Donald Kauerauf Selected to Lead Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services
     On the same day Gov. Parson unveiled the state’s new vaccine incentive program, the governor also announced the new director of the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services (DHSS). Donald Kauerauf, who previously served as the assistant director of the Illinois Department of Public Health, will lead Missouri’s public health efforts beginning September 1.
    Parson said, “Don is no stranger to state government and has more than 30 years of experience in public health and emergency management with the state of Illinois. It is obvious that he has a firm grasp on public health issues and the COVID-19 crisis, and we are confident in his ability to lead DHSS.”
    Parson noted that Kauerauf has more than 30 years of experience in state government and has served in various senior leadership positions in public health and emergency management. During his time with the Illinois Department of Public Health, he developed a statewide structure to improve communication between the Department and local public health agencies and directed the development and implementation of the nation's first statewide pandemic influenza exercise, among other accomplishments. 
     “I’m looking forward to working with public health agencies, healthcare providers, and communities to build upon the great work that has been initiated in Missouri to address the current COVID-19 situation. At the same time, I’ll work to make available critical preventative programs and services to increase the health and safety of all Missourians,” said Kauerauf.
 
State Offers New Funding to Combat Crimes Against Children
     The state of Missouri is enhancing its efforts to combat crimes against children and to support agencies that provide services to crime victims.
     Gov. Parson recently announced that $2 million in grant opportunities will be made available to assist local law enforcement and prosecutors to combat crimes against children, which rose in 2020 and 2021 during the COVID-19 pandemic. An additional $2 million in grant opportunities will be available to support crime victim service agencies, which have reported increases in service referrals during the COVID-19 pandemic.
     Parson said, “The last two years have created hardships and strained resources across the nation, but the reported rise in crimes affecting children and the difficulties experienced by agencies that provide vital services to crime victims is most concerning.” 
     He added, “These new grant programs will allow us to better investigate and prosecute criminals who victimize children and support domestic violence service agencies and child advocacy centers who serve our most vulnerable citizens and help bring criminals to justice.”
     The two competitive grants will utilize funds previously allocated to Missouri from the federal Coronavirus Emergency Supplemental Funding Program (CESF). The grants will be administered by the Missouri Department of Public Safety.
     The funding opportunity for the Crimes Against Children/Sex Crimes Grant is expected to open August 1, 2021. Projects may include hiring additional staff to investigate, prosecute, and detect crimes against children.  
     The funding opportunity for the Victims of Crime Grant is expected to open September 1, 2021. Projects may include providing resource assistance to domestic violence service agencies and child advocacy centers and aiding other entities serving victims from vulnerable populations adversely impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic.
 
     Please let me know If you have other concerns and suggestions.  If you would like to schedule a specific time to meet locally, please call my office at 573-751-1487, or email my office at jeff.coleman@house.mo.gov. 
 
 

House Approves Medicaid Funding Measure and Strong Pro-Life Protections (SB 1 and HB 2)
    House members made a strong statement this week in support of the state’s most vulnerable citizens and in defense of the lives of the unborn. The House approved legislation that will provide essential funding to the state’s Medicaid program, also known as MO HealthNet, and passed a pro-life bill meant to prevent taxpayer dollars from going to abortion providers.
    Lawmakers were called into a special legislative session last week by Governor Mike Parson to renew the Federal Reimbursement Allowance (FRA) program. Under the program, hospitals, nursing homes, and pharmacies provide funds to the state and MO HealthNet uses these funds to draw down matching federal dollars. The state collects approximately $1.6 billion, which draws down $2.9 billion in federal support. Gov. Parson told lawmakers he would have to cut $722 million from budget if the FRA isn’t renewed.
     Lawmakers took up and passed SB 1 to renew the FRA program. Specifically the bill extends the sunset for the program from September 30, 2021 to September 30, 2023. House and Senate members also agreed to pro-life language in the bill. The provision prohibits the state’s Medicaid program from covering any drug or device approved by the FDA that may cause the destruction of, or prevent the implantation of, an unborn child.
     The House also advanced its own pro-life legislation, HB 2, meant to prevent taxpayer dollars from going to abortion providers in the state. The bill makes it unlawful for any public funds to be expended to any abortion facility, or to any affiliate or associate of the facility.
     The sponsor of the bill noted the legislature had previously moved to defund Planned Parenthood through language contained in the state operating budget. However, the Missouri Supreme Court ruled in 2020 that the Missouri Constitution prohibits lawmakers from using appropriations bills to create policy. HB 2 is meant to comply with the constitution by implementing the language in a policy bill.
     The sponsor also noted the bill contains provisions to protect the state from a possible repeal of the Hyde Amendment, which bars the use of federal funds to pay for abortions. The bill makes it clear that no federal act, law, order, rule, or regulation can infringe on the rights of the people of Missouri to encourage childbirth over abortion in the use of taxpayer funds, and to restrict public funds from being used to perform or assist in an abortion.
    While SB 1 will now become law with the governor’s signature, HB 2 still requires Senate approval before moving to the governor’s desk.
     If the Senate does not take action on the bill before the special session concludes, lawmakers have been assured that Gov. Parson will work to prevent taxpayer dollars from going to Planned Parenthood by implementing an administrative rule.
 
Legislation to Support Small Businesses and Cut Taxes Signed into Law (SBs 153 & 97)
    Governor Mike Parson recently signed legislation designed to level the playing field so Missouri-based businesses can better compete with their online counterparts. Commonly referred to as the Wayfair bill, it would require online retailers to collect sales tax on internet purchases made by Missouri consumers.  
     The bill would balance this new tax revenue collected from online purchases by cutting personal income tax for Missouri taxpayers.
     The bill will allow Missouri and local jurisdictions to collect a use tax from online retailers who sell and deliver more than $100,000 in tangible goods to consumers in the state annually. 
    Collection and remittance obligations will begin on January 1, 2023. 
     Currently, Missouri businesses lose sales  because out-of-state, online retailers are not subject to the same state sales tax laws that local businesses are. The current system also burdens Missouri businesses because they are required to remit sales and use taxes to other states, but out-of-state businesses selling to Missourians do not. 
The new tax revenue generated by the collection of the use tax will be offset by a tax reduction for Missourians. Under legislation previously approved by the General Assembly, Missourians receive a 0.1 percent reduction in income tax when revenues grow at a healthy level. The bill signed into law by Gov. Parson adds two additional 0.1 percent reductions if revenues reach the growth trigger. Additionally, the bill calls for a third 0.1 percent reduction in 2024. In total, with the previous legislation and the bill approved this year, Missourians could see their income tax cut by a total of 0.8 percent.
The legislation also creates the Missouri Working Family Tax Credit Act, which is a state level earned income tax credit (EITC) worth at least 10 percent of any federal EITC utilized by a taxpayer. If revenues grow at a healthy level the amount of the credit would increase to 20 percent. The EITC will provide vital tax relief for low- and middle-income families. Additionally, it protects Missourians from having to pay state income tax on the federal stimulus payments they received.
 
