“…House Committee Substitute for Senate Substitute for Senate Bill No. 694 appears to be part of a coordinated effort by the payday loan industry to avoid more meaningful reform. This I cannot support…”

Governor Jay Nixon (D) vetoed SB 694 today. His veto message [pdf]:

Governor of Missouri

[….]

July 10, 2014

TO THE SECRETARY OF STATE OF THE STATE OF MISSOURI

Herewith I return to you House Committee Substitute for Senate Substitute for Senate Bill No. 694 entitles:

AN ACT

To repeal sections 408.500, 408.505, and 408. 506, RSMo, and to enact in lieu thereof three new sections relating to unsecured loans of five hundred dollars or less, with penalty provisions.

I disapprove of House Committee Substitute for Senate Substitute for Senate Bill No. 694. My reasons for disapproval are as follows:

House Committee Substitute for Senate Substitute for Senate Bill No. 694 provides false hope of true payday lending reform while in reality falling far short of the mark. This bill cannot be called meaningful reform and does not receive my approval.

Supporters point to the lower cap on interest this bill would impose, but allowing payday lenders to charge 912.5% for a 14-day loan is not true reform. Supporters point to the requirement that payday lenders offer extended payment plans, but in states where payday lenders are required to offer such plans they are seldom used by borrowers. Supporters point to the legislation’s requirement for payday lenders to comply with “restrictions and prohibitions applicable to creditors contained in the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act,” but the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act does not apply to creditors, which renders this requirement hollow. Supporters point to the prohibition on loan rollovers, but missing from the legislation is anything to address the unfortunately all-to-common situation where someone living paycheck-to-paycheck is offered multiple loans by multiple lenders at the same time or is encouraged to take out back-to-back loans from the same lender.

Although some may contend that House Committee Substitute for Senate Substitute for Senate Bill No. 694 is an improvement over the status quo, it fails to protect consumers and fails to prevent the cycle of debt that payday lending perpetuates. Instead House Committee Substitute for Senate Substitute for Senate Bill No. 694 appears to be part of a coordinated effort by the payday loan industry to avoid more meaningful reform. This I cannot support.

In accordance with the above stated reasons for disapproval, I am returning House Committee Substitute for Senate Substitute for Senate Bill No. 694 without my approval.

Respectfully submitted,

s/

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon

Governor

912.5% interest on a 14 day loan? Are there really people on this planet who think that’s reasonable? Wow.

Oopsie.

Governor Jay Nixon vetoed SB 508 today. In his veto message [pdf] he pointedly made reference to a major error in the bill due to its cut and paste origins from a right wingnut American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) template:

Governor of Missouri

[….]

July 7, 2014

TO THE SECRETARY OF STATE OF THE STATE OF MISSOURI

Herewith I return to you House Committee Substitute for Senate Bill No. 508 entitled:

[….]

I disapprove of House Committee Substitute for Senate Bill No. 508. My reasons for disapproval are as follows:

House Committee Substitute for Senate Bill No. 508 contains a number of worthwhile provisions that can become law with my action on other legislation. However, this legislation does not receive my approval due to a significant drafting error.

House Committee Substitute for Senate Bill No. 508 would impose additional restrictions on the licensure of an individual as a “navigator,” one who provides information or services in connection with eligibility, enrollment, or the program certification of any health benefit exchange operating pursuant to the Affordable care Act. Section 376.2004.6 of the bill would require an applicant for a navigator license to submit two full sets of fingerprints to the Missouri Highway patrol “for the purpose of obtaining a state and federal criminal records check under section 43.540 and Public Law 92-554 [sic].”

The bill’s reference to Public Law 92-554 should be to Public Law 92-544. This mistaken reference to Public Law 92-554, which deals with alcohol abuse and prevention, instead of to Public Law 92-544, which deals with federal criminal records, was included in model legislation developed by the American legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) entitled the “Navigator Background Check Act,”….

[….]

It appears that in copying and pasting from the ALEC model act, the General Assembly failed to correct this incorrect reference to Public Law 92-554.[….] While some may believe that such an error is “close enough” for a model act, it cannot be allowed to become the law of this State. Particularly in an area of the law that is subject of ongoing litigation, a glaring defect such as this cannot simply be ignored. Accordingly, this measure does not receive my approval.

In accordance with the above-stated reasons for disapproval, I am returning House Committee Substitute for Senate Bill No. 508 without my approval.

Respectfully submitted,

s/

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon

Governor

Heh. If they were in junior high school the General Assembly would get an “F” on the assignment. Come to think of it, they are still in junior high school. And they deserve the grade.

