• About
  • The Poetry of Protest

Show Me Progress

~ covering government and politics in Missouri – since 2007

Show Me Progress

Tag Archives: micromanagement

HB 1196: if we close our eyes, cover our ears, and say nothing it doesn’t exist and never did

21 Tuesday Mar 2023

Posted by Michael Bersin in Missouri General Assembly, Missouri House

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

DEI ban, Doug Richey, General Assembly, HB 1196, higher education, micromanagement, missouri

A bill:

HB 1196
Provides protections against ideological discrimination in postsecondary education
Sponsor: Richey, Doug (039)
Proposed Effective Date: 8/28/2023
LR Number: 2452H.01I
Last Action: 03/20/2023 – HCS Voted Do Pass (H)
Bill String: HB 1196
Next House Hearing: Hearing not scheduled
Calendar: Bill currently not on a House calendar

The bill summary as introduced [pdf]:

HB 1196 — POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION DISCRIMINATION
SPONSOR: Richey

This bill provides definitions for “discriminatory ideology” which includes any ideology that promotes the differential treatment of any individual or group of individuals based on characteristics of race, color, religion, sex, gender, ethnicity, national origin, or ancestry. The bill prohibits any public institution of post secondary education from requiring any applicant, employee, student or contractor to endorse such discriminatory ideology. The bill also prevents institutions from requiring a “diversity, equity, and inclusion statement” as defined in the bill from such individuals.

Any individual that is determined to have been compelled to endorse a discriminatory ideology or submit a diversity, equity, and inclusion statement, or that is adversely affected by preferential considerations provided to any individual that endorses such ideology or submits such statement may pursue an action for injunctive or declaratory relief as outlined against such institution.

The bill provides for discipline procedures to be taken by the institution for any individual that violates the provisions outlined by first being placed on unpaid leave for an academic year, and being ineligible for employment by another institution in the state, any subsequent offense would result in termination and ineligibility for employment for five years.

The bill requires each institution to annually submit a written report of compliance to the Speaker of the House and the Senate’s President Pro Tem.

Some of the submitted testimony:

I support this bill and its protection of students, staff and contractors/employees at Missouri post-secondary education schools from unproven discriminatory ideology. I am concerned about such discrimination at all levels of the Missouri school systems. I find the use of my tax dollars to support these discriminatory policies and their lack of accountability to the taxpayer offensive and fear that such policies will undermine the foundations of Missouri and our nation.

I support this bill and its protection of students, staff and contractors/employees at Missouri post-secondary education schools from unproven discriminatory ideology. I am concerned about such discrimination at all levels of the Missouri school systems. I find the use of my tax dollars to support these discriminatory policies and their lack of accountability to the taxpayer offensive and fear that such policies will undermine the foundations of Missouri and our nation.

Two different submissions. Apparently, supporters of the bill are lazy.

Mr. Vice-Chair, I grew up not far from where you did in St. Charles. I daresay you might have met one of my older siblings at a football game in high school as you were in the same graduating class. I am sad to say I no longer live near my family in Missouri. Like so many people of the great Show-Me state, I left and took my business with me. For fifteen years, I have made a point of spending as little money as possible in my beloved home state because of bills like this. I refused to attend college in Missouri because of the ridicule and baseless accusations of “reverse racism” that politicians complain about while obviously ignoring real problems in our land. Instead, I spent my money attending colleges in Washington, DC and in Illinois. I contributed to their economies, both by paying tuition and by living and working in these other places. How much money do you think this fear-mongering has cost the beautiful souls of Missouri? How many more taxpayers will you shove out, depleting Missouri’s government funds for the sake of a racist, bigoted falsehood. How impoverished will you make your state? What’s worse, I left Missouri to become a mental health counselor – those are skills I know for a fact Missourians desperately need. But how many of us Missourians refuse to return with our training to save lives because we see how politicians such as yourself use fear mongering to stay in power, rather than actually help people. Consider for a moment the millions or even billions of dollars you are robbing yourself and your government and your people of by supporting discriminatory bills like HB 1196. I urge all committee members to question whether this bill’s costs are really worth some likes on Facebook and Twitter. Oppose HB 1196, if only to satisfy your own greed

Stop the attacks on our LGBTQ community. We are tired of having to fight for the rights of our friends and family every week. Just stop. Stop trying to ruin our educational systems even more than you already have.

I oppose this bill without reservation.