Other Bills Recently Signed into Law by Gov. Parson
SB 36 establishes the Capitol Complex Tax Credit program to preserve historic buildings located throughout downtown Jefferson City for generations of Missourians to enjoy. Buildings like the State Capitol, the Governor’s Mansion and others need financial support and investment if we expect them to stand the test of time. Through SB 36, individuals can donate to restoration and preservation efforts for these buildings and receive a portion of their donation back as a tax credit.
 
SB 57 creates the Economic Distress Zone Fund which provides funding to nonprofits that focus on deterring crime in high crime areas of the state. It also creates the Critical Incident Stress Management Program to assist officers with stress and trauma.
HB 402 protects lottery winners from unwanted attention. The current practice is for prize winners to have their names posted to the lottery website to announce their winnings. The bill changes state law to prohibit the lottery from publishing the name, address, or identifying information of a lottery winner in printed or electronic form.
SB 71 allows victims of domestic abuse to obtain lifetime orders of protection against their abusers. Under current law, a court can issue an order of protection for up to one year. SB 71 will allow courts to issue protection orders for any length of time the judge feels is appropriate, up to and including a lifetime. The bill also allows parents, guardians, and juvenile officers to appeal child placement decisions, allows modifications to custody agreements to include grandparent's visitation rights, and modifies the definition of stalking to include newer technologies like social media. 
HB 697 puts important consumer protections in place for residential Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) programs, which provide loans for energy efficient home improvements. The bill remedies the fact these programs currently have little oversight by requiring them to be reviewed by the Division of Finance at least every other year. The bill also requires PACE programs to provide residential borrowers with complete information about the potential impact of their loan. Additionally, the bill will require programs to base loans on local government appraisals rather than rely on private appraisers who may have higher valuations.
SB 106 modernizes statutes related to the licensing and regulation of financial institutions in Missouri. Additionally, the bill allows the Division of Finance to approve certain mergers of financial institutions and aligns state law with the Universal Commercial Code requirements for electronic lending instruments. 
HB 345 allows arbitration awards for personal injury and wrongful death claims to be enforced against an insurer only when the insurer has agreed to the arbitration agreement in writing.
SB 6 modifies statutory provisions regarding insurance, including making association health plans more accessible, clarifying protections and responsibilities of insurers and consumers in group policies, and ensuring continued National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) accreditation and best practice standards in Missouri related to reinsurance.
SB 176 creates statutory definitions and operational frameworks for food delivery platforms (FDP) and personal delivery devices (PDDs) in Missouri. The bill also creates a definition for electric bicycles of three classifications, and excludes electric bicycles from definitions for other types of vehicles.
HB 476 cuts bureaucratic red tape to ensure more skilled veterans are able to work and practice in the state. It allows members of the military or veterans to use their military experience or training towards a relevant occupational license. The bill also enacts the Occupational Therapy Licensure Compact and modifies other provisions related to professional licensure. 
HB 273 adopts several of the same provisions relating to professional licensure as HB 476, updates the Uniform Athlete Agents Act, and clarifies that the sole act of shampooing does not require state licensure.
 
Please let me know If you have other concerns and suggestions.  If you would like to schedule a specific time to meet locally, please call my office at 573-751-1487, or email my office at jeff.coleman@house.mo.gov. 
 
 
 
 

     I hope everyone is having a good start to their summer. Make sure you stay tuned to my Facebook page for upcoming Town Hall Meetings where we will talk about our residential property assessments and my proposed legislation to help ease the pressure of skyrocketing property taxes. 
     I am also pleased to have co-sponsored the Second Amendment Protection Act which Governor Parson just signed into law this month. Please read all of the very good legislation that we were able to pass this last session to help protect our citizens of Missouri. 
 
Second Amendment Preservation Act Signed into Law (HBs 85 & 310)
     Lawmakers took action during the 2021 legislative session to protect the Second Amendment rights of Missourians against an overreaching federal government. This week Gov. Parson signed the legislation approved by the General Assembly to create the Second Amendment Preservation Act.
     The act is meant to protect law-abiding gun owners from potential gun control legislation that could be passed in Washington, D.C. It states that laws and other actions that prohibit the manufacture, ownership, and use of firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition within Missouri exceed the powers granted to the federal government. It also declares that all federal laws, acts, and orders that infringe on Missourians’ second amendment rights are invalid in the state.
     Gov. Parson said the bill “draws a line in the sand and demonstrates our commitment to reject any attempt by the federal government to circumvent the fundamental right Missourians have to keep and bear arms to protect themselves and their property.”
     The bill prohibits state and local cooperation with federal officials that attempt to enforce any laws, rules, orders, or actions that violate the Second Amendment rights of Missourians. Additionally, the bill is an acknowledgment that the right to keep and bear arms is fundamental and inalienable, and that the nation's federalist constitutional structure limits the federal government's authority over states.
     Under the bill, any person or entity who knowingly deprives Missouri citizens of their right to bear arms - as protected by state and federal constitutions - will be liable for redress and monetary damages of $50,000 per occurrence. Local law enforcement’s ability to assist federal officials in other instances remains unchanged under the new law.
     Parson said the bill “puts those in Washington D.C. on notice that here in Missouri we support responsible, law-abiding gun owners, and that we oppose government overreach and any unlawful efforts to limit our access to firearms.”
 