“…And, oh, by the way, if you look at those places where people have to wait in line to vote, if you look at the places where people have to wait in line to vote in America it’s where what are called poor people live and that’s wrong. Okay, that’s just deeply wrong…”

Previously:

David Axelrod – Missouri Boys State – June 14, 2014 (June 15, 2014)

Kansas City Mayor Sly James – Missouri Boys State – June 15, 2014 – on guns (June 16, 2014)

Governor Jay Nixon spoke at Missouri Boys State this evening in Warrensburg on the campus of the University of Central Missouri. His prepared remarks were followed by a freewheeling forty-five minute question and answer session.    

Governor Jay Nixon speaking at Missouri Boys State in Warrensburg on the campus of the University of Central Missouri – June 19, 2014.

The subject of early voting came up:

[….]

Question: ….You mentioned participating for voting. How do you plan on having more people participate in actual voting?

Governor Jay Nixon (D): I don’t plan it. I just tell you to do it. And if you don’t do it then idiots get elected and bad things happen. [applause, cheers]

You know what it is, I mean, sure, I’m for early voting, I’m for absentee voting, I think we ought to have voting on weekends beforehand, I think you ought to be able to show up and vote like two weeks beforehand, that fits your schedule instead of making it hard.

I don’t think there ought to be lines at the polls. I think it’s ridiculous to live in a world in which you can go to McDonald’s and get a cheeseburger in one minute, but if you’re gonna vote you’ve got to stand in line for three hours. [applause, cheers] And we ought to fund it to make sure people can vote [inaudible]. [applause, cheers]  And, oh, by the way, if you look at those places where people have to wait in line to vote, if you look at the places where people have to wait in line to vote in America it’s where what are called poor people live and that’s wrong. Okay, that’s just deeply wrong. You go to the, you know, you go to the really ritzy places where they got plenty of tax dollars and people don’t have to wait at all. By golly, they can order a Perrier and vote at their leisure. [laughter] But, uh, I think we need to make voting much easier for people, both in time and in the way you do it.

[….]

“…The bills I am vetoing today appear to be part of an ongoing effort by the general Assembly to enact special exemptions and credits that pick winners and losers through the tax code and shift a greater tax burden to the majority of taxpayers who are unable to utilize such loopholes…”

“…The unabated growth of these special carve-outs and the fiscal irresponsibility of failing to budget for them are all the more troubling when the general Assembly is simultaneously seeking to raise taxes on all Missourians with what could be the largest tax hike in Missouri history…”

Governor Jay Nixon vetoed a number of bills today:

Gov. Nixon vetoes special interest breaks rushed through in the final hours of the legislative session

June 11, 2014

Fiscally irresponsible carve-outs were not accounted for in the budget passed by the General Assembly or in the budgets of local jurisdictions they would impact

Jefferson City, MO – Gov. Jay Nixon today vetoed legislation containing more than a dozen special breaks and exemptions passed in the final hours of the legislative session.  These special interest carve-outs would reduce state and local revenues by up to $776 million annually and were not accounted for in the Fiscal Year 2015 budget passed by the legislature or in the budgets of the local jurisdictions they would impact.  In a letter addressed to members of the General Assembly, the Governor faulted the legislature for ignoring the legislative process and adding new loopholes to the tax code that will shift a greater tax burden to the majority of taxpayers.

“Rushed through with little debate in the final hours of the legislative session, these special breaks and exemptions for a handful of special interests are the result of a deeply flawed process and a fundamentally misguided approach to tax policy,” Gov. Nixon said. “Many of the most costly provisions were slipped into bills without a public hearing or even a fiscal note, and none of these giveaways were accounted for in the budget the legislature sent to my desk or in the local budgets of the jurisdictions they would impact.”

The provisions include special breaks for fast food restaurants, personal seat licenses, commercial dry cleaners and laundries, data storage and processing, certain used vehicles, farmers’ markets and fitness centers.  The fiscal impact of these provisions, which would reduce state and local revenues by as much as $776 million annually starting in the fiscal year that will begin on July 1, was not accounted for in the budget passed by the General Assembly or in the budgets of local jurisdictions.  This includes a $425 million annual reduction in state tax and a $351 million reduction in local taxes.

Most of these provisions would impact sales tax collections, and therefore would reduce local tax revenues that support police, fire, ambulance, emergency services, parks, children’s services and other public services provided at the local level. The loss of local revenue from these provisions could also impact repayment of voter-approved bonds issued to finance capital improvements such as county jails, county hospitals, fire stations, emergency management centers, road projects and other critical public infrastructure.

