removing the national membership restriction regarding sexual orientation. This would mean there would no longer be any national policy regarding sexual orientation, and the chartered organizations that oversee and deliver Scouting would accept membership and select leaders consistent with each organization’s mission, principles, or religious beliefs. BSA members and parents would be able to choose a local unit that best meets the needs of their families.
“The policy change under discussion would allow the religious, civic, or educational organizations that oversee and deliver Scouting to determine how to address this issue. The Boy Scouts would not, under any circumstances, dictate a position to units, members, or parents. Under this proposed policy, the BSA would not require any chartered organization to act in ways inconsistent with that organization’s mission, principles, or religious beliefs.”