My name is [….], I am a Black pediatric cardiologist living and working in KCMO. I am testifying on the necessity of diversity-equity-inclusion education and training in Missouri hospitals, clinics, and healthcare academic programs. I staunchly oppose HB 489 and HB 1196. When I first started working at my current hospital here in Missouri, there was a Black mother who had a chronically ill child admitted to the hospital. She previously had been labeled as “difficult” and “resisting treatment” for her child. But after instilling unconscious bias training, and DEI efforts that have been adopted in the hospital, the relationship between the mother and the hospital staff, and her mistrust of the medical staff significantly improved. DEI training and initiatives are imperative to ensure that all patients receive equitable treatment and care and aren’t just broadly deemed as “difficult” without trying to understand their perspective. Thank you for reading my testimony. Your consideration of these matters and solutions is very much appreciated.

DEI allows our state to progress with the rest of the world. We celebrate that we are the “great American melting pot” yet try to erase parts of our history, culture and background. I firmly stand in opposition to these bills that will encourage racism

This proposed bill undermines democratic discourse, deprives students of a true understanding of history and deeper learning, and likely abridges rights guaranteed by the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. By seeking to prescribe what parts of our nation’s history -checkered with discrimination and oppression – can be taught to today’s multiracial students, they intend to deny students the right to receive information and ideas that cultivate deeper thinking and learning. Urge you to vote no.

It is disingenuous and harmful to call diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives “discriminatory.” In fact the existence of such rhetoric demonstrates the need for increasing access to DEI education. To do the opposite, as HB 1196 does by banning DEI statements and practices, is authoritarian and shameful. Why are some of our state representatives so afraid of Missouri residents learning accurate history and practicing ways to improve equity for all? It seems honest and reasonable legislatures would want to increase learning and equity for the benefit of all Missourians. I fully oppose HB 1196.

It is a mistake to penalize institutions of higher education for emphasizing the importance of diversity, equity, and inclusion. Education is a community value and needs to be supported by the community and made accessible to people of all backgrounds.

As a proud fourth generation Missourian, I am disappointed to the marrow of my bones that in the year 2023 these are the hills our leaders are choosing to die on. I was raised in rural south Missouri in an openly racist and oppressive household. I am only the person I am today because teachers in my secondary education settings helped to broaden my understanding of the world and helped me to see the ways willful ignorance of our history perpetuates systems of oppression. I am able to be a free thinking, considerate, and evolving human being because teachers devoted to making the world a better place were given the freedom to tell me the truth after living in a setting that fed me a lifetime of lies. White supremacy is a lie and to usurp it’s stranglehold on our nation we must empower the truth tellers.

I am a Missouri citizen and longtime voter and taxpayer. I am appalled at the ridiculous nature and content of this bill. It’s part of the ongoing witch hunt by Missouri Republicans to attack anyone and everyone who isn’t a straight, white, cis, conservative Christian — all to appeal to an extremist base. The very title of this bill is also ridiculous, because the bill sponsors have every intention of hurting people with this legislation: people of color, queer people, trans people, and everyone else who does not fit the description above. Missouri is an embarrassment, with a long list of real life problems that affect us citizens every single day: #44 for maternal mortality rates, #42 in health care, #40 in health care access, #41 in public health, #30 in education (and failing fast), #45 in crime, etc etc. etc. Diversity, equity and inclusion work improves health care outcomes, according to the National Institutes of Health. DEI improves employee engagement, improves hiring and retention, and drives growth. Why do you think every major corporation dedicates substantial resources to DEI? It’s also the right thing to do, in the spirit of respecting and including people from a diverse range of backgrounds, identities, and abilities.I oppose this harmful bill and urge this committee to stop its progress

These bills reduce learning, hurt patients, and contribute to negative health outcomes and health disparities. If a bill like this passes, it will set a precedent that your peers in higher ed programs in Missouri will have a significantly lesser education everyone else. It will make our state less competitive if curriculum requirements across the board ban teaching the diversity of humanity and how to treat or care for diverse bodies. I have two children remaining at home, both are looking at out-of-state colleges, and never looking back at Missouri.

I support diversity, equity and inclusion like Jesus would do. WHAT WOULD JESUS DO?