“These special carve outs and loopholes would undermine local public services and flout the will of voters by eroding revenues that support services like firefighters and cops, libraries and ambulance services, snow plows and health inspectors, public transit and road repair,” Gov. Nixon said. “From storm water management in West Plains to fire protection in Webster Groves, voters in communities across Missouri have come together to pass local sales taxes to support local public services and capital improvements . These special breaks passed by the General Assembly would siphon these voter-approved resources away from their intended purpose, and into the pockets of the well-connected.”

The reduced state sales tax revenue would also reduce funding from dedicated sales taxes for K-12 schools (also called the Proposition C sales tax), Highways, Conservation, State Parks, and Soil and Water Conservation Programs.

“Perhaps most troubling is the way the General Assembly is carving out special sales tax breaks for a select few, while pushing a $6.1 billion sales tax hike on all Missourians,” Gov. Nixon said.   “Passing secret, sweetheart deals so that the well-connected can pay less, while asking all Missourians to pay more, reflects priorities that are dangerously out of whack.”

Senate Bill 693, which would reduce state and local highway funding by more than $30 million annually, was passed just two days after legislators sent to the ballot a $6.1 billion sales tax increase to fund roads.

“Instead of engaging in an open and honest debate about the overall tax policy of our state, the legislature has once again opted for an undisciplined, scattershot approach by adding more loopholes to the already dizzying array of carve-outs that riddle our tax code,” Gov. Nixon said. “My vetoes today are a first step toward restoring fiscal sanity to a budget process that has gone off the rails.  That being said, I have the responsibility to maintain fiscal discipline regardless of whether my vetoes are sustained.  Moving forward, I will take the actions necessary to account for the reduced state revenues resulting from these giveaways and keep our state on a fiscally sustainable path.”

The Governor vetoed the following bills:

   Senate Bill 693, which would exempt from state and local sales tax certain used vehicles and rights of first refusal for tickets sold at the Sprint Center in Kansas City, and would expand the Wine and Grape Production Tax Credit;

   Senate Bill 584, which would, among other provisions, exempt from state and local sales tax items used in the storage or processing of data in any form, items used in the generation, transmission, distribution, sale or furnishing of electricity by power companies, and certain fees paid to places of recreation.

   House Bill 1865, which would create new exemptions from state sales taxes for the cost of utilities used by restaurants, grocery stores, convenience stores, fast food restaurants and other facilities engaged in food preparation;

   Senate Bill 612, which would exempt commercial laundries and dry cleaners from state and local sales taxes on various purchases, and would waive tax liability for certain business.

   Senate Bill 860, which would enable a purchaser to obtain a sales or use tax refund, even when they have current tax delinquencies;

   House Bill 1296, which would authorize certain corporations to utilize an alternative method of determining the amount of their income that is derived in Missouri and would add graphing calculators to the back to school sales tax holiday.

   Senate Bill 727, which would exempt certain items purchased from some, but not all, farmers’ market vendors from state and local sales and use taxes;

   Senate Bill 662, which would waive tax liability for certain businesses and would exempt from sales tax rights of first refusal for tickets sold at the Sprint Center in Kansas City;

   House Bill 1455, which would allow a business to claim a sales tax exemption without requiring it to prove eligibility for the exemption;

   Senate Bill 829, which would enact duplicate legislation to House Bill 1455.

[emphasis in original]

Governor Nixon’s letter [pdf] to the General Assembly:

Governor of Missouri

[….]

June 11, 2014

Members of the General Assembly:

I am writing to inform you of my veto today of a number of bills passed during the final hours of the legislative session that put the Fiscal Year 2015 budget you passed significantly out of balance. These measures would also negatively impact the budgets of local jurisdictions around the state, in addition to reducing sales tax revenues that provide dedicated funding to education, highways, conservation, parks and soil and water programs.

The bills I am vetoing today include House Bill No. 1296, House Bill No. 1455, House Bill No. 1865, Senate Bill No. 584, Senate Bill No. 612, Senate Bill No. 662, Senate Bill No. 693, Senate Bill No. 727, Senate Bill No. 829, and Senate Bill No. 860. Contained within these bills are loopholes and special breaks that a thorough fiscal analysis projects will permanently and immediately begin reducing state revenue by up to $425 million annually and local revenue by up to $351 million annually. Unlike the fiscal impact of Senate Bill Nos. 509 & 496, which was conveniently foisted off on future budgets, there are no delays, triggers, or other gimmicks that can be touted as shielding education, public safety, and other vital public services from the projected $776 million in state and local revenue legislators voted to to send to narrow special interests on the last day of the session.

