Suppose the Governor (r) called a special session of the General Assembly on a relatively trivial subject, ignoring the elephant in the room, and the minority party (D) reminded him anyway

10 Tuesday Sep 2019

Posted by Michael Bersin in Missouri General Assembly, Missouri House

Tags

General Assembly, governor, gun violence, guns, Mike Parson, Special Session

Pun intended. The one about ignoring the elephant.

Governor Mike Parson (r) [2018 file photo].

The Missouri General Assembly was called into a special today by Governor Mike Parson (r) to address used auto taxes (seriously). The Democratic Party minority in the House filed a few bills:

100th General Assembly, 1st Extraordinary Session

HB2 Green, Alan 2563H.01I – Prohibits the sale of an assault weapon to a person under the age of 21.

HB3 Green, Alan 2540H.02I – Establishes the “Extreme Risk Protection Order Act”

HB4 Green, Alan 2562H.01I – Requires the department of public safety to commission a study on gun violence in the state of Missouri

HB5 Lavender, Deb 2541H.01I – Modifies orders of protection by adding provisions that allow the confiscation of firearms from individuals a court deems to be a danger to themselves or others

HB6 Price, Wiley 2533H.01I – Establishes the offense of unlawfully storing a firearm in the presence of a child

HB7 Bland Manlove, Ashley 2566H.01I – Requires that all sales or transfers of ammunition be processed through a licensed firearms dealer

HB9 Brown, Richard 2554H.01I – Repeals provisions that prohibit political subdivisions from adopting orders, ordinances, or regulations relating to firearms

HB10 Bangert, Gretchen 2556H.01I – Modifies provisions relating to the transport and storage of firearms

HB11 Merideth, Peter 2542H.01I – Changes the laws regarding firearms

HB13 Brown, Richard 2535H.01I – Modifies the offense of unlawful possession of a firearm

HB14 Washington, Barbara 2557H.01I – Adds public libraries to the list of places CCW permit holders are not authorized to carry concealed weapons

HB18 Mackey, Ian 2551H.01I – Specifies that the seller of a firearm must verify the age of the purchaser.

HB19 Mackey, Ian 2539H.01I – Establishes extreme risk protection orders and gun violence seizure warrants and prohibits certain persons involved in domestic violence from possessing a firearm

HB20 Beck, Doug 2536H.01I – Modifies the offenses of unlawful transfer of weapons and unlawful possession of a firearm

HB21 Morgan, Judy 2547H.01I – Requires a firearm owner to report lost or stolen firearms

HB22 Merideth, Peter 2573H.01I – Establishes the “Community Police Tax Credit”

HB23 Razer, Greg 2543H.01I – Requires that all sales or transfers of firearms be processed through a licensed firearms dealer

HB24 Washington, Barbara 2553H.01I – Makes it a class C felony to manufacture, import, possess, purchase, sell, or transfer any assault weapon or large capacity magazine

HB25 Appelbaum, LaDonna 2560H.01I – Creates a civil penalty for businesses who sell or produce high capacity magazines

HB26 Appelbaum, LaDonna 2559H.01I – Creates a civil penalty for possession of a large capacity magazine

HB28 Windham, Kevin 2576H.02I – Establishes a firearm registry under the management of the Attorney General

HCR1 Windham, Kevin 2577H.01I – Urges the United States Congress to repeal the Firearm Owners Protection Act, 18 U.S.C. Section 926

HJR1 Merideth, Peter 2544H.01I – Proposes a constitutional amendment to require a background check for all firearm transfers of ownership and to require a permit to conceal carry a firearm

Representative Deb Lavender (D) [2019 file photo].

Representative Ashley Bland Manlove (D) [2019 file photo].

Representative Richard Brown (D) [2019 file photo].

Rep. Judy Morgan (D) [2016 file photo].

Representative Greg Razer (D) [2019 file photo].

