You’re familiar with the classic situation of somebody who gets hoodwinked because they didn’t read the small print. Well, it looks like we’ve got some purveyers of very, very small print (so small that it’s not even there) here in Missouri. These are the folks who devised and are promoting the proposed Missouri Constitutional Amendment 1 (House Joint Resolution Nos. 11 & 7). This is the August 5 ballot language that you will see when you vote:

Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to ensure that the right of Missouri citizens to engage in agricultural production and ranching practices shall not be infringed?

The potential costs or savings to governmental entities are unknown, but likely limited unless the resolution leads to increased litigation costs and/or the loss of federal funding.

However, the Linn County Reader informs us that :

… although the official ballot language voters will see when they go to the polls next month gives no indication of this, the Fair Ballot Language that voters won’t see when they go to the polls on Aug. 5 states, “A ‘yes’ vote will amend the Missouri Constitution…subject to any power given to local government under Article VI of the Missouri Constitution.” Instead, the voters will see official ballot language that reveals nothing about the impact of Amendment One on the ability of local government to regulate CAFOs.

[…] If Constitutional Amendment One passes, you will be left without any ability to provide reasonable health and welfare safeguards for neighbors living in the rural areas of your county.”

If you doubt that all is not what it seems, note that Missouri GOP Senator Roy Blunt, a.k.a. Montsanto’s man in Washington, came out recently for the Amendment, dubbed yet another “Montsanto Protection Act” by one writer who is concerned about the proliferation of genetically modified foods and the dominance of the biotech sector in agriculture.  Blunt straightaway set about trying to assuage fears that rather than protecting the “family farms” that supporters are piously evoking in their pro-Amendment 1 TV ads, the bill is intended to protect powerful corporate factory farms whose questionable agricultural practices might be vulnerable to regulation and so-called “nuisance” suits that threaten the bottom-line for the Blunt-friendly big-guys.

The fact that Blunt is the latest pro-Amendent 1 batter up speaks for itself, as does the likely source of the amendment:

A year ago, the North Dakota [right to farm] measure was a topic for discussion as legislative agriculture chairmen from across the U.S. gathered for a conference in Vancouver, Canada. The event by the State Agriculture and Rural Leaders Association was financed by dozens of agriculture businesses, including Archer Daniels Midland Co., Cargill, DuPont Pioneer, Deere & Co. and Tyson Foods. Among those present was Missouri Rep. Bill Reiboldt, a farmer who sponsored the right-to-farm amendment referred to this year’s ballot by the Republican-led state Legislature.

If you’re interested in why one would oppose what seems on the surface to be an almost meaningless reiteration of support for farming, this video of former Missouri Lt. Governor Joe Maxwell speaking against the bill spells out the ways that Amendment 1 not only threatens the family farm, but the safety of our food supply:

Among other points Maxwell makes, he points suggests that Amendment 1 could result in weakening the protections for the family farmer that were spelled out in the 1975 Family Farm Act. As he noted elsewhere:

This amendment is about ensuring the largest multi-national corporation constitutional rights here in Missouri so they can do whatever THEY want to us neighbors out in the country. […]. What other industry has constitutional protections to do whatever they want and strips the local voice, either at the local level, the county level or even at the statehouse from being able to put in safeguards for neighbors out in the country?

Not only will supporters of this stealth legislation not answer these questions, they would prefer that you not even realize that anyone is asking.

“…They’re putting up big signs, But, as we say, signs don’t vote…”

On July 7, 2014 in Springfield, Missouri former Missouri Lieutenant Governor Joe Maxwell (D) spoke on voting “no” on Amendment No. 1.

Video by Jerry Schmidt.

From the video description:

Missouri Right to Farm Amendment

This issue will be on your ballot August 5 as Amendment One to the state constitution.

This amendment does not originate organically from our legislator’s recognizing a need for Missouri people. It is rather a product of ALEC […]

There are several Right to Farm states already. This amendment promotes a corporatist agenda. Down deep in the language of the document there is permission for Corporations to pollute, treat animals very badly, and harm our food system.