The special tax breaks in these bills are not fiscally responsible. Indeed, not a penny of them was taken into account in the Fiscal Year 2015 budget you passed. Although legislators may have abdicated their fiscal responsibilities in failing to account for this budgetary impact, the resulting imbalance cannot be ignored and will have to be corrected through dramatic spending reductions by state and local governments. In addition to disregarding the budget process, legislators ignored the normal legislative process in rushing these bills to passage, slipping in costly provisions without public hearings and without fiscal notes reflecting the impact on state and local budgets.

Just as these measures were not accounted for in the state budget, neither has their impact been accounted for by the local jurisdictions that rely on local sales tax revenue to support police, fire, ambulance, emergency services, parks children’s services and many other vital public services. Indeed, the eduction in local revenue resulting from these special breaks could impact repayment of voter-approved bonds issued to finance capital improvements such as county jails, county hospitals, fire stations, emergency management centers, road projects and other critical infrastructure.

The new exemptions and loopholes in the bills that I am vetoing today are not the mere clarifications their supporters claim. Instead, they seek to overrule no fewer than twenty Missouri Supreme Court decisions going back to 1977 that have been followed by the Department of revenue over the course of previous and current administrations. The court cases sought to be abrogated by this legislation ruled that the laws enacted by the General Assembly required a tax to be collected, notwithstanding that a particular business had hoped to be excused from the legal obligations we all share. While it is well within the rights of a losing litigant to petition their elected representatives, it is wholly disingenuous to call doing so here anything than what it is – seeking a special exemption from the law, as currently written and confirmed by the courts.

The bills I am vetoing today appear to be part of an ongoing effort by the general Assembly to enact special exemptions and credits that pick winners and losers through the tax code and shift a greater tax burden to the majority of taxpayers who are unable to utilize such loopholes. With more than 260 current sales tax exemptions and tax credits, the continued erosion of the tax base through additional individualized exemptions and credits violates well-established principles of sound tax policy that call for a broad tax base so that tax rates can remain low. Indeed, legislative leadership has recently called for a comprehensive review of this dizzying array of tax exemptions. But rather than heeding calls to reduce costly and inefficient carve-outs, legislators have instead rushed through many more, leaving Missouri families to pick up the tab for education,law enforcement, and other vital public services.

The unabated growth of these special carve-outs and the fiscal irresponsibility of failing to budget for them are all the more troubling when the general Assembly is simultaneously seeking to raise taxes on all Missourians with what could be the largest tax hike in Missouri history. While the benefits of the more than one billion dollars in annual tax breaks legislators have passed over the last two months will go disproportionately to the wealthy, the burden of this multi-billion dollar tax increase for transportation would fall disproportionately on Missouri’s working families and seniors.

Throughout my time as Governor, I have worked with legislators on fiscally responsible ways to improve our tax code while protecting our state’s fiscal health and balancing the budget, including four tax cuts that I have signed into law. Even during this legislative session, I worked directly with legislators to put forward a specific, concrete proposal that would have lowered taxes for Missourians and reined in costly and inefficient tax credits for special interests, broadened the overall tax base and reduced tax rates, while protecting our ability to invest in education and other vital services. Unfortunately, legislators refused to enact this broad tax relief in favor of narrow giveaways. That is an endeavor I cannot support.

Sincerely.

s/

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon

Governor

That’s gonna be one heck of a veto session.

A release from the office of Governor Jay Nixon:

Gov. Nixon issues statement on transportation tax

June 2, 2014

Jefferson City, MO

Gov. Jay Nixon today issued the following statement regarding the sales tax increase for transportation that will appear on the August ballot. The proposal would increase sales taxes by $6.1 billion over ten years.

We can all agree on the need for a robust discussion about Missouri’s long-term transportation infrastructure needs. Along with a highly-skilled workforce, quality schools, and healthy communities, well-maintained roads and bridges are key to our economic competitiveness.  However, any proposal to change how we fund transportation must be considered in the context of the overall tax policy of our state and funding for other priorities like education.

Recently, members of the General Assembly have been engaged in a relentless effort to erode Missouri’s tax base by carving out new loopholes and exemptions for wealthy individuals and businesses.  In the past two months alone, the legislature has passed over a billion dollars in tax breaks that disproportionately benefit the most affluent taxpayers and businesses.  These misguided policies, including the $776 million package of primarily sales tax giveaways rushed through on the last day of session, have shifted the tax burden away from the wealthy and onto working Missourians, while undermining support for education and other vital public services that create opportunity for Missouri families.