This bill is a direct attack on diversity, inclusion and equity in Missouri. Though the sponsor said in the hearing that it is to promote diverse dialogue and ideologies on campus, it is absolutely not this at all. It is a knee-jerk reactionary bill to stop “wokeism” in Missouri. This tired, phony straw man certainly has folks worried. It’s almost as if we want to stop new ideas from coming into Missouri to preserve the status quo of the last 200 years. The status quo is a system created by, and therefore for, white privileged males. They are so afraid of the idea of losing grasp on their perceived power that they are afraid to even use the words diversity and equity. Make no mistake. This is NOT about diversity of ideologies. It is about one specific ideology, a tired, old and dangerous one that is about limiting people. It is a vehicle to promote just that tiresome ignorance. Ignorance is the tool of authoritarians and fascists. We should not be that!The young med student who testified had it right: the time to find out you’re hiring someone whose bigotry is so entrenched that they will be unable to keep it from covering their interactions with students through micro- or macro-aggressions is before they are hired. Having a campus dedicated to diversity in thought and practice, to including safe spaces for everyone, and providing equitable opportunities and practices is vital for us to move forward as a state rather than retreating to a past. The national concerns that are promoting these bills have been doing so slowly but surely for 50 years, and it is no coincidence that it started after the Civil Rights Bill of 1964, VRA of 1965 and the proposal of the ERA in the 1970s, when marginalized groups like racial minorities and women began to be able to affect real and lasting change on the status quo. The Gay Rights movement of the last 30 years has supercharged the idea that some need to hold on to their systemic power by returning to the rigged systems of the past. So here’s what I have to say to that: Stop it. You cannot stop an idea whose time has come. So I’ll take the idea of “woke” and run with it. I’d rather be awake, aware and adaptable than seek frightened refuge in archaic ideology.

This legislation will exclude an entire population and bind the ability of educators to address current issues and society as it is currently stands. This bill will not represent me and I therefore oppose it. This legislation will not represent progress but a return to discriminatory past that as a Missourian I hope we can move past.

As a lifelong educator in language and literature, I find the way in which authors of bills such as HB1196 have taken the notion of discrimination against marginalized people and turned it on its head to be both disingenuous and dangerous.We live in a multiracial democracy with a history of shutting whole populations out of certain levels of education. It’s not discriminatory to learn about past discrimination and collaborate in a thoughtful way about continually moving forward. Thus I strongly oppose HB1196.

I am educated as a speech-language pathologist (both of my degrees were earned in Missouri) and one of the requirements for graduation from an American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) accredited program – which is required to pursue licensure for speech pathology – is that we learn about DEI topics in the classroom to prepare us for the culturally diverse patients we will see in our clinical rotations and professional practice. It would be a disservice to both the students and the people they will serve in the future to prevent them from learning about topics that will help them to be better clinicians in our schools, clinics, nursing homes, and hospitals. I can’t imagine how I would have possibly provided appropriate and efficacious services to my clients if I had been prohibited from learning about cultural-linguistic groups and gender studies – because I would not have been able to do so except for my majority culture (white) clients. This bill will place Missouri students at a disadvantage compared to those in other states; degrees from Missouri institutions both public and private will not be viewed as sufficient preparation to enter the workforce.

Distinguished Committee Members: [….] the Associated Students of the University of Missouri (ASUM), [is] a non-partisan advocacy organization that represents the 75,000+ students across the University of Missouri System. ASUM stands in opposition to House Bill 1196 for a variety of reasons. First, we are concerned that some of the bill language is written in such a way that it leaves room for possible abuse in interpretation. The prohibition of “DEI-related topics” creates a scope so large that almost any unique characteristic of the human experience could be challenged under this term. One such potential interpretation of “DEI-related topics” that may be of interest to members of this committee is the sincerely held beliefs of both political and religious student groups. This bill would prohibit preferential treatment for these groups and undermine any attempt to recognize their marginalization. However, that directly conflicts with another bill proposed by the General Assembly, HB136, that does just that for belief-based student organizations. The term “Discriminatory ideology” is also misleading in its definition. DEI is not the preferential treatment of people based on these characteristics, but creating an understanding that historical and generational hardships exist as a result of these differences while working to create a more inclusive and equitable society for future generations. Students entering the workforce post-graduation will meet all kinds of different people. The restriction of DEI on college campuses will inhibit students’ ability to properly function and perform in diverse workplace settings by not preparing them for these situations. This would reflect poorly on not only postsecondary institutions, but the state of Missouri as a whole.Finally, in lines 76 and 77, the bill language states there are no legal or financial protections for institutions who institute DEI policies. This leaves institutions of higher education in a gray area where state and federal funding requirements could conflict. Losing funding from either level of government could greatly affect the quality of higher education in the State of Missouri and the size of our workforce.

These bills are government overreach.

Please do not do this.

I am writing as a Missouri citizen in opposition to HB 1196. Changing a narrative or trying to eliminate a relevant conversation does not support our kids. Exposure to different ideas, cultures and narratives is what makes for well rounded future adults. Adults who can think for themselves and makes up their own minds. Censorship does not allow for critical thinking.