Previously:

Campaign Finance: $110,000.00 for something they really care about (January 3, 2014)

Campaign Finance: Food fight! (May 28, 2014)

Campaign Finance: Because, across Missouri, family farms are being supplanted by… (June 24, 2014)

Campaign Finance: as if yard signs were actually a cash crop for actual farmers… (June 28, 2014)

Utilizing the First Amendment to challenge our oppressive corporate overlords… (July 2, 2014)

“…I believe that anybody who looks at our country over its long illustrious history and Missouri’s history who doesn’t think that there has been a slow steady erosion of people’s voices, I mean the average person’s voice, in our government and the way we do things today, um, and this is just another, overturning what we put on the ballot, is just another step in silencing our, you know, what, our voice about what we want…”

Joe Trippi (left) and former Lieutenant Governor Joe Maxwell (D) (right) in Kansas City for Your Vote Counts!

Blue Girl and I had the opportunity to sit down for a conversation with Joe Trippi and former Missouri Lieutenant Governor Joe Maxwell (D) in Kansas City Wednesday morning about the ballot initiative addressing the Missouri General Assembly’s propensity to overturn the results of ballot initiatives.

Previously:

Joe Trippi in Kansas City for Your Vote Counts!

Joe Trippi in Kansas City for Your Vote Counts! – part 2

The final portion of the transcript:

…Joe Trippi: …and we can get into that [crosstalk]…

Show Me Progress: But then you’d have arguments in Missouri that’s an oxymoron. [inaudible crosstalk]

Joe Trippi: …but then you’d have to ask, ’cause, that’s what I’m saying. No, that’s my point. Then you have to argue whether, it’s like a, the argument that, uh, hey, you know, our elections, uh, you know, there’s a presumption that, that elections are, are, you know, are, are fair and, and, you know, [inaudible]. There’s also, you, you’d like to make the presumption that the legislature actually are thinking adults who don’t, who aren’t influenced by how much money an interest group [crosstalk] will give.

Show Me Progress: Or, or  they’re, they’re  trying to solve a problem [crosstalk][inaudible]…

…Joe Trippi: There’s nothing [crosstalk, yeah, they’re pure, they’re very pure. Yeah, that system’s really pure. I mean, that’s what I’m saying. So, you know, look, there, there’s not like there’s any perfect way to do it. But I think the more citizens are participating in, the more citizens have a say and the, and the harder it is. The easier it is for citizens to participate and the harder it is for legislators to undo what citizens, when citizens voice things in initiative the better the pro, the better  we’ll, we’ll be then the system we’ve got now which is the legislature doesn’t do what it needs to do and then when we take action they say, oh, you idiots, you don’t know what you’re talking about. We think you’re wrong. And that, it was a mistake [crosstalk] and, you know…

Show Me Progress: Yeah, and, and it’s been interesting for me, the, the idea of the citizen participation as, as, as we’ve been doing this for the past couple of years watching this. It’s, it’s almost scary that, um, you know in two thousand ten to see the, the drop in people who were, were participating. [inaudible] Because I think there is a fear, two thousand twelve, of not, not sustaining the kinds of interest that we saw in two thousand eight. [crosstalk]

Joe Trippi: No, that’s definitely in the [inaudible].

Show Me Progress: And it has, and it has a huge impact.

Joe Trippi: No, that, that’s what I’m saying, so that’s like, you know, let’s keep cutting off, making it tougher. Hey, you guys pass something, we’re outta here, you wasted all your time. That was anybody who carried those petitions, anybody who knocked on any doors, anybody sent twenty-five bucks in. [voice: “Yeah.”] You wasted it. It was a waste, ’cause us guys up in Jeff City said, you were wrong. Well that’s a great message to send to people about what, why they should be active in politics. That’s, I mean, that’s why, you know, I’m for this thing. I mean, I think we need to buttress and make strong the foundation where American people and Missouri, people of Missouri can participate, can, uh, have more of a say. And we’d probably be a lot better off, um, you know, if we had some sort of system where you could do that, get, you know, where they had more of a say directly in Washington, too. But, you know, that’s, that’s a dif, different [crosstalk], different day.

