Tag Archives: Secretary of State

Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft (r): “…it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less…”

12 Wednesday Jun 2019

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

, , , , , ,

Another rejection of a petition for a referendum on the subject of HB 126 – which radically shuts down abortion in Missouri.

Pre 1973 2019 medical equipment.

Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft (r) [2019 file photo].

Another press release:

For immediate release: June 11, 2019
[….]
Ashcroft Rejects Third Referendum Petition

Jefferson City, Mo. — Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft today rejected the third referendum petition on House Bill 126 for failing to comply with the Missouri Constitution. On May 17, 2019, the legislature passed HB126. The Governor signed HB126 on May 24 which included an “emergency clause,” a section that made a portion of the law effective immediately.

“The Constitution of Missouri may not be changed – and never has been changed – without a vote of the people,” Ashcroft said.

Approving a referendum petition in which a portion of the law is already in effect would set a new precedent in Missouri. Although the Missouri Constitution (Article III, Section 49) states the people may approve or reject by referendum any “act” of the general assembly, never in Missouri history has a secretary of state approved a referendum petition in which a portion of the law was already in effect. Additionally, a secretary of state has never approved a referendum of only a portion of an act of the legislature.

A small number of state constitutions provide an option to refer a portion of a law to the people for a vote, but Missouri does not have that option. As an example, the Maryland Constitution provides for a referendum of “any Act, or part of any Act” of the general assembly. In Oregon, a referendum on an “Act or part thereof” may be ordered by a petition. The State of Washington’s Constitution allows for a referendum of “all or part of any act, bill, or law” passed by the legislature. The Constitution of Arizona provides for a referendum of “any item, section, or part of any measure” and allows for the rest of the measure to become law.

—30—

“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master—that’s all.” – Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass

In the Missouri Constitution:

Article III
LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT
Section 52a

Referendum–exceptions–procedure.

Section 52(a). A referendum may be ordered (except as to laws necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health or safety, and laws making appropriations for the current expenses of the state government, for the maintenance of state institutions and for the support of public schools) either by petitions signed by five percent of the legal voters in each of two-thirds of the congressional districts in the state, or by the general assembly, as other bills are enacted. Referendum petitions shall be filed with the secretary of state not more than ninety days after the final adjournment of the session of the general assembly which passed the bill on which the referendum is demanded.
Source: Const. of 1875, Art. IV, § 57.

Uh, the Maryland, Oregon, Arizona, etc. state Constitutions have nothing to do with Missouri.

“…it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less…”

“…Referendum petitions shall be filed with the secretary of state not more than ninety days after the final adjournment of the session of the general assembly which passed the bill on which the referendum is demanded.”

The petition has to be filled not more than ninety days after the final adjournment of the General Assembly which passed the law. That’s it. There’s no restriction if the law is in “effect” or not at the time the petition is filled.

So, Jay, tell us who’s trying to rewrite the Missouri Constitution without a vote of the people?

Previously:

HB 126 and HB 127: catering to their single issue base (December 3, 2018)

Gov. Mike Parson (r): Alabama, hold my beer… (May 15, 2019)

Gov. Mike Parson (r): New York is shorthand for what? (May 16, 2019)

Medieval (May 17, 2019)

Sen. Denny Hoskins (r): post session victory dance over any individal woman’s personal medical decisions (May 17, 2019)

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): the 13th Century GOP in 21st Century America (May 20, 2019)

HB 126: the elephant in the womb (May 24, 2019)

HB 126: “…here for the ratio” (May 25, 2016)

Missouri: Medieval (May 28, 2019)

ACLU: Referendum Petition filed on HB 126 (May 28, 2019)

Women’s Health Care in Missouri – 1, Gov. Mike Parson (r) – 0 (May 31, 2019)

Our nation turns its eyes to Missouri (June 1, 2019)

State Auditor Nicole Galloway (D): Gov. Mike Parson (r) and HB 126 – “…extreme and cruel.” (June 3, 2019)

In the Medieval State of Missouri (June 4, 2019)

Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft (r): Emergency! Emergency! (June 7, 2019)

Campaign Finance: fighting HB 126

Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft (r): Emergency! Emergency!

