• About
  • The Poetry of Protest

Show Me Progress

~ covering government and politics in Missouri – since 2007

Show Me Progress

Tag Archives: Denny Hoskins

Rep. Denny Hoskins (r) on HB 253: Stop being afraid, being very afraid

05 Thursday Sep 2013

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Denny Hoskins, HB 253, missouri

Today, via Twitter:

Denny Hoskins, CPA ‏@DLHoskins

Just left the Moberly Airport. I know the Governor has unfortunately scared every educator into believing HB253 will be doomsday for MO. 3:03 PM – 4 Sep 13

Because Representative Hoskins (r) has done such a fine job over the years keeping us all so uplifted.

I’m bettting that the Missouri – National Education Association (MNEA) is regretting that endorsement in 2012.

Previously:

New Missouri Rule: if the governor governs right of center you can’t call him a “liberal” (July 1, 2013)

Bill signing Kabuki (July 12, 2013)

Rep. Denny Hoskins (r): probably not gonna sustain the Governor’s veto of HB 253 (August 19, 2013)

Rep. Denny Hoskins (r) to UCM on HB 253: I don’t care, I’d rather be the new Speaker Pro Tem (August 24, 2013)

Rep. Denny Hoskins (r): your constituents know what you’re doing to them (August 26, 2013)

Rep. Denny Hoskins (r): your constituents know what you’re doing to them

27 Tuesday Aug 2013

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Chuck Ambrose, Denny Hoskins, HB 253, Marvin "Bunky" Wright, missouri, override, UCM, University of Central Missouri, veto

Not that he cares.

“….the University of Central Missouri and public education and the rest of the State of Missouri could not withstand fulfilling all the responsibilities that you fulfill every day and lose this much support and us sustain the requirements of what it takes to build a future….”

The constituents of Representative Denny Hoskins (r), the Speaker Pro Tem-elect of the Missouri House, know who he sold out for that leadership position.

Dr. Chuck Ambrose, President of the University of Central Missouri, spoke about the impact of a veto override of HB 253 on the institution.

Dr. Chuck Ambrose, President of the University of Central Missouri, speaking in Warrensburg

on the “State of the University” – July 26, 2013.

“….I do think it’s really important to note, that all the things that we are doing, to be as efficient and effective as you’ve been, there is a limit….”

The transcript:

[….]

President Chuck Ambrose, University of Central Missouri: ….But there are storm clouds, right, that, uh, have not left us. Matter of fact, uh, this would be the third consecutive fiscal year that we’ve entered in to thinking about where we are and where we can go. And, and certainly, the consideration, this lists the Senate bill, but now the House bill [HB 253] that will be considered, uh, most likely, uh, in veto session. Uh, at some estimates, could disrupt the state revenue, uh, and this is more the best case, by six hundred million dollars. At worst case, uh, it could disrupt funding for the University of Central Missouri and all of the other state agencies by one point two billion dollars.

Uh, and, I want to give specific appreciation, uh, because we have a strong board, uh, who supports us, uh, and engages in those things that are most important. Uh, but on Friday, uh, our board President, [Marvin] “Bunky” Wright, uh, made certain that both the Senate and House delegates here on our local district knew that the University of Central Missouri and public education and the rest of the State of Missouri could not withstand fulfilling all the responsibilities that you fulfill every day and lose this much support and us sustain the requirements of what it takes to build a future. And, uh, Governor Wright, I, I want to thank you, uh, for that because [applause] I was [inaudible].

And let me just say, he said it in a way that was very clear. Uh, I probably would have batted around a bit. Uh, but, uh, I do think it’s really important to note, that all the things that we are doing, to be as efficient and effective as you’ve been, there is a limit. Uh, and the consideration [veto override vote on HB 253] that’s moving forward here in the next couple weeks and, and happens at September the, uh, eleventh and twelfth in Jefferson City, uh, could be, uh, a, as the Governor [Jay Nixon] has indicated to me, debilitating for the momentum that we have currently if we lose that much revenue.

And, so, uh, needless to say, uh, and, and I would like to, to make this a very firm transition point in our thinking, uh, institutional decision making today, uh, has gotten to be quite simple. Matter of fact, the number of decisions, uh, it takes to drive this institution forward are basically these: How many students do we have? How much are they not, not only how much can they pay, but how much are they willing to pay? How much is the state going to provide us in state appropriations? How much is our health care going to cost? And after those decisions, some of which, which we have no control over whatsoever, how much money do we have left to help us do what we do every day and care for those in our community?….

[….]

Who in their right mind would vote to cripple one of the largest employers and productive public institution in their own district?

Previously:

New Missouri Rule: if the governor governs right of center you can’t call him a “liberal” (July 1, 2013)

Bill signing Kabuki (July 12, 2013)

Rep. Chris Kelly (D): HB 253 – “I’d like to know what your opinion is.” (July 19, 2013)

Rep. Denny Hoskins (r): probably not gonna sustain the Governor’s veto of HB 253 (August 19, 2013)

Sec. of State Jason Kander (D) to Texas Gov. Rick Perry (r): You forgot about that Medicaid thing? (August 23, 2013)

Rep. Denny Hoskins (r) to UCM on HB 253: I don’t care, I’d rather be the new Speaker Pro Tem (August 24, 2013)

Rep. Denny Hoskins (r) to UCM on HB 253: I don’t care, I’d rather be the new Speaker Pro Tem

24 Saturday Aug 2013

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Chuck Ambrose, Denny Hoskins, HB 253, Jay Nixon, Marvin "Bunky" Wright, missouri, UCM, University of Central Missouri, veto

Yesterday morning Representative Denny Hoskins (r) appeared with Senator David Pearce (r) before the University of Central Missouri Board of Governors meeting on campus in Warrensburg. The effect of a veto override of HB 253 was the main subject of the conversation.  

And, we may have an idea of the latest whip count.

“….Um, you know, my personal opinion on, on 253, currently I, I do not believe the votes are there for a override of the Governor veto. Uh, could that change? Yes, it could change….”

The transcript:

[….]

Representative Denny Hoskins (r) : ….And I want to commend UCM [University of Central Missouri], uh, professors, staff, Board of Governors that, uh, we are a, a shining star, uh, among the state universities. And a lot of the different things that we’re doing, um, are models for a lot of the other state schools. And so I’m going to commend, uh, the Board of Governors and professors and staff on that.