Show Me Progress: And, and, and there’s some ironies in the thing. The carry conceal, uh, initiative was in ninety-nine, am I right about that. Do I remember that? [voice: “Ninety-eight.”] Ninety-eight. Ninety-eight. ‘Cause I remember being in Jefferson City and, and [Senator] Harold Caskey [voice: “Yep.”] , uh, with, with that. Uh, what I remember about that was that the NRA started throwing huge amounts of money in that election. And what they did was, that people started to wake up about what was going on. And what actually happened is it boosted voter turnout. And I think the irony is, the way I looked at it, is if they would have kept quiet it would have passed. And, and they spent millions and people started going, wait a minute, we don’t want that. And, and what happened was it, it went down to defeat. So there, uh, sometimes the Missouri voters are…

Voice: But just for, just for a little bit of clarification, the conceal carry was not an, an initiative. The citizens didn’t put it on the ballot. [crosstalk] The legislature did. It’s a different term [inaudible].

Show Me Progress: Right. I understand that. [crosstalk] But, it was, it was a ballot [voice: “Right.”] issue. Right.

Voice: But that’s something that we do point at because the voters made it very clear how they felt about conceal carry [voce: “Right.”] and the legislature still went against them. So there are examples of even, not the, necessarily, or overturning initiatives that citizens put on the ballot, but there are a lot of examples like that [crosstalk] where the citizens have voted on and then they just say I don’t, still don’t care about what you say.

Show Me Progress: Things which are already [crosstalk] voted,  decided on. [crosstalk] Yeah.

Former Lieutenant Governor Joe Maxwell (D): In two thousand eight we passed Prop C for the [inaudible] requirement. I worked on that for renewable energy standards. We worked then, after that passed, almost two years getting rules adopted. And finally get the rules and then the legislature guts the whole thing this year in about thirty minutes. And I went around, we had four public deals, you know, trying to explain to all our supporters, you know, yeah, we worked for three years, raised all this money, God love ya for knockin’ on doors and getting signatures, and overwhelming number of people just like [inaudible], you know, they just said, it does no good. You know, I mean, they are just devastated that they, they got engaged and excited in the process. And, yeah, we turned, you know, the legislature, voters just turn off. It, it just, it’s terrible that, uh, they just totally disrespect it.

Show Me Progress: And, and some of this is, you know, the people that get involved in those kind of things, is we see, is they’re, you know, they’re activists, the core, they believe , you know, the core activists, they believe in something and want to get something done, they want to solve a problem, they want to do the right thing. And it takes the wind out of their sails, uh, but sometimes it’s like, you know, how do we, the people that reverse that in the General Assembly, how do we hold them accountable? You know, get, channel people
, and say, well, your state representative in your district, your district voted overwhelmingly to support this thing and, and your state representative voted to overturn it. And there’s a disconnect. [voice: “Yes, sir.”] And, you know, the, the other thing is, how do you inform people that, you’ve, you know, you put your heart and soul in this, your people in this district wanted this overwhelmingly, and there are districts in this state that are that way. [voice: “That’s correct.”] In, in several of these. And, and yet they keep reelecting these same people to the General Assembly. And there’s a disconnect.