Rep. Peter Merideth (D): about that Sunshine Law…

09 Friday Aug 2019

Posted by Michael Bersin in Missouri General Assembly, Missouri House

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Attorney General, CLEAN Missouri, Eric Schmitt, General Assembly, missouri, Missouri Sunshine Law, Peter Merideth

A release, yesterday, from Representative Peter Merideth (D):

State Rep. Peter Merideth
80th District
peter.merideth@house.mo.gov

For Immediate Release:
Aug. 8, 2019

Five months later, Schmitt hasn’t provided requested legal opinion
Attorney general shows pattern of protecting GOP officials in Sunshine Law cases

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. – More than five months after state Rep. Peter Merideth submitted a request for a legal opinion from Attorney General Eric Schmitt regarding whether the Republican-controlled House of Representatives is violating state law and the Missouri Constitution by preventing public access to certain lawmaker records, Schmitt has yet to respond – even though his office promised to do so with 90 days.

Yesterday, State Auditor Nicole Galloway noted that Schmitt, a Republican, likewise has failed to timely act on a request she submitted on May 7 seeking the attorney general’s opinion on whether government entities can assert the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution as justification to close portions of public documents that are open under Missouri’s Sunshine Law. Republican Gov. Mike Parson’s office recently invented the novel legal argument, which has been ridiculed by experts in open records law.

“Eric Schmitt has established an unfortunate pattern of looking the other way when Republican elected officials violate the law by shielding public records from public scrutiny,” said Merideth, D-St. Louis. “As attorney general, it is his duty to fight for transparency and protect Missourians. Instead he has chosen to protect officials of his own party and keep Missourians from holding their state government accountable.”

Merideth submitted his request for an attorney general’s opinion on March 7. Other than a same-day letter acknowledging receipt of the request and promising to respond to respond “within 90 days,” Merideth has received no further information from Schmitt regarding this issue.

“Missouri law requires the attorney general to issue legal opinions when requested by other elected officials,” Merideth said. “Eric Schmitt needs to do his job.”

Merideth’s original opinion request and the attorney general’s letter of acknowledgment are attached.

-30-

The original request for an opinion from Attorney General Eric Schmitt (r):

Request for Attorney General Opinion

1. Information about requestor: Representative Peter Merideth represents Missouri House District 80. He was first elected to the Missouri House of Representatives in 2016, reelected in 2018, and currently serves as a member of the 100th General Assembly.

2. Official capacity of requestor: Rep. Merideth is a duly elected State Representative serving the constituents of St. Louis City residing in Missouri House of Representatives District 80. He currently serves as a member of the 100th General Assembly, First Regular Session. His principal office is in Cole County, Missouri, in the Missouri Capitol building.

3. The question of LAW upon which I request your legal opinion is as follows: Does Rule 127 of the rules governing proceedings before the Missouri House of Representatives for the 100th General Assembly, as set forth in House Resolution 7, passed by the Missouri House of Representatives on January 15, 2019, violate Article III, Section 19(b) of the Missouri Constitution?

4. A complete statement of the FACTS giving rise to this question is as follows: Constitutional Amendment 1 (“Clean Missouri”) On November 6, 2018, 62 percent of Missouri voters approved Constitutional Amendment 1, also known as the “Clean Missouri” Amendment. Among its provisions, Constitutional Amendment 1 required all legislative records, defined broadly, to be subject to the state open meetings and records law, known as the Missouri Sunshine Law. Subsequent to its approval, Article III, Section 19 of the Missouri Constitution was amended to include subsection (b), which states: “Legislative records shall be public records and subject to generally applicable state laws governing public access to public records, including the Sunshine Law. Legislative records include, but are not limited to, all records, in whatever form or format, of the official acts of the general assembly, of the official acts of legislative committees, of the official acts of members of the general assembly, of individual legislators, their employees and staff, of the conduct of legislative business and all records that are created, stored or distributed through legislative branch facilities, equipment or mechanisms, including electronic. Each member of the general assembly is the custodian of legislative records under the custody and control of the member, their employees and staff. The chief clerk of the house or the secretary of the senate are the custodians for all other legislative records relating to the house and the senate, respectively.” House Rule 127 On January 15, 2019, the Missouri House of Representatives adopted House Resolution 7, which details the rules governing proceedings before the Missouri House of Representatives for the 100th General Assembly. House Resolution 7 included a new rule, Rule 127, “House Records,” which purports to grant Members of the Missouri House of Representatives the authority to close constituent case files, which it defined broadly, as well as records containing caucus strategy, which it did not define. The rule states: “Members may keep constituent case files, and records of the caucus of the majority or minority party of the house that contain caucus strategy, confidential. Constituent case files include any correspondence, written or electronic, between a member and a constituent, or between a member and any other party pertaining to a constituent’s grievance, a question of eligibility for any benefit as it relates to a particular constituent, or any issue regarding a constituent’s request for assistance.” Sunshine Request On March 2, 2019, Rep. Peter Merideth, who is currently an elected official in the Missouri House of Representatives, received two requests for legislative records pursuant to the Missouri Sunshine law. The first request specifically asked for emails purportedly, though likely fraudulently, sent to Rep. Merideth using his constituent’s email address. The second request specifically asked for emails, including attachments to said emails, sent from Democratic caucus staff and leadership to Rep. Merideth in regards to certain bills filed in 2018.