Legislation to Improve Local Government Accountability and Transparency Signed into Law (HB 271)
     Gov. Parson recently gave his stamp of approval to legislation approved by the General Assembly to ensure greater accountability and more transparency on the local government level.
     One provision of the bill creates the Missouri Local Government Expenditure Database, which creates an easy to use, downloadable database allowing taxpayers to search expenditures and payments received and made by counties and municipalities. The new database will be housed on the Missouri Accountability Portal.
     The bill’s sponsor said the database will make it easier for taxpayers to hold local officials and governments accountable for spending decisions. “When we shine a brighter light on how government spends the people’s money, it leads to better outcomes for Missouri taxpayers,” he said.
     Another provision added to the bill is meant to provide oversight for the ability of local health officials to close businesses, churches, and schools during an emergency. Under the bill, political subdivisions may only issue public health orders that directly or indirectly restrict access to businesses, churches, schools, or other places of assembly for 30 calendar days in a 180-day period when the governor has declared a state of emergency. Orders may be extended more than once with a simple majority vote by the local governing body. 
     The legislation also bans so-called “vaccine passports” so that Missourians do not have to show proof of vaccination in order to access public transportation or other public services. It ensures that no county, city, town, or village receiving public funds can require an individual to provide documentation of a COVID-19 vaccination in order to access a public transportation system, services, or any other public accommodations.
 
New House Committee Launches Effort to Improve Broadband Access
     A newly-formed committee is taking on the challenge of finding ways to improve access to broadband internet in Missouri. Formed by House Speaker Rob Vescovo, the Interim Committee on Broadband Development will spend the next several months gathering data and testimony as it works toward policy recommendations that will make high speed internet more available and affordable.
     The chair of the committee said, “As we are all well aware, the recent pandemic demonstrated that high-speed, broadband internet can no longer be considered a luxury, it has become a necessity, a necessity that far too many Missourians have done, and continue to do, without. “
     He added that the committee will “study where we are as a state in 2021, where we need to be, and what steps we will need to take as policy makers and appropriators to ensure that broadband internet is readily available to every Missourian who wants it.” He said the committee plans to examine three core areas: access, speed, and affordability.
     During its first hearing on June 10, committee members heard from the director of the Office of Broadband Development, which works to expand and accelerate broadband deployment in Missouri. The director noted there are 392,000 Missourians who lack high-speed internet, either because it’s not available or they can’t afford it. Right now Missouri ranks in the bottom five for access to low-cost internet with only 55 percent of Missourians having access to a low-cost internet plan.
     The committee will continue to meet each month throughout the interim to gather information from subject matter experts, Federal officials, statewide associations, internet providers, and from the general public. The committee will take written testimony, live testimony and remote testimony between now and December 1. Based on the information gathered, the committee will prepare a report and generate policy options and appropriations requests before the end of 2021.
 
Pandemic-Electronic Benefit Transfer Program Returns
     Families with children who qualify for free or reduced priced meals can once again apply for Pandemic-Electronic Benefit Transfer (P-EBT) benefits. The benefits are meant to help cover food costs experienced by families while their student was not doing in-seat learning due to the pandemic.
     “We heard from Missouri families how last year’s P-EBT benefit helped with the extra household food costs and I am very pleased Missouri can once more make the benefit available,” said the acting director of the Missouri Department of Social Services.
     It’s important to note the P-EBT 2020-2021 program is very different from last year’s program.
 
Highlights of the changes include:
All families must apply to get the P-EBT benefit, regardless of whether they receive Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)/Food Stamp benefits.
Families do not need to apply for P-EBT benefits for children under age six. Families who receive SNAP with an eligible child under age six will automatically get a P-EBT benefit for that child added to the household’s existing EBT card.
A child may be eligible for P-EBT if the school was closed, not doing in-seat learning, or had reduced hours at least five school days in a row due to COVID-19.
P-EBT benefits are available for the months of September 2020 through May 2021.
The P-EBT benefit is based on the school’s report of how much of the month was not in-seat learning. If most of the school’s month was not in-seat learning, the monthly P-EBT benefit amount is $129.58. If only some of the school’s month was not in-seat learning, the monthly P-EBT benefit amount is $77.75.
Each eligible student will get an EBT card in his or her name with the lump sum P-EBT benefit amount for the 2020-2021 school year. Ineligible families will receive a denial letter.
 
     Families can download the application at the following link: https://dss.mo.gov/covid-19/pdf/P-EBT-Application%20-%20English.pdf. Families can directly email the application to FSD.MOPEBT@dss.mo.gov or mail the P-EBT application to:
 
Family Support Division
615 E. 13th Street
Kansas City, MO 64106
 
All applications must be received by July 31, 2021.
 
     Please let me know If you have other concerns and suggestions.  If you would like to schedule a specific time to meet locally, please call my office at 573-751-1487, or email my office at jeff.coleman@house.mo.gov. 
 

​Prescription Drug Monitoring Program Signed into Law (SB 63)
 
     PDMP was passed by both the House and the Senate and passes by the Governor, however, I did not vote for this new law.  I do however see some benefits to having it.  Please contact me to get further information about my position.
     Legislation approved by the General Assembly to create a statewide prescription drug monitoring program (PDMP) was recently signed into law by Gov. Mike Parson. 
      The PDMP will allow medical professionals to see their patients’ medication history, which will allow them to recognize signs of addiction and prevent dangerous drug interactions. The bill establishes the Joint Oversight Task Force of Prescription Drug Monitoring, which is responsible for collecting and maintaining the prescription and dispensation of prescribed controlled substances to patients within the state. 
     “SB 63 will help provide necessary information to health care professionals and empower them to make decisions that better serve their patients and assist in fighting the opioid epidemic in Missouri,” said Parson, who called the bill a top priority for his administration.
     The bill limits access to private information to medical professionals, specifically prohibits the information from being used to deny firearm purchases, and includes a rolling purge of the data. Under the bill, patient information is considered a closed record under state law and will not be provided to law enforcement agencies, prosecutorial officials, or regulatory bodies for purposes not allowed under HIPAA.
     Parson noted that similar statewide prescription drug monitoring programs have been adopted in every other state in the country, as well as the District of Columbia and Guam, in an effort to address the opioid epidemic occurring across the United States. 
     The bill also extends the expiration date of the RX Cares for Missouri Program to August 28, 2026. 
 