Joe Trippi: But see, I think, you know, I think part of this is, uh, I think if you had a real, uh, protection of participatory Democracy in terms of when people do this you start to have those people stay in place. I mean, other words, once you, you know, you get something on the ballot and you pass it and now it takes seventy-five percent, you know, and they, and they have that success. And, and they, you know, it, you know, I think it’s tough, when the legislature, the legislature at seventy-five percent throws it out that organiz, that group of people stay, gets I think sort of, it, it makes it easier to connect that they just, I mean, they really just undid for x interest group what we all just did. And that organization can stay on the ground, actually start to impact some of the elect, you know, some of the, the candidate elections that are going on either way. Um, uh, so, you know, in the end, look, there’s, there’s gonna be, there’re, there’re enough flaws in Jeff City or in this process, that process, in the end I, I think the more we’re involved, the more people are involved, I’ll take whatever flaws come out of that. I mean, it, they’re gonna be some [crosstalk], um, but…

Show Me Progress:There, there will always, somebody will always find a way to exploit something.

Joe Trippi: Yeah. And [crosstalk]…

Show Me Progress: If you’re, if you’re doing it with, uh, um, good, good will and good intention, you know, it, it tends to be okay.

Joe Trippi: Well, you know, I put it this way, if you’re an interest group, uh, you’re an interest group and, you know, is it, you know, which would you rather have the interest group have to try to do, persuade half of a small group in Jeff City behind closed doors with a check book, uh, about your view, uh, or a majority of people who turn out, Missourians who turn out in [crosstalk]…

Show Me Progress: Decide, who, who is gonna show up on election day.

Joe Trippi: …gonna show up on election day. You have to convince them of your point of view. You may have to spend a lot of money to do that and you may even win it doing it. I’m not, but, which would we actually rather have them have to do? I mean, assuming something, they’re gonna do something untoward, it’s gonna hurt working people or, [voice: “Yeah.”] right? Which, they, they’re gonna have [crosstalk] to fool…

Show Me Progress: Which is about everything today.

Joe Trippi: No, no, but they’re gonna have to fool half of the state into doing it. [crosstalk]  Um, versus…

Show Me Progress: Yeah, you might as well, you might as well make them fool half the state.

Joe Trippi: Yeah, or, or we can let ’em fool, or, not fool, knowingly [laugh], you know, uh, uh, work Jeff City to get, to get half the vote there and, uh, you know, you know, and, which is that, which makes sense to the average person? Well, I mean, I, I think it’s pretty clear. I trust, I’d rather have them have to fool all of us than, uh, than, than working [crosstalk]…

Show Me Progress: Or, or have to do it openly.

Joe Trippi: Yeah, right, right, exactly. Have to have the spot has to be on your efforts, we have to all see it, and we all have to nod our heads or go, what are they talking about, you know. [crosstalk]

Show Me Progress: As opposed to getting some, something coming through which nobody’s paying attention to crosstalk] and…

Joe Trippi: Right.

Show Me Progress: The puppy mills, the puppy mill vote the last election [inaudible] we overwhelmingly voted to do away with puppy mills and the legislature undid it in five minutes.

Joe Trippi: That’s what I’m saying, I mean, what, what signal does that send to anybody about [crosstalk]…

Show Me Progress: …[inaudible] [crosstalk] discouraging people in this state who [inaudible] participate.

Joe Trippi: …and they, but, who did they do that for? ‘Cause they didn’t do it for [voice: “Uh, uh.”] the, yeah, they didn’t do it for any voters out there. They did it for, for the, uh, puppy mill folks, you know, so, you know, an, an interest group. They probably, you know, you go back and look at who gave [inaudible] but, you know, that’s. And, by the way, even if that isn’t what happened the problem is the poison that that creates among the electorate [crosstalk] of the people who believe and go, that’s what happened, we all know that’s what happened, and that’s how Jeff City works. In other words it starts to poison the entire trust in the system. Um, and that’s why I just don’t think, look, you know, let’s, you know, let’s make it really, if you guys are gonna do this it’s gotta be seventy-five, you gotta have rural, urban, you know, it’s gotta be like, it can’t be, in, you know, in. And look, if they’re gonna pay to, to throw out what we did let’s make them pay off seventy-five percent of the legislature not just, not just [laughter] sixty percent.

Voice: [inaudible] one more question. [inaudible] time for one more question then we gotta go.

[….]

