• About
  • The Poetry of Protest

Show Me Progress

~ covering government and politics in Missouri – since 2007

Show Me Progress

Tag Archives: reform

CLEAN Missouri bar fight!

12 Saturday Jan 2019

Posted by Michael Bersin in campaign finance, Claire McCaskill, Missouri General Assembly, social media

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

#TrumpShutdown, campaign finance, campaign finance reform, CLEAN Missouri, Donald Trump, General Assembly, lobbying reform, missouri, redistricting reform, reform, Robert Cornejo, social media, Twitter

Someone doesn’t like CLEAN Missouri restrictions on lobbying expenditures:

Robert Cornejo @CornejoForMO
This great idea is banned here in Missouri #moleg thanks to the unconstitutional sham of Clean Missouri! People of all political stripes should get together over a drink and work towards common ground. Prost!

Harpoon Brewery @harpoonbrewery
Govt shutdowns impact all of us. As a brewery, we can’t get approvals needed to keep new beers headed your way. We’re asking our reps to share a beer (on us) with a colleague and help America’s brewers get back to doing what we do. So all of you…

12:36 PM – 12 Jan 2019

You want a brewer to buy you a beer?

Uh, at least use the correct spin. The beer purveyor’s post was about the #TrumpShutdown. You know, a federal issue. Own it, dude.

And, Claire McCaskill (D) lands a punch:

Claire McCaskill @clairecmc
Whooaaaa. There is nothing in CLEAN Missouri that stops YOU or any other legislator from buying a beer for your colleagues, no matter what their party. Says a lot that you think LOBBYISTS buying you booze is necessary for the work towards common ground.
[….]
12:55 PM – 12 Jan 2019

Bam!

Heh. That’s our Claire. This beer’s for you…

Campaign Finance: the same fight

27 Monday Aug 2018

Posted by Michael Bersin in campaign finance

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

campaign finance, CLEAN Missouri, Ethics, initiative, lobbying, Missouri Ethics Commission, Redistricting, reform, sunshine

Today at the Missouri Ethics Commission in support of the initiative (Amendment 1) for campaign finance, lobbying, legislative open records, and redistricting reform:

C161298 08/27/2018 CLEAN Missouri Planned Parenthood Great Plains Votes 4401 W. 109th St Suite 200 Overland Park KS 66211 8/27/2018 $50,000.00

[emphasis added]

“Which side are you on? Which side are you on?”

Previously:

Campaign Finance: teaching your children well (August 20, 2018)

Campaign Finance: teaching your children well

20 Monday Aug 2018

Posted by Michael Bersin in campaign finance, Missouri General Assembly

≈ 6 Comments

Tags

campaign finance, CLEAN Missouri, initiative, lobbying, missouri, Missouri Ethics Commission, open records, Redistricting, reform, sunshine

Today at the Missouri Ethics Commission from educators in support of the initiative (Amendment 1) for campaign finance, lobbying, legislative open records, and redistricting reform:

C161298 08/20/2018 CLEAN Missouri Missouri National Education Association Ballot Issue Crisis Fund 1810 E. Elm st Jefferson city MO 65107 8/18/2018 $250,000.00

[emphasis added]

If teachers are for it you can bet a lot of money that right wingnut republicans are against it.

Campaign Finance: keep it clean

07 Wednesday Mar 2018

Posted by Michael Bersin in campaign finance

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

campaign finance, initiative, missouri, Missouri Ethics Commission, organized labor, reform, working people

Today at the Missouri Ethics Commission for the campaign finance reform, ethics reform, redistricting reform initiative:

C161298 03/07/2018 CLEAN Missouri Western Missouri and Kansas Laborers’ District Council 8500 Ward Parkway Suite 300 Kansas City MO 64114 3/7/2018 $50,000.00

[emphasis added]

Interestingly you don’t see any corporate lobbyists making the same contribution.

Previously:

Campaign Finance: definitely not a right wingnut PAC (May 16,2017)

Campaign Finance: cleanliness (July 31, 2017)

Campaign Finance: more for cleanliness (September 11, 2017)

Campaign Finance: when in Rome… (January 13, 2018)

Campaign Finance: cleanliness

31 Monday Jul 2017

Posted by Michael Bersin in campaign finance

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

campaign finance, initiative, missouri, Missouri Ethics Commission, reform

Today at the Missouri Ethics Commission for the CLEAN initiative:

C161298 07/31/2017 CLEAN Missouri Langdon & Emison, LLC 911 Main St Lexington MO 64067 7/31/2017 $10,000.00

[emphasis added]

The committee:

C161298: Clean Missouri
Committee Type: Campaign
510 East 115Th Terrace
Kansas City Mo 64131
Established Date: 07/20/2016
[….]
Ballot Measure History
Ballot Measures Election Date Subject Support/Oppose