07 Friday Jun 2019

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 12 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , ,

“…This move is so predictable, we’ve already assembled our suit to require the Secretary of State to put aside his anti-abortion agenda and do his job by certifying the referendum.”

Pre 1973 2019 medical equipment.

Missouri Secretary of Jay Ashcroft (r) [2017 file photo].

From the office of Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft (r):

For immediate release: June 6, 2019
[….]
Ashcroft Rejects Two Referendum Petitions

Jefferson City, Mo. — Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft today held a press conference to announce the rejection of two referendum petitions for failing to comply with the Missouri Constitution.

On May 17, 2019, the legislature passed HB126, called the “Heartbeat Bill”. The Governor signed HB126 on May 24, which included a section that made a portion of the law effective immediately. It stated: “Because of the need to protect the health and safety of women and their children, both unborn and born, the repeal and reenactment of section 188.028 of this act is deemed necessary for the immediate preservation of the public health, welfare, peace and safety and is hereby declared to be an emergency act within the meaning of the constitution, and the repeal and reenactment of section 188.028 of this act shall be in full force and effect upon its passage and approval.” This emergency clause was approved, as required in Article III, Section 29 of the Constitution, by two-thirds of the legislature.

Article III of the Constitution reserves the people’s power to approve or reject acts of the legislature, called a referendum, which may occur on bills passed by the House and Senate. To begin the referendum process, a referendum petition must be filed with the Secretary of State not less than 90 days after the end of the legislative session during which the bill was approved. Once filed, the referendum petition is examined by the Secretary of State, and transmitted to the Attorney General and Auditor for review. State law requires the Secretary of State to approve or reject a petition. If approved, the referendum petition may be circulated for signatures, and will be placed on the ballot of the next general election if it meets the signature requirements as described in Article III, Section 52(a) of the constitution.

There are certain limits to the people’s right to a referendum. Specifically, Article III, Section 52(a) makes exceptions for “laws necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health or safety, and laws making appropriations for the current expenses of the state government, for the maintenance of state institutions and for the support of public schools.”

Because the legislature approved HB126 and its emergency clause with the constitutionally-required two-thirds vote of both houses of the legislature, HB126 may not be referred to the people.

—30—

Apparently the emergency is that women in Missouri aren’t supposed to have the autonomy to make their own health care decisions.

This will go to court.

Alison Dreith @alidreith
Denying the people their constitutional right to referendum is a sad and cynical ploy, but it is not surprising given that HB126’s entire purpose is to elevate the legislature above constitutional rights. The @aclu_mo will see @MissouriSOS @JayAshcroftMO in court.
[….]
11:46 AM – 6 Jun 2019

Uh, yep:

MO Secretary of State Creates Sham Emergency, Rejects Referendum

June 6, 2019 – 12:00pm
Statement attributed to Tony Rothert, Acting Executive Director, ACLU of Missouri

The Missouri constitution gives citizens the right to veto a newly enacted law by referendum.

Secretary of State John Ashcroft is caught up in Missouri politicians’ longing to be the first state in the nation to ban abortion. Predictably, he is trying to deprive Missourians’ of their right to weigh in on the abortion question with a vote.

Denying the people their constitutional right to referendum is a sad and cynical ploy, but it is not surprising given that HB126’s entire purpose is to elevate the legislature above constitutional rights.
This cowardly move by the Secretary of State proves that Missouri’s anti-abortion zealots understand that they’re acting against the wishes of the majority. They hope to short-circuit the people’s vote because they know they will lose if the people get their say.

This move is so predictable, we’ve already assembled our suit to require the Secretary of State to put aside his anti-abortion agenda and do his job by certifying the referendum.