“…Censorship does not allow for critical thinking.”

It never has.

HB 2105: any stupid idea will do

29 Wednesday Dec 2021

Posted by Michael Bersin in Missouri General Assembly

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Adam Schnelting, General Assembly, HB 2105, higher education, idiocracy, micromanagement, right wingnut

“…or expresses or intends to express any viewpoint or ideology that can be found in any major American political party platform…”

What could possibly go wrong?

A bill, prefiled today:

HB 2105
Establishes the Missouri Censorship Prohibition Act to protect the rights of speakers on campuses of public institutions of higher education
Sponsor: Schnelting, Adam (104)
Proposed Effective Date: 8/28/2022
LR Number: 4464H.01I
Last Action: 12/29/2021 – Prefiled (H)
Bill String: HB 2105
Next House Hearing: Hearing not scheduled
Calendar: Bill currently not on a House calendar

From the bill language [pdf]:

[….]
8. (1) This subsection shall be known and may be cited as the “Missouri Censorship Prohibition Act”.
(2) As used in this subsection, the following terms mean:
(a) “Censor”, the act of barring, banning, cancelling, prohibiting, or rescinding an invitation to a speaker;
(b) “Political party”, the same definition as in section 115.013;
(c) “Speaker”, a person invited to appear on the campus of a public institution of higher education as a public speaker, lecturer, or presenter.
(3) No public institution of higher education that receives state moneys shall censor a speaker based solely on the fact that such speaker espouses a particular political persuasion, holds a particular party affiliation, or expresses or intends to express any viewpoint or ideology that can be found in any major American political party platform.
(4) In addition to the causes of action allowed under subsections 5 to 7 of this section, any speaker censored by a public institution of higher education that receives state moneys may bring a civil action for defamation against such institution for violations of this subsection.

Pass the popcorn.

Cue the Leopards Eating People’s Faces Party. And a host of others.

Protecting Grandparents from letting their grandchildren know what they really said and did in the 50s and 60s

16 Tuesday Nov 2021

Posted by Michael Bersin in Josh Hawley, social media, US Senate

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Fascist pig, Josh Hawley, micromanagement, Public Education, right wingnut, U.S. Senate, Virginia

Gimmick of the week.

Josh Hawley [2016 file photo].

“The most dangerous place to stand in Washington D.C. is any place between Senator Josh Hawley and a live microphone” – Charles P. Pierce

Yesterday:

Josh Hawley
@HawleyMO
Parents’ Bill of Rights is needed to combat Left’s indoctrination of students
[….]
10:17 AM · Nov 15, 2021

Just a few of the comments:

I wish you took school shootings this seriously.

Gotta protect Grandma’s right to keep her grandkids from finding out what which side she was on in the 60s

What in the world are you talking about? My #Missouri teachers taught me about Laura Ingalls Wilder.

If Josh lived in Missouri he probably would know that.

Or not. The knowing part.

Josh, can you please share a list of actual obstacles preventing me from engaging with my child’s school district’s teachers, administrators and staff?

I am really tired of your lies. I am a public school teacher. Come to my classroom, I am more concerned with getting students to read and write proficiently. Who has time to indoctrinate?

It’s projection. Josh Hawley (r) wants indoctrination.

Funny, I don’t have a problem engaging with my school district. Of course I don’t feel the need to threaten the school board members, the faculty or the superintendent either. Maybe your groupies should learn to have conversations instead of using threats of violence.

Teaching America’s uncomfortable truths is not indoctrination.

Ridiculous. If you want to white-up & man-up history, don’t do it at my kid’s expense. I want my kids to know what really happened, ESPECIALLY the bad stuff, so it doesn’t happen again. Are you trying to hide past discrimination so you can introduce it again? Or burn some books?

Well, not his book.

Your attack on edu is just another subversive effort to dismantle edu (for control, obviously)
Good parenting should go a long way in buffering children from whatever they may encounter outside the house, where ever they may encounter it. So just step up your parenting game.

Yes- history and science are so scary. People who don’t learn those things are what is wrong with this country

Please produce a single set of CRT curriculum materials.

Sir, if you could get the parents interested in their children’s education that would be great.
Signed,
Every Teacher in the Country

Show us on the doll where information hurt you, Josh.

Why don’t you introduce a bill to combat insurrections on the Capitol?

This is all in your head. It’s a false narrative. Meanwhile, billions of dollars are headed to Missouri to improve our infrastructure.

The stuff he didn’t vote for?

[….] Should Arabic Numerals be taught in school?

Heh.