Lawmakers Call for Special Session on Agricultural Issues
 
     The leaders of agriculture committees in the House and Senate have asked Gov. Mike Parson to call a special session to address some of the important agriculture issues left on the table from the recently-ended legislative session. The chairs and vice-chairs of the House Agriculture Policy Committee and the Senate Agriculture Committee wrote a letter to the governor asking for a special session “to address a number of legislative items directly affecting agriculture in our great state.”
     The letter asks for the governor to include provisions contained in Senate Bill 37, which received widespread support during the regular session but ultimately did not pass. The bill deals with regulation changes for anhydrous ammonia. The lawmakers said it provides a “critical update to our current laws that will keep Missouri in line with federal standards and prevent possible intervention from the EPA.”
     Senate Bill 37 also extends the Missouri Agricultural and Small Business Development Authority tax credit programs that are set to sunset on December 31 of this year. The letter notes these programs “have brought in $247 million in direct and indirect benefits to Missouri since 2000.” Additional provisions in the bill include a pilot program to allow recipients to use Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits at local farmers markets, and tax credits for ethanol and biodiesel.
     The legislative leaders have also called on Gov. Parson to include provisions from House Bill 527, which would restrict the use of eminent domain for merchant utility lines. It would require all impacted county commissioners to present a resolution of support for the proposed project to the Public Service Commission before proceeding. The letter notes the issue is “of great concern for agriculturalists and all Missouri landowners, and we have a duty to provide them with certainty moving forward.”
 
Lawmakers Call for Special Session to Protect Police Budgets and Improve Public Safety
      A group of state lawmakers have asked Gov. Parson to call a special session focused on preventing cities from cutting funding for law enforcement. Republican lawmakers from both the St. Louis and Kansas City areas are calling on Parson to help prevent cuts to the police departments in the state’s two largest cities.
     In St. Louis, the mayor has proposed a $4 million cut from the budget for the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department. In Kansas City, the Kansas City Council approved a $42 million cut to the budget for the Kansas City Police Department. Lawmakers expressed concern that the cuts are coming at a time when the rate of violent crime continues to increase in these areas. They noted St. Louis and Kansas City were two of the most deadly cities in the nation in 2020. St. Louis had its worse homicide rate in 50 years with 262 murders. Kansas City also set a record with 180 murders.
      Gov. Parson has not made a commitment to calling a special session but a spokesperson from his office issued a statement saying, “Governor Parson believes in law and order, which means there must be brave men and women in uniform willing to enforce the law and protect victims. It is imperative that communities support our law enforcement officers who risk their lives daily to keep Missourians safe. Any effort to defund the police is dangerous and irresponsible.”
 
     Please let me know If you have other concerns and suggestions.  If you would like to schedule a specific time to meet locally, please call my office at 573-751-1487, or email my office at jeff.coleman@house.mo.gov. 
 
 
 

     After hours of fierce debate that spanned the course of two days, the Missouri House on Wednesday signed off on a prohibition on transgender students participating on the sports teams that match their gender identity.
     The provision, offered as an amendment by Rep. Chuck Basye, R-Rocheport, to House Bill 1141 was adopted by a vote of 100 yes to 51 against, with one member voting present.
     Yet for the second time in two days, the underlying bill was tabled before it could be granted initial approval by the House. This time, debate stalled over an amendment that would have barred school districts from teaching curriculum on critical race theory or the 1619 Project by The New York Times, that detailed the United States’ legacy of slavery.
     Lawmakers in support of the measure insisted the move was not intended to discriminate against transgender youth, while those in opposition became emotional as they shared the experiences of their own transgender family members and warned the provision would cost lives.
     Rep. Ian Mackey, D-St. Louis, cited a 2015 study that found 40 percent of transgender people surveyed had attempted suicide.
     “Can we agree that people in our state deserve dignity and respect, especially under the color of law, and on a topic that is so unfamiliar to us,” Mackey said, noting there are no transgender lawmakers in the House.
     Basye has sponsored a version of the language as a constitutional amendment that would allow voters to decide the issue. House Joint Resolution 53 was passed out of the rules committee earlier this month, but has yet to be heard on the House floor.
     “I’m not a homophobe. I’m not a transphobe,” said Basye, who shared that his younger brother is gay.
     Basye argued it comes down to protecting the integrity of women’s sports and stressed that transgender students could still play in co-ed sports leagues.
     “I care about everybody. I love everybody,” Basye said. “This is not about ill feelings. This is about doing the right thing and protecting girls.”
     House Minority Leader Crystal Quade, D-Springfield, said she had been assured the amendment would not resurface   Wednesday afternoon after the House had voted to expel a Republican member who had been accused by his adult children of sexual and physical abuse.
     With less than a month left in the session and after conversations with the Senate, “we all know in this body this bill is not going to become law,” Quade said. Instead, she said, the conversation was spanning the course of two days for the sake of political futures and upcoming elections.
     “I ask that you think about the children who are listening, the same children that we voted to protect this morning who are deeply at risk,” Quade said.
     Transgender youth and their family who testified against the bill last month said it was a solution in search of a problem — noting that the Missouri State High School Activities Association already has a policy in place outlining requirements for transgender youths’ participation.
     The association requires an approved application and transgender girls must go through one year of “documented” hormone therapy before they may participate on girls’ teams.
     And once granted, transgender girls must document that “the appropriate hormone levels are being maintained,” according to the policy.
     Rep. Shamed Dogan, R-Ballwin, said he disagrees with Basye’s amendment and asked if Basye planned to still offer the language as a constitutional amendment, which would put the question on the statewide ballot for voters to decide.
     “I would like to do both,” Basye said.
     Dogan warned of the potential economic impacts, citing the National Collegiate Athletic Association’s threat that it may move to pull championship tournaments from states that pass such bans.
     A wave of anti-trans legislation has been filed in statehouses nationwide this year, with similar bills restricting transgender youths’ participation recently signed into law in Arkansas, Mississippi and Tennessee.
     Dogan urged lawmakers to put themselves in others’ shoes, noting that for many of the lawmakers — who are straight, white males — they are in the majority.
     “I wonder how many of you have ever walked into a room and been the super minority among people who look like you? Certainly doesn’t happen in this chamber,” Dogan said. “Have you ever been a super minority in terms of the color of your skin, particularly in a room of powerful people? Have you ever been a super minority in terms of who you love? Have you been the only straight person in a room full of gay people? Have you ever been the only super minority in terms of how you express your gender?”
     At times amid the debate some Republican lawmakers alluded that allowing transgender youth to participate on teams that match their gender identity would lead to increased sexual assault or indecent exposure in locker rooms.
     “As a female, a God-given (gender) that was assigned to me at birth… I represent all the females in Missouri that want to compete and not be forced to be subjected to unpleasant views of male genitalia or anything like that,” said Rep. Suzie Pollock, R-Lebanon, who has sponsored a bill that would prohibit medical care for transgender youth for the purpose of gender confirmation. 
      “Women’s rights are something that we have fought for for years and I think this is a regression on those women’s rights.”
     Lawmakers with transgender family members of their own urged their colleagues to consider how the legislation would affect them personally.
     “I will look at you. I’ll remember. This is about human rights. It’s about fair treatment. It’s simply being good policymakers. That’s all we’re asking here,” said Rep. Doug Clemens, D-St. Ann, whose brother’s child is transgender.
     “I get where you’re coming from. I just ask you to have an open mind and learn before jumping to writing something in the law books or changing our constitution for God’s sake.”
     This story has been updated since it was first published.
     Tessa Weinberg covers education, health care and the legislature. She previously covered the Missouri statehouse for The Kansas City Star and The Columbia Missourian, where her reporting into social media use by the governor prompted an investigation by the Attorney General’s office. She most recently covered state government in Texas for The Fort Worth Star-Telegram.
www.missouriindependent.com.
 