Previously:

HB 126 and HB 127: catering to their single issue base (December 3, 2018)

Gov. Mike Parson (r): Alabama, hold my beer… (May 15, 2019)

Gov. Mike Parson (r): New York is shorthand for what? (May 16, 2019)

Medieval (May 17, 2019)

Sen. Denny Hoskins (r): post session victory dance over any individal woman’s personal medical decisions (May 17, 2019)

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): the 13th Century GOP in 21st Century America (May 20, 2019)

HB 126: the elephant in the womb (May 24, 2019)

HB 126: “…here for the ratio” (May 25, 2016)

Missouri: Medieval (May 28, 2019)

ACLU: Referendum Petition filed on HB 126 (May 28, 2019)

Women’s Health Care in Missouri – 1, Gov. Mike Parson (r) – 0 (May 31, 2019)

Our nation turns its eyes to Missouri (June 1, 2019)

State Auditor Nicole Galloway (D): Gov. Mike Parson (r) and HB 126 – “…extreme and cruel.” (June 3, 2019)

In the Medieval State of Missouri (June 4, 2019)

Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft (r): April Campaign Finance Report – 2019

16 Tuesday Apr 2019

Posted by in campaign finance

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

The April quarterly campaign finance reports are due at the Missouri Ethics Commission:

Jay Ashcroft (r) [2017 file photo].

From Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft’s (r) campaign committee:

C151004: Ashcroft For Missouri
Committee Type: Candidate
Po Box 1554
Jefferson City Mo 65102
Party Affiliation: Republican
Established Date: 01/06/2015
[….]
Information Reported On: 2019 – April Quarterly Report
Beginning Money on Hand $113,246.70
Monetary Receipts + $95,700.00
Monetary Expenditures – $2,793.96
Contributions Made – $75.00
Other Disbursements – $0.00
Subtotal $92,831.04
Ending Money On Hand $206,077.74

[emphasis added]

Not a lot in expenditures. 2022 is a while away.

About those small contributions:

MISSOURI ETHICS COMMISSION
CONTRIBUTIONS AND LOANS RECEIVED
Ashcroft For Missouri 4/15/2019

13. TOTAL MONETARY CONTRIBUTIONS RECEIVED FROM PERSONS GIVING $100 OR LESS $150.00
14. TOTAL IN-KIND CONTRIBUTIONS RECEIVED FROM PERSONS (NOT COMMITTEES) GIVING $100 OR LESS $60.00

[emphasis added]

That’s out of $95,700.00 raised in the quarter.

Anyone remember Bill Webster (r)?

22 Saturday Dec 2018

Posted by in Claire McCaskill, Josh Hawley, social media, US Senate

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

We do.

“…He [Josh Hawley] is, well here’s, let me make sure that you understand. He is, every member of his staff is a taxpayer resource. Every e-mail they read from his political operatives is using taxpayer resources. When political operatives are in official meetings giving direction, talking about punch lists that is a political operation that he is bringing his state staff to deal with. He is having the political operatives run the taxpayer operated operation. So he is bending taxpayer resources to his political will. That is using taxpayer resources for political purposes. It may not be a copy machine where he’s copying flyers, but it is just as significant and, frankly, in some ways more insidious because he has turned official resources into a political operation. That’s what violates, uh, not only good judgment, not only does it disappoint Missourians about what the Attorney General’s office is supposed to be, but I believe it crosses the line in terms of the law…” – Claire McCaskill (D) – November 1, 2018

Senator Claire McCaskill (D) [2018 file photo].

Late last night, Claire McCaskill (D) on Josh Hawley (r), via Twitter:

Claire McCaskill @clairecmc
This isn’t what real prosecutors do. And btw not one person has gone to jail or been convicted of a felony in Missouri as a result of this made for TV “raid”, directed by political consultants. “Run of show” and make sure he has law enforcement outfit on? Lord above this is bad.
[….]
10:55 PM – 21 Dec 2018

Josh Hawley (r) [2016 file photo].

On the documents in the Friday news dump:

Mark Pedroli @MarkPedroli
Josh Hawley’s “outside consultants” directing taxpayer-paid state employees to produce Josh Hawley movies.

“Wag the Dog”??

They’re even telling him what to wear. No wonder @AGJoshHawley dumped the docs on @JayAshcroftMO Fri before Christmas. Good Grief!
[….]
3:55 PM – 21 Dec 2018

We remember Attorney General Bill Webster (r).

Previously:

Josh Hawley (r): Who did you say was in charge at the Attorney General’s office? (October 31, 2018)

Sen. Claire McCaskill (D): Who was in charge at the Attorney General’s office? (November 1, 2018)

Senator Claire McCaskill (D): Who was in charge at the Attorney General’s office? – Press Q and A – November 1, 2018 (November 1, 2018)

Josh Hawley (r): Ask me no more questions, I’ll tell you no more lies… (November 4, 2018)

Josh, we barely knew ya (December 6, 2018)

By the book (December 14, 2018)

By the book

14 Friday Dec 2018

Posted by in Josh Hawley, US Senate

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

“…heightened scrutiny…”

Josh Hawley (r) [2016 file photo].