5. List each and every governmental entity involved in this request:
Rep. Peter Merideth The House Minority Caucus.

6. Which of the entities listed in response to Question 5 have attorneys paid with public funds? For each entity listed, attach a copy of the written legal opinion of each such attorney on the question involved herein. Rep. Merideth is represented in this matter by the House Minority Caucus Counsel, Casey Millburg. As an employee of the Missouri House of Representatives, Ms. Millburg is paid with public funds. Ms. Millburg’s written legal opinion on the question is attached.

7. State in detail how the question of law relates to your official position or to the discharge of your duties. Pursuant Article III, Section 19(b) of the Missouri Constitution, each member of the general assembly is the custodian of legislative records under the custody and control of the member, their employees and staff. As the custodian of such records for his office, Rep. Merideth is responsible for determining how to comply with Sunshine requests made for his office’s legislative records. Further, pursuant to this subsection, in doing so Rep. Merideth must comply with the provisions of the state’s open records laws. As a duly elected official serving as a Member of the Missouri House of Representatives, Rep. Merideth is also subject to the rules governing proceedings before the Missouri House of Representatives for the 100th General Assembly. As set forth in House Resolution 7 passed by the General Assembly on January 15, 2019, Rule 127 purports to give Rep. Merideth and all Members of the Missouri House of Representatives the power to determine whether or not to release constituent case files of the type at issue in Mr. Pedroli’s request in response to a Sunshine request for such records.

8. Is any litigation pending involving the issues raised in your opinion request? We are aware of no pending litigation involving the specific issues in this request.

9. If the answer to Question 8 is “yes” list the name of case, court in which it is pending and docket number of case: See above.

It ain’t exactly rocket surgery.

Rep. Dean Dohrman (r): making legislative and word salads

10 Monday Jun 2019

Posted by Michael Bersin in Missouri General Assembly, Missouri House

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

CLEAN Missouri, Dean Dohrman, General Assembly, HB 573, lobbyist, missouri, SB 259, Title IX

Or, letting a lobbyist pull your puppet strings.

“…’A lot of people come with a lot of ideas. I talk to constituents, they may mention something to me, I look into it. There’s some reason the law is the way it is. We can or can’t proceed with their suggestion,’ Dohrman told The Star…”

What the hell does that even mean?

Representative Dean Dohrman (r) [2016 file photo].

It’s about HB 573 and SB 259 and gutting Title IX in Missouri – for someone with a personal agenda.

Yesterday in the Kansas City Star:

Saga of Missouri Title IX bills shows sway of lobbyists, dark money in state government

[….]

Toward the end of October 2018, McIntosh met with state Rep. Dean Dohrman, R-La Monte, a friend who would sponsor the House version of the bill. McIntosh followed up with Dohrman and his staff by sending a series of articles decrying what he called a lack of due process for those accused of sexual assault on campus.

[….]

For the next month, the McIntoshes and Dohrman’s legislative staff worked together to write the bill.

They exchanged drafts, with both McIntosh and his wife outlining provisions they wanted included. The bill was crafted such that the expulsion of McIntosh’s son could have been retroactively appealed to the board of commissioners that his mother presided over.

In an email to Dohrman last fall, a nonpartisan legislative analyst assisting with the bill said, “You should be aware that significant legal concerns are likely to be raised regarding this legislation.”

Dohrman said he didn’t involve himself in the details of the bill’s drafting.