And one of those items that, that, uh, President Obama talked about was the Senate Bill 381. We did have the [inaudible] Nixon come in and sign that bill earlier this year.  Uh, it really, that’s, uh, a great bill, a great law that’s , will go into effect August twenty-eighth. And so I want to commend the University for supporting us on that. As well as, uh, commend the House sponsor and as well the Senate sponsor, as that gone through to create that fund in order to further the innovation campus.

Um, in other news, and before I turn it over to Senator [David] Pearce [r], uh, we did have the Speaker Pro Tem election this past, uh,  weekend and I’m glad to report that I am the new Speaker Pro Tem of the Missouri State House of Representatives. So that is the number two leadership spot in the Missouri State House of Representatives. I’m excited about, uh, the opportunity that will afford me for, to help out UCM as well as, uh, 54th District and the State of Missouri. So, I’m transitioning into that new role, uh, in leadership and therefore I, I will be giving up my, uh, chairmanship of the Appropriations for Economic Development and, [inaudible] five other ones on there, Department of Revenue, Department of Insurance, Department of Labor, and, uh, MoDOT. So, it’s, uh, kind of a transition period for us as we lead up to veto session on September eleventh….

[….]

Chuck Ambrose, President, University of Central Missouri: ….and, of course, this has been in, in, very, uh, specific spotlight across the state, uh, both from the Governor and the legislature going into veto section, session. I think, uh, for us, just specifically focusing that on the impact on the University of Central Missouri. We’re, we’re at a point where we’re educating the most students, graduating the most students, maintaining a high level of performance, and done everything, uh, as diligent as we possibly can to be good stewards of our resources.  Um, and, uh, [Senator] David {Pearce], as you mentioned the, the funding formula, and this appropriation cycle, even though we got an appropriations increase, uh, it did not meet the requirements of just our MOSER mandate, uh, to keep up with our retirement. And, uh, as best as we understand it, uh, the range of potential, uh, negative impact on general revenue could range from six hundred million dollars, uh, kind of in a best case, uh, to maybe as much as one point two billion [dollars], uh, in a worst case. And then of course anywhere, as you know as appropriators, anywhere in that kind of loss of revenue would, would mean, as the Governor said, the very difficult, uh, time that even thinking about running state government they way we’re currently running it. Certainly, we continue to be more efficient. Um, but, with his tack of maintaining the state’s triple A bond rating by, uh, putting the withhold, uh, in place currently, at two hundred thousand dollars a month [for UCM] and a projected two and a half million dollar loss off, uh, appropriations in this fiscal year, uh, without passing significant costs on students, which we know one of the best things that we collectively have done together is hold our increases in costs down, uh, it would be catastrophic for the University of Central Missouri. And there would be no way for us to meet this fiscal challenge, uh, without reducing workforce, uh, or significant, and when I say significant, it would be major double digit tuition increases passed on to our students. And we all know that they simply just can’t afford it. Uh, and we’ve heard from, you know, all of the public sector, and, of course, K-12 has been very direct in its impact with resolutions from board, you know, school boards and, uh, but we would ask, uh, especially at a time when we are trying to, to run as a, as high performers to meet the state’s needs, and as you said, trying to, to create the, the future from here, uh, it, it would not just slow our momentum, uh, it, it would take it away from us. Um, so, I, I would like to just ask, you know, where is it, uh, what you would suggest for us to do, uh, to underlie its impact not just on Central Missouri and our students, uh, but across the state, uh, across education, uh, and, and certainly, uh, within scarce resources? Uh, and if we look across the border to our west, there’s no demonstration that, that that tax experiment done, has done anything to, to strengthen, uh, resources to, to put into, to teaching. So, I, I just ask, what can we do, where are we, uh, and, uh?

Representative Denny Hoskins (r): I get, I guess, uh, the first question I have, I know that we ended up with four hundred million dollar surplus over, um, this past fiscal year and the Governor decided to withhold that. So, had the board taken any position on asking the Governor to release the withholds?

Chuck Ambrose, President, University of Central Missouri: Well, we talked to the Governor about releasing the withhold.

Representative Denny Hoskins (r): Great.

Chuck Ambrose, President, University of Central Missouri: And, uh, and absolutely, uh, and as John Merrigan would put it, [inaudible], right now, uh, with his tack, uh, it is two hundred thousand dollars of, of cash, uh, withheld money which would not take us very long to feel. Uh, and I, I guess the only thing he’s come back with and said, until we get through veto session and know where that’s gonna go that he will continue [withholding]. And if it is overturned his intent would be to keep that [inaudible].

Representative Denny Hoskins (r): There are a lot of different groups out there and, and I know the Governor has, uh, his groups and his talking points, as well as what, uh, he, uh, believes to be a cat, catastrophic, uh, shortfall of revenue. I’m of, I’m of the other opinion. I don’t, I don’t believe that there, I believe that the Governor’s playing political games and, uh, he’s, he’s hitting all the right groups and withholding these funds even though that the money is right there, uh, in order to use. And I disagree with the Governor philosophically as far as what a tax cut would do for the State of Missouri, uh, on a personal side, uh, incremental tax cut of twenty-five percent over the next ten years. And that’s only happens if, uh, revenue, general revenue increase a hundred million dollars [inaudible] each year. So, uh, [inaudible]. Again, that does not happen if general revenue doesn’t, doesn’t increase at least a hundred million dollars. So, philosophically the, the Governor and I have a difference of opinion on, uh, [inaudible]. I know you mentioned Kansas, uh, our, our neighbor to the west. We’ve seen other states such as Tennessee, Oklahoma, uh, Texas. And you know, if you haven’t heard yet Governor Rick Perry is coming to Missouri next week and he’s launched a campaign to try and lure, uh, Missouri businesses to, uh, Texas, the State of Texas. And, um, you know, [inaudible] the low, the low tax state as well as, uh, a state that’s very friendly toward business and, and the economy.

So, I guess, I understand your concerns and many of my colleagues have those same concerns on both sides of the aisle. Uh, I do have, I do share some of those concerns but philosophically I believe that, that those can be overcome and I do not believe in, in the doomsday, uh, projections that, uh, Governor Nixon has, has said. Um, and I’ve gone on record and I said I, I guarantee that if House Bill 253 [veto] was  overridden education would not receive less money next year. We will not fulfill the Governor’s promise. That, that’s kind of where I stand [inaudible]. Senator [David] Pearce and I agree on a lot of things and, uh, we, we have a difference of opinion on, on this issue. So….

[….]

Chuck Ambrose, President, University of Central Missouri: ….Uh, but, you know, I, I, I’m taking the Governor on his word he’s gonna maintain the withhold if his veto is overturned.