State Auditor Nicole Galloway (D) [2018 file photo].

Auditor Galloway responds to request from Secretary of State for assistance in investigating complaint against Attorney General
December 14, 2018

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo (Dec. 14, 2018) State Auditor Nicole Galloway today responded to the request by Secretary Jay Ashcroft for assistance in investigating a complaint against the Attorney General. The complaint alleges Attorney General Josh Hawley used public funds to support his candidacy for the U.S. Senate. A routine closeout audit of the Attorney General’s Office will begin after Attorney General Hawley officially resigns.

“The goal of an independent audit is to get to the truth for taxpayers and not to proceed based on assumptions,” Auditor Galloway said. “My office will review these concerns with heightened scrutiny.”
[….]

It’s nice to have a real State Auditor.

The letter [pdf] from State Auditor Nicole Galloway (D) to Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft (r):

Nicole R. Galloway, CPA
Missouri State Auditor
December 14, 2018

The Honorable John R. Ashcroft
Secretary of State
James C. Kirkpatrick State Information Center
600 W. Main Street
Jefferson City, MO 65101

Re: Closeout audit of the Missouri Attorney General’s Office

Dear Secretary Ashcroft:

In your letter dated December 10, 2018, you requested my office investigate, as part of or routine closeout audit, whether Attorney general Josh Hawley used public funds while Attorney general in support of hi candidacy for the U.S Senate. In that letter, you also offered to provide documents to my office and requested access to audit records, as well s access to audit discussions with employees and third-parties related to the allegations of improper use of state resources.

Based on you letter, I understand that you have determined that the allegations in the American Democracy League Fund complaint are not frivolous, and are proceeding with an investigation. We appreciate your offer to provide documentation obtained in the course of your investigation. My office will be reaching out to your office to request these documents.

As you noted, the State Auditor’s Office always reviews use of taxpayer funds in audits. The same is true of any closeout audit of a statewide office holder. Based on the concerns expressed in your letter, my office will review the allegation with heightened scrutiny.

A closeout audit will begin when the term of the prior officer has ended – here, after Attorney general Hawley officially resigns. Attorney General Hawley’s administration will be the subject of the audit, but the auditee will be both Attorney general Hawley and appointed Attorney General Eric Schmitt. As such, document requests to that office will be directed to and processed by incoming Attorney General Schmitt.

Missouri law permits us to share with you records in matters officially before your office. In conducting an audit, we must comply with Government Auditing Standards established by the Comptroller General of the United States, as well as Missouri law. We look forward to discussing those parameters with your office.

[….]

My Chief of Staff, Michael Moorefield, will be contacting your office in the coming days.

Sincerely,
s/
Nicole Galloway, CPA
State Auditor

cc: The Honorable Josh Hawley, Missouri Attorney General
The Honorable Eric Schmitt, Missouri State Treasurer

Jay Ashcroft (r) [2017 file photo].

Alrighty then.

Josh, we barely knew ya

06 Thursday Dec 2018

Posted by in Josh Hawley, US Senate

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

Uh, oh.

Alexandra @aliemalie
Can you serve in the US Senate if you’re in federal prison? Asking for a friend.
[….]
3:31 PM – 6 Dec 2018

A month ago:

ADLF Files Legal Complaint Against Hawley For Misuse of Public Funds
November 5, 2018, 12:15 pm
The American Democracy Legal Fund has filed a legal complaint against Missouri Attorney General Josh Hawley for his misuse of taxpayer resources to further his political career.

The complaint asks the Missouri Secretary of State to investigate Hawley’s alleged outsourcing of Attorney General business to two partisan political consultants, who directed taxpayer-funded Attorney General staff to conduct the office in a manner that would benefit Hawley’s political career.