“I put in some input here and there, of course, but that’s a complicated matter and I thought it was best for me to hear it out through the whole process before I put in my two cents, if you will,” he said. “It wasn’t a blind acceptance on my part.”

“When I get a bill that’s extremely complicated I kind of let the person work it out,” Dohrman told The Star in recent interview. “You know, and we had (legislative research) involved, and I was there of course. I just kind of let it work out to see where it went.”

Dohrman said that McIntosh’s involvement shouldn’t lead people to believe lobbyists write all laws.

“A lot of people come with a lot of ideas. I talk to constituents, they may mention something to me, I look into it. There’s some reason the law is the way it is. We can or can’t proceed with their suggestion,” Dohrman told The Star. “Lobbyists, of course, that’s their job, and they’re there more often, but it’s an open process, as it should be.”

[…]

“…It wasn’t a blind acceptance on my part…” Narrator: “It was.”

“…Dohrman said that McIntosh’s involvement shouldn’t lead people to believe lobbyists write all laws…” This one.

“…Lobbyists, of course, that’s their job, and they’re there more often, but it’s an open process, as it should be….” “Open process”. That’s laughable. We wouldn’t be reading about this sordid tale if the republican majority in the General Assembly had managed to gut CLEAN Missouri provisions about Missouri Sunshine Law access to legislative communications.

Previously:

HB 573: Why? Who? (March 9, 2019)

SB 259: Really? For what purpose? (March 11, 2019)

HB 573 and SB 259: Let the army of lobbyists go forth… (March 12, 2019)

HB 573 and SB 259: What took you so long? (March 12, 2019)

HCS HB 573: if you put marshmallows and sprinkles on a mud pie it’s still a mud pie (March 13, 2019)

“…political satire became obsolete when Henry Kissinger was awarded the Nobel Prize…” (April 24, 2019)

HB 126: “…here for the ratio”

25 Saturday May 2019

Posted by Michael Bersin in Missouri General Assembly, Missouri Governor, Missouri House, Missouri Senate, social media

≈ 18 Comments

Tags

abortion, anti-choice, fictional character, General Assembly, HB 126, missouri, Nick Schroer, social media, Twitter

~~Pre 1973~~ 2019 medical equipment.

The sponsor of the anti-choice HB 126 took to social media last night, responding to a movie actor:

Nicholas B. Schroer @NickBSchroer
It’s called there’s an actual #CaptainAmerica for the unborn here in MO. Not just some on screen character. Missouri has a crew of #ProLife legislators speaking for our most vulnerable from womb to tomb. Our unborn deserve saving too, not just your on-screen characters #moleg
[….]
10:24 PM – 24 May 2019 from Lake St Louis, MO

Some of the responses:

So, you support expanding Medicaid? After all, babies who are born, as well as their mothers, need healthcare. And how about proper education? Are you going to ensure everyone has access to quality education?

Let’s talk about housing. After all, babies need a roof.

Or are you really only concerned about a political agenda, enforcing your views, as well as reducing women’s rights?

We’re gonna go with the second one.

“speaking for our most vulnerable from womb to tomb”
only when one enters the tomb immediately after birth.
Failure to support adequate policy otherwise. #moleg
The from-womb-to-tomb supporters are @MOLegDems.

We noticed that, too.

If that’s the case, then I expect our legislators to expand Medicaid, food stamps, etc. I also expect them to fund schools and raise the minimum wage. See, you really don’t mean “to tomb”. GTFO of my personal decisions and my body, Nicholas.

Narrator: “It was not the case. It never was.”

Cute, but we are an army of Captain Marvels, Nick. Bet.

We see what you did there.

Again, the term is #ForcedBirth.

a professional joker or “fool” at a medieval court, typically wearing a cap with bells on it and carrying a mock scepter. — @NickBSchroer this is the definition of jester.

Just stop with the “womb to tomb” thing. It’s clear that you don’t and it just sounds douchey. You haven’t stopped abortion; only safe abortions.

This makes no sense.

It never has.

To tomb? Have you seen Missouri statistics on maternal and infant mortality? These so called prolife legislators refuse to expand Medicaid or other services to care for those outside the womb.

He was trolling people with what he thought would be a clever little rhyme.