​     During a recent hearing on his bill to establish the “Stop Social Media Censorship Act,” state Rep. Jeff Coleman repeatedly referenced experts sitting behind him in the audience who would be better able to address questions about the legislation’s legality.
     The first of these experts to testify was Chris Sevier, an Iraqi war veteran, Tennessee attorney and advocate who has pushed anti-LGBTQ and anti-porn legislation in statehouses across the country — and was deemed a “security concern” in the Missouri Capitol two years ago.
     Sevier may be best known for suing states that wouldn’t recognize his marriage to his laptop — a move to protest gay marriage. He’s also made headlines for past legal issues, including being charged with stalking and harassing country music singer John Rich and a 17-year-old girl.
     Sevier later pleaded guilty to reduced charges of misdemeanor harassment.
In 2011, Sevier’s Tennessee law license was moved to “disability inactive status” due to being “presently incapacitated from continuing to practice law by reason of mental infirmity or illness.”
     Meanwhile, Sevier has been connected to controversial legislative efforts across the country for years — often leaving uneasy interactions in his wake.
     Last month, Sevier was escorted by security out of the Oklahoma Capitol after an altercation with a lawmaker. Three years ago in Rhode Island, a state senator withdrew a bill pushed by Sevier, citing its “dubious origins.”
     After Missouri Senate Administrator Patrick Baker sent an email to senators and staff with a photo of Sevier and the subject line “security concern” in 2019, Sevier filed a federal lawsuit against him alleging defamation. The lawsuit was dismissed the same month. 
     The “Stop Social Media Censorship Act” is the latest of his legislative initiatives to find its way to Missouri.
Social media posts and draft legislation uploaded online indicate Sevier has crafted versions of the bill, in addition to a handful of others, for all 50 states. He’s also been working to find lawmakers to sponsor his bills since the fall.
     Coleman, R-Grain Valley, said Sevier first approached him in late October or early November after seeing Coleman’s public complaints about social media censorship.
     The bill would allow Missourians whose political or religious speech is censored on large social media platforms to bring lawsuits against those companies. Opponents argue the legislation is unconstitutional and would impede platforms’ ability to remove objectionable content, while supporters say it’s necessary to give users a voice.
     “He asked me to carry that bill, and I agreed to it,” Coleman said, later adding: “In general, I think it’s a very good bill, because we have to figure out something in order to stop what’s going on.”
     When reached by phone by The Independent Tuesday afternoon, Sevier said, “You can kiss my ass,” before hanging up.
     Coleman, who was elected in 2018, said he had previously never heard of Sevier.
     “As a legislator, you’ve got so many things going on, so many bills you’re trying to keep up with, you really don’t have time to do a background check on someone,” Coleman said.
     But after learning of Sevier’s past following his testimony at last month’s committee hearing, Coleman said he is moving forward without Sevier’s input and working to refine the bill.
     “He seems like a nice enough guy. But there’s enough out there that’s a concern that we don’t have him helping us anymore,” Coleman said, later adding:   “We don’t need those distractions, because this is an important issue. We want to make sure that that’s the issue, not him.”
     Rep. Dottie Bailey, R-Eureka, is also sponsoring a version of the “Stop Social Media Censorship Act.” Bailey could not immediately be reached for comment Tuesday.
 
