• About
  • The Poetry of Protest

Show Me Progress

~ covering government and politics in Missouri – since 2007

Show Me Progress

Tag Archives: Dan Houx

Rep. Dan Houx (r): your awl reely stoopit

10 Friday Mar 2023

Posted by Michael Bersin in Missouri General Assembly, Missouri House

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

54th Legislative District, Dan Houx, General Assembly, HJR 43, missouri, right wingnut

HJR 43.

Dan Houx (r) [2018 file photo].

From an email communication to his constituents:

[….]
Protecting the Constitution – HJR 43 is designed to protect the state constitution from the influence of out-of-state interests by allowing voters to decide if the state should raise the threshold to modify the constitution in the future. The measure would change the threshold required to approve changes to the state constitution. Currently, changes to the constitution require only a simple majority for approval. If approved by the legislature and voters, HJR 43 would raise the threshold to 60 percent voter approval for passage.

Proponents say the increased threshold will help minimize the influence of out-of-state groups that have no ties to Missouri but spend millions of dollars to change the state constitution. The sponsor of HJR 43 said the groups “try to reimagine Missouri in their vision.” He said, “I think it should be in the vision of the people of the state of Missouri.”
[….]

If you’re worried about wealthy interests (in-state and/or out-of-state) exerting undue influence in our elections when they spend millions of dollars trying to overwhelm voters with bullshit ads and mailings then do something about campaign finance reform, fool.

This resolution is just right wingnut dogma geared to gutting the ballot initiative process in Missouri. It’s embarrassing.

A small sample of the witness statements on HJR 43 submitted to the House Elections and Elected Officials Committee:

This proposed amendment is unnecessary, harmful, and misleading. It would lead to MORE out-of-state money affecting our ballot initiatives. It reduces the ability for the will of the people to be our supreme law. Also, the dog-whistle about only citizens voting is the exact kind of unnecessary addition to the state constitution your side claims to want to keep out of the constitution.

I am against changing the initiative process. It works, (witness Hancock amendment, right to farm, the conservation department). Proposed attempts to increase necessary percentages will effectively kill the ability of citizens to directly participate in democracy. This is a transparent effort to subvert the will of the majority of the people of Missouri. Leave it alone.

Notwithstanding that the Hancock Amendment was, and still is, a huge mistake and the Right to Farm was a ridiculous gesture.

This bill makes it more difficult to place and pass measures on a ballot. The people have a right to be heard in the simplest manner possible.

You’d think.

We should not be making it harder for Missourians to get things they want passed in our state. We have passed so many good things the last few years using this process. It’s awesome that these have had bipartisan voter support as well. Making it harder for voters to have their voices heard is unconstitutional and Un-American. If our legislators can’t get the job done then we should be able to get things on the ballot ourselves and lawmakers should not be making it harder for us to so

I believe these proposed limitations of the MO people’s ideas and voices all head the wrong direction. I think voters’ voices should be stronger and easier to become law, not harder with more obstacles, as these proposed rules are attempting.

The right wingnut controlled General Assembly considers that a feature, not a bug.

As a citizen of Missouri and an activist who has spent countless hours encouraging people to vote, I strongly oppose any legislation that makes it more difficult for Missouri citizens to get initiatives on the ballot and/or create higher thresholds for passing ballot initiatives. Missouri’s initiative petition process has been used to represent the will of the people ON BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE. This is the only recourse Missourians have when our public servants fail to address issues that are important to us. The current system which entails getting hundreds of thousand of votes to be considered for the ballot is already rigorous (as it should be). Have you ever stood on a street corner or knocked doors in an effort to get support for a cause or a candidate (or for yourself?) I imagine many of you have and thus you understand how hard you work for every issue, for every vote, for every signature. One can easily extrapolate that to the already complex and lengthy process it takes to obtain signatures for a statewide ballot initiative. In other words, it’s already difficult- we don’t need you to make it more so. If Republican legislators continue to support and eventually pass this legislation, they will reap what they sow. An electorate who will easily identify that their Republican legislators have upended the Missouri Constitution in an attempt to weaken the influence of the very people who put them in Jeff City

The initiative petition process is amongst the purest forms of democratic participation. For more than a century, Missouri citizens across the political spectrum have been able to have their voices heard through the initiative petition process. The Missouri constitution guarantees: “The people reserve power to propose and enact or reject laws and amendments to the constitution by the initiative, independent of the general assembly.” The process already requires a high threshold of signatures from registered voters to get a proposal on the ballot. Missourians across the political spectrum have used and benefited from the citizen initiative process. Measures passed by a majority – as is currently the case – reflect the will of the people. Making it more difficult – as these bills do – undermines the will of the people. Representatives should e supporting the will of the people – that’s what we elected you for.