Show Me Progress: Um, if, um, if this passes, um, do you think it’ll cause, um, an increase in kind of initiative petitions in, in this state? Where the idea where, you know, sort of, people are going, uh, the incentive will be like, we have this thing, there’s a problem, we want to address it, and we know that if we put the effort into it we’re, we’re not gonna be subject to the whims of the, the General Assembly as in the puppy mill, you know, bill [crosstalk] which was, you know, that turned around just like that.

Joe Trippi: Yeah, I think [crosstalk] , yeah, I mean, I put it this way, I think people realize that [inaudible] will believe they, uh, will know they have a voice again. Um, right now if you look at the, some of the items we’ve talked, uh, issues we’ve talked about what they learned is you can, you can believe in something, you can sign it, you can put it on there, you can work, you can door to door, you can give twenty-five dollars and in five minutes the legislature takes it all away. Well, no, this means citizens count. We put something on there and we pass it, it’s gonna stick unless they can get a whole lot, you know, across the board, rural, urban, across ideological, um, members who would never vote together on something, uh, vote because this, there was a legitimate mistake or something that wasn’t, wasn’t right. I think, hey, you know, it means we have a voice again. And, um, all you gotta do, look, I believe that anybody who looks at our country over its long illustrious history and Missouri’s history who doesn’t think that there has been a slow steady erosion of people’s voices, I mean the average person’s voice, in our government and the way we do things today, um, and this is just another, overturning what we put on the ballot, is just another step in silencing our, you know, what, our voice about what we want. And this is, you know, your vote counts. It’s gonna say to people your vote matters. What you do matters. And if you believe something and you believe strongly enough that you actually put some elbow grease and some thought and some votes and [inaudible], you know, it can count. Um, what they know right now is it doesn’t. I mean, that’s what the legislature’s been saying. We’re smarter than you or we know better than you or, or we’ve got, or we’ve got really important friends who think you’re wrong and, uh, y
ou can’t hurt our really important friends who think you’re wrong ’cause we’re gonna do right by them instead of doing right by you. And everything is, you know, it, that is a poisonous, uh, thing that breaks down trust between the people and its legislature and its government. And that’s what we’re seeing all, in a weird way, in a lot of ways that’s the kind of stuff that, that helped create the tea party, frankly. Um, they, I mean, that’s what get across all ideological lines here. No, but I’m saying that’s what [crosstalk]…

Show Me Progress: And, and that and several million dollars from [with another voice] the Koch brothers. Yeah. [laughter]

Joe Trippi: Yeah, yeah, but , you know, what I’m trying to say is, no, but I’m talking about the, the [crosstalk] anger.

Show Me Progress: The anger. [voice: “Yeah.”]

Joe Trippi: And the person who’s, who’s actually sprung up and joined and goes to these, you know, goes to these things. It’s because they’ve lost, it’s, it’s, it, it’s this kind of slow erosion of trust between [crosstalk] them…

Show Me Progress: Right. But we see this thing, there’s this kind of disconnect in that, that everybody loves, everybody hates the General Assembly but they love their representative, you know, and [crosstalk]…

Joe Trippi: That’s changing. For the first time, they have a poll, uh, yesterday or the day before fifty-four percent of the American people would vote against every member of Congress including their own. [voice: “Yeah.”] So, that, that’s starting, that’s what I’m trying to say, we’re seeing this really kind of, I don’t think a very unhealthy disconnect between, uh, uh, I mean, I guess it’s healthy that everybody’s finally that mad and, and wants actually throw their guy, you know, actually looking at their guy, you know, through, through, uh, not rose colored lenses. But I also think it’s, there’s a, uh, a real, uh, I, you know, it’s what, there’s a real, uh, change, sea change in terms of, you know, literally breaking down the level of trust between people and their government which I don’t think is healthy long term unless we do, start doing things to restore it. And that’s [crosstalk] our responsibility as much as. [crosstalk] Yeah., right, yeah.