He has. He doesn’t care. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

That, too

I’m here for the ratio

Tomb?

I think you mean womb only there bro. Lets not pretend your policies do much for anyone but rich folks after that.

Bet you are against so-called “entitlement” programs, for the death penalty, support Trump… but yeah… all about this… FOH…

Are you going to increase the budgets for WIC, free/reduced school lunch programs, SNAP, etc. for all these children? I will wait right here…

Don’t hold your breath.

Like the tomb they will be placed in after they die in war bcuz they didnt get healthcare or an education w.o signing up as canon fodder bcuz their family couldnt plan their birth?

Iran.

“Our unborn” #rightwinghyperbole

Every conservative that talks about abortion sounds like a sociopath trying to say things to fit in [….]

Womb, sure. After that, they don’t seem to give a shit about anyone.

Who speaks for the woman?

At this point, not the woman.

Oh, sure. That’s why our infant/maternal mortality rates are so high. That’s why deaths of despair are rising. Sure, #moleg is full of super heroes..that’s why opioid addiction is so high. Yeppers, our reps think they are fabulous while the state craters.

It’s pretty ridiculous, isn’t it? They just care about forced pregnancy but don’t care about maternal or infant mortality.

Jeezus you’re desperate for attention.

Not not too much attention though. They passed the bill to strip women of their rights in the middle of the night. The governor signed the bill in a private ceremony. And he doesn’t even reply to Chris Evans—he quote tweets him.

They proved with their consensual rape and women lie nonsense that if they talk too much it’s bad for them. Now they’ll waste millions of our tax dollars paying lawyers to do their talking for them while the law gets shot down in courts.

Hey Nicholas, how about addressing the increasing maternal mortality rates in Missouri first…unless dead women is your thing?

Oh word? What are you doing for children after birth? Expanding Medicaid? Providing for family leave? Ensuring equality of education? Or…none of that? So maybe shut the hell about “womb to tomb”; you don’t care about children once they take a breath.

God, this is idiotic.

You sir, are a tool.

Womb to tomb? How’s that Medicaid expansion going? Universal pre-k? Paid family leave? Education funding? Are you addressing maternal mortality rates at all? What about the 400,000 foster kids? What exactly are you doing to protect the lives of the living?

Really Nic??? Are you will to start paying child support, insurance, and anything else it needs from the womb?? Yeah didnt think so asshat. Until you grow a uterus, zip it little man

Previously:

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

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

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

Medieval (May 17, 2019)

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

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

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

HB 126: the elephant in the womb

24 Friday May 2019

Posted by Michael Bersin in Missouri General Assembly, Missouri Governor, Missouri House, Missouri Senate

≈ 19 Comments

Tags

abortion, anti-choice, General Assembly, governor, Mike Parson, missouri

Governor Mike Parson (r) [2018 file photo].

Own it.

~~Pre 1973~~ 2019 medical equipment.

Today, from Governor Mike Parson (r):

Governor Parson Signs House Bill 126 and Senate Bill 21

May 24, 2019

Jefferson City This morning at the State Capitol, Governor Parson joined with House and Senate members and pro-life coalition leaders to sign House Bill 126. The bill was passed by super-majorities in both the House and the Senate.

“By signing this bill today, we are sending a strong signal to the nation that, in Missouri, we stand for life, protect women’s health, and advocate for the unborn,” said Governor Mike Parson. “All life has value and is worth protecting.”

HB 126, also known as the “Missouri Stands for the Unborn Act”, prohibits an abortion in a non-medical emergency past eight weeks of gestational age and ensures the protection of women’s safety. HB 126 prohibits an individual from performing or inducing an abortion solely because of a diagnosis of potential for Down Syndrome in an unborn child or because of the race or sex of the unborn child.

HB 126 contains an emergency clause that requires written notification of a parent or guardian by the custodial parent or guardian of consent for an abortion to be performed on a minor. The bill expands the definition of a pregnancy resource center for tax credit purposes to include facilities that provide assistance to families as well. In addition, this bill removes the sunset and cumulative tax credit cap beginning in FY 2021 and increases the pregnancy resource center tax credit from 50 percent to 70 percent beginning January 1, 2021.

