Today, via Twitter:

Rep. Vicky Hartzler ‏@RepHartzler

Heading to Pettis and Johnson Counties today! 5:44 AM – 25 Nov 13

From Representative Hartzler’s (r) congressional web site:

Representative Vicky Hartzler’s (r) congressional web site – November 25, 2013.

Evidently not.

Today, at the Missouri Ethics Commission:

C001135 11/24/2013 A BETTER MISSOURI WITH GOVERNOR JAY NIXON Burns & McDonnell PO Box 419173 Kansas City MO 64141 11/22/2013 $10,000.00

[emphasis added]

What’s next? We have no idea.

Previously:

Campaign Finance: …running for what? (November 14, 2013)

Today, at the Missouri Ethics Commission:

C031159 11/24/2013 MISSOURIANS FOR KOSTER Holman Schiavone, LLC 4600 Madison Suite 810 Kansas City MO 64112 11/22/2013 $25,000.00

[emphasis added]

Previously:

Campaign Finance: expending political capital (November 16, 2013)

Campaign Finance: the Attorney General giveth away and the Attorney General taketh in (November 17, 2013)

Campaign Finance: they’re probably not going to produce the campaign commercials (November 24, 2013)

Yesterday, via Twitter:

Al Gore ‏@algore

Congratulations to Sec John Kerry and Pres Obama on what could become a truly historic step toward a safer world. 10:02 PM – 23 Nov 13

Uh, former Vice President Al Gore (D) possesses just a bit of knowledge about the issue of nuclear disarmament.

On the other hand, from a leading republican voice:

JohnCornyn ‏@JohnCornyn

Amazing what WH will do to distract attention from O-care 9:15 PM – 23 Nov 13

Really?

There is a difference.

But they’ll certainly help pay for them.

Yesterday, at the Missouri Ethics Commission:

C031159 11/23/2013 MISSOURIANS FOR KOSTER Brown & Crouppen PC 211 N. Broadway Suite 1600 Saint Louis MO 63102 11/21/2013 $25,000.00

[emphasis added]

Heh.

Previously:

Campaign Finance: expending political capital (November 16, 2013)

Campaign Finance: the Attorney General giveth away and the Attorney General taketh in (November 17, 2013)

Today, on a vehicle in central Missouri:

State-run health insurance exchanges report November ‘enrollment surge’

By Lena H. Sun and Sarah Kliff, Published: November 22

After anemic enrollment in the federal health insurance marketplace, several states running their own online exchanges are reporting a rapid increase in the number of people signing up for coverage, a trend officials say is encouraging for President Obama’s health-care law….

….”It’s not all doom and gloom,” Kaiser Family Foundation President Drew Altman said. “What this says is that the problems are system problems, not problems with demand or interest….”

“…not problems with demand or interest…”

And that bodes ill for who?

The last few days, at the Missouri Ethics Commission:

C071362 11/21/2013 CITIZENS FOR STEVE STENGER CHIPP Political Account 1401 Hampton Ave., 3rd Floor St Louis MO 63139 11/21/2013 $5,005.00

C071362 11/22/2013 CITIZENS FOR STEVE STENGER Daniel Devereux 1328 Litzsinger Woods Ln. St Louis MO 63124 Executive 11/22/2013 $5,100.00

[emphasis added]

The message remains, $5000.00.

Previously:

Campaign Finance: making your mark (November 13, 2013)

Campaign Finance: $5,001.00 (November 20, 2013)

Dancing would definitely be involved.

A letter to the editor, as submitted, in today’s edition of the Warrensburg Daily Star Journal:

To the editors:

One of the worst bills passed in the Missouri General Assembly this year was one that made it a crime for any federal agent to enforce federal gun laws. Representatives Dohrman, Hoskins, and Senator Pearce all voted for this gun nullification bill. Fortunately, Governor Nixon’s veto was sustained.