Representative Denny Hoskins (r) : This has been a point of contention with the, uh, Missouri General Assembly as well as the Governor’s office. Um, and something will probably get [inaudible] to take to court. Constitutionally the Governor is not supposed to withhold unless the revenue’s not there. But the revenue’s there and [inaudible] he’s still deciding to withhold.

Um, you know, my personal opinion on, on 253, currently I, I do not believe the votes are there for a override of the Governor veto. Uh, could that change? Yes, it could change. I have, uh, been in discussions with, with some of the different groups, education as well as business groups. Uh, in the event that it is not overridden on September eleventh, come together [inaudible] work out a, uh, tax cut as well as, uh, provide adequate funding for education….

[….]

Marvin “Bunky” Wright, President, University of Central Missouri Board of Governors:  ….Uh, the board has discussed at great length this whole situation. You can refer to it as a difference in philosophy, frankly, I don’t care what you refer to it as. Uh, this board has got responsibility of this University. And I’ve seen President Ambrose, the faculty, the staff, everybody cut to the core budgetwise in the last three years. Uh, the last thing we need is a further crunch because of political differences. There isn’t any political difference when it comes to higher education when we’ve got responsibility. And we would ask that the two of you [Rep. Hoskins and Senator Pearce], uh, do not support the position of overriding this veto. I mean, we can’t sit back and wonder who’s right or wrong, because some money’s gonna go by the wayside. And whatever it is is gonna hurt us. So, you know, we would ask you to support this University which is in your district and the people. We think we’re one of the best universities in the state. I happen to think it is the best. A lot of it is due to the help of people like you. And we’re asking you again, and I’d like to go on record for this board as requesting that you support us, uh, in this override session. We appreciate you coming in very much. If you ever have any questions, why, give us a call. We’ll try to answer them.

Representative Denny Hoskins (r): Thank you.

[….]

Philosophically, giving tax breaks to billionaires and millionaires while increasing the burden on seniors and the poor through an added sales tax on their prescription medications is a good thing. Philosophically.

Philosophically, giving tax breaks to billionaires and millionaires while defunding the infrastructure of society and diminishing access to a quality education is a good thing. Philosophically.

Philosophically, holding up the less than erudite Governor of another state making a political visit to poach jobs from your own state as an ideal is a good thing. Philosophically.

….Governor Perry (r) is wasting money traveling to Missouri (paid for by TexasOne) to poach jobs and advocate for a change in Missouri law (HB 253) that would ostensibly (in his opinion) make it more difficult for Texas to poach Missouri jobs? Uh, definitely not the sharpest knife in the drawer….

Philosophically, being the new Speaker Pro Tem of the Missouri House is more important than representing the interests of the voters in your district. Philosophically.

If you’re in the right wingnut majority in control of the Missouri General Assembly, that is.

Previously:

New Missouri Rule: if the governor governs right of center you can’t call him a “liberal” (July 1, 2013)

Bill signing Kabuki (July 12, 2013)

Rep. Chris Kelly (D): HB 253 – “I’d like to know what your opinion is.” (July 19, 2013)

Rep. Denny Hoskins (r): probably not gonna sustain the Governor’s veto of HB 253 (August 19, 2013)

Sec. of State Jason Kander (D) to Texas Gov. Rick Perry (r): You forgot about that Medicaid thing? (August 23, 2013)

Rep. Denny Hoskins (r): probably not gonna sustain the Governor’s veto of HB 253

20 Tuesday Aug 2013

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

54th House District, Denny Hoskins, HB 253, missouri, veto

A press release today from Representative Denny Hoskins (r):

NEWS From the Office of

Representative Denny Hoskins

54 District

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

August 19, 2013

CONTACT: Rep. Denny Hoskins

[….]

Rep. Hoskins selected as Republican Caucus nominee for Speaker Pro Tem

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. – Rep. Denny Hoskins, R-Warrensburg, has been selected as the Republican Caucus nominee for Speaker Pro Tem of the Missouri House of Representatives. Speaker Pro Tem is the second highest leadership position in the House and is responsible for all House proceedings if the Speaker of the House is absent.

“I eagerly anticipate taking a leadership position within the House,” said Hoskins. “There is no higher honor then being recognized by your colleges. I take this position very seriously and hope to use the office of Speaker Pro Tem to better serve my constituents and the entire state of Missouri,” he added.

The vote was taken during the Republican Summer Caucus meeting help August 16th and 17th in St. Louis Missouri. The Position of Speaker Pro Tem was vacated when the previous Speaker Pro Tem, Jason Smith, was elected to Congress for the 8th District. The official vote for Speaker Pro Tem will be taken September 11th, during the annual veto session.

####

What are the odds that Representative Hoskins bucks the republican leadership and the republican caucus and votes for and with his district on HB 253? Just asking.

If “by better serve my constituents” he means screwing the school districts and the state university in his district he’s got it down cold.

Previously:

New Missouri Rule: if the governor governs right of center you can’t call him a “liberal” (July 1, 2013)

Bill signing Kabuki (July 12, 2013)

Rep. Chris Kelly (D): HB 253 – “I’d like to know what your opinion is.” (July 19, 2013)

Bill signing Kabuki

12 Friday Jul 2013

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

David Pearce, Dean Dohrman, Denny Hoskins, Gary Cross, HB 253, Kabuki, missouri, SB 281, Will Kraus

Missouri politics, where everyone is your friend and everything is all sweetness and light.

Governor Jay Nixon (D), in Warrensburg on the campus of the University of Central Missouri – July 11, 2013.

Yesterday morning in Warrensburg, on the campus of the University of Central Missouri, Governor Jay Nixon (D) signed SB 381 into law. The bill “officially defines in state statute an Innovation Campus as an educational partnership comprised of one or more Missouri public community colleges…one or more Missouri public or private four-year institution of higher education, one or more Missouri high schools or K-12 school districts, and at least one Missouri-based business.” In the scheme of things everyone involved in supporting the bill is patting themselves on the back that this is a good thing for education in the state. The amount of good varies with who you ask.

Governor Nixon (D) signing SB 381 into law – July 11, 2013.

These kinds of public self-congratulatory exercises are a magnet for state legislators in or near the districts where the bill signing takes place. The bill handlers from the Senate and the House tend to show up, too. Senator Will Kraus (r) and Representative Gary Cross (r) were in attendance and took the opportunity to heap praise. Senator David Pearce (r) and Representatives Denny Hoskins (r) and Dean Dohrman (r), who represent the districts most closely connected to the University of Central Missouri, were also in attendance. They, too, praised the bill and the institution.