‘De Facto Attorneys General’    Despite detailing amendments and changes that he said would be made to Coleman’s House Bill 482, Sevier denied playing a role in writing the legislation when asked by Rep. Keri Ingle, D-Lee’s Summit, during the Feb. 22 hearing.
     “We have many lawyers. We would respectfully submit that the bills are written out of multi-state federal litigation so it would be different suggestions from judges and courts — it’d be language that’s pulled from different pleadings and opinions, if you will,” said Sevier, who said he was not a lobbyist. “So there’s many people that we support (on) this bill. Rep. Coleman is the author of this bill. We support his bill.”
     On the witness form he submitted to testify on the bill, Sevier did not list an organization that he’s affiliated with. But his connections to the bill and the groups he associated with aren’t hard to find.
     Sevier is listed on websites for the groups “Special Forces of Liberty” and “De Facto Attorneys General,” and has listed those same groups in lawsuits. In a December discussion with the New Jersey Constitutional Republicans, Sevier said the name “De Facto Attorneys General” comes from doing the work attorneys general should be doing, but aren’t.
    Through filing federal lawsuits challenging issues, Sevier said judges are “communicating in ways in their opinions,” which guides legislation. 
In the past, Sevier has filed a slew of federal lawsuits against companies like Apple for not restricting pornography on their products and to stop a Louisiana city from holding “Drag Queen Story Time.” A decision in 2018 litigation referenced over a dozen lawsuits Sevier filed since 2014 challenging same-sex marriage. 
     “And then from the federal lawsuits, we’ve been writing a litany of legislation for all 50 states that cover mainly the ‘culture war’ issues and hopefully to proliferate human flourishing, to restore the rule of law and to underscore constitutional supremacy,” Sevier told the New Jersey Constitutional Republicans.
     A website for the “Stop Social Media Censorship Act” that details bills filed across the country doesn’t indicate what groups are affiliated with it. However, the website domain is registered to “De Facto Attorney Generals” with an Alabama address.
     The bill language listed for Missouri, like many others linked from the website, shows suggested amendments in red text to House Bill 482 — some of which Sevier described during last month’s House hearing. And videos explaining the bill for each state are nearly identical.
     From Facebook posts and news stories, Sevier appears to have been crisscrossing the country meeting with lawmakers in recent months. Standing in front of the Missouri Capitol, Sevier said in a video posted on Facebook on Jan. 6 that Coleman was already a sponsor, and that he was “looking for prime sponsors for the other four bills.”
     In an October post to the Facebook page of Jenna Ellis, an attorney who served on former President Donald Trump’s legal team that tried to overturn the results of the 2020 election, Sevier shared a link to files of draft legislation he said he wrote for all 50 states, including talking points.
     “What I need is a letter from the President endorsing the legislation that I can take to the statehouses and give to the Majority Leaders and Speakers,” Sevier wrote.
     Both Coleman and Bailey’s bills have definitions that closely resemble those in bills filed across the country.
     For example, Bailey’s bill defines hate speech as “a phrase concerning content that offends an individual’s personal moral code.” It’s a similar definition used in bills on the topic in at least 11 states.
Coleman is also sponsoring House Bill 1193, which would establish the “Human Trafficking and Child Exploitation Prevention Act,” another measure Sevier has pushed nationwide that would require a $20 fee for users to unblock access to websites facilitating human trafficking, prostitution or pornography. 
     Coleman said a woman from St. Louis had approached him about that bill, not Sevier.
     In the lawsuit against Baker, Sevier claimed credit for authoring a similar version of the bill filed by Rep. Jim Neely in 2018.
     Similar bills have been filed in years past. A bill filed last year by Rep. Tom Hannegan, R-St. Charles, that included provisions of both the acts was withdrawn a little over a month into the session. Hannegan said he did so because the bill wasn’t a good fit for what he was trying to achieve.
     “Somebody sent an email, I think, pretty randomly out and just was saying what it was,” Hannegan said. “And it looked like something that I might be interested in, but it just wasn’t the route that I wanted to go down.”

Missouri Lawsuit     In February 2019, staff in several Missouri Senate and House offices reported uncomfortable encounters with Sevier. 
     As a result, Baker, the Missouri Senate administrator, sent an email to lawmakers and staff warning of “jittery and/or suspicious” interactions with Sevier and reminding them to notify Capitol Police any time they’re in situations in which they feel uncomfortable or threatened, according to The Kansas City Star.
     A week after Baker’s email, Sevier filed a lawsuit against him.
     In the lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri, Sevier accused Baker of stalking him, deploying a hoax and colluding with the Democratic Party and media organizations who reported on the email, which the lawsuit argued resulted in defamation and emotional distress. 
     Sevier asked for $36 million in damages and that Baker — who the lawsuit repeatedly refers to as “Dishonest Defendant Baker” — issue a retraction, apology and correction.
Sevier argued there was no basis for the email and that Baker “floated this hit piece to cause legislatures to shun and avoid the Plaintiffs…” Both Sevier and another activist with Special Forces of Liberty were listed as plaintiffs. The lawsuit also listed a litany of other alleged motivations, such as hating Christians and supporting what Sevier’s proposed legislation is attempting to stop.
     “The evidence will show that Defendant Baker and others published the false and defamatory statements because they are proponents of child molestation,” the lawsuit alleged.
     The lawsuit was dismissed the same month it was filed.
     Asked about Sevier being back in the Capitol, Baker referred to his previous comments in 2019. Trevor Fox, a spokesman for the Missouri House, said there was no action taken by the House in 2019 regarding Sevier.
     Tessa Weinberg covers education, health care and the legislature. She previously covered the Missouri statehouse for The Kansas City Star and The Columbia Missourian, where her reporting into social media use by the governor prompted an investigation by the Attorney General’s office. She most recently covered state government in Texas for The Fort Worth Star-Telegram.
www.missouriindependent.com

     Amid signs that COVID-19 is loosening its grip on Missouri, the state Senate this week will hold hearings on coronavirus liability protections while the state House is home as leaders attempt to control a Capitol Building outbreak.
     The Department of Health and Senior Services on Tuesday reported 1,357 new COVID-19 infections and it marked the third consecutive day of reporting fewer than 1,500 cases since the first week of October. And the 7-day positive rate on tests, 12.7 percent, is down 4.7 percentage points over the past week.
     Republican leadership in the House didn’t detail how many lawmakers are sick or in quarantine from exposure when they canceled this week’s session. There were 11 members absent last week during a roll call vote that defeated a proposed rule change to require masks in the House chamber.
     The leadership has not stated whether regular sessions will resume next week.
     On the Senate side of the building, the Judiciary and Civil and Criminal Jurisprudence Committee will hold hearings Tuesday on two bills shielding employers and business owners from lawsuits alleging they allowed exposure to COVID-19. That will be followed Wednesday with hearings in the Senate Health and Pensions Committee on bills limiting the scope and duration of local health orders.
     One bill, sponsored by Sen. Rick Brattin, R-Harrisonville, scheduled for a hearing Wednesday would exempt religious worship services from health restrictions and barring lawsuits from people who contract COVID-19 during services.
     Senate hearings will have audio streaming but no online video.
     The indicators that the pandemic is easing in Missouri as it rages elsewhere have been visible in several indicators in recent weeks. The lower daily counts are driving down the 7-day average of reported cases, which fell below 2,000 per day for the first time since late October.
     There are also fewer local health jurisdictions reporting new cases. Of 117 local jurisdictions listed on state reports, there were new cases in 89 on Tuesday, the second day with new cases in fewer than 100 health departments since early October.
     Missouri’s rate of new cases has been below the national average for eight consecutive weeks. The result is that the overall per capita infection rate in the state, which rose above the national average on Oct. 10, fell below the national average on Saturday.
     As of Monday, Missouri had an overall infection rate of 7,150 cases per 100,000 residents. The national infection rate was 7,244 per 100,000 people.
     The vaccines being administered are already having a positive effect for the health care workers who were first in line, Springfield’s CoxHealth CEO Steve Edwards wrote in a Monday tweet.
     He reported that 6,658 of the company’s 12,500 health care workers had received a first dose and those employees would start receiving their booster shots on Tuesday. 
     “Total daily employee infections are already down 50%!” Cox wrote.
     According to data from the CDC, Missouri has administered about one-third of the 528,000 doses received so far, with about 153,000 people receiving a first dose.
     Hospitalizations, which health experts consider a lagging indicator, are also showing some improvement. The total number of inpatients stood at 2,392 on Saturday, the first time the tally has been below 2,400 since Nov. 10.
 