“Hawley suggested nobody is above the law. And, as Missouri’s chief law enforcement officer and advisor, neither is he,” writes ADLF President Brad Woodhouse. “Hawley’s conduct violates the trust that Missourians gave him to serve the public interest and enforce this state’s laws honorably. And most of all, Hawley’s conduct appears to demonstrate a misuse of public funds.”

Today:

Missouri Secretary of State Ashcroft launches investigation into Josh Hawley
JEFFERSON CITY – Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft has launched an investigation into the way Attorney General Josh Hawley ran his attorney general’s office, Ashcroft’s deputy general counsel wrote to the Democratic-allied American Democracy Legal Fund on Thursday.

The group wrote to Ashcroft on Nov. 2, days before the midterm elections, alleging that Hawley may have “used public funds as Attorney General to support his candidacy for U.S. Senate.”

[….]

Pass the popcorn.

Previously:

Josh Hawley (r): Who did you say was in charge at the Attorney General’s office? (October 31, 2018)

Sen. Claire McCaskill (D): Who was in charge at the Attorney General’s office? (November 1, 2018)

Senator Claire McCaskill (D): Who was in charge at the Attorney General’s office? – Press Q and A – November 1, 2018 (November 1, 2018)

Josh Hawley (r): Ask me no more questions, I’ll tell you no more lies… (November 4, 2018)

About those political consultants running the Attorney General’s office…

17 Saturday Nov 2018

Posted by in Josh Hawley, US Senate

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Josh Hawley (r) [2016 file photo].

A press release from the American Democracy Legal Fund:

ADLF Files Legal Complaint Against Hawley
For Misuse of Public Funds

The American Democracy Legal Fund has filed a legal complaint against Missouri Attorney General Josh Hawley for his misuse of taxpayer resources to further his political career.

The complaint asks the Missouri Secretary of State to investigate Hawley’s alleged outsourcing of Attorney General business to two partisan political consultants, who directed taxpayer-funded Attorney General staff to conduct the office in a manner that would benefit Hawley’s political career.

“Hawley suggested nobody is above the law. And, as Missouri’s chief law enforcement officer and advisor, neither is he,” writes ADLF President Brad Woodhouse. “Hawley’s conduct violates the trust that Missourians gave him to serve the public interest and enforce this state’s laws honorably. And most of all, Hawley’s conduct appears to demonstrate a misuse of public funds.”

The pdf of the complaint letter is here. [pdf]

And in January he’s in the U.S. Senate.

Previously:

Josh Hawley (r): Who did you say was in charge at the Attorney General’s office? (October 31, 2018)

Sen. Claire McCaskill (D): Who was in charge at the Attorney General’s office? (November 1, 2018)

Senator Claire McCaskill (D): Who was in charge at the Attorney General’s office? – Press Q and A – November 1, 2018 (November 1, 2018)

Josh Hawley (r): Ask me no more questions, I’ll tell you no more lies… (November 4, 2018)

Josh Hawley (r): afraid of playing softball with Chuck Todd (November 4, 2018)

You think maybe he’s just waiting for the subpoena? (November 5, 2018)

Missouri voter photo ID law challenged in court case

13 Wednesday Jun 2018

Posted by in Missouri General Assembly

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

In 2016 the republican controlled General Assembly overrode then Governor Jay Nixon’s (D) veto of HB 1631, a more restrictive voter photo ID law.

“…my position is we should make voting available to as many people as we possibly can. I mean, and we should make it as easy as we possibly can for people to vote. Uh, and, uh, so we’re reviewing this, this is relatively similar to a measure that I vetoed a few years ago, uh, that would have, uh, made it very expensive and difficult, especially for senior citizens and others that didn’t have driving privileges to, uh, to get a separate state issued ID. So, um, it’s not an area that my, my general philosophy is let’s make voting, uh, easier for folks, um, so this kind of, uh, comes at that…” – Governor Jay Nixon (D), on HB 1631, June 16, 2016

“…I’m not, I’m gonna let you get back now to today’s opening ceremonies because I know I’m not who you came to hear and I know that none of this was what you wanted to hear. But I am your Secretary of State for a bit little longer, and as a result I feel a responsibility to tell you that even though you have the power to take away the right to vote from the citizens of Missouri, you shouldn’t.
And that if you choose to follow the example of Wisconsin or North Carolina, well then, I guess we’ll see you in court. [applause]” – Secretary of State Jason Kander (D), January 4, 2017

That has come to pass.