An excerpt from Representative Dean Dohrman’s (r) brief remarks:

Ah, political science. That’s really interesting, considering that whole nullification thing was settled one hundred fifty years ago.

Representative Gary Cross (r) – July 11, 2013.

Representatives Dean Dohrman (r) (left) and Denny Hoskins (r) (right) – July 11, 2013.

Here’s the all too familiar Kabuki element in Missouri politics: on one hand they’ll show up for the photo op and glory in the credit for one bill which supports an institution in their district, all the while, voting for a more far reaching bill which seriously screws that same institution. They can get away with it because most of their constituents usually aren’t paying attention when the screwing actually happens. And that occurred with HB 253.  

What would HB 253 do to the University of Central Missouri, along with a whole bunch of other institutions and essential programs across the state?:

New Missouri Rule: if the governor governs right of center you can’t call him a “liberal” (July 1, 2013)

[….]

Governor Jay Nixon (D): With a price tag of at least eight hundred million dollars annually House Bill 253 would undermine our fiscal foundation now and for years to come. It’s the equivalent of cutting all support for higher education, all of it, closing all of our prisons, or shutting down the entire Department of mental Health. House Bill 253 is a dangerous experiment we simply cannot afford. These costs are real and immediate if my veto is not sustained.

[….]

“…These costs are real and immediate if my veto is not sustained…”

And how did those Representatives vote? The vote on HB 253, from the Journal of the House (2339) [pdf]:

[….]

On motion of Representative Berry, SS HB 253, as amended, was truly agreed to and finally

passed by the following vote:

AYES: 103

Allen Anderson Austin Bahr Barnes

Bernskoetter Berry Brattin Brown Burlison

Cierpiot Conway 104 Cookson Cornejo Cox

Crawford Cross Curtman Davis Diehl

Dohrman Dugger Elmer Engler Fitzpatrick

Fitzwater Flanigan Fraker Franklin Frederick

Gatschenberger Guernsey Haahr Haefner Hansen

Hicks Higdon Hinson Hodges Hoskins

Hough Houghton Hurst Johnson Jones 50

Justus Keeney Kelley 127 Koenig Kolkmeyer

Korman Lair Lant Lauer Leara

Love Lynch Marshall McCaherty McGaugh

Messenger Miller Molendorp Moon Morris

Muntzel Neely Neth Parkinson Pfautsch

Pike Pogue Redmon Rehder Reiboldt

Remole Rhoads Richardson Riddle Roorda

Ross Rowden Rowland Scharnhorst Schatz

Schieber Schieffer Shull Shumake Solon

Sommer Spencer Stream Swan Thomson

Torpey Walker White Wieland Wilson

Wood Zerr Mr Speaker

NOES: 051

Anders Black Burns Butler Carpenter

Colona Conway 10 Curtis Dunn Ellinger

Ellington English Englund Fowler Frame

Gannon Gardner Hampton Harris Hubbard

Hummel Kirkton Kratky LaFaver May

Mayfield McCann Beatty McDonald McKenna McManus

McNeil Meredith Mims Montecillo Morgan

Newman Nichols Norr Otto Pace

Peters Pierson Rizzo Runions Schupp

Smith 85 Swearingen Walton Gray Webb Webber

Wright

PRESENT: 000

ABSENT WITH LEAVE: 009

Entlicher Funderburk Gosen Grisamore Kelly 45

Lichtenegger Mitten Phillips Smith 120

Representative Frederick declared the bill passed.[….]

[emphasis added]

Senator Will Kraus (r) – July 11, 2013.

And the vote [pdf], from the Journal of the Senate (1512):

[….]

Senator Schmitt moved that SS for HB 253, as amended, be called from the Informal Calendar and taken up for 3rd reading and final passage, which motion prevailed.

SS for HB 253, as amended, was read the 3rd time and passed by the following vote:

YEAS-Senators

Brown Cunningham Dempsey Dixon Emery Kehoe Kraus Lager

Lamping Libla McKenna Munzlinger Nieves Parson Richard Romine

Rupp Sater Schaaf Schaefer Schmitt Silvey Wallingford Wasson-24

NAYS-Senators

Chappelle-Nadal Curls Justus Keaveny LeVota Nasheed Pearce Sifton Walsh-9

Absent-Senators-None

Absent with leave-Senator Holsman-1

Vacancies-None

The President declared the bill passed.

[emphasis added]

Do you think they won’t vote to overturn the governor’s veto? Somebody’s spending big bucks to make sure they do overturn it.

They’re republicans, the outlook isn’t good for the rest of us.

Faith, Hope, Charity…and Persistence

16 Thursday May 2013

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

Dean Dohrman, Denny Hoskins, General Assembly, Gina Mitten, Karla May, missouri, Nick Marshall, SB 224, SB 73, Stanley Cox

Previously:

It’s the last week of the session (May 14, 2013)

May as well (May 15, 2013)

In the House chamber.

If one spends any amount of time watching the House in action during the last week of the session you are bound to witness a moment or two of legislative drama.

In this morning’s session Representative Karla May (D) introduced HA 3 to SB 73 (Judicial Procedures). Her amendment would allow an individual convicted of the felony of non support (not paying child support) who made complete restitution and after waiting eight years to go through the process of expunging their felony conviction for the purpose of job application. That is, a qualifying individual would not have to report their non support felony conviction on a job application if they met all the requirements stated in the amendment.  

Representative Karla May (D), introducing HA 3 to SB 73 in the House this morning.

Representatives Karla May (D) and Stanley Cox (r).

Representative Stanley Cox (r) spoke against the amendment. After the previous question was invoked the amendment was defeated in a voice vote.

There was an amount of frustration and exasperation exhibited on the floor with that outcome.

This is a story about persistence and bouncing back.

Later in the morning Representative May took the opportunity to attach the same amendment language to another germane bill, introducing HA 2 to SB 224 (Law Enforcement Agencies). Hope.

Representative Karla May (D), introducing HA 2 to SB 224 (the same as HA 3 to SB 73

which was defeated in an earlier voice vote) in the House this morning.

Representative Stanley Cox (r) again spoke against the amendment.

Representative Stanley Cox (r).

Then Representative Gina Mitten (D) spoke in a rapid exchange in the form of an inquiry with Representative May.

Representative Gina Mitten (D).