The headline story in the Star-Journal on Monday, November 18th, that reported the arrest of  eight people in Johnson County on federal charges of illegal drug and illegal firearm possession raises an interesting question with respect to the gun nullification bill. The story quotes both Sheriff Heiss and Warrensburg’s Police Chief Hovey highlighting the cooperation of local law enforcement agencies with federal agents in these arrests.

The bill that Dohrman, Hoskins, and Pearce voted for would have prevented such cooperation with respect to arresting people for violation of federal gun laws. In fact, the bill they supported required local law enforcement agencies to arrest federal agents who attempted to enforce federal gun laws.  

I look forward to reading the explanation that Dohrman, Hoskin, and Pearce have for why they supported legislation that would have made such cooperation next to impossible and whether they will continue to support gun nullification legislation in the future.

Bob Yates

[….]

Warrensburg, Missouri

[with permission of the author]

“…I look forward to reading the explanation that Dohrman, Hoskin, and Pearce have for why they supported legislation that would have made such cooperation next to impossible and whether they will continue to support gun nullification legislation in the future…”

Don’t hold your breath.

Previously:

HB 436: loonier than Wayne LaPierre at a press conference (February 5, 2013)

Ladies and gentlemen, your right wingnut controlled General Assembly (May 9, 2013)

HB 436: nullification – there’s no such thing as a moderate republican (May 10, 2013)

State Treasurer Clint Zweifel (D) – Missouri Boys State – June 17, 2013 – one word (June 17, 2013)

HB 436: we told you so (July 5, 2013)

HB 436: null and void (September 11, 2013)

On unconstitutional gun bills (September 11, 2013)

A majority of the members of the U.S. Senate can change their procedural rules. Today that body did just that, in a reaction to republican minority obstruction, in ridding the body of the filibuster for district court federal judgeships, appellate court judgeships, and administration appointments subject to Senate approval. Bear in mind, a majority of senators must still approve these appointments.

Senator Claire McCaskill (D) was one of the members of the Senate who finally had enough of the unprecedented republican minority obstruction and who voted for the rule change.

Meanwhile, a few people have come down with a case of pearl clutching vapors, via Twitter:

Milo ‏@chasbottom

@clairecmc I’ll remember your vote on the filibuster rule when election day is here. You’re Harry Reids vote, right? 2:42 PM – 21 Nov 13

Uh, you’re gonna have to wait until 2018. It’s going to be a while.

Tessa M. Harper ‏@TessaHarper2

@clairecmc Today you put another nail in the coffin of your political career 7:23 PM – 21 Nov 13

Again, it’s a long wait to 2018.

It’s so comforting to know that republican senators agree that the filibuster is one of the most important and inviolable constitutional prerogatives of that body. Oh, wait…

Almost three years ago we asked Senator McCaskill (D) about filibuster reform:

Senator Claire McCaskill (D): a conversation with bloggers in Kansas City (January 20, 2011)

….Blue Girl: One in nine federal judgeships, first question here, uh, they, you know, Congress, the hundred eleventh adjourned before the Senate could even consider hundreds of bills, uh, nothing’s been getting done, uh, this did not happen because it takes sixty votes to break a filibuster but because the minority can force the entire Senate to waste up to thirty hours ever, ever, every time the Senate holds a vote. What reforms do you support to stop this obstruction of even the most uncontroversial business?

Senator Claire McCaskill (D): Um, well the good news is that we did get twenty-two of them through, um, judges through, uh, by, by unanimous consent right before we adjourned. So, that’s good. Um, I do think the secret hold thing is really important because if you own it then you gotta explain it. And what happens is these guys hold these things secretly and then they, of course, vote for the nominees when they’re for, forced to.

Blue Girl: Right.

Senator Claire McCaskill (D): So, you having the ability just to gum things up without anybody ever taking ownership is a huge problem. I am optimistic that we are gonna get the rule change on secret holds.  Um, I think that is really hard for the other side to justify as they’re preaching transparency and accountability. I don’t know how they don’t accept a change in the rules to do away with the secret hold. And I think you do away with the secret hold it has an amazing ability to clean some of this stuff up. Now, do we make the changes in the filibuster? I would love to see the people who are filibustering have to be the ones to produce the forty. I’d love to see the people who are doing the filibustering have to hold the floor. I’d love for the people to see an actual filibuster.