     Rudi Keller covers the state budget, energy and the legislature. He’s spent 22 of his 30 years in journalism covering Missouri government and politics, most recently as the news editor of the Columbia Daily Tribune. Keller has won awards for spot news and investigative reporting.
www.missouriindependent.com

     Voters will be asked to reconsider how state legislative districts are determined through Amendment 3 on the November ballot, after voting to approve Amendment 1 in 2018. Voters approved Amendment 1 with 62% of the vote.
     Amendment 3 would return the state to the use of bipartisan commissions appointed by the governor for legislative redistricting and eliminate the nonpartisan state demographer, created by the approval of Amendment 1 in 2018. 
     The bipartisan commissions would be renamed the House Independent Bipartisan Citizens Commission and the Senate Independent Bipartisan Citizens Commission and consist of 20 members each. The amendment would also change the criteria used to draw district maps. 
     Included in the amendment are slight changes to the threshold of lobbyist gifts and campaign contribution limits for state senate campaigns. It would  change the threshold of lobbyists' gifts from $5 to $0 and lower the campaign contribution limit for state senate campaigns from $2,500 to $2,400.
    Opponents of Amendment 3 contend it is an effort to undo the will of the people, using the issues of reducing lobbyist gifts and campaign contribution limits to detract from an effort to allow lobbyists and politicians to rig district maps.
     A bipartisan group of leaders have come out in opposition to Amendment 3, including former Republican Senator Jack Danforth, former Democratic Senator Jean Carnahan, Kansas City Mayor Quinton Lucas, as well as AARP Missouri, AFL-CIO Missouri, NAACP Missouri Conference, and Missouri NEA.
     State Senator Mike Cierpiot (R – 30th District) and State Representative Jeff Coleman (R – 32nd District) both support Amendment 3.
     “There are detractors who say that we are just trying to change to a method that would allow us to maintain our super majority. That is not the whole process here. We are trying to keep things the same so that we can continue to try to represent everyone instead of having districts carved up that are not representative of those communities,” Coleman said.
     “Everything they (Amendment 3 opponents) say we are doing now is what they were trying to do with Amendment 1. They reduced lobbyist gifts down to $5. Why didn’t they reduce it down to zero? We are going back and trying to fix these things that should have been fixed the first time around.”
     “Our caucus hired a demographer to draw district lines based on the priorities of the new law. The demographer said there’s no way to draw lines that way and create a district in the way in which the law states, which says the most important thing is to create a district that is competitive and as close to a 50/50 split as possible,” Coleman said.
    Cierpiot also points to the weaknesses he sees in Amendment 1 as his reasoning for supporting Amendment 3.
     “I support Amendment 3 to correct the weaknesses that passed in 2018.  The old, original redistricting plans only moved forward if a bipartisan majority of a redistricting committee (14 of 20, 70% of 10 Democrats & 10 Republicans) voted for it, stopping partisan tampering. The new way turns that on its head and now it takes 14 of 20 to stop it.  That means if the Democrats are happy and the Republicans are being hurt it goes into effect, or vice versa.  If anyone questions the intent of those pushing this plan in 2018, ask yourself why they chose the auditor’s office to control it when other election responsibilities rest with the Secretary of State. I’m confident it was because they were quite certain the Auditor would be a Democrat,” Cierpiot said.
     “There are many other parts of the 2018 amendment that are problematic. I haven’t found anyone that can say how it’s going to work with certainty. Compact and contiguous are now low on the list of descriptors for new districts where they were primary. In my view, communities of interest are what politics are all about. They must now be divided to align with the 2018 amendment.”
     “And to satisfy the description of Non Partisan Demographer you have to be out of partisan politics for 4 years, meaning former Governor Nixon or former Senator Ashcroft qualify,” Cierpiot said.
     Clean Missouri, the committee that sponsored Amendment 1 in 2018, is leading the campaign in opposition of the amendment. The committee maintains Amendment 3 is a last ditch effort to set up a process that will affect district maps through 2030. Opponents maintain the amendment is an effort to create unfair, noncompetitive districts to limit voters’ ability to hold leaders accountable, not count children and non-citizens, and create unprecedented restrictions on citizens’ abilities to challenge unfair maps in court.
     The full resolution (Senate Joint Resolution 38) outlining details of the proposed amendment can be found at www.grainvalleynews.com.
 

     Candidate filing for Missouri’s August primary began February 25th, with a total of 349 candidates visiting the Secretary of State’s office on the first day to ensure their name will be on the August 4th ballot. 
“We’re grateful to all the candidates who filed at our office yesterday,” Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft said. “It’s inspiring to see the number of individuals willing to run for public office and serve the people of Missouri.” 
     Of the 349 candidates that filed yesterday, the party affiliation broke down to 216 Republican, 125 Democrat, six Libertarian, one Green and one Constitution. 
     For the District 32 Missouri State Representative seat, Republican incumbent Jeff Coleman of Grain Valley has filed for re-election. As of February 26th, Coleman is unopposed.
     Candidates for U.S. and state offices, along with some judges, are required to file in person at the Secretary of State’s office at 600 W. Main St. in Jefferson City. Candidate filing will continue through March 31st during regular office hours, 8:00am to 5:00pm Monday through Friday. 
     Candidates who filed on the first day were given a random number to determine the order their name will appear on the ballot. Candidates filing from now until March 31st will be placed on the ballot in order of their filing time. Exceptions for in-person filing will be made for candidates that are active duty members of the armed services or unable to appear in person due to physical disabilities. 
     For a current list of filed candidates, visit s1.sos.mo.gov/candidatesonweb.
 