On the heels of this headlong rush to provide special breaks and carve-outs for the wealthy and well-connected, members of the General Assembly are now attempting to raise taxes on all Missourians.  The burden of this $6.1 billion sales tax increase would fall disproportionately on Missouri’s working families and seniors by increasing the cost of everyday necessities like diapers and over-the-counter medication, while giving the heaviest users of our roads a free pass.  If this effort is successful, Missouri will have the dubious distinction of being a state that, in a matter of months, cut taxes on lawyers and lobbyists, but hiked taxes on bar soap and baseball gloves.      

I cannot in good conscience endorse a $6.1 billion tax hike on Missouri families and seniors when special interests and the wealthy are being showered with sweetheart deals.  This tax hike is neither a fair nor fiscally responsible solution to our transportation infrastructure needs and it does not have my support.

“…This tax hike is neither a fair nor fiscally responsible solution…”

That’s the main feature of any regressive tax.

Rex Sinquefield had a thing or two to say about Governor Jay Nixon at a Heritage Foundation event (starting at around the forty-six minute mark – via @ssnich):

Rex Sinquefield: ….You know, Kansas has three great things going for it. First of all, it has a great governor. We all agree with that, right? [applause] Secondly, it’s got a great tax policy. And thirdly, and most important, Missouri has an idiot for a governor. [laughter] Am I allowed to say that in public [laughter]?

[….]

So much for respectful discourse when it comes to public policy.

Not that we’ve ever been accused of subscribing to that philosophy.

Governor Jay Nixon (D) announced today that he will vet SB 493:

Gov. Nixon announces that he will veto legislation that would have sent public dollars to private schools

May 23, 2014

Senate Bill 493 fails to address challenges resulting from existing transfer law and instead would create even more problems for students and families, Governor says

Jefferson City, MO

Gov. Jay Nixon today announced that he will veto legislation that would have diverted public, taxpayer dollars away from Missouri’s public schools and given that money to private schools without any accountability to voters.  In addition, the Governor said that this failed attempt to fix the current school transfer law would, in fact, result in further disruption for students in struggling school districts by eliminating the requirement that unaccredited school districts pay for transportation costs.

“Every child in Missouri deserves a quality public education, and that is why I am vetoing Senate Bill 493,” Gov. Nixon said. “Senate Bill 493 fails to address the challenges resulting from the existing school transfer law and instead, would create even more problems by allowing public funds to be used for private schools and pulling the rug out from under students who have transferred.”

Senate Bill 493 includes a provision that would allow public taxpayer dollars to be used to pay for private school tuition, a dangerous voucher scheme that would undermine the core principles and protections enshrined in Missouri’s constitution.

“Throughout the legislative session I repeatedly made it clear that any effort to send public dollars to private schools through a voucher program would be met by my veto pen,” Gov. Nixon said.  “The General Assembly ignored my warnings, and this veto will be the result.”

Senate Bill 493 would eliminate the requirement that unaccredited districts pay for the transportation costs of students.  This provision would negatively impact the hundreds of students and families who have already transferred to another school district with an understanding that their transportation costs would be paid.

Senate Bill 493 would also have allowed districts that receive students from unaccredited districts to discount the tuition paid for transfers in exchange for not having to include those students’ performance data for accountability purposes for up to five years.  The result of this provision would be to allow schools to not be held accountable for the education of these transfer students.

[emphasis in original]

Far from it.

From Governor Jay’s Nixon’s veto of SB 509:

….Moreover, the revenue triggers in the legislation only apply until the tax cuts are fully phased-in. After that time, under the legislature’s own estimates, there would be at least $620 million less in general revenue available each and every year, regardless of whether revenue collections are going up or down. In addition, the legislation’s annual cost would continue to grow above the legislature’s $620 million annual estimate because the income bracket adjustments in the bill for increases in the consumer price index would continue indefinitely. See Section 143.011.3. This provision alone would result in an additional $128 million in annual revenue reductions ten years after the legislation is fully phased-in, increasing each year in perpetuity….

[emphasis added]

A bill cannot be bipartisan when it needs a majority of only one party to pass it.

Democratic lawmaker removed from committees after voting with GOP on tax cut

by Eli Yokley • May 7, 2014

….English was a special guest at a private reception for Republican lawmakers on Tuesday night. He told members that he wanted to vote in favor of the bill when it was first brought up in the House, but that he was urged by Republican leadership to hold off until the override vote in an attempt to avoid pressure from Democrats, including the governor.