Show Me Progress: And, and that, this started, [crosstalk] that started a long time ago with, you know, gov, government is the problem.

Voice: I’m sorry, we’ve got to go guys. Sorry about that.

Show Me Progress: Thank you very much.

Joe Trippi: Good talking to you guys….

Joe Trippi (left) and former Lieutenant Governor Joe Maxwell (D) (right) in Kansas City for Your Vote Counts!

Blue Girl and I had the opportunity to sit down for a conversation with Joe Trippi and former Missouri Lieutenant Governor Joe Maxwell (D) in Kansas City this morning about the ballot initiative addressing the Missouri General Assembly’s propensity to overturn the results of ballot initiatives. Think about that for a minute.

The Your Vote Counts Act is a proposed citizen-backed initiative seeking to qualify for the November 2012 statewide ballot, in order to help protect the integrity of the ballot initiative process and provide greater protections for voter-approved initiatives. The constitutional measure would require a three-fourths vote in both the House and the Senate, or a vote of the people by referendum, in order for the legislature to repeal or amend any voter-approved initiative….

It comes down to a simple question. Do we trust the voters to do the right thing in the light of day or does the General Assembly hold all of the marbles?

The transcript of our conversation will follow in subsequent posts.

I attended the training in St. Louis yesterday (Sat.) for the Your Vote Counts petition drive.  This is an effort to collect enough signatures to have a vote of the people in November 2012 on whether to add an amendment to the Missouri Constitution that will require a 3/4 vote of both houses of the state legislature to overturn or amend a law passed by the voters through the initiative petition process.  It will also allow the legislature to send a law they don’t like back to the voters, so essentially, it will make it harder for legislators to do what they did and tried to do this past legislative session to so many progressive victories in the past.

I know there are many progressives opposed to this petition drive, and I respect independent thinking.  I went with an open but cautious mind yesterday for that reason.  People I admire greatly have given me their reasons for not participating in this process, so I wanted to hear the reasons why I should.

I arrived a few minutes late (parking in U City is the pits) so I didn’t get the introductions and names.  I looked up the man who ran the session online.  He is M. Dane Waters, President and Co-Chair of the Initiative and Referendum Institute at USC – CalTech Center for the Study of Law and Politics.  He is currently directing the initiative and referendum projects of the Humane Society of the U.S.

(I’d guess that 3/4 of the 60 or so people at the training were there because of Prop B.  I recognized many of the faces from rallies this spring.)   His main point is that “We, the People” have the rights in this country.  We “give” the federal and state governments some of those powers in order to manage our society more efficiently.  His implication seemed to be that, if we don’t use our rights of initiative and referendum, we will lose those rights and too much power is vested in the hands of a few elected officials already.

A man whose first name is Patrick from Citizens in Charge spoke briefly about how the Missouri Constitution grants the people the right to initiative and referendum.  (For those who aren’t familiar with those terms,  an initiative is a proposed law or const. amendment initiated by voters.  A referendum is when an already passed law is “referred” back to the voters.)   I looked up Citizens in Charge, and it is definitely a very conservative group and includes prominent Libertarians on its board.

Rep. Scott Sifton was the next to talk to us.  He described how he was inundated by proposals to change many of the laws passed by the initiative process within 24 hours of arriving to take his seat as a first-term legislator.  He said his first thought was, “Why bother voting if the legislature is just going to overturn or gut what the people want?”   He introduced a bill that would require a 3/4 vote of the legislators to overturn something that was recently passed.  And then scaled back to 2/3 when an issue had been on the books awhile.  Of course the GOP leadership sat on his bill and it never came up for a vote.  Scott said that progressive Democrats have to use the initiative and referendum (I & R) process because we are so outnumbered in the legislature, and the chances of progressive Dems controlling both houses any time soon are very slim.  He also mentioned that, although many individuals and groups say requiring a 3/4 vote is too high, most of the bills passed in the legislature this year received 90 to 95% of the vote.