We can hardly get kids to write their names on their papers. This whole thing is ridiculous and one more insult to educators everywhere

Don’t forget to include our right not to be abducted by space aliens. Also, I think green leafy vegetables should be outlawed.

So..education is indoctrination…wow

When you’re afraid of school education, maybe it’s you that’s out of touch?

Parents already have these rights. They just have to care enough to ask.

WTH?

Apparently, it’s not considered indoctrination when schools ONLY teach subjects that conservatives like Hawley want taught in schools.[….]

Bashing teachers didn’t work. Mandatory testing didn’t work. How else will the Republicans privatize schools and collect the cash?

Stay tuned.

Teaching facts and the truth about our history isn’t indoctrination. You always accuse others of the things you’re doing yourself. Attempting to restrict education is the real indoctrination and that’s exactly what you’re trying to do. We see through your lies.

Josh, get positively bent.

Only in crazy GQP land is learning science, history and math considered “indoctrination”.

You sink lower all the time. How can you look in the mirror at yourself?

Easy.

Politicizing Parenting is a losing proposition and smacks of desperation! I’m guessing that your previous attempt to make “Masculinity” your platform failed! Now onto the next thing to become relevant.

Fear Mongering hatriot spreads more lies.

It’s in his nature.

HB 952: making the trains run on time

19 Monday Apr 2021

Posted by Michael Bersin in Missouri General Assembly, Missouri House

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

1619 Project, Brian Seitz, censorship, curriculum, First Amendment, HB 952, micromanagement, Public Education, right wingnuts

So much for local control.

Apparently, for right wingnuts, there is only the one true amendment.

A bill, sponsored by Brian Seitz (r)

FIRST REGULAR SESSION
HOUSE BILL NO. 952 {pdf]
101ST GENERAL ASSEMBLY

INTRODUCED BY REPRESENTATIVE SEITZ.
2087H.01I DANA RADEMAN MILLER, Chief Clerk

AN ACT

To amend chapter 170, RSMo, by adding thereto one new section relating to the 1619 Project in school districts and charter schools.
Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the state of Missouri, as follows:
Section A. Chapter 170, RSMo, is amended by adding thereto one new section, to be known as section 170.352, to read as follows:

170.352. 1. As used in this section, “1619 Project” means the 1619 Project initiative of the New York Times.

2. No school district, charter school, or personnel or agent of such school district or charter school shall:
(1) Teach, use, or provide for use by any pupil the 1619 Project as part of any curriculum, course materials, or instruction in any course given in such school district or charter school; or
(2) Teach, affirm, or promote as an accurate account or representation of the founding and history of the United States of America any of the claims, views, or opinions presented in the 1619 Project as part of any curriculum, course materials, or instruction in any course given in such school district or charter school.

Is there a grading rubric if it’s used as a reference in a student research paper?

Be afraid, be very afraid.

When knowledge is outlawed, only outlaws will have knowledge.

HB 1528: micromanagement

08 Friday Dec 2017

Posted by Michael Bersin in Missouri General Assembly, Missouri House

≈ 5 Comments

Tags

Dean Dohrman, General Assembly, HB 1528, higher education, micromanagement

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

A bill, prefiled on Wednesday:

HB 1528
Requires students at public and private institutions of higher education to pass an examination on the provisions and principals of American civics as a condition of graduation
Sponsor: Dohrman, Dean (051)
Proposed Effective Date: 8/28/2018
LR Number: 5087H.01I
Last Action: 12/06/2017 – Prefiled (H)
Bill String: HB 1528
[….]

Who’s going to pay for this new unfunded mandate?

The bill text, as prefiled:

SECOND REGULAR SESSION
HOUSE BILL NO. 1528 [pdf]
99TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY
INTRODUCED BY REPRESENTATIVE DOHRMAN. 5087H.01I D. ADAM CRUMBLISS, Chief Clerk
AN ACT

To amend chapter 170, RSMo, by adding thereto one new section relating to the Missouri higher education civics achievement examination.

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

Section A. Chapter 170, RSMo, is amended by adding thereto one new section, to be 2 known as section 170.013, to read as follows:

170.013. 1. Any student pursuing an associate’s or bachelor’s degree from a public or private institution of higher education, except those attending private trade schools, shall successfully pass an examination on the provisions and principles of American civics with a score of seventy percent or greater as a condition of graduation from such institution. The examination shall be known as the “Missouri Higher Education Civics Achievement Examination”.
2. The examination required under this section shall consist of at least fifty questions, but shall not exceed one hundred questions, and shall be similar to the one hundred questions administered to applicants for United States citizenship by the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services division of the Department of Homeland Security. Subject matter on the examination shall include the United States Constitution, the United States Bill of Rights, governmental institutions, historical manifestations of federalism, and history of constitutional interpretation and amendments.
3. The examination required under this section may be included within any other examination that is administered on the provisions and principles of the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the state of Missouri, and in American history and American institutions, as required in subsection 3 of section 170.011.
4. Institutions of higher education may use online testing to comply with the provisions of this section.

