Introduced today by Representative Robert Ross (r):
HCR 28
Invites President Trump to deliver the State of the Union address from the Missouri capitol
Sponsor: Ross, Robert (142)
Proposed Effective Date: 8/28/2019
LR Number: 1664H.01I
Last Action: 01/31/2019 – Introduced and Read First Time (H)
Bill String: HCR 28
Next House Hearing: Hearing not scheduled
Calendar: HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTIONS FOR SECOND READING
Definitely all in.
In August? Bad timing.
Bad combover. Check. Too long red tie. Check. Orange spray tan. Check. Tiny hands. Check. Cluelessness. Check…
In, not one, but, two places in the Missouri Constitution:
Article I
BILL OF RIGHTS
Section 7
Public aid for religious purposes–preferences and discriminations on religious grounds.
Section 7. That no money shall ever be taken from the public treasury, directly or indirectly, in aid of any church, sect or denomination of religion, or in aid of any priest, preacher, minister or teacher thereof, as such; and that no preference shall be given to nor any discrimination made against any church, sect or creed of religion, or any form of religious faith or worship.
Source: Const. of 1875, Art. II, § 7.
Article IX
EDUCATION
Section 8
Prohibition of public aid for religious purposes and institutions.
Section 8. Neither the general assembly, nor any county, city, town, township, school district or other municipal corporation, shall ever make an appropriation or pay from any public fund whatever, anything in aid of any religious creed, church or sectarian purpose, or to help to support or sustain any private or public school, academy, seminary, college, university, or other institution of learning controlled by any religious creed, church or sectarian denomination whatever; nor shall any grant or donation of personal property or real estate ever be made by the state, or any county, city, town, or other municipal corporation, for any religious creed, church, or sectarian purpose whatever.
Source: Const. of 1875, Art. XI, § 11.
There’s something about that establishment clause that irritates right wingnuts.
A bill introduced yesterday by Representative Hardy Billington (r):
HB 728
Requires the name of the real party in interest to be named in civil actions involving the separation of church and state unless the party in interest is a minor
Sponsor: Billington, Hardy (152)
Proposed Effective Date: 8/28/2019
LR Number: 1693H.01I
Last Action: 01/29/2019 – Introduced and Read First Time (H)
Bill String: HB 728
Next House Hearing: Hearing not scheduled
Calendar: HOUSE BILLS FOR SECOND READING
Wait, don’t right wingnuts keep telling everyone that there is no such thing as “separation of church and state”? Just asking.
INTRODUCED BY REPRESENTATIVE BILLINGTON. 1693H.01I DANA RADEMAN MILLER, Chief Clerk
AN ACT
To repeal section 507.010, RSMo, and to enact in lieu thereof one new section relating to the name of the party in interest in certain civil actions.
Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the state of Missouri, as follows:
Section A. Section 507.010, RSMo, is repealed and one new section enacted in lieu thereof, to be known as section 507.010, to read as follows: 507.010.
1. Except as provided in subsection 2 in this section, every action shall be prosecuted in the name of the real party in interest, but an executor, administrator, personal representative, guardian, conservator, trustee of an express trust, a party with whom or in whose name a contract has been made for the benefit of another, or a party authorized by statute may sue in his own name in such representative capacity without joining with him the party for whose benefit the action is brought; and when a statute so provides, an action for the use or benefit of another shall be brought in the name of the state of Missouri.
2. Except if the party in interest is a minor, in any action involving the separation of church and state, such action shall be prosecuted in the name of the real party in interest.
[emphasis added]
“…2. Except if the party in interest is a minor, in any action involving the separation of church and state, such action shall be prosecuted in the name of the real party in interest.”
Gov. Jay Inslee declared a state of emergency today in all counties in response to more than two dozen confirmed cases of measles in our state.
“Measles is a highly contagious infectious disease that can be fatal in small children,” Inslee stated in his proclamation. “The existence of 26 confirmed cases in the state of Washington creates an extreme public health risk that may quickly spread to other counties.”
The proclamation directs state agencies and departments to utilize state resources and do everything reasonably possible to assist affected areas. A proclamation is also necessary to utilize the Emergency Management Assistance Compact to request additional medical resources from other states.
The Washington State Department of Health has instituted an infectious disease Incident Management Structure to manage the public health aspects of the incident to include investigations, laboratory testing and other efforts to protect communities. Meanwhile, the Washington Military Department is coordinating resources to support DOH and local officials in alleviating the impacts to people, property and infrastructure.