And, later, Representative Nick Marshall (r) (a former assistant prosecutor) spoke at length in support of the amendment, citing his experience prosecuting these cases, a felony where there can be no criminal intent on the part of the defendant (they may have lost their job, they have no resources to pay child support).

Representative Nick Marshall (r).

Persistence.

The tide turned. The amendment was approved overwhelmingly in a recorded vote.

The board for HA 2 for SB 224 right before the vote was closed. Yes votes in green, no votes in red, not voting/not yet voting in amber.

No votes included Representatives Stanley Cox, Dean Dohrman, and Denny Hoskins. They do represent contiguous districts in west central Missouri.

Representative Dean Dohrman (left) and Representative Denny Hoskins (right).

What, again?

I spoke with Representative Karla May (D) about her amendment in the recess between the morning and afternoon sessions:

Show Me Progress: ….Could you just briefly explain the purpose of your amendment?

Representative Karla May (D):  Well, the purpose of the amendment is to give gentlemen who have been convicted of criminal non support  a second chance. Um, we have a very punitive correctional system. It’s overcrowded. It’s costing the state billions of dollars.

Um, these guys go to jail, it’s a, it’s one crime that can, you can be convicted with a Class B felony with no criminal intent. Um, these guys have, uh, my amendment is basically saying that, okay, after you’ve decided to admit to the crime, come into court, and they call it suspended imposition of sentence, you come in, they give you a suspended imposition of sentence, you get convicted with a Class B felony.

So, a felony, everybody knows, prevents people from getting employed. You have different companies that don’t hire people with felonies. Period. You know, so, it prevents them, and you can’t get any professional licensing, real estate licensing, things like that. You can’t, no longer work.

Show Me Progress: And, so, so, and so the amendment is, after somebody’s gone through this whole process, they’ve paid their debt, they’ve taken care of everything, spend a long period, and this would allow them to actually be, when they apply for a job they didn’t, wouldn’t have to say that they’ve been convicted of a felony? And, therefore [Representative May: “Yes.”] they could be somebody who will continue to contribute to society.

Representative May: Exactly. Pay taxes, buy a house, you know, continue to contribute to society.

And the thing about it is, you know, some, the court gives suspended imposition for five years and sometimes ten years. So, you have to complete that ten years and then wait eight years before you can even come in to get a one time, one time only expungement. It’s not like we’re opening the flood gates or anything. It’s, a, giving people an opportunity, it’s even giving them an incentive.

Show Me Progress: Well, well, it was an interesting turn of events on the floor [of the House] today when the first time the amendment was offered on one bill it, it went down. And then some people spoke very eloquently in support in, across party lines. [Representative May: “Yes.”]  And, and then there was overwhelming support for the bill. [Representative May: “Yes.”]

And, so, the next step is it goes, it’s attached to a bill which will end up going through the Senate.

Representative May: Yes, it’ll go to the Senate. It’s attached to [Senator] Kiki Curls’ bill.

Show Me Progress: Okay. And, uh, do you have good hopes for this?

Representative May: I’m a praying person. My hopes rest with God.  I was like, if you want these fathers to have this opportunity it’s up to you. I just walk by faith.  I did what I was supposed to do, now the rest is up to him.

Show Me Progress: Well, thank you very much for your time.

Representative May: No problem. Thank you.

Faith.

The entire bill goes back to the Senate. Hope, again.

SB 267 – wingnut dogma – there’s no such thing as a moderate republican

12 Sunday May 2013

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Brian Nieves, Dean Dohrman, Denny Hoskins, General Assembly, missouri, right wingnuts, SB 267, Sharia law

“Useless laws weaken the necessary laws.” – Charles-Louis de Secondat, baron de La Brède et de Montesquieu (1689 – 1755)

The past week Missouri General Assembly did its utmost to hold back the tide of Sharia and international law cases contaminating our state courts. Yes, that’s sarcasm.

All nuts, all the time.

This has been a right wingnut obsession for quite some time.

Previously:

HJR 31: things that keep us awake at night worrying, part 2 (February 25, 2011)

Anti-Sharia bigotry in Missouri hides behind a constitutional pretense (March 28, 2012)

HB 1512: definitely not a jobs bill (March 27, 2012)

One question:

What does God need with a starship?

“…political satire became obsolete when Henry Kissinger was awarded the Nobel Prize…” (May 8, 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)

SB 265: tinfoil hats – there’s no such thing as a moderate republican (May 11, 2013)

SB 267, as truly agreed and finally passed on May 8th:

FIRST REGULAR SESSION

[TRULY AGREED TO AND FINALLY PASSED]

SENATE SUBSTITUTE FOR

SENATE BILL NO. 267 [pdf]

97TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY

2013

1409S.02T

AN ACT

To amend chapter 506, RSMo, by adding thereto one new section relating to the laws of other countries.

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Missouri, as follows:

Section A. Chapter 506, RSMo, is amended by adding thereto one new section, to be known as section 506.600, to read as follows:

506.600. 1. This section shall be known as the “Civil Liberties Defense Act”. The Missouri general assembly finds that it shall be the public policy of this state to protect its citizens from the application of foreign laws when the application of a foreign law will result in the violation of a right protected by the constitutions of the state of Missouri and the United States, including, but not limited to, due process, freedom of religion, speech, or press, and any right of privacy.

2. The Missouri general assembly fully recognizes the right to contract freely under the laws of this state, and also recognizes that his right may be reasonably and rationally circumscribed pursuant to the state’s interest to protect and promote rights and privileges protected under the Missouri and United States constitutions, including, but not limited to, due process, freedom of religion, speech, or press, and any right of privacy.

3. As used in this section, the following terms mean:

(1) “Court”, any court, board, administrative agency, or other adjudicative or enforcement authority of this state;

(2) “Foreign law, legal code, or system”, any law, legal code, or system of a jurisdiction outside of any state or territory of the United States, including, but not limited to, international organizations and tribunals, and applied by that jurisdiction’s courts, administrative bodies, or other formal or informal tribunals;

(3) “Religious organization”, any church, seminary, synagogue, temple, mosque, religious order, religious corporation, association, or society, whose identity is distinctive in terms of common religious creed, beliefs, doctrines, practices, or rituals, of any faith or denomination, including any organization qualifying as a church or religious organization under section 501(c)(3) or 501(d) of the United States Internal Revenue Code.

