Bill legalizing video lottery games narrowly passes Missouri House

by Rudi Keller, Missouri Independent
April 9, 2025

After a heavy lobbying effort, backers of video lottery games squeezed a slim majority out of the Missouri House on Wednesday, sending a bill promising $350 million a year for schools to the state Senate.

By an 83-73 vote — just one more than the minimum needed to pass — the House approved the bill that also promises to remove “gray market machines” from retail locations.

“This is not a solution in search of a problem,” said the sponsor, Republican Rep. Bill Hardwick of Dixon. “We have a genuine problem, a money problem, a regulatory problem, a commerce problem, and this is a solution for all of that.”

House leadership held the tally board open for more than 15 minutes as they searched for the votes needed to pass. The bill was given first-round approval on Monday but with only 74 votes.

After that backers and opponents scrambled to find votes, with both sides claiming Tuesday that they would prevail.

The bill faces an uncertain future in the state Senate. Three video lottery bills have been proposed in the upper chamber but none have been given a hearing.

In the final vote, 54 Republicans were joined by 29 Democrats to pass the bill, while 18 Democrats and 55 Republicans opposed it. 

Passing video lottery bill would be ‘a heavy lift’ in Missouri Senate

The bill received support from nine of 10 Republicans who were absent on Monday and present on Wednesday. Five GOP members on each side of the question switched from yes to no or vice-versa.

Among Democrats, four members absent on Monday voted yes on Wednesday, while two Monday absentees voted no. Only one Democrat switched sides, voting no on Wednesday after voting yes on Monday. 

Under the bill, the Missouri Lottery would be given the job of licensing video lottery terminal vendors and regulating their use in retail locations. While there would be a cap of eight machines in any location, the total number of machines that would be in use statewide is not capped.

The House added an amendment so counties and cities will be able to authorize — or ban — video lottery games in their home communities. It also added an amendment that declares any unlicensed games that offer cash prizes to winners to be illegal slot machines.

The games resembling casino slot machines that can be seen at retail locations throughout the state are unregulated. Called gray market or “no chance” games, operators claim they are not illegal under current law because a player can learn the outcome of the next play before committing their money.

The options for a player with a pending losing bet are to change games in search of a winner, ending their playing session or deliberately losing the bet to get to the next outcome.

The Missouri State Highway Patrol has tried to initiate prosecutions under anti-gambling laws, but most prosecutors have been reluctant to file charges.

And after years of operation, convenience store owners, fraternal lodges and other establishments have become dependent on the revenue.

The video lottery machines will be more trustworthy, supporters say, because the machines will be required to pay out at least 80% of the money wagered in prizes. 

The remainder will be split three ways — the lottery will receive 34% of the net to support state education programs, with retailers and operators splitting the other 66%. The fiscal note for the bill estimates that within three years, there will be $1.1 billion annually for the three-way split generating approximately $350 million in state revenue.

Some opponents of the measure argue it is not strong enough to force gray market machine operators to shut down. Others said they do not support any expansion of gambling.

“I fully support my American Legion and VFW,” said state Rep. Dean Van Schoiack, a Republican from Savannah, “but they better be able to find a better way to raise funds than stealing from their members and their patrons.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Missouri Independent is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Missouri Independent maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jason Hancock for questions: [email protected].

Lawmakers and business groups push rollback of Missouri minimum wage hike, sick leave law

by Clara Bates, Missouri Independent
March 12, 2025

Months after Missouri voters overwhelmingly approved a minimum wage increase and paid sick leave requirements, the new laws face challenges this week in court and the state legislature. 

On Wednesday, the state Supreme Court Court heard arguments in a lawsuit seeking to strike down Proposition A, which guarantees sick leave for hundreds of thousands of workers and gradually hikes the minimum wage to $15. 

A day earlier, the Missouri House gave initial approval to a bill repealing the sick leave law and modifying the minimum wage. 

“This is a one-two punch to businesses, and it creates a one size fits all approach,” said Republican state Rep. Sherri Gallick of Belton, who is sponsoring the legislation targeting the paid sick leave law. 

A coalition of business groups and individuals argued Wednesday morning to the Missouri Supreme Court that the minimum wage and paid sick leave laws should be thrown out for violating constitutional rules on ballot initiatives.

“Both on the statutory side and the constitutional side, voters were misled,” Marc Ellinger, an attorney representing the plaintiffs, told the court. “The constitution was not complied with.”

YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.

SUPPORT

The lawsuit, filed late last year, argues the election results should be overturned because of several alleged constitutional violations, including violations of the state constitution’s single-subject requirement and a lack of a clear title. 

It also contends that sick time and minimum wage are distinct issues that violate the single-subject rule, which should result in the election outcome being invalidated. It requests a new election be held, alleging the ballot title, which includes a summary of the proposition and its potential cost to the state, was misleading. 

“This case is an example of where all of those procedures have been ignored,” Ellinger said.

A lawyer for Missouri Jobs with Justice, which led the campaign in support of Proposition A, said the court should uphold the law if at all possible, since voters approved it.

“The challengers ask you to overturn the will of the voters who exercised their fundamental right of the initiative,” said attorney Loretta Haggard, “based on technical issues that were not raised before the election.”

The measure won by a margin of over 400,000 votes. Haggard and other attorneys representing the responding parties wrote in a recent filing that the plaintiffs are asking the court “to tell these voters that their votes do not matter, and the court, not the people, will decide whether Proposition A should stay in effect,” calling it an “extraordinary request.” 