He said he understands why representatives from districts that vote against I & R proposals by large majorities feel the need to try to overturn them.  If a 3/4 vote is required to return the issue to the voters, those legislators will have less incentive to do that.

Next on the agenda was Barbara Schmitz, Missouri Director of HSUS.  She said animal protection supporters are outnumbered and outspent which makes it impossible to get anything passed in the legislature.  Her group and others have tried for 20 yrs to update the law passed in 1992 that regulated puppy mills, all to no avail.  (She didn’t mention it but the attacks on HSUS are funded by the same industries and billionaires who attack everything else progressives try to do.  E.g., the same people who fight us when we try to raise the cigarette tax.  I have tons of info on those groups if anyone wants more on that.)

Former Lt. Gov. Joe Maxwell was, by far, the most dynamic speaker at the session.  His involvement with this campaign to protect the vote of the people is because of the renewable energy issue (Prop C) passed by 66% of the voters in 2008.  He was very involved in that campaign and has been working with a group of people since it passed to write the rules to put it into effect.  They finished their work in December 2010, turned it in, and the legislature’s first priority was to gut the whole thing.  So, he said, within 30 days, a handful of powerful legislators gutted what he had worked on for four years.  He listed many other laws that were gutted or attempts that were made to gut them this spring, and he’s obviously passionate about this petition drive to make it harder for the lege to do that in the future.  He said we’ve been “rolled over, tramped on and flattened” in the halls of the legislature, and we have to do something to stop that.  If it takes a 2/3 vote of the legislature to overturn a governor’s veto, it should take a 3/4 vote to overturn the will of the people.  He said back 20-30 years ago, laws passed by I & R were “sacrosanct.”  The legislators respected the voters enough not to mess with them.  He didn’t say it, but I will.  The anti-government, anti-people yahoos running our state legislature right now are out of control.  Like their ALEC counterparts in Washington, DC, they have no respect for the opinions of others.  They think they are right and will do anything they are allowed to do to dismantle every state and federal program that works for the benefit of the people as individuals.  (www.alec.org)

The Q & A session was a no-holds barred discussion and the suspicions on both sides came out. I asked the question about billionaires who can afford to pay signature gatherers getting their laws passed and how this 3/4 vote of the lege would make it harder for us to overturn them.  Rep. Sifton, Dane Waters and Joe Maxwell all responded saying “the rich will do what the rich always do,” and it’s not true that money always wins in elections.  They had several examples of this including billionaire candidates that don’t get elected.  Dane Waters mentioned Rex Sinquefeld, and Patrick from Citizens in Charge countered with the money the Sowers family put into passing stem cell laws.  (I’m not all that familiar with that issue, so feel free to correct me.)

Dane Waters answered another question about whether the conservative groups in this Protect the Vote coalition are actually going to help, or are they on board just to sabotage the effort.  (I said the discussion was blunt !)  He pointed out that, although the conservative groups in the coalition may not be able to enlist as many signature gatherers as the progressive groups, they can help in other ways.  He mentioned funding, but he also said they could “tamp down” the opposition to the effort.  (I’m not sure what that means in practice.)

I was impressed enough with Dane Waters, Scott Sifton and Joe Maxell that I signed up to be a petition carrier.  Anyone who wants to carry petitions in Missouri must sign up with the Secretary of State’s office.  You do not have to be a registered voter to carry petitions, but the people who sign them do.  You can get all the info you need here.

The assembled delegates at the convent

John Edwards at the press availability after the speech

As a strong Edwards supporter, it had not occurred to me that John Edwards might have a problem filling the Carpenters Union Hall. I badly wanted to see him speak here; naturally there would be many people like me. But early Saturday morning, at about 7:00 am waiting for the bus in single digit cold, I started to realize, “I am not a normal person.” Normal people don’t go out into the freezing morning cold to see a longshot presidential candidate; normal people sip their hot coffee in their warm living room watching morning TV. Better yet, normal people stay snuggled under warm blankets.