Blue Girl: Yeah.

Senator Claire McCaskill (D): Instead of the procedural  way they’ve done it,  which is they quietly object and then they kind of skulk off and the majority is left there to hold the floor and, and for the thirty hours and the staff [crosstalk] is there and so [crosstalk]…

Blue Girl: They should read about the Polish Sejm.

Senator Claire McCaskill (D): Uh, yeah. So, so, um, but the question is, are we willing to break what has been traditional precedent in the Senate and change the rules by a simple majority vote? And once we do that then we need to realize that it can always be done. And that means that the Republicans could do the same thing if they took the majority in two years. And we have to realize the rules they may want to change may not be as reasonable and modest as the rule changes we want. [crosstalk]

Michael Bersin, Show Me Progress: But does, but does anybody expect that, you know, given their past behavior that they wouldn’t do that anyway?

Blue Girl: Yeah.

Senator Claire McCaskill (D): I think it’s really hard for them to do that anyway. I think it’s very hard. I think, um, it’s, it’s, uh, it’s kind of what happened with the nuclear option. As you remember, there was a group of Republicans that wanted to do this when Democrats, uh, were blocking Bush’s judicial nominees. And it was in fact a group of moderate Republicans that said, no, we’re not gonna do this. And it didn’t happen. If it had happened I don’t know, you know, we probably would have had some significant rule changes along the lines that a lot of people are talking about now. You know, the Republicans make the point, and it is a valid point, how often we fill the tree. Um, we have filled the tree a lot. We have not given the Republicans an opportunity to offer amendments and so it’s almost like an escalating warfare here. Um, and the reason that we fill the tree is because they’re, I think the leadership thought it was a good idea to keep us from having to waste time on voting on amendments that were not germane. What I affectionately call the gotcha amendments.  And [crosstalk]…

Blue Girl: Poison pills.

Senator Claire McCaskill (D): The, yeah, poison pills. Um, at the end of the day. It’s probably what you signed up for when you go to the United States Senate, that you’ve got to cast difficult votes. And I’m one of the senators that is encouraging leadership to not always fill the tree, to allow open amendment process. Um, so, we’ll see what happens on the rules. But I, I’m gonna be surpri, we’ve all signed  a letter  saying we want these rule changes. And I am supporting these rule changes. And I’m hopeful these rule changes happen. Um, but if they don’t I think we’ve got to, you know, decide, um, how far are we willing to go and what are the consequences of that long term for the Senate and for the minority, not just in the current scenario….

Here’s the thing, anyone who thinks a republican majority in the Senate wouldn’t get rid of the filibuster (for everything) at their first opportunity is delusional.

It took long enough for the current Democratic majority to realize just that.

From 2012:

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): the black helicopters will be dropping microchip infested toasters on us (April 8, 2012)

[….]

….Question: …It’s an honor to talk to you. Uh, my concern, one of the concerns, is China. We’re buying military parts for our military from China. We’re buying military parts that do not work. We have closed factories in this country and that’s moved one of the big companies that we’re buying, [inaudible] countries that we’re buying from. [inaudible] We’re buying this stuff, we’re putting it in planes, we’re putting it in our material and it does not work. And they [inaudible].

There are a lot of people in this country that are getting fed up with this. I mean, fed up [inaudible] [Representative Hartzler: “Right.”] And something had better be done. I’m not threatening anybody. What I’m saying is something, I, I know, I follow this, and I know, I know what, I believe I know what I’m talking about.

There’s a line in this country. And I’m on one side of that line, a lot of people are. And there are people [inaudible] on the other side. I don’t know what’s gonna happen. If things don’t change it’s not going to be good. It’s going to be bad. I really believe that.