When you find yourself in a deep hole the first rule is to stop digging.

While the House was in session today, working to complete the process on budget bills by the deadline on Friday, we spoke with three representatives about the veto override vote of SB 509. Representative Keith English was the only Democrat in the General Assembly to vote to override Governor Nixon’s (D) veto:

Representative Keith English (D)(center) – May 6, 2014.

Show Me Progress: So, it’s been an, uh, something of an interesting week for you, hasn’t it?

Representative Keith English (D): Uh, it’s been a very interesting week. You know, um, I worked very hard with both sides of the aisle this week to make sure that, uh, we try to do what we can to make the state move forward, be more competitive with other states, stopping right to work and paycheck deception, stripping teachers of their pensions and the tenure. Um, I had to look really deep into, uh, legislation that we can be more competitive. And I think this bill is definitely gonna do that.

Show Me Progress: You’re, you’re referring to Senate Bill 509.

Representative English (D): Senate Bill 509, that’s correct. Senate Bill 509, uh, will take a two year period, the next two years, we’ll look at, uh, how much money we generate. Then on the third year, through the next five years after that, if, and that’s the big word, if, we can get small businesses, which are the backbone of this, this state, uh, to help generate seven hundred and fifty million dollars to the good, uh, we will, uh, give a little bit back to those businesses to reinvest in their companies to expand more.

And with the rising cost of health insurance, uh, under Obamacare, uh, and insurance companies, uh, dropping companies for uh, for different reasons, uh, and the possibility of the federal government increasing minimum wage to a possible ten dollars and ten cents an hour I feel strongly that we have to do something to tell the small businesses in Missouri, don’t move away, we’ll try to help you. Um, in my district we have businesses that are struggling so bad, uh, and with business of course, and if we can give them some incentive to hire more people, ’cause a lot of them have cut back, cut back to three and four employees when they had five and six. And being a small business owner, um, I know exactly what that feels like.

Show Me Progress: But, uh, didn’t, you know, in some ways, uh, uh, the, the concept of sort of an economic stimulus, per se, with this kind of, uh, cutting back of, of revenue in the sense of, of  tax cut, per se [crosstalk] it’s, it’s, the bill made it structural though, and something that can’t be rolled back.

Representative English (D): Well, in the bill [crosstalk]…Well, there’s a failsafe in there, in case, if we don’t hit that hundred fifty million the bill dies. The bill will not move further. It has to, for the five years, has to increase a hundred and fifty million. The failsafe in this bill is, is that it will not cut funds to education. We have to increase seven hundred fifty million, if we don’t the bill’s moot. There’s a lot of people out there that are saying that there’s a possibility that this bill will not move forward, but we have to do something. We do have the lowest taxes of any state neighboring us, we do have the best cities, the best home structures, we have the greatest people and tools and resources. I don’t know what else to do to bring big business here. We’ve had Chrysler move out. Ford closed up and moved out. We’ve had so many businesses that have moved out of state. And if that’s the, the, the issue there, as we have lowest taxes, Florissant, that I represent, is one of the best places to retire. I want to make sure that this continues for a long time. And the only way I could see to do that in the legislation that we have, and the ideas that we have bipartisan sitting at the table, and I believe this was a bipartisan bill. Unfortunately the Governor vetoed it, it made it a partisan issue. I had four, maybe five other Democrats that wanted to be with this bill but just couldn’t go against the Governor. And I had to do something.

[….]

Representative Stephen Webber (D) [file photo].

Show Me Progress: So, how would you, how would you characterize the, uh, the vote on, um, the final vote on, uh, the override on SB 509?

Representative Stephen Webber (D): I mean, it’s certainly shortsighted, uh, to begin with. You know, if, if it’s a good idea it’s something that we should do now. The fact that people pushed off, um, the tax cuts so that they’ll never have to deal with the consequences of their actions, they’ll never actually have to budget, they’ll never actually have face the reality of not funding schools. Um, to me, that, that’s very irresponsible.

Show Me Progress: Would you characterize the bill as bipartisan?

Representative Webber (D): No, absolutely not. No. No, it’s clearly not. I mean, um, getting you know, less than two percent [one person] of the Democrats doesn’t make it a, a bipartisan bill.