4. Any court, arbitration, tribunal, or administrative agency ruling or decision shall violate the public policy of this state and be void and unenforceable if the court, arbitration, tribunal, or administrative agency bases its rulings or decisions in the matter at issue in whole or in part on any foreign law, legal code, or system that is repugnant or inconsistent with the Missouri and United States constitutions.

5. A contract or contractual provisions, if capable of segregation, which provides for the choice of a law, legal code, or system to govern some or all of the disputes between the parties adjudicated by a court of law or by an arbitration panel arising from the contract mutually agreed upon shall violate the public policy of this state and be void and unenforceable if the foreign law, legal code, or system chosen includes or incorporates any substantive or procedural law, as applied to the dispute at issue, that is repugnant or inconsistent with the Missouri and United States constitutions.

6. (1) A contract or contractual provisions, if capable of segregation, which provides for a jurisdiction for purposes of granting the courts or arbitration panels in personam jurisdiction over the parties to adjudicate any disputes between parties arising from the contract mutually agreed upon shall violate the public policy of this state and be void and unenforceable if the jurisdiction chosen includes any foreign law, legal code, or system, as applied to the dispute at issue, that is repugnant or inconsistent with the Missouri and United States constitutions;

(2) If a resident of this state, subject to personal jurisdiction in this state, seeks to maintain litigation, arbitration, agency, or similarly binding proceedings in this state and if the courts of this state find that granting a claim of forum non conveniens or a related claim violates or would likely violate rights protected under the Missouri and United States constitutions of the nonclaimant in the foreign forum with respect to the matter in dispute, then it is the public policy of this state that the claim shall be denied.

7. Without prejudice to any legal right, this act shall not apply to a corporation, partnership, limited liability company, business association, or other legal entity that contracts to subject itself to foreign law in a jurisdiction other than this state or the United States.

8. No court or arbitrator shall interpret this act to limit the right of any person to the free exercise of religion as guaranteed by the First Amendment to the United States constitution and by the constitution of this state. No court shall interpret this act to require or authorize any court to adjudicate, or prohibit any religious organization from adjudicating ecclesiastical matters, including, but not limited to, the election, appointment, calling, dismissal, removal, or excommunication of a member, officer, official, priest, nun, monk, pastor, rabbi, imam, or member of the clergy, of the religious organization, or determination or interpretation of the doctrine of the religious organization, where adjudication by a court would violate the constitution of this state or the prohibition of the establishment clause of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.

9. This section shall not be interpreted by any court to conflict with any federal treaty or other international agreement to which the United States is a party to the extent that such treaty or international agreement preempts or is superior to state law on the matter at issue.

[emphasis in original]

….4. Any court, arbitration, tribunal, or administrative agency ruling or decision shall violate the public policy of this state and be void and unenforceable if the court, arbitration, tribunal, or administrative agency bases its rulings or decisions in the matter at issue in whole or in part on any foreign law, legal code, or system that is repugnant or inconsistent with the Missouri and United States constitutions….

Ah, that would be the blanket immunity from answering for crimes against humanity clause. I wonder who that was for? Just asking.

Think about that “any foreign law, legal code, or system” phrase for a minute. Apparently America popped into existence fully formed. One minute it wasn’t there, then, “poof”, it was. Go figure.

Marbury v. Madison 5 U.S. 137 (1803)

…In Great Britain, the King himself is sued in the respectful form of a petition, and he never fails to comply with the judgment of his court…

Great Britain isn’t in the United States and we don’t have a king, right? Apparently we do have a Kenyan born usurper who’s gonna put us all in U.N. mandated FEMA gay marriage camps. But, I digress.

Damn, with one bill the Missouri General Assembly swept away over two hundred years of American legal precedent. They can do that?

In the Journal of the Missouri House for May, 8, 2013:

[….]

2267 Journal of the House [pdf]

[….]

SS SB 267, relating to the laws of other countries, was taken up by Representative Curtman.

Representative Diehl assumed the Chair.

On motion of Representative Curtman, SS SB 267 was truly agreed to and finally passed by

the following vote:

AYES: 109

Allen Anderson Austin Bahr Barnes

Bernskoetter Berry Black Brattin Brown

Burlison Cierpiot Conway 104 Cookson Cornejo

Cox Crawford Cross Curtm an Davis

Diehl Dohrman Dugger Elmer Engler

Entlicher Fitzpatrick Fitzwater Flanigan Fowler

Fraker Frame Franklin Frederick Gannon

Gatschenberger Gosen Grisamore Guernsey Haahr

Hampton Hansen Harris Hicks Higdon

Hinson Hoskins Hough Houghton Hurst

Johnson Jones 50 Justus Keeney Kelley 127

Koenig Kolkmeyer Korman Lair Lant

Lauer Leara Love Lynch Marshall

McGaugh Messenger Miller Molendorp Moon

Morris Muntzel Neely Neth Parkinson

Pfautsch Phillips Pike Pogue Redmon

Rehder Reiboldt Remole Rhoads Richardson

Riddle Roorda Ross Rowden Rowland

Schatz Schieber Schieffer Shull Shumake

Smith 120 Solon Sommer Spencer Stream

Swan Thomson Torpey Walker White

Wieland Wilson Wood Mr Speaker

NOES: 041

Anders Burns Butler Carpenter Colona

Conway 10 Curtis Dunn Ellinger Ellington

English Hodges Hubbard Hummel Kirkton

LaFaver May McCann Beatty McDonald McKenna

McManus McNeil Meredith Mitten Montecillo

Morgan Newman Nichols Norr Otto

Pace Peters Pierson Rizzo Runions

Schupp Smith 85 Swearingen Walton Gray Webb

Wright

PRESENT: 002

Englund Mayfield

ABSENT WITH LEAVE: 011

Funderburk Gardner Haefner Kelly 45 Kratky

Lichtenegger McCaherty Mims Scharnhorst Webber

Zerr

Representative Diehl declared the bill passed.

[….]

[emphasis added]

Well, Representative Dean Dohrman (r) and Representative Denny Hoskins (r) were three for three when it came to right wingnut dogma this past week. Nope, no moderates around there.

SB 265: tinfoil hats – there’s no such thing as a moderate republican

11 Saturday May 2013

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Agenda 21, Brian Nieves, Dean Dohrman, Denny Hoskins, General Asembly, missouri, tinfoil hats

“Useless laws weaken the necessary laws.” – Charles-Louis de Secondat, baron de La Brède et de Montesquieu (1689 – 1755)

Yes, this about Agenda 21 paranoid posturing.

If the hat fits, wear it:

The ultimate in head wear, with accessory, for the right wingnut controlled Missouri General Assembly.