Today Priorities USA filed a suit in Circuit Court in Cole County over Missouri’s voter ID law:

June 13, 2018 | Press Release
Priorities USA and a Missouri Voter File Suit Against Missouri’s Burdensome Strict Photo ID Law
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
June 13, 2018

Washington, DC — Today, Priorities USA and a Missouri voter filed suit in the Circuit Court of Cole County against the State of Missouri and its Secretary of State, John R. Ashcroft, requesting that the court restrain the Secretary from enforcing the state’s burdensome photo identification requirements in upcoming elections and declare that these requirements violate the Missouri Constitution.
In 2016, the Missouri General Assembly passed HB 1631, a bill containing new, burdensome photo identification requirements, over Governor Jay Nixon’s veto. HB 1631 lays out a narrow list of acceptable photo IDs that a voter must present in order to cast their ballot, along with an arduous process for eligible voters without photo ID that involves, at various stages, signing a confusing and misleading sworn statement under penalty of perjury, returning to the polling place with acceptable ID, or having untrained individuals match signatures in order to verify the voter’s identity.
A study conducted by the Missouri Secretary of State in 2014 indicated that the implementation of a comparable photo ID law could disenfranchise 220,000 eligible Missouri voters. The complaint filed today argues that HB 1631 would have similar effects, given the time and effort required to obtain even a free state-issued photo ID and the labyrinthine procedures for voters who forget or are unable to bring their acceptable photo ID.
“When state lawmakers passed HB 1631, they began to chip away at Missourians’ fundamental right to vote,” said Guy Cecil, Chairman of Priorities USA. “The Missouri Supreme Court rightfully found an earlier attempt to do the same thing unnecessary and unfair to Missouri voters. The legislature should not be permitted to evade the law and burden voting rights. In order to ensure that everyone in Missouri who wants to cast a ballot is able to do so, Priorities USA and many others will have to spend significant time, money and effort to educate Missourians about these new, onerous photo ID requirements. We’re asking the court to enjoin this law before the upcoming elections, and we look forward to our day in court when we’ll show HB 1631 to be the unconstitutional farce that it is.”
The lawsuit filed today comes on the heels of separate litigation brought about by the Missouri NAACP, which challenged HB 1631 on the grounds that the state did not provide adequate funding for the new photo ID requirements. While Priorities USA is not involved in the NAACP lawsuit and is presenting the court with a different legal argument based on the constitutionality of HB 1631, Priorities remains supportive of the NAACP’s parallel efforts to invalidate the law.
Earlier this year, Priorities USA joined a lawsuit challenging Florida’s law requiring candidates of the governor’s political party to be listed in the first position on every ballot. The Priorities USA Foundation, an affiliated non-partisan group that engages in voting rights advocacy, has also supported litigation in Indiana, New Hampshire, Florida, and Iowa against laws and practices that restrict the right to vote.

Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft (r) [2017 file photo].

A year ago at Show Me Progress:

…When asked about the appropriation of funds by the General Assembly to assist his office in communicating these new requirements to voters and to assist them in acquiring the photo IDs Secretary [of State John] Ashcroft [(r)] again deflected the question. A local newspaper reporter pointed out in his question to Secretary Ashcroft that there were only twenty people in the room and there are more than 20,000 people in Warrensburg. How is the Secretary of State’s office going to communicate the new ID requirements to those voters? The answer was somewhat vague, along the lines of “we’ll keep doing what we’re doing”. There was no discussion of any estimate of the number of registered voters in the state who do not have the required photo ID or of the costs associated with providing those voters with the proper ID…

Inadequate funding and insufficient notice? If only someone had thought of that a year ago. Oh, wait…

Previously:

Gov. Jay Nixon (D): on SB 656 (“stand your ground”) and HJR 53/HB 1631 (voter ID) (June 16, 2016)

Gov. Jay Nixon: veto of HB 1631 – voter photo ID (July 7, 2016)

Secretary of State Jason Kander (D): at the opening of the legislative session (January 4, 2017)

Jay Ashcroft’s (r) voter photo ID tour – Warrensburg – June 16, 2017 (June 16, 2017)

First day of candidate filing – 2018 primary

27 Tuesday Feb 2018

Posted by in Missouri General Assembly, Missouri House, Missouri Senate, US Senate

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , ,

Today is the first day of candidate filing in Missouri for the 2018 election cycle. Candidates for federal offices (U.S. Senate and House of Representatives), statewide offices (State Auditor only this cycle), General Assembly seats (both houses), and Circuit Judge file with the Secretary of State in Jefferson City. County offices file with the election authority in that particular county.