Andrew Crane, an assistant attorney general representing the Secretary of State on Wednesday, defended the single subject of employee compensation, saying sick leave and pay “logically relate together… these are the kind things that employees and lawyers consider in any hiring decision.” 

Robert Tillman, representing the auditor’s office, defended the fiscal note summary and said the plaintiffs didn’t prove any alleged irregularities that would have impacted the election.

“Even if contestants could establish election irregularities, they must then demonstrate that such irregularity sufficiently cast doubt for the entire election, to justify a new election.” Tillman said. “…As you can see from the record, contestants have offered no such evidence.”

The judges asked a few questions about whether they have jurisdiction to review the case, or whether a lower court would be the more appropriate venue.

Prop A passed with 58% of the vote and had the support of numerous unions, workers’ advocacy groups, social justice and civil rights organizations, as well as over 500 business owners. A group of businesses filed a friend-of-the-court brief in this case defending the proposition. 

Under the law, beginning May 1, the law requires employers with business receipts greater than $500,000 a year to provide at least one hour of paid leave for every 30 hours worked. Employers with fewer than 15 workers must allow workers to earn at least 40 hours per year, with larger employers mandated to allow at least 56 hours. 

Legislature

On Tuesday, a bill in Missouri’s House to overturn the sick leave provisions and modify the minimum wage provisions was given initial approval. It needs to be approved one more time in the House before heading to the Senate for consideration.

Because the measure changed state law and not the constitution, the legislature can modify or overturn it without returning for a new vote of the people.

Gallick’s bill would repeal the paid sick leave provisions approved by voters.

It would also modify the minimum wage increase by no longer indexing it to inflation, a policy that has been in place since 2007. The minimum wage would still increase to $15 per hour in 2026, as voters approved, but it would not be adjusted for inflation thereafter. 

Gallick has argued employees will “abuse” the sick leave.

In states that have adopted sick leave mandates, employees take, on average, two more sick days a year than prior to the law going into effect, a National Bureau of Economic Research report found.

Studies have found that offering paid sick time can increase workers’ productivity and reduce illness, and generally adds little or nothing to business expenses.

States with paid sick leave laws, as of Dec. 2024 (Screenshot: U.S. Department of Labor issue brief).

Republican state Rep. Scott Miller from St. Charles said “just because 57% of the people that voted that day, voted in favor of something, that doesn’t make it right. “They’re taking away the choice of businesses to engage in free market.”

Businesses are not equipped to handle the additional expenses from the proposition, said Republican state Rep. Jeff Vernetti of from Camdenton.

“I know that the will of the people will be brought up several times in this and I think that we’ve also got to represent the 87 counties that did not vote for this,” Vernetti said. “I think it’s our duty to respect the will of the people, but also at the same time, safeguard the long term prosperity of Missouri.”

Rep. Eric Woods, a Democrat from Kansas City, pointed out that Prop A passed in rural counties as well, including Clark, Adair, Mississippi and Henry.

“This isn’t a situation where Proposition A just passed in the cities,” he said, “this was a broad acceptance percentage wise.” 

Lawmakers are wrong to treat voters as having been oblivious to what they were voting on, said state Rep. Keri Ingle, a Democrat from Lee’s Summit.

“The part that irks me is that you guys repeatedly call your constituents dumb,” Ingle said. “You say that they’re too stupid to understand what they voted for. I mean, you don’t use those words, but they hear you loud and clear, and they continue to vote for these policies.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Missouri Independent is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Missouri Independent maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jason Hancock for questions: [email protected].

Child care tax credits legislation scores bipartisan support in Missouri House

by Natanya Friedheim, Missouri Independent
February 25, 2025

A bill to create three new child care tax credits received initial approval by the Missouri House on Tuesday. A similar measure received bipartisan support last year but fell victim to Republican infighting in the Senate.

The measure would help employers foot the bill for their employees’ child care costs and encourage existing providers to grow their capacity. Shields said three-fourths of Missouri’s 115 counties are considered “child care deserts.” It needs to be approved one more time in the House before heading to the Senate.

“We have a child care crisis in our state. We’re all familiar with it,” state Rep. Brenda Shields, a Republican from St. Joseph, who sponsored the bill, said during House debate Tuesday. “We hear from our business leaders across the state that they have trouble recruiting and retaining employees because the lack of child care.”

The bill creates three tax credits. Under the first, people or businesses who donate to child care centers would receive a tax credit worth 75% of their donation. The donor cannot personally benefit from the contribution; for example, a parent cannot make a donation and expect lower tuition.

The second is for businesses that help pay for their employees’ child care costs or create child care programs for their employee’s children.

The third allows child care providers to claim a tax credit worth up to 30% of expenses related to construction projects. The credit also grants tax relief equal to the provider’s employer withholding tax, which applies to providers with at least three employees who work at least 10 hours per week and have been employed for at least three months.

A number of business groups have voiced support for the measure, including the Missouri Chamber of Commerce and Industry and the Columbia Chamber of Commerce.

“Without child care, Missouri’s economy cannot grow,” Shields said.

The credits cannot be transferred to another person or entity and cannot reduce a citizen’s tax burden below zero, meaning the credits cannot be used to add to a tax refund. The measures proposed this year would expire in 2026 without reapproval by the legislature due to a “sunset” provision included in the bill. Parents would not be able to claim tax credits for child care tuition under any of the proposed credits.

State Rep. Sherri Gallick, a Republican from Belton, spoke about her own experience as a single parent while voicing her support for the bill.

“My career took a backseat because I didn’t have adequate child care,” she said.

Earlier, the bill passed unanimously out of the House Economic Development Committee. Three of 10 members of the rules committee, all Republicans, voted against its passage, and it faced