     In the first of two town hall events hosted at the Grain Valley Community Center, Missouri District 32 Representative Jeff Coleman addressed resident concerns  on October 22nd regarding Jackson County tax assessments.
     Approximately 25 residents attended the initial town hall, which focused heavily on County tax assessments and touched briefly on Coleman’s plans for the upcoming 2020 legislative session.
     Coleman represents areas in north Blue Springs, most of Grain Valley and Oak Grove.
     Coleman was appointed over the summer to a special committee charged with looking at concerns of homeowners across the state regarding the process of assessing property tax values and fairness of the process. Hearings were held in Kansas City, St. Louis, and Jefferson City. Coleman explained the committee has one meeting remaining to come up with recommendations to  resolve issues property owners are facing.
     An issue raised during the meeting was the seemingly haphazard way in which increases occurred and the burden placed on the property owner to appeal decisions.
     Coleman referenced 74,311 property owners whose properties all increased by 14.9%.
     “The assessor is required at a 15% increase or more to go out and do a physical inspection. So, when you put 74,311 folks at 14.9%, which is the maximum you can do without having to go out and do a physical assessment, it starts to make you wonder what’s involved. We’re trying to unpack all of this and understand what could have been done differently,” Coleman said.
     “The onus is on the property owner to disprove the assessment.  We have to come up with evidence to disprove the County’s assessment and not everyone has the wherewithal to do that. Especially in lower income areas, and that’s where a lot of those 14.9% increases were. How are these folks supposed to know the process.”
     Coleman cites funding issues and incompetency as major reasons behind the issues faced in Jackson County.
     “We are really behind the eight ball in reference to the funding we have for the County Assessment department and the tools the County needs, because the County Assessor doesn’t have the funding to buy the right tools. Because of that , there is zero data for them (the County) to show why they put their assessment where they have it,” Coleman said.
     “Thanks to local reporting (referring to KCTV Channel 5 reporting) and Sunshine Law requests, we now have access to emails that show a real incompetency in what they did and how they got there.”
     Reached for comment, Marshanna Smith, spokesperson for the Jackson County Executive’s Office, emphasized the County Assessor is bound by state laws and rules when setting values and funding cuts have impacted the department’s ability to fulfill the state-mandated reassessment process.
     “The County is sympathetic to the concerns raised by residents during this year’s reassessment and we have worked very hard to address them, while maintaining an equitable and accurate process. For example, contrary to many media reports, more than 1,600 homeowners in the 64029 zip code will pay less in taxes this year than last year.
     When setting values, the assessor is required by state laws and rules designed to ensure assessments are as uniform as possible. As a result, properties must be placed on the tax rolls at their true market value. Market value is the price the property would bring when offered for sale by a person who is willing but not obligated to sell it, and is bought by a person who is willing to purchase it but who is not forced to do so. Any deviation from this mandate would be a violation of state law.  In addition, if any taxpayer believes their property’s value is inaccurate, they have multiple options.  First, Jackson County offers all property owners an opportunity for an informal review by our Assessment Department, where the property owner can provide additional information that may not have been available to our staff at the time they first determined the property’s value.  Second, a property owner can appeal their valuation to the Board of Equalization.  Finally, if a property owner is still not satisfied, they can ask the State Tax Commission to hear their case,” Smith said.
     “The County is hopeful that Rep. Coleman and colleagues in the state legislature will address residents’ concerns by passing meaningful reforms in Jefferson City. Such changes must include providing adequate funding to counties across the state so that assessors can properly fulfill the state-mandated reassessment process. Unfortunately, over the last 10 years, the state has cut this funding in half and are now only providing a reimbursement of $3 per parcel to counties. We are also hopeful that the Missouri Legislature will not only protect the “circuit breaker” tax credit protections currently in place for senior citizens and persons with disabilities, but will also look at increasing and expanding this protection.”
      Coleman emphasized that the likelihood of a solution coming before the end of the calendar year was slim, but that multiple legislators would likely be proposing bills in the 2020 session to address property tax assessment issues.
     Coleman touched on a proposal he is considering that is similar in scope to California’s Proposition 13, which when passed in 1978 brought sweeping changes to the states property tax system. Primarily, Proposition 13 capped tax rates at one percent of full cash value at the time of acquisition, transferred responsibility for allocating property tax to the state,  and replaced annual assessments with reassessment upon change of ownership.
     Outside of property tax issues, Coleman is interested in focusing on disability and Medicaid issues as well as the foster care system in the coming session. In addition, Coleman stated that transportation must be a priority for the state.
     “Someone’s going to have to stick their neck out and raise the tax two cents or something similar. I don’t think there’s any support for toll roads; I think it’s going to have to be a tax. I think you’re going to see the legislature push the issue out to voters,” Coleman said.
     A year in to his tenure, Coleman reflected on the highs and lows of the job.
     “The most frustrating thing so far is that I hate that every two years you have to re-up, because it becomes all about getting back into office and it shouldn’t be like that. That’s been the most frustrating thing to me.  The most positive thing so far is that I got one bill and two amendments through in my first session and was elected Vice Chair of Economic Development. Those are nice accomplishments for a first year member, but I’m really most proud when I’m able to help folks with issues that affect their lives,” Coleman said.
     “I had a single mom email me and her children had been covered by the  PACE program for insurance. She sent the paperwork in to renew coverage but the Division of Family Services claimed they did not receive it, dropping her children’s coverage. I told her, ‘I can’t promise anything, as I’ve never done this before, but I’m going to call and see what I can come up with.’ I left a message with DFS and the mother called in the tears the next day letting me know that her coverage had been restored.”
     “That means more to me than anything I’ve done in the legislature, because I was able to help somebody with something they were struggling with and unable to get through. Those are the kinds of things that I hope will happen more. I want people to call me. I want people to get involved.”
 Representative Jeff Coleman can be reached at 573-751-1487 and jeff.coleman@house.mo.gov.