Health officials in Washington have declared a state of emergency and are urging immunization as they scramble to contain a measles outbreak in two counties, while the number of cases of the potentially deadly virus continues to climb in a region with lower-than-normal vaccination rates.
[….]
Measles was declared completely eliminated within the U.S. in 2000 because the country’s widespread vaccination program. However, state laws allowing parents to opt out of mandatory vaccinations quickly began eroding those statistics, leading to outbreaks across the nation.
[….]
Meanwhile, in the Missouri General Assembly Representative Lynn Morris (r) introduced HB 711:
HB 711
Prohibits discrimination against children who are not immunized
Sponsor: Morris, Lynn (140)
Proposed Effective Date: 8/28/2019
LR Number: 1670H.01I
Last Action: 01/29/2019 – Read Second Time (H)
[….]
191.260. No child shall be discriminated against by any health care provider because he or she has not been immunized as required due to a proper exemption.
Currently, under RSMo 210.003
[….]
2. A child who has not completed all immunizations appropriate for his or her age may enroll, if:
(1) Satisfactory evidence is produced that such child has begun the process of immunization. The child may continue to attend as long as the immunization process is being accomplished according to the ACIP/Missouri department of health and senior services recommended schedule;
(2) The parent or guardian has signed and placed on file with the day care administrator a statement of exemption which may be either of the following:
(a) A medical exemption, by which a child shall be exempted from the requirements of this section upon certification by a licensed physician that such immunization would seriously endanger the child’s health or life; or
(b) A parent or guardian exemption, by which a child shall be exempted from the requirements of this section if one parent or guardian files a written objection to immunization with the day care administrator [….]
And:
[….] 6. Nothing in this section shall preclude any political subdivision from adopting more stringent rules regarding the immunization of preschool children. [….]
“…A parent or guardian exemption, by which a child shall be exempted from the requirements of this section if one parent or guardian files a written objection to immunization with the day care administrator…”
The current statute contains a clause that appears to effectively be a personal belief exemption, one other than for religious or medical reasons. Can you see where this bill could be going? It looks like under HB 711 a medical provider won’t be able to drop a patient from their practice because of a parent’s anti-vaxxer beliefs.
That’s working out so well right now in the State of Washington.
A grand legislative strategy – keep throwing stuff against the wall to see if something sticks.
Representative Mary Elizabeth Coleman (r) [2019 file photo].
Last week Representative Mary Elizabeth Coleman (r) introduced yet another anti choice bill:
HB 680
Establishes the “Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act”
Sponsor: Coleman, Mary Elizabeth (097)
Proposed Effective Date: 8/28/2019
LR Number: 1651H.01I
Last Action: 01/24/2019 – Introduced and Read First Time (H)
Bill String: HB 680
Next House Hearing: Hearing not scheduled
Calendar: HOUSE BILLS FOR SECOND READING
This bill establishes the “Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act,” which specifies that no abortion may be performed or induced, or attempted to be performed or induced if the probable gestational age of the fetus has been determined by a physician to have reached the pain capable gestational age, unless it is necessary to avert the patient’s death or serious risk of substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function. The physician must terminate such pregnancy in a manner which provides the best opportunity for the fetus to survive unless doing so would pose a greater risk of death or substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function to the patient.
Any physician who performs or induces an abortion shall report certain information, as specified in the bill, to the Department of Health and Senior Services. Beginning June 30, 2019, the department must issue a statistical report of reported information during the previous calendar year.
Any physician or other licensed medical practitioner who intentionally or recklessly performs or induces an abortion in violation of this bill is subject to discipline from the appropriate licensure board.
This bill is the same as HB 339 and HB 1266 (2018).
“…This bill is the same as HB 339 and HB 1266 (2018).”
Ah, the right wingnut caucus is passing out leftovers for the freshmen.
It’s complicated, but every Missourian should know and care about our state budget. It impacts our daily lives and it determines our economic future. Simply put, the budget is a reflection of our shared priorities. Right now, however, our budget is also a reflection of confusion and uncertainty, as we are experiencing an alarming decrease in revenue collections. Here is what we know about our current dilemma and, more importantly, what we do not.