Representative Vicky Hartzler (r): Okay. Excellent. Excellent point. You’re, you’re spot on. I, I joined the, the name of the caucus is China caucus which I wish we’d change, change the name. But basically it’s a watch China caucus. It’s a, it’s a bunch of us who are concerned about China. And on a regular basis we get reports [inaudible] watching what they’re doing.

And I am concerned. They are shipping all the, I’m concerned about the microchips. That they are in many, many of the things that we own. And some of those are embedded, I believe, with, with detection and, uh, capabilities or tracking capabilities. Things that we don’t know. I, I read a report the other day talking how China is the number one spy network in the world. And I thought, we need to have a new, uh, double oh seven James Bond movie, you know, with China as the bad guys, as the spies, because really, it’s true, those movies always portray, uh, Russia or something. But China has the largest spy network, they’re stealing our intelligence from our co, corporations. The article talked about how it’s the largest industrial, um, uh, espionage and, uh, stealing, uh, theft in, in history. And yet, how many people are talking about it, how they’re accessing our intellectual property of our corporations and it’s very concerning.

Just want you to know, it’s supposed to be illegal, uh, you’re supposed to use American products in our military equipment. But, I’m not sure that’s always the case and so I am looking in to that as well, with your concern. To make sure that they’re not using China microchips in our planes or in our tanks or anything else. So, I want to make sure that doesn’t happen. So, I will follow up on that ’cause that is a concern I have as well. So, China is very concerning….

[….]

“…And I am concerned. They are shipping all the, I’m concerned about the microchips. That they are in many, many of the things that we own. And some of those are embedded, I believe, with, with detection and, uh, capabilities or tracking capabilities. Things that we don’t know…”

Today, via Twitter:

Rep. Vicky Hartzler ‏@RepHartzler

Am just starting hearing in HASC on the 2013 Report to Congress on the U.S.-China Economic & Security Review Commission. Important topic. 7:06 AM – 20 Nov 13

And this response, from a constituent:

Bob Yates ‏@OldDrum

@RepHartzler I look forward to reading how the Chinese are planting their microchips in what they make in order to spy on us.7:24 AM – 20 Nov 13

And, a retort!:

Rep. Vicky Hartzler ‏@RepHartzler

@OldDrum You’ve totally distorted the issue. Here’s what Sen. Levin (D) has to say: [….] 7:33 AM – 20 Nov 13

What Senator Carl Levin’s (D) “has to say” is something about counterfeit electronic parts in the Department of Defense supply chain coming from (mostly) China and a few other places:

Senate Armed Services Committee Releases Report on Counterfeit Electronic Parts

Monday, May 21, 2012

…China was found to be the source country for suspect counterfeit parts in an overwhelming majority of those cases, with more than 70 percent of the suspect parts traced to that country.  The next two largest source countries were the United Kingdom and Canada.  The Committee identified instances in which both countries served as resale points for suspect counterfeit electronic parts from China….

“…And I am concerned. They are shipping all the, I’m concerned about the microchips. That they are in many, many of the things that we own. And some of those are embedded, I believe, with, with detection and, uh, capabilities or tracking capabilities. Things that we don’t know…”

Uh, there doesn’t appear to be anything in Senator Levin’s (D) release and in the report [pdf] which refers to “tracking capabilities in some of the things we own.”

Actually, the report addresses substandard parts which could lead to reliability issues in a system or subsystem. That is an important issue, but it’s not “detection or tracking capabilities” embedded in consumer products.

The Department of Defense definition of counterfeit includes “both unauthorized copies and previously used parts that are made to look new, and are sold as new.”

So, the mockery directed at Representative Hartzler (r) via Twitter from the constituent stems from her eager conflation of two different and competing concepts at that town hall in Sedalia, Missouri in 2012:

…On one hand their stuff doesn’t work, and on the other hand the microchips in the stuff they sell us (that does or doesn’t work?) are spying on us…

Somebody did totally distort the issue. It wasn’t Bob Yates.