Uh, I’ve described it as, it’s like, it’s like boiling a frog. You know, you put frog, a frog in the water and you turn up the heat. And so it feels good at first, and then it starts slowly, by the time you realize you’re burning, you’re boiling it’s, it’s too late. Uh, that’s the way this bill works. I mean it, it doesn’t, uh, fully implement for seven years at the earliest. And so every single member of this General Assembly will be termed out, um, before they have to face the true impact of cutting school funding, of not funding higher education. And at that point, all people are gonna know is there not money, there’s not money for these projects. They’re not gonna know who’s fault it is, they’re not gonna know who to blame, they’re not gonna , they’re not gonna say, oh, let’s go back to, in twenty twenty-two they’re not gonna say let’s go back to twenty fourteen and look at who voted for this bill. I mean, that’s not gonna happen. [crosstalk] Um.

Show Me Progress: Uh, so for, um, and, and, to be clear, the, the, the only way that the, the, the, the bill is reversible is if it comes to a vote of [crosstalk] of…

Representative Webber (D): We have to change the law again, right.

Show Me Progress: Well, you have to change the, and the change will have to go to a vote of the people due to the Hancock amendment.

Representative Webber (D): Correct. Correct.

Show Me Progress: And, and so, there is no sunset clause on any of this.

Representative Webber (D): No. Uh, and, and, they keep saying there’s these triggers and, and the folks that know that, uh, they know that’s incredibly misleading. They know that every year, um, that, the hundred fifty million dollars a year that you have to hit is eaten up very quickly in, in, you know, mandatory, uh, spending for federal match programs, um, I mean, inflation, population growth. It, it clearly will result in a, uh, cut to education funding. And they either, um, most of them know that and they’re just misleading people. Um, those that don’t know  that are just uninformed.[….] It clearly will result in education cuts.

[….]

Representative Jeremy LaFaver (D) – May 8, 2014.

Show Me Progress: So, I want to talk with you about the, uh,  Senate Bill 509, the veto override.

Representative Jeremy LaFaver (D): Uh huh.

Show Me Progress: Um, would you characterize, what, what  would you characterize, the, the long term effect of the bill?

Representative LaFaver (D): Unknown. I think that there are a lot of things up in the air, particularly with the section that the Governor pointed out, that eliminates the top bracket. I think the long term effect, um, is truly unknown. It’s either gonna be bad or it’ll be devastating.

Show Me Progress: Would, would you characterize, uh, any part of the bill as bipartisan?

Representative LaFaver (D): No.

Show Me Progress: [….]  Do you, is there, is, is there any easy way to fix any of the problems in the bill?

Representative LaFaver (D): No.

Show Me Progress: [….] Is there any kind of sunset provision in the bill?

Representative LaFaver (D): No.

Show Me Progress: None whatsoever?

Representative LaFaver (D): No. In order for us to fix it, uh, through the legislature anyway, we would have to pass something and then it would have to go to the voters as a tax increase. And so, if we’re gonna try and fix the, uh, section that the Governor  is talking about we would have to then go back and approve a tax increase of four point eight billion dollars and ask Missourians to increase their taxes by  four point eight billion.

[….]

There are people in Missouri and out who are laughing last.

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): your constituents know what you’re doing to them (August 26, 2013)

HB 253: Because those dissolute leeches at the public trough should shut up, that’s why! (August 28, 2013)

Missouri Democratic Party on HB 253: Yes, yes, let’s talk about Texas Gov. Rick Perry (r)…. (August 28, 2013)

AG Chris Koster (D) to Speaker Jones (r) on HB 253: you all certainly made a mess of things… (August 29, 2013)

Speaker Tim Jones (r) and HB 253: hone your legal analytical skills litigating birth certificates (August 30, 2013)

HB 253: any way you slice it (September 11, 2013)

HB 253: Watch out – It’ll be baaaaaaaaaack (September 11, 2013)

SB 509: once more, with feeling (April 17, 2014)

SB 509: “….We’d like to think that most of them are not simpletons….” (April 18, 2014)

SB 509: Governor Jay Nixon (D) strikes back (April 22, 2014)

SB 509: dueling on Twitter (April 22, 2014)

SB 509: Would you like some whine with your bill? (April 23, 2014)

SB 509: strange gyrations (April 23, 2014)

The Missouri GOP, Evel Knievel and political stuntsmanship (April 24, 2014)

SB 509: the folks back home ain’t buying what they’re selling (April 24, 2014)

SB 509: in a wingnutshell (April 28, 2014)

SB 509: the folks back home ain’t buying what they’re selling – part 2 (April 29, 2014)

SB 509: thank the FSM (or the deity of your choice) for Kansas (May 1, 2014)