I oppose this change to the initiative petition process because it makes it more difficult for Missourians to engage in direct democracy. The recent legislature is notorious for not considering the will of the people and passing policy that harms Missourians in need of workplace protections, social services, and full and fair access to elections. These bills expand our long help practice of majority rule that is defined as 50% plus one. Placing higher thresholds for getting initiative petitions on the ballot and passing ballot measures into law limits the will of the people. It is already extremely difficult, time consuming, and costly to get initiatives on the ballot. Majority rule in Missouri should be maintained and defined as it always has, equal to or greater than half votes cast.

Campaign Finance reform anyone?

Outrageous. Republicans in this state are out of control. Reign it in please.

We already knew that.

Ballot initiatives engage Missourians directly into the democratic process, increase civic participation and investment, and most importantly, give citizens a voice in the policies that govern our lives. Limiting this process is anti-democratic, plain and simple. I oppose this bill.

[….] I have been a volunteer collecting signatures on initiative petitions for the last 40 years. I have worked on campaigns that won, and on campaigns that lost. But I would say that all my work has been successful in that it promoted citizen voter awareness of issues and provided an opportunity for voters to have a direct voice about policies that affect them. I highly value the fact that since 1907 the Missouri Constitution has guaranteed the power of the people to propose and “enact or reject laws” independent of the General Assembly. This House Joint Resolution seeks to weaken that power. Voters from across the political spectrum: conservatives, progressives, moderates and independents have used this important tool of direct democracy. Collecting the required number of signatures is already a difficult undertaking. I have collected signatures in blistering heat and biting cold. I (along with hundreds of others) have spent hours talking to voters outside grocery stores, churches, fish fries, schools, elections, at parades and sports events. I say this not to ask for sympathy, but to underscore how important the tools of direct democracy are to me and to all Missourians. Creating more rigorous standards regarding the numbers of signatures needed, and raising the bar for what constitutes a majority, weaken the voices of the people. These proposed changes shift power toward elected officials and the special interests who court their favor. This is taking Missouri in the wrong direction. I urge you to protect the Constitutional rights of Missourians and vote NO. Thank you for this opportunity to share my perspective.

Participatory Democracy will become a faint memory, if that.

A stylized dance

17 Friday Feb 2017

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

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Dan Houx, Denny Hoskins, General Assembly, Glen Kolkmeyer, missouri

Yesterday evening the Warrensburg MSTA-CTA (teachers) held an informational meeting with Johnson County area legislators. The program listed Denny Hoskins (r-21st Senate District), Dean Dohrman (r-51st Legislative District), Glen Kolkmeyer (r-53rd Legislative District), and Dan Houx (r-54th Legislative District). Dean Dohrman did not attend.

Denny Hoskins (r-21st Senate District).

Denny Hoskins (r-21st Senate District).

To their credit three legislators did show up to take questions from their teacher constituents. MSTA-CTA provided refreshments and a box dinner for everyone who attended the event.

A MSTA representative served as moderator, explaining that he took solicited pre-submitted questions (from those who had sent in an RSVP to the event). After brief introductions the moderator read questions and asked each legislator in turn for their comments.

Understandably, from teachers, the first questions were on the state budget and K-12 funding from Jefferson City. The responses included the usual soothing sounds about the importance of education, shortfalls in state revenues, and the requirement that the state have a balanced budget. What was missing in those early comments was any explanation of how the past actions of two of those three legislators (Dan Houx is in his first term in Jefferson City) in the General Assembly contributed significantly to the structural shortfalls in state revenue.

I left the event after listening to the stylized dance around the subject for a half hour.

It’s possible they could have addressed increasing state revenue after I left the event. Nah, they’re republicans in the Missouri General Assembly.

(left to right) Denny Hoskins (r), Glen Kolkmeyer (r-53rd Legislative District), Dan Houx (r-54th Legislative District).

(left to right) Denny Hoskins (r), Glen Kolkmeyer (r-53rd Legislative District), Dan Houx (r-54th Legislative District).

Subscribe

  • Entries (RSS)
  • Comments (RSS)

Archives

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

Categories

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

Meta

  • Log in

Blogroll

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

Donate to Show Me Progress via PayPal

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

Blog Stats

  • 775,197 hits

Powered by WordPress.com.

 

Loading Comments...