The Governor encourages all Missourians to get involved in efforts to support life in their communities, whether that’s opening your family’s home to adoption to assist children in need, volunteering at your local pregnancy resource center, or joining with your faith community to provide the necessary support to help individuals choose life.

Governor Parson continued, “Thanks to decades of pro-life leadership, Missouri recently hit an all-time low for the number of abortions. We’ve gone from a high of more than 20,000 in our state, to now below 3,000. By working together, we can continue to assist more Missourians in choosing life.”

[….]

The reviews are in:

Danielle Spradley @dubbledutched
A society that would force a child that has been raped by a family member to give birth to her rapist baby is not a just society. #HB126 is a sick perversion of religion used for political theater. #StopTheBans
12:54 PM – 24 May 2019 from Jefferson City, MO

Hon Stacey Newman @staceynewman
As they gleefully throw women under the bus as mandated birthers.
[….]
2:16 PM – 24 May 2019

Crystal Quade @crystal_quade
My statement on #HB126
[….]
11:03 AM – 24 May 2019

Sean Soendker Nicholson @ssnich
HB126 is bad policy, done poorly. #moleg
12:13 PM – 24 May 2019

From the ACLU of Missouri:

ACLU of Missouri Condemns Governor Parson’s Decision to Ban Abortion at 8-weeks, Will Pursue All Options to Keep this Measure from Going into Effect
May 24, 2019 – 11:15am

Governor Parson’s decision to sign Missouri’s extreme anti-abortion bill into law today is a horrific blow to healthcare in Missouri. This measure will drastically limit the ability of Missourians to access safe, legal abortion care and endanger the lives of minors.

Missourians recognize the right to an abortion is protected under the U.S. Constitution. The Missouri Legislature, trying to outdo the misguided and extreme examples of anti-choice zealots in Alabama, Ohio, Georgia, and Kentucky, has made its intention clear: it wants to ban all abortion. Preventing Missourians from accessing abortion after eight weeks, before some even know they are pregnant, is unconstitutional and dangerous.
Abortion access is healthcare. This law would criminalize doctors who perform abortions and force pregnant individuals to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term, even if the pregnancy is not viable or is risky for the mother. This measure will also require minors seeking an abortion to notify both parents prior to their abortion, even though minors are already required to have the written consent of a parent or guardian. This disregards the risk to teens who have an abusive or absent parent and delays their care.

“With Governor’s Parson’s decision to sign HB 126, he joins the other out of touch Republican leaders who fail to protect the right to an abortion even in cases of rape and incest,” said ACLU of Missouri Legislative and Policy Director Sara Baker. “This legislation puts politicians in the exam room and challenges the basic autonomy of Missourians. It is unconstitutional, and it must be stopped.”

Passing an eight week abortion ban is an example of government overreach and disregard for the constitutional rights of Missourians. The ACLU of Missouri will explore all options, including litigation, to block the law from going into effect.

“The Constitution gives pregnant individuals with their doctors the right to make the profoundly important and personal decision whether to terminate a pregnancy,” said Tony Rothert, Legal Director of the ACLU of Missouri. “Despite this political stunt, we will make sure that abortion remains legal in every state.”
Without further action, HB 126 will become law on August 28, 2019.

Planned Parenthood Advocates in Missouri @PPMO_Advocates
Let’s be clear: This bill does absolutely nothing to protect women’s health.

It is an extreme and dangerous ban on safe, legal abortion. #StopTheBans #MoLeg
[….]
11:40 AM – 24 May 2019

Previously:

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

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

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

Medieval (May 17, 2019)

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

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

SB 147: the legislative effort to increase organ donations

18 Saturday May 2019

Posted by Michael Bersin in Missouri General Assembly, Missouri Senate

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

David Sater, General Assembly, missouri, Missouri Senate, motorcycle helmet, organ donation, SB 147

“I think there’s a limit of what government should be involved in our lives.” – Sen. David Sater (r)

SB 147 was introduced by Senator David Sater (r). The bill summary:

[…]
MOTORCYCLE HEADGEAR (Sections 302.020 and 302.026)

…This act also provides that qualified operators who are 18 or older may operate a motorcycle or motortricycle without a helmet if he or she is covered by a health insurance policy or other form of insurance which will provide the person with medical benefits for injuries incurred as a result of a motorcycle or motortricycle accident. Proof of such coverage shall be provided on request of law enforcement by showing a copy of the qualified operator’s insurance card…
[…]

And:

[….]
Motorcyle helmet law

The House and Senate signed off on a package of transportation-related changes in state law, including one that would lift the requirement that all riders wear protective headwear.