Constitutional Amendment To Article Iii, Relating To The General Assembly, Version 1-8, 2018-042 To 2018-049
11/06/2018
Shall The Missouri Constitution Be Amended To: •Change Process And Criteria For Redrawing State Legislative Districts During Reapportionment; •Change Limits On Campaign Contributions That Candidates For State Legislature Can Accept From Individuals Or Entities; •Establish A Limit On Gifts That State Legislators, And Their Employees, Can Accept From Paid Lobbyists; •Prohibit State Legislators, And Their Employees, From Serving As Paid Lobbyists For A Period Of Time; •Prohibit Political Fundraising By Candidates For Or Members Of The State Legislature On State Property; And •Require Legislative Records And Proceedings To Be Open To The Public?
Support

Here’s hoping.

Campaign Finance: Fight for Reform

22 Monday May 2017

Posted by Michael Bersin in campaign finance

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

campaign finance, initiative, missouri, Missouri Ethics Commission, reform

Today at the Missouri Ethics Commission:

C171133 05/22/2017 Fight For Reform-Missouri Fight for Reform 1050 17th St., NW Suite 590 Washington DC 20036 5/22/2017 $20,000.00

[emphasis added]

They’re a new committee:

C171133: Fight For Reform-Missouri
Committee Type: Campaign
510 East 115Th Terrace
Kansas City Mo 64131
Established Date: 05/09/2017
[….]
Treasurer
Sean Soendker Nicholson
510 East 115Th Terrace
Kansas City Mo 64131

Ballot Measures Election Date Subject Support/Oppose

Constitutional Amendment To Article I[II], Relating To The General Assembly, Version 1 2018-042 To Version 8 2018-049

11/06/2018

Shall The Missouri Constitution Be Amended To:
•Change Process And Criteria For Redrawing State Legislative Districts During Reapportionment;
•Change Limits On Campaign Contributions That Candidates For State Legislature Can Accept From Individuals Or Entities;
•Establish A Limit On Gifts That State Legislators, And Their Employees, Can Accept From Paid Lobbyists;
•Prohibit State Legislators, And Their Employees, From Serving As Paid Lobbyists For A Period Of Time; •Prohibit Political Fundraising By Candidates For Or Members Of The State Legislature On State Property; And •Require Legislative Records And Proceedings To Be Open To The Public?

Support

Now that’s a noble cause. They’re gonna need a lot more money.

If this gets on the ballot and passes, what’s a right wingnut billionaire to do?

Previously:

Campaign Finance: definitely not a right wingnut PAC (May 16, 2017)

Time capsule

03 Friday Jul 2015

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

campaign finance, Ethics, Jason Kander, missouri, reform, Secretary of State, Time capsule

Today, via Twitter, from Missouri Secretary of State Jason Kander (D):

Jason Kander ‏@JasonKander

Folks burying 100 year time capsule at state Capitol asked me for a #moleg roster. Couldn’t resist … [….] 10:39 AM – 3 Jul 2015

In the time capsule – from Missouri Secretary of State Jason Kander (D).

Hope springs eternal.

Previously:

Kander (D) and Flook (r): ethics reform legislation in Jefferson City (December 14, 2009)

Kander (D) and Flook (r): ethics reform legislation in Jefferson City, part 2 (December 15, 2009)

Kander (D) and Flook (r): ethics reform legislation in Jefferson City, part 3 (December 16, 2009)

Kander (D) and Flook (r): ethics reform legislation in Jefferson City, part  4 (December 22, 2009)

Well, it took long enough

22 Friday Nov 2013

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Claire McCaskill, filibuster, missouri, reform, U.S. Senate

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

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

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

Milo ‏@chasbottom

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

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

Tessa M. Harper ‏@TessaHarper2

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

Again, it’s a long wait to 2018.

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

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

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

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

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

Blue Girl: Right.

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

Blue Girl: Yeah.

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

Blue Girl: They should read about the Polish Sejm.

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

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

Blue Girl: Yeah.

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

Blue Girl: Poison pills.

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

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

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

Why can't Missouri be more like Michigan?

18 Wednesday Jan 2012

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

2012 budget, education cuts, Jay Nixon, Misouri, reform, spending cuts, tax credits

Yesterday the St. Louis Post-Dispatch ran a great editorial. The problem it addressed was straightforward: the $500 million plus state budget shortfall. The editorial writers made no bones about the obvious source of the problem:

Digging out of this hole is Missouri’s true challenge. But neither our Legislature nor our governor can get over their “no new taxes” pledges to do anything meaningful about it.

The solution they suggested was just as straightforward:

Mr. Nixon should declare a holiday. A tax credit holiday.

This single action would more than fill the budget hole estimated by legislative leaders to be in the range of $500 million.