SB 509: veto it is (May 1, 2014)

SB 509: Governor Jay Nixon’s (D) Veto (May 2, 2014)

SB 509: That’s a mighty interesting legal citation you got there… (May 2, 2014)

SB 509: “Brawndo! It’s got electrolytes!” (May 3, 2014)

SB 509: You were expecting anything else? (May 5, 2014)

SB 509: not so much these days (May 6, 2014)

The face of shame (May 6, 2014)

SB 509: the moment when all hope for the future of Missouri died (May 6, 2014)

Dude, you’ve got bigger problems than an out of the way blog with dozens of readers (May 6, 2014)

The day Missouri went down the toilet (May 7, 2014)

Dude, you’ve got bigger problems than an out of the way blog with dozens of readers – part 2 (May 8, 2014)

…and now you know the rest of the story (May 8, 2014)

This morning the House took up the vote to override Governor Jay Nixon’s veto of SB 509. The republican majority needed 109 votes to override the governor’s veto. After quickly calling the previous question, the majority forced a vote without floor debate. The board was held open, amounting to a significant delay, waiting for the vote of Representative Keith English. Interestingly, the republican majority allowed that lone member of the minority party the final and deciding vote. Don’t you just love their bipartisan spirit?

During the wait the quips from the floor included, “Maybe we should all stand and applaud when he walks in” and “If this is such a good bill, what’s he hiding for?”

Representative Keith English, escorted in by Representative Ron Hicks (r), quickly approached his desk, pushed the vote button, and just as quickly left the House floor. The republican majority stood and applauded.

The override vote was 109-46.

Governor Jay Nixon (D) made the following statement:

Gov. Nixon issues statement on Senate Bill 509 veto override

May 6, 2014

Jefferson City, MO

Gov. Jay Nixon today issued the following statement regarding the legislature’s override of his veto of Senate Bill 509:

“Missouri families and businesses know that public education is the best economic development tool there is, and that is why I vetoed Senate Bill 509,” Gov. Nixon said. “While scaled back from last year’s billion-dollar House Bill 253, Senate Bill 509 fails to prioritize or adequately protect public education at a time when quality public schools are more important than ever to our ability to create jobs in the global economy.  And while its authors may have delayed its impact, Senate Bill 509 remains a very real threat to the principles of fiscal discipline that have helped us maintain our spotless AAA rating for decades.  As I have from Day One, I will continue to manage the budget with the resources available and keep our state moving forward.”

Rough translation: Representative Keith English won’t be sitting next to me at the next Democratic Party dinner.

Meanwhile, the rest of us are royally screwed.

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): your constituents know what you’re doing to them (August 26, 2013)

HB 253: Because those dissolute leeches at the public trough should shut up, that’s why! (August 28, 2013)

Missouri Democratic Party on HB 253: Yes, yes, let’s talk about Texas Gov. Rick Perry (r)…. (August 28, 2013)

AG Chris Koster (D) to Speaker Jones (r) on HB 253: you all certainly made a mess of things… (August 29, 2013)

Speaker Tim Jones (r) and HB 253: hone your legal analytical skills litigating birth certificates (August 30, 2013)

HB 253: any way you slice it (September 11, 2013)

HB 253: Watch out – It’ll be baaaaaaaaaack (September 11, 2013)

SB 509: once more, with feeling (April 17, 2014)

SB 509: “….We’d like to think that most of them are not simpletons….” (April 18, 2014)

SB 509: Governor Jay Nixon (D) strikes back (April 22, 2014)

SB 509: dueling on Twitter (April 22, 2014)

SB 509: Would you like some whine with your bill? (April 23, 2014)

SB 509: strange gyrations (April 23, 2014)

The Missouri GOP, Evel Knievel and political stuntsmanship (April 24, 2014)

SB 509: the folks back home ain’t buying what they’re selling (April 24, 2014)

SB 509: in a wingnutshell (April 28, 2014)

SB 509: the folks back home ain’t buying what they’re selling – part 2 (April 29, 2014)

SB 509: thank the FSM (or the deity of your choice) for Kansas (May 1, 2014)

SB 509: veto it is (May 1, 2014)

SB 509: Governor Jay Nixon’s (D) Veto (May 2, 2014)

SB 509: That’s a mighty interesting legal citation you got there… (May 2, 2014)

SB 509: “Brawndo! It’s got electrolytes!” (May 3, 2014)

SB 509: You were expecting anything else? (May 5, 2014)

SB 509: not so much these days (May 6, 2014)

The face of shame (May 6, 2014)