I could be good with this if the members of the Missouri General Assembly had to take and pass the same test before they could be sworn in. But we should expect a higher passing score from them, right?

HB 1474: once again, this time with feeling

06 Wednesday Dec 2017

Posted by Michael Bersin in Missouri General Assembly, Missouri House

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

General Assembly, HB 1474, higher education, micromanagement, missouri, Rick Brattin, tenure

Representative Rick Brattin (r) [2013 file photo].

A bill on higher education prefiled yesterday by Representative Rick Brattin (r):

HB 1474
Eliminates tenure for new employees at public institutions of higher education and specifies information that public institutions of higher education must make available to the public
Sponsor: Brattin, Rick (055)
Proposed Effective Date: 8/28/2018
LR Number: 4356H.01I
Last Action: 12/05/2017 – Prefiled (H)
Bill String: HB 1474
[….]

Some of the text:

SECOND REGULAR SESSION
HOUSE BILL NO. 1474
99TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY
INTRODUCED BY REPRESENTATIVE BRATTIN. 4356H.01I D. ADAM CRUMBLISS, Chief Clerk
AN ACT

To repeal section 173.1004, RSMo, and to enact in lieu thereof two new sections relating to public institutions of higher education.

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

Section A. Section 173.1004, RSMo, is repealed and two new sections enacted in lieu 2 thereof, to be known as sections 173.940 and 173.1004, to read as follows:
173.940. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no public institution of higher education in this state shall award tenure to any person who is hired by such institution for the first time on or after January 1, 2019. The provisions of this section shall not apply to employees hired prior to January 1, 2019.
[….]

Why, this seems rather punitive in nature.

It appears that any understanding of the concept of faculty tenure and the implications for faculty recruitment and shared governance escape the representative. He should, perhaps, bother to ask someone who does.

[….]
Rep. Brattin is a 1999 graduate of Lee’s Summit High School.
[….]

Well, that could explain some of it.

HB 203: Suffer little children…

14 Wednesday Dec 2016

Posted by Michael Bersin in Missouri General Assembly, Missouri House

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

General Assembly, HB 203, Jeff Pogue, micromanagement, missouri, refugees

A bill on legislative micromanagement filed in the House on Monday:

HB 203  
Forbids the placement of refugees without the approval of the Missouri General Assembly
Sponsor: Pogue, Jeff (143)
Proposed Effective Date: 8/28/2017
LR Number: 0295H.01I
Last Action: 12/12/2016 – Prefiled (H)
Bill String: HB 203
Next Hearing: Hearing not scheduled
Calendar: Bill currently not on a House calendar

The complete bill text:

FIRST REGULAR SESSION
HOUSE BILL NO. 203
99TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY

INTRODUCED BY REPRESENTATIVE POGUE.
0295H.01I D. ADAM CRUMBLISS, Chief Clerk

AN ACT

To amend chapter 21, RSMo, by adding thereto one new section relating to the general assembly.
Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the state of Missouri, as follows:
Section A. Chapter 21, RSMo, is amended by adding thereto one new section, to be known as section 21.008, to read as follows:
21.008. In order to maintain security and conserve peace in this state, the Missouri general assembly shall approve any refugees that are to be relocated within this state.

[emphasis in original]

Maintain security? Conserve peace? That’s rich.

The reality:

The Screening Process for Refugee Entry Into the United States

1. Many refugee applicants identify themselves to the U.N. Refugee Agency, UNHCR. UNHCR, then:
​​Collects identifying documents
Performs initial assessment
Collects biodata: name, address, birthday, place of birth, etc.
Collects biometrics: iris scans (for Syrians, and other refugee populations in the Middle East)
Interviews applicants to confirm refugee status and the need for resettlement
Initial information checked again
Only applicants who are strong candidates for resettlement move forward (less than 1% of global refugee population).
2. Applicants are received by a federally-funded Resettlement Support Center (RSC):​​
Collects identifying documents
Creates an applicant file
Compiles information to conduct biographic security checks
3. Biographic security checks start with enhanced interagency security checks
Refugees are subject to the highest level of security checks of any category of traveler to the United States.
​​U.S. security agencies screen the candidate, including:
National Counterterrorism Center/Intelligence Community
FBI
Department of Homeland Security
State Department
The screening looks for indicators, like:
Information that the individual is a security risk
Connections to known bad actors
Outstanding warrants/immigration or criminal violations
DHS conducts an enhanced review of Syrian cases, which may be referred to USCIS Fraud Detection and National Security Directorate for review. Research that is used by the interviewing officer informs lines of question related to the applicant’s eligibility and credibility.
4. Department of Homeland Security (DHS)/USCIS interview:
Interviews are conducted by USCIS Officers specially trained for interviews​​
Fingerprints are collected and submitted (biometric check)
Re-interviews can be conducted if fingerprint results or new information raises questions. If new biographic information is identified by USCIS at an interview, additional security checks on the information are conducted. USCIS may place a case on hold to do additional research or investigation. Otherwise, the process continues.
5. Biometric security checks:
Applicant’s fingerprints are taken by U.S. government employees
Fingerprints are screened against the FBI’s biometric database.
Fingerprints are screened against the DHS biometric database, containing watch-list information and previous immigration encounters in the U.S. and overseas.
Fingerprints are screened against the U.S. Department of Defense biometric database, which includes fingerprint records captured in Iraq and other locations.
If not already halted, this is the end point for cases with security concerns. Otherwise, the process continues.
6. Medical check:
The need for medical screening is determined​​
This is the end point for cases denied due to medical reasons. Refugees may be provided medical treatment for communicable diseases such as tuberculosis.
7. Cultural orientation and assignment to domestic resettlement locations:
​​Applicants complete cultural orientation classes.
An assessment is made by a U.S.-based non-governmental organization to determine the best resettlement location for the candidate(s). Considerations include:
Family; candidates with family in a certain area may be placed in that area.
Health; a candidate with asthma may be matched to certain regions.
A location is chosen.
8. Travel:
​​International Organization for Migration books travel
Prior to entry in the United States, applicants are subject to:
Screening from the U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s National Targeting Center-Passenger
The Transportation Security Administration’s Secure Flight Program
This is the end point for some applicants. Applicants who have no flags continue the process.
9. U.S. Arrival:
​​All refugees are required to apply for a green card within a year of their arrival to the United States, which triggers:
Another set of security procedures with the U.S. government.
[….]

[emphasis in original]

Apparently some individuals in the General Assembly believe they can implement a more thorough screening system in their spare time. Reality has never been a consideration for right wingnuts.

From a November 17, 2015 Department of State briefing:

….Half of the Syrian refugees brought to the U.S. so far have been children; [2.5%] are adults over 60. And I think you will have heard that only 2 percent are single males of combat age. So we – there’s slightly more – it’s roughly 50/50 men and women, slightly more men I would say, but not – not a lot more men. So this is normal that as you’re – as we set a priority of bringing the most vulnerable people, we’re going to have female-headed households with a lot of children, and we’re going to have extended families that are maybe missing the person who used to be the top breadwinner but have several generations – grandparents, a widowed mother, and children….

An early morning social media conversation about legislative micromanagement

05 Tuesday Jan 2016

Posted by Michael Bersin in Missouri House, social media

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Caleb Jones, General Assembly, Jeremy LaFaver, micromanagement, missouri, University of Missouri

A combination of football and public protest will do that.

This morning two members of the Missouri House, Representative Jeremy LaFaver (D) and Representative Caleb Jones (r) engaged in a conversation about the University of Missouri via Twitter:

LaFaver010516

Jeremy LaFaver ‏@jeremylafaver
It will be interesting to see if MU caves to the latest legislative temper tantrum. Their lobbying team is knocking it out of the park…. 8:44 AM – 5 Jan 2016

CalebJones010516

Caleb Jones ‏@calebmjones
@jeremylafaver not a temper tantrum. You have kids. Is that who you want teaching them? You should sign up [….] 8:45 AM – 5 Jan 2016

Really? A member of the Missouri General Assembly pushes an anonymous web site attacking two faculty at the University of Missouri on the same morning that domain and web site go up?

You know, if someone in the field of communications made a mistake, acknowledged that mistake, and apologized for it do you think they could offer salient observations about the experience, what they learned, and the processes of modern media to students?

There are several other tweets in the exchange. And, a few times, others joined in:

EliYoklei010516

Eli Yokley ‏@eyokley
@calebmjones @jeremylafaver I think it’s fascinating how the #CoMo delegation has completely flipped its tactics toward @Mizzou since I left 9:24 AM – 5 Jan 2016

Micromanagement will do that.