Everybody in the Capitol knows that Missouri’s biggest ongoing budget problem, outside of the Great Recession, is the state’s propensity to hand out tax credits like legislative candy along a parade route. Some credits go to good causes, like senior citizens on a fixed income. Most go to developers or corporations as incentives, theoretically, to create jobs.

Unfortunately for the theory that tax credits create jobs, the evidence that they do so overall is just not there. This fact is fairly well known, accounting for the fact that there are folks on all sides of the partisan divide willing to take pot shots at the practice.

Happily, there are some folks who are willing to at least try to take action to rationalize the use of tax credits. Sadly, they aren’t in Missouri. Michigan Democratic lawmakers, referencing the relationship between an educated work force and job creation, put forward a plan to finance free community college tuition for state residents, which would paid for by canceling $3.5 million worth of tax credits:

Study after study after study has emphasized the importance of a highly educated workforce in the economic vitality of any state in the 21st century” said Senate Democratic leader Gretchen Whitmer, D-East Lansing

So what has our governor decided to do? In spite of the importance of education to our economically beleaguered state, Governor Nixon proposes to partially balance the budget by cutting $89 million from an already mediocre state higher education system.

This year, when you hear talk about the state’s dire budget situation and the pain and suffering it has caused – 860 state jobs will be lost, for just one instance – remember there was a solution staring us in the face, and miracle of miracles, it might even  have garnered some bipartisan support. Also keep in mind that a few days ago, GOP gubernatorial candidate Dave Spence actually proposed a moratorium on tax credits as an important part of his economic plan. He seems to have learned something in those home economics courses.

To give the Governor his due, he’s up against a system that practically dictates that the worst case solution will be the only practicable option. In spite of some GOP criticism of tax credits, others in the legislature have made their unwillingness to reform the state’s program known. Last year, in fact, the Governor was warned by Steve Tilley, who has since become House Speaker, and three other powerful committee chairman – before he even put a budget proposal forward – that they would not permit him to use tax credit reform to balance the budget.

It’s hard not to conclude that once again powerful vested interested are calling the shots when it comes to the distribution of state tax dollars.  Nevertheless, one can’t help wondering just what might be achieved if the Governor had been willing to go out on a limb and show just a little more political courage. Surely there’s a time when we have to fight – even if we’re already backed to the wall? Perhaps that’s when we most need to show some fight.

 

Well, Claire?

15 Wednesday Dec 2010

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ 5 Comments

Tags

Claire McCaskill, constitutional option, filibuster, missouri, reform, rules, Senate, Tom Udall

Making the U.S. Senate actually work via changing the rules, explained in 90 seconds:

Narrator: This legislative summary is brought to you by Main Street Insider. Today we examine the “constitutional option” as proposed by Senator Tom Udall which is a mechanism that opens the door to changing filibuster rules. The Senate’s reputation as the place where bills go to die is becoming increasingly appropriate since two thousand seven.

David Waldman: Major legislation used to face a filibuster about eight to ten percent of the the time as far back as the sixties. These days seventy plus percent of the bills and nominations coming to the floor face a filibuster which really means that the Senate has just become paralyzed.  

Narrator: In response Senator Udall has proposed using a procedural mechanism that allows a simple majority to end a debate on rules changes at the beginning of a new Congress instead of the usual two thirds super majority.

This so-called “constitutional option”, if approved, would apply only on the first legislative day of the session and would require the President of the Senate’s approval. It does not contain any substantive changes to the rules themselves and simply provides an avenue to approve the rules with fifty-one votes.

Supporters say that filibuster reform is crucial to meeting the nation’s many pressing concerns and believe this option presents the best hope to change the rules.

Senator Tom Udall: With the hundreds of bills passed by the House the senate’s to do list keeps growing. the obstruction is irresponsible and far too easily influenced by the special interests.

Narrator: Opponents argue that the filibuster is a longstanding and important tradition that should not be jettisoned so casually.

The measure is expected to be brought up by Senator Udall in the first day of the new session, January fifth, and will require a majority vote, or fifty votes plus Vice President Biden to pass….

Previously:

Senator Claire McCaskill (D): Twitter flurry on republican obstruction and filibuster reform (December 10, 2010)

….And, of course, we chimed in:

@MBersin @clairecmc Then do something about changing the rules in January. #MO 44 minutes ago via web in reply to clairecmc

And Blue Girl:

@BGinKC @clairecmc And if the Ds don’t change the rules 1st thing Jan 5th, it stops being their fault and starts being yours. #thatsjustthewayitis 41 minutes ago via web in reply to clairecmc

And someone else:

@DoctorD71 @clairecmc You guys need to vote to change the Senate rules to stop the R roadblock. 39 minutes ago via Twitter for BlackBerry® in reply to clairecmc

….

Well, Claire, which side are you on?

← Older posts

Subscribe

  • Entries (RSS)
  • Comments (RSS)

Archives

  • 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

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

  • 775,197 hits

Powered by WordPress.com.

 

Loading Comments...