UNOFFICIAL Candidate Filing List
2018 Primary Election

Since new candidates can be added throughout the day, use your web browser’s “Refresh” or “Reload” button to get the latest filings.
Ballot Placement: First day filers (2/27/2018) selected a number by random drawing to determine their placement on the primary ballot. After the first day, all candidates are placed on the ballot in order of their filing.
All Candidates and parties are listed in ballot order.

Summary

Offices Republican Democratic Libertarian Green Constitution Total

U.S. Senator 8 4 0 0 0 12

State Auditor 3 1 0 0 0 4

U.S. Representative 8 18 4 0 0 30

State Senator 21 14 2 1 0 38

State Representative 173 113 4 0 1 291

Circuit Judge 44 14 0 0 0 58

Total 257 164 10 1 1 433

The last day to file for office is March 27, 2018.

Jay Ashcroft’s (r) voter photo ID tour – Warrensburg – June 16, 2017

16 Friday Jun 2017

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

, , , , ,

Yesterday evening Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft brought his statewide voter photo ID tour to Warrensburg. Approximately twenty individuals showed up for his presentation and question and answer session, not counting his staff and media covering the event.

Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft (r) in Warrensburg – June 16, 2017.

Secretary Ashcroft (r) spoke about the new requirements in Missouri to present photo ID when registered voters go to their polling place to cast their ballot. This, ostensibly, to prevent in person voter impersonation fraud at polling places on an election day. Secretary Ashcroft cited a case of voter registration fraud in the Kansas City area and instances of insufficient ballots at polling places in St. Louis in his discussion. Neither of these instances would have been addressed by these new voter photo ID requirements. When pressed by a questioner in the audience about the number of in person voter impersonation cases in Missouri Secretary Ashcroft deflected the discussion.

When asked about the appropriation of funds by the General Assembly to assist his office in communicating these new requirements to voters and to assist them in acquiring the photo IDs Secretary Ashcroft again deflected the question. A local newspaper reporter pointed out in his question to Secretary Ashcroft that there were only twenty people in the room and there are more than 20,000 people in Warrensburg. How is the Secretary of State’s office going to communicate the new ID requirements to those voters? The answer was somewhat vague, along the lines of “we’ll keep doing what we’re doing”. There was no discussion of any estimate of the number of registered voters in the state who do not have the required photo ID or of the costs associated with providing those voters with the proper ID.

There is a provision in the new law for a registered voter who has ID which would be sufficient in the past to use those forms of ID and sign an affidavit at their polling place on election day so that they could receive a regular ballot. There is also a provision in the new law for issuing a provisional ballot and allowing the registered voter to present their photo ID at their polling place at a later time before the polls close or, barring that, have their signature on the provisional ballot compared with their voter registration signature. In the latter instance the local election authority would have a process to compare the signatures and make a decision.

Anyone with an elderly relative can tell you that their relative’s current signature can possibly differ significantly from what it looked like decades ago.

Asking a question.

All this is taking place in an environment where there have been no documented cases of in-person voter impersonation fraud in the State of Missouri. Yet it is an article of faith with right wingnuts that such fraud is epidemic in Missouri and across the nation.

Absent evidence of in-person voter impersonation fraud the only outcome of these new ID requirements is voter suppression, particularly the kinds of eligible registered voters who have difficulty acquiring the necessary paperwork, for one reason or another, which would allow them to get the ID to allow them to vote on election day.

Previously:

Finally, documentation of voter impersonation fraud in Missouri. Zero. (August 12, 2012)

Secretary of State Jason Kander (D): with Melissa Harris-Perry on MSNBC on voter ID (February 9, 2014)

Voter ID and the GOP art of hoodwinkery (April 7, 2016)