From the Southern Poverty Law Center (March 14, 2012):

….In the world of far-right extremists, Agenda 21 is demonized as a sort of Trojan horse, part of a larger scheme to shatter Americans’ liberties and institute a totalitarian, one-world government known typically as the “New World Order…”

…to the John Birch Society (JBS), one of the main groups promoting the conspiracy theory about Agenda 21, it represents the end of America as we know it. This is the same group, of course, that claimed President Dwight D. Eisenhower was a secret communist….

Previously:

HB 42: first, they came for the black helicopters and I did not speak up (December 5, 2012)

SB 265: if you didn’t want the black helicopters to track you down… (February 6, 2013)

“…political satire became obsolete when Henry Kissinger was awarded the Nobel Prize…” (May 8, 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)

On May 8th the Missouri House passed SB 265, an anti Agenda 21 bill, by a veto proof majority. The bill, as truly agreed to and finally passed:

FIRST REGULAR SESSION

[TRULY AGREED TO AND FINALLY PASSED]

SENATE BILL NO. 265 [pdf]

97TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY

2013

1330S.01T

AN ACT

To amend chapter 1, RSMo, by adding thereto one new section relating to prohibition

on certain policies that infringe on private property rights.

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Missouri, as follows:

Section A. Chapter 1, RSMo, is amended by adding thereto one new section, to be known as section 1.370, to read as follows:

1.370. 1. As used in this section, “political subdivision” means any state, county, incorporated city, unincorporated city, public local entity, public-private partnership, and any other public entity of the state, a county, or city.

2. Neither the state of Missouri nor any political subdivision shall adopt or implement policy recommendations that deliberately or inadvertently infringe or restrict private property rights without due process, as may be required by policy recommendations originating in, or traceable to Agenda 21, adopted by the United Nations in 1992 at its Conference on Environment and Development or any other international law or ancillary plan of action that contravenes the Constitution of the United States or the Missouri Constitution.

3. Since the United Nations has accredited and enlisted numerous nongovernmental and intergovernmental organizations to assist in the implementation of its policies relative to Agenda 21 around the world, the state of Missouri and all political subdivisions are prohibited from entering into any agreement with, expending any sum of money for, receiving funds from, contracting services from, or giving financial aid to those nongovernmental and intergovernmental organizations as defined in Agenda 21.

[emphasis in original]

In the Journal of the Missouri House for May, 8, 2013:

[….]

2237 Journal of the House [pdf]

On motion of Representative Rowland, SB 265 was truly agreed to and finally passed by the

following vote:

AYES: 118

Allen Anderson Austin Bahr Barnes

Bernskoetter Berry Black Brattin Burlison

Cierpiot Conway 10 Conway 104 Cookson Cornejo

Cox Crawford Cross Curtm an Davis

Diehl Dohrman Dugger Ellington Elmer

Engler English Entlicher Fitzpatrick Fitzwater

Flanigan Fowler Fraker Frame Franklin

Frederick Gannon Gatschenberger Gosen Grisamore

Haahr Haefner Hampton Hansen Harris

Hicks Higdon Hinson Hodges Hoskins

Hough Houghton Hurst Johnson Jones 50

Justus Keeney Kelley 127 Koenig Kolkmeyer

Korman Lair Lant Lauer Leara

Love Lynch Marshall Mayfield McCaherty

McGaugh Messenger Miller Molendorp Moon

Morris Muntzel Neely Neth Parkinson

Pfautsch Phillips Pike Pogue Redmon

Rehder Reiboldt Remole Rhoads Richardson

Riddle Roorda Ross Rowden Rowland

Scharnhorst Schatz Schieber Schieffer Shull

Shumake Smith 120 Solon Sommer Spencer

Stream Swan Swearingen Thomson Torpey

Walker White Wieland Wilson Wood

Wright Zerr Mr Speaker

NOES: 037

Anders Burns Butler Carpenter Colona

Curtis Dunn Ellinger Englund Hubbard

Hummel Kirkton Kratky LaFaver May

McCann Beatty McDonald McKenna McManus McNeil

Meredith Mitten Montecillo Morgan Newman

Nichols Norr Otto Pace Peters

Pierson Rizzo Runions Schupp Smith 85

Walton Gray Webb

PRESENT: 000

ABSENT WITH LEAVE: 008

Brown Funderburk Gardner Guernsey Kelly 45

Lichtenegger Mims Webber

Speaker Jones declared the bill passed.

[….]

[emphasis added]

Nope, no “moderate” republicans here.

HB 436: nullification – there’s no such thing as a moderate republican

11 Saturday May 2013

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

51st Legislative District, 54th Legislative District, Dean Dohrman, Denny Hoskins, guns, HB 436, missouri, nullification

Previously:

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

National Firearms Act (NFA)

….Firearms subject to the 1934 Act included shotguns and rifles having barrels less than 18 inches in length, certain firearms described as “any other weapons,” machineguns, and firearm mufflers and silencers….

Uh that would be sawed off shotguns, fully automatic machineguns, and silencers.

FIRST REGULAR SESSION

[TRULY AGREED TO AND FINALLY PASSED]

SENATE COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR

HOUSE COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR

HOUSE BILL NO. 436

97TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY

1204S.04T          2013

AN ACT

To repeal sections 21.750, 571.030, 571.101, 571.107, 571.117, and 590.010, RSMo, and to enact in lieu thereof fourteen new sections relating to firearms, with a penalty provision.

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the state of Missouri, as follows:

[….]

3. (1) All federal acts, laws, orders, rules, and regulations, whether past, present, or future, which infringe on the people’s right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 23 of the Missouri Constitution shall be invalid in this state, shall not be recognized by this state, shall be specifically rejected by this state, and shall be considered null and void and of no effect in this state.

           (2) Such federal acts, laws, orders, rules, and regulations include, but are not limited to:

           (a) The provisions of the federal Gun Control Act of 1934;

           (b) The provisions of the federal Gun Control Act of 1968…

[….]

[bold emphasis in original, underline emphasis added]

In the Journal of the Missouri House for May, 8, 2013:

[….]