Missouri’s fiscal year begins on July 1 and ends on June 30. As of January 17––halfway through FY19––revenue collection for the state is down 8.76% compared to this time last year. As one of many measures of our state’s fiscal health, such a significant decrease in revenue indicates something is not right. A closer look at the data shows that the biggest contributor to this problem is a 26% decrease in the amount of personal income taxes being paid to date, as compared to last year.
[….]
Directly stated, the growing body of evidence suggests Missouri cannot afford any more tax cuts—and that we likely cannot afford those already in effect. Unequivocally, it was fiscally irresponsible to layer multiple tax cuts without ever truly and fully realizing the impact of any one of the bills alone. Still, it is amazing how many legislators continue to talk about the need for additional tax cuts. I will continue to demand that my colleagues pump the brakes on any additional cuts, but sadly, brakes may not be enough if policies already set in motion have us heading straight for a fiscal cliff.
Bad combover. Check. Too long red tie. Check. Orange spray tan. Check. Tiny hands. Check. Cluelessness. Check…
#TrumpShutdown
Thirty-five days into the government shutdown, with escalating financial tress on approximately 800,000 federal workers, an increasing drag on the economy, and an air traffic control system breaking, Donald Trump (r), blinks.
The republican controlled Senate and most republican senators, as Trumpian sycophants, have placed themselves in the position of voting against opening the government the day before and, now, voting to open the government – with no funding for Donald Trump’s wall – his unnecessary and narcissistic monument to himself.
Josh Hawley (r) [2016 file photo].
Of course, Josh Hawley (r) can’t help himself:
Josh Hawley @HawleyMO
After President’s announcement, Democrats now have chance to demonstrate that they are truly serious about securing the border. Democrat members of Congress have said over & over that they support border security. Now it’s time to prove it 12:39 PM – 25 Jan 2019
You first.
There was much hilarity in some of the responses:
I’m still trying to figure out how you aren’t in jail yet.
Hopefully in time.
Right, that political consultants in the Attorney General’s office thing.
How do you explain the past two years? The President couldn’t get a wall built with a majority. How is that winning again?
We get it Mr. Hawley, you are a WH rubber stamp.
Thursday: A CR with no wall funding is unacceptable, doesn’t address the border
Friday: President Trump is right, a CR with no wall funding is a sensible way forward.
Meanwhile people are 2 paychecks in the hole. Thanks.
So you want to spend $5-7billion for a wall that can be breached by a ahh… ladder? Not my tax money!
Well, Josh Hawley (r) certainly knows a thing or two about climbing ladders.
Your party could have done this in the two years y’all had control of the Exec. and Legislative branches. Why put this on the Democrats?
GOP is so serious about border security that they stop paying the people providing it.
and YOU need to figure out if you stand for something besides political opportunism.
Convenient you don’t mention who shut down the government in the first place. We could have been here 35 days ago.
Border security does not mean a wall.
This is also an opportunity for you to prove that you can be reasonable about securing the border, rather than simply parroting partisan doublespeak.
Too late.
Pretty soon you will have to prove you didn’t violate campaign finance laws while you were busy ladder climbing. Rs had 2 years to do this. Own your own party’s failure and stop scapegoating.
Ooh, ladders again.
Provided you’re ready to focus on solutions rooted in the 21st century, not the 4th.
Well, almost every other policy he supports is Medieval. he’s somewhat consistent.
You’re a clown. And the fact that you support Trump proves me right.
Stop wasting our time with a wall and address real issues.
At least they are willing to stand up to a bully and do something and not cower as you have
No wall
Just proving you’re a #TrumpToady. We get it you are trying to save face, but I’m from Missouri – you’re going to have to #ShowMe more than this.
It would be nice also if YOU and @RoyBlunt prove that you give a flying fig about WORKING PEOPLE (like the approx 4,600 decent Missourians at the IRS in KC). Remember most illegals come thru the airports & a wall won’t help. But you guys know that. You think we are all stupid.
You are lying. Dems want border security, just know the wall is pointless, as you do. You threaten the lifes of thousands, with your disregard and loyalty to Trump.
Yeah, @SenSchumer and @SpeakerPelosi are taking a victory lap on TV now, no wall, no wall $$.
Border security. Not a wall. How’s that coordination between your campaign and the NRA going? Scared yet?
Aren’t you under investigation Josh?
Looking forward to casting my vote to make you a one term Senator next election. You’re a crook just like @senatemajldr and @realDonaldTrump .