Previously:

The power (sometimes) of speaking out (November 8, 2015)

Meta: in the public sphere (November 12, 2015)

HB 1743: and so it goes

16 Wednesday Dec 2015

Posted by Michael Bersin in Missouri House

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

General Assembly, HB 1743, intercollegiate athletics, micromanagement, missouri, Rick Brattin

Apparently the sponsor of HB 1743 withdrew the bill today which he had previously prefiled for the 2016 legislative session. We were gonna call Representative Rick Brattin’s (r) legislation “the punish intercollegiate athletes for speaking out about things we don’t want to hear bill”:

HB 1743
Provides that any college athlete on scholarship who refuses to play for a reason unrelated to health shall have his or her scholarship revoked

Sponsor: Brattin, Rick (055)
Proposed Effective Date: 8/28/2016
LR Number: 4679H.01I
Last Action: 12/16/2015 – Withdrawn (H)
Bill String: HB 1743[….]

[emphasis added]

Widespread public derision will do that.

Previously:

The power (sometimes) of speaking out (November 8, 2015)

“Is there a proper blessing for the Missouri House?” (December 12, 2015)

HB 1743: the reviews are in (December 14, 2015)

HB 1743: the reviews are in

14 Monday Dec 2015

Posted by Michael Bersin in Missouri House

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

General Assembly, HB 1743, intercollegiate athletics, micromanagement, missouri, Rick Brattin

Representative Rick Brattin (R) has some difficulty with the concept of intercollegiate athletes in Missouri exercising the First Amendment. People are noticing.

Via Twitter:

Nicholson121415

Subtle.

Sean Nicholson ‏@ssnich
I am surprised @RickBrattin filed a stupid bill. #moleg 5:31 PM – 14 Dec 2015

That’s one word for it.

Representative Rick Brattin (r) on the House floor [2013 file photo].

Representative Rick Brattin (R) on the House floor [2013 file photo].

The full bill text:

SECOND REGULAR SESSION
HOUSE BILL NO. 1743 [pdf]
98TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY

INTRODUCED BY REPRESENTATIVE BRATTIN.
4679H.01I D. ADAM CRUMBLISS, Chief Clerk

AN ACT

To amend chapter 173, RSMo, by adding thereto one new section relating to collegiate athletes, with a penalty provision.

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

Section A. Chapter 173, RSMo, is amended by adding thereto one new section, to be 2 known as section 173.1650, to read as follows:
173.1650. 1. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any college athlete who calls, incites, supports, or participates in any strike or concerted refusal to play a scheduled game shall have his or her scholarship revoked.
2. Any member of a coaching staff who encourages or enables a college athlete to engage in behavior prohibited under subsection 1 of this section shall be fined by his or her institution of employment.
3. The department of higher education shall promulgate all necessary rules and regulations for the administration of this section. Any rule or portion of a rule, as that term is defined in section 536.010, that is created under the authority delegated in this section shall become effective only if it complies with and is subject to all of the provisions of chapter 536 and, if applicable, section 536.028. This section and chapter 536 are nonseverable, and if any of the powers vested with the general assembly pursuant to chapter 536 to review, to delay the effective date, or to disapprove and annul a rule are subsequently held unconstitutional, then the grant of rulemaking authority and any rule proposed or adopted after August 28, 2016, shall be invalid and void.

[emphasis in original]

“…Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any college athlete who calls, incites, supports, or participates in any strike or concerted refusal to play a scheduled game shall have his or her scholarship revoked…”

So, wearing an armband in solidarity would be a punishable offense? Just asking.

“…Any member of a coaching staff who encourages or enables a college athlete to engage in behavior prohibited under subsection 1 of this section shall be fined by his or her institution of employment…”

Oh, really?

We’re not at all surprised by Representative Brattin’s (r) legislative priorities. Not at all.

Previously:

The power (sometimes) of speaking out (November 8, 2015)

“Is there a proper blessing for the Missouri House?” (December 12, 2015)

← Older posts

Recent Posts

  • Show us on your diploma where the professors hurt you…
  • Stormy Weather
  • Read the country, Mark (r)
  • Winning at losing…again
  • What were they thinking?

Recent Comments

Winning at losing… on Passing the gas – Donald…
TACO Tuesday | Show… on TACO or Mushrooms?
TACO Tuesday | Show… on So much winning
So much winning | Sh… on Passing the gas – Donald…
What good is the 25t… on We are the only people on the…

Archives

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

Categories

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

Meta

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

Blogroll

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

Donate to Show Me Progress via PayPal

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

Blog Stats

  • 1,039,657 hits

Powered by WordPress.com.

 

Loading Comments...