2273 Journal of the House [pdf]

On motion of Representative Funderburk, SCS HCS HB 436, as amended, was truly agreed

to and finally passed by the following vote:

AYES: 116

Allen Anderson Austin Bahr Bernskoetter

Berry Black Brattin Brown Burlison

Cierpiot Conway 10 Conway 104 Cookson Cornejo

Cox Crawford Curtman Davis Diehl

Dohrman Dugger Elmer Engler English

Entlicher Fitzpatrick Fitzwater Flanigan Fowler

Fraker Frame Franklin Frederick Funderburk

Gannon Gatschenberger Gosen Grisamore Guernsey

Haahr Hampton Hansen Harris Hicks

Higdon Hinson Hodges Hoskins Hough

Houghton Hubbard Hurst Johnson Jones 50

Justus Keeney Kelley 127 Koenig Kolkmeyer

Korman Lair Lant Lauer Leara

Love Lynch Marshall Mayfield McCaherty

McGaugh McKenna Messenger Miller Moon

Morris Muntzel Neely Neth Parkinson

Pfautsch Phillips Pike Pogue Redmon

Rehder Reiboldt Remole Rhoads Richardson

Riddle Roorda Ross Rowden Rowland

Scharnhorst Schatz Schieber Schieffer Shull

Shumake Smith 120 Solon Sommer Spencer

Stream Swan Thomson Torpey Walker

White Wieland Wilson Wood Zerr

Mr Speaker

NOES: 038

Anders Barnes Butler Carpenter Colona

Curtis Dunn Ellinger Ellington Englund

Hummel Kirkton Kratky LaFaver May

McCann Beatty McDonald McManus McNeil Meredith

Mitten Montecillo Morgan Newman Nichols

Norr Otto Pace Peters Pierson

Rizzo Runions Schupp Smith 85 Swearingen

Walton Gray Webb Wright

PRESENT: 000

ABSENT WITH LEAVE: 009

Burns Cross Gardner Haefner Kelly 45

Lichtenegger Mims Molendorp Webber

Representative Diehl declared the bill passed.

Speaker Jones resumed the Chair.

[….]

[emphasis added]

Yes, you got that right. A veto proof majority in the Missouri General Assembly voted to nullify federal prohibitions of sawed off shotguns, fully automatic machineguns, and silencers.

Forget seersucker. It looks like scratchy gray wool uniforms are back in vogue. [That sarcastic reference to the last serious nullification disagreement which was settled almost 150 years ago came from someone else on the Internets.]

There’s even more right wingnutty goodness in HB 436:

….6. Any official, agent, or employee of the United States government who enforces or attempts to enforce any of the infringements on the right to keep and bear arms included in subsection 3 of this section is guilty of a class A misdemeanor….

[emphasis in original]

Oh, that’ll cost a lot of money to litigate all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

It looks like Representative Dean Dohrman (r) has earned his keep.

And Representative Denny Hoskins (r) is running for a leadership position:

Denny Hoskins, CPA

Missouri House of Representatives

District 54

Capitol Report

May 10th, 2013

[….]

….I am pleased to officially announce my candidacy for Speaker Pro Tem of the Missouri House of Representatives. As you may, or may not know, Rep. Jason Smith, current Speaker Pro Tem, is running for the vacant Congressional seat in Missouri’s 8th district. I believe I have the experience, character, and conviction needed to fill the position. Speaker Pro Tem is selected by a vote of my House colleagues, many of whom have already expressed their support of my candidacy….

[….]

Heh. Service is its own reward.    

Rep. Denny Hoskins (r): difficulties

07 Tuesday May 2013

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Denny Hoskins, General Assembly, HB 631, missouri, punishment, republicans, SB 125, Tim Jones

Today, in Representative Denny Hoskins’ (r) weekly (generally) constituent e-mail:

[….]

Teacher Tenure

Earlier in the session I voted against HB 631, which would have taken control over teacher evaluations away from local school boards. On Thursday, April 25th a similar bill, SB 125, came before the Fiscal Review committee. As a member of that committee I was asked to vote on the bill, and I stayed with my previous position on the issue and voted “No.” Immediately following the vote I and Rep. Messenger, the other republican who voted “No” on the bill, were removed from the Fiscal Review committee by Speaker Tim Jones. I felt it was important to hold my ground on this issue and vote in the best interest of my constituents. I appreciate everyone who has contacted me with their support regarding SB 125.  I will continue to stand up for what I believe, even when it is difficult.

[….]

[emphasis and capitalization in original]

Nope, we didn’t edit a thing.

Previously:

Campaign Finance: pay the piper, call the tune (April 25, 2013)

← Older posts
Newer posts →

Recent Posts

  • Medicare for All
  • Campaign Finance: wasted money
  • Mississippi Goddam
  • Oopsie!
  • Pete Hegseth (r): everyone knows

Recent Comments

Campaign Finance: wa… on Missouri republicans: an etern…
Campaign Finance: wa… on Campaign Finance: no quarter
Campaign Finance: wa… on Campaign Finance: Next
Mike’s Blog Round-Up… on Mark Alford (r): you can smell…
Mark Alford (r): you… on Mark Alford (r): manufacturing…

Archives

  • November 2026
  • October 2026
  • September 2026
  • August 2026
  • July 2026
  • June 2026
  • May 2026
  • April 2026
  • March 2026
  • February 2026
  • January 2026
  • December 2025
  • November 2025
  • October 2025
  • September 2025
  • August 2025
  • July 2025
  • June 2025
  • May 2025
  • April 2025
  • March 2025
  • February 2025
  • January 2025
  • December 2024
  • November 2024
  • October 2024
  • September 2024
  • August 2024
  • July 2024
  • June 2024
  • May 2024
  • April 2024
  • March 2024
  • February 2024
  • January 2024
  • December 2023
  • November 2023
  • October 2023
  • September 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007

Categories

  • campaign finance
  • Claire McCaskill
  • Congress
  • Democratic Party News
  • Eric Schmitt
  • Healthcare
  • Hillary Clinton
  • Interview
  • Jason Smith
  • Josh Hawley
  • Mark Alford
  • media criticism
  • meta
  • Missouri General Assembly
  • Missouri Governor
  • Missouri House
  • Missouri Senate
  • Resist
  • Roy Blunt
  • social media
  • Standing Rock
  • Town Hall
  • Uncategorized
  • US Senate

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org

Blogroll

  • Balloon Juice
  • Crooks and Liars
  • Digby
  • I Spy With My Little Eye
  • Lawyers, Guns, and Money
  • No More Mister Nice Blog
  • The Great Orange Satan
  • Washington Monthly
  • Yael Abouhalkah

Donate to Show Me Progress via PayPal

Your modest support helps keep the lights on. Click on the button:

Blog Stats

  • 1,102,897 hits

Powered by WordPress.com.

Loading Comments...