My fears were allayed when I arrived; there were already 30 people standing in line waiting for the doors to open 45 minutes later for a speech that wasn’t set to start until over 2 hours from then. That line quickly doubled and then tripled, and after doors opened, the room swelled with over 1000 people spilling into the foyer and into an overflow room in the back.  

A row of speakers warmed up the crowd. Alderman Stephen Gregali, St. Louis American City Editor Alvin Reid, State Senator Tim Green, State Senator Wes Shoemyer, House Minority Whip Connie Johnson, St. Louis Carpenters Council President Terry Nelson, and Lt. Gov. Joe Maxwell each in turn made fiery speeches almost equal in passion to John Edwards himself. The main points that came across were: “John Edwards can win a general election against even John McCain” and “John Edwards is a fighter for the middle class of America.” Rep. Connie Johnson made some of these points, but she emphasized the personal connection John Edwards has with Missouri, as he has come back to Missouri several times since 2004 to campaign for downticket Dems and for ballot initiatives like the minimum wage increase.

St. Louis American City Editor Alvin Reid after the speech

State Senator (and family farmer) Wes Shoemyer

Attorney General candidate Rep. Jeff Harris works the crowd. He is not endorsing a presidential candidate.

John Edwards himself did not disappoint. Making his way through a throng to the right of the stage, he took the stage to deafening applause. My colleague hotflash, who was also in attendance, made the following notes:

“I have never taken a DIME from a lobbyist or a special interest group.”

“When did our party become the party of big money? When did we become the party that takes money from drug companies? from insurance companies? from Washington lobyists? The candidate taking more money from Washington lobbyists, Democrat or Rep., is not a Rep. It is a Democrat. The dandidate taking more money from drug companies, Democrat or Rep., is not a Rep. It’s a Democrat. Let me just say this, as your candidate and your nominee for president, that will not be me.”

E referred to Obama’s praise of Reagan as pres of change.  Reagan is “no example for change.” He did “everything in his power to break the organized labor movement.” he changed the tax structure to favor the wealthy. he deregulated industry as far as environmental laws.

(I don’t think he actually used Obama’s name for the following, but the reference was clear.) “we don’t really have to fight. You know, if you’re good to these people, if you’re nice,” you can get along with them. You can’t “nice these people to death.”

E concerned re global warming. Americans 4 % world population, use 25 % of its energy. Wants national cap on cargon emissions and make polluters pay.

Unlike Cl. and Ob. “dead against” building more nuclear power plants” and against building more coal-fired plants until  technology to clean them up can be used.

He wants to ask Americans to be “patriotic about something other than war.”

We must conserve. You “can’t spend and innovate your way of of this problem.”

Wants to stand on White House lawn and actually say the word “union”.

Minimum wage is finally $7.25. Ought to be at least $9.50.

“The first year that I am president I will end this war in Iraq.” no more combat missions, no permanent bases

“Suppose we had a president that believed in the United States Constitution and the bill of rights.” He’d close Guantanamo. no more illegal spying on the Amer. people. “No more debate in America about what kind of torture is permissible.”

“NAFTA CAFTA and these kinds of trade policies, they exist only for the purpose of destroying Amer. jobs.” E would “close that tax loophole that gives tax breaks to Amer. cos. sending jobs overseas.”

Health care woman finds lump in breast. what is she supposed to do? There’s no chemotherapy in emergency rooms.

Exxon $40 billion profit last year–world record for any corp.

Health insur. co. exec made $200 million

Conclusion: His parents and grandparents would have done anything to give him the chance at a better life. Everyone in audience has experienced that. We must take the reins and offer that same possibility to our children and grandchildren.

For a fuller picture of the speech, this video of his speech the previous night in Oklahoma City is very similar:

All in all, it was an electric atmosphere. I got the feeling from talking to people in the crowd that the majority of them were already committed Edwards supporters, which led to an even more charged response than there otherwise would have been. The task now for the Edwards campaign is mobilize these people and use that energy to bring others on board.