Motorcycle riders under the age of 18 would still need to wear a helmet. Those over 18 could go without if they have health insurance.

During earlier debate, lawmakers agreed motorcyclists should wear helmets, but some said the choice should be a matter of personal freedom.

“I think there’s a limit of what government should be involved in our lives,” Sen. David Sater, R-Cassville said.
[….]

“…some said the choice should be a matter of personal freedom.” Like, maybe, personal medical decisions? Just asking.

He’s no where close to connecting the dots here, is he?

Previously:

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

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

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

Medieval (May 17, 2019)

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

Medieval

17 Friday May 2019

Posted by Michael Bersin in Missouri General Assembly, Missouri Governor, Missouri House, Missouri Senate

≈ 23 Comments

Tags

abortion, anti-choice, General Assembly, HB 126, missouri, Nick Schroer

Yesterday evening, appropriated from someone’s social media post:

Michael Bersin @MBersin
Breaking News: Alabama Accuses Missouri of Stealing Its Idea About Becoming a Medieval Theocracy.
7:36 PM – 16 May 2019

Missouri House at the close of the legislative session – May 13, 2016 [file photo].

The right wingnut republican controlled Missouri General Assembly just pushed Alabama out of the news:

House Communications @MOHOUSECOMM
The House has truly agreed to and finally passed HB 126 (To establish the “Missouri Stands for the Unborn Act” that places new limits on abortion) with a vote of 110-44.
[….]
12:02 PM – 17 May 2019

And there’s an emergency clause:

House Communications @MOHOUSECOMM
The emergency clause for HB 126 (To establish the “Missouri Stands for the Unborn Act” that places new limits on abortion) passes with a vote of 109-46.
[….]
12:10 PM – 17 May 2019

“….Section C. Because of the need to protect the health and safety of women and their children, both unborn and born, the repeal and reenactment of section 188.028 of this act is deemed necessary for the immediate preservation of the public health, welfare, peace and safety, and is hereby declared to be an emergency act within the meaning of the constitution, and the repeal and reenactment of section 188.028 of this act shall be in full force and effect upon its passage and approval.”

It would be fitting for the republican caucus to throw wire hangers at the conclusion of the session.

~~Pre 1973~~ 2019 medical instruments.

Previously:

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

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

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

HB 565: Your republican controlled Missouri General Assembly in action – May 16, 2019

17 Friday May 2019

Posted by Michael Bersin in Missouri General Assembly, Missouri House

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

General Assembly, HB 565, missouri

Yesterday, in yet another in the list of great legislative achievements from the Missouri General Assembly:

SS SCS HB 565 [pdf] — STATE DESIGNATIONS

This bill creates seven new state designations.
November 9th of every year shall be known as “Stars and Stripes Day” to commemorate Missouri’s role in the creation of the newspaper of the United States Armed Forces (Section 9.090).
May 26th shall be known as “Battle of St. Louis Memorial Day” to commemorate the only battle of the American Revolution fought in what would become the state of Missouri (Section 9.117).
July 7th of every year shall be known as “Missouri Sliced Bread Day” to commemorate the first sale of sliced bread in Chillicothe, in 1928 (Section 9.240).
The month of November shall be designated as “Cardiovascular Disease and Type 2 Diabetes Awareness Month”(Section 9.290).
The pawpaw tree is designated as the state fruit tree (Section 10.105).
The hellbender salamander, also known as the snot otter, or lasagna lizard, is the official endangered species (Section 10.200).
The Missouri “Show Me” tartan is the official tartan of the state. The colors of blue, brown, and silver are derived from the eastern bluebird, the Missouri mule, and the bear on the state flag, and the crescent moon, representing vigilance and justice, valor, purity, steadfastness, hope, and strength (Section 10.190)

Democracy, the greatest invention since sliced white bread.

Wait, I thought republicans didn’t believe that there was such a thing as an endangered species.

They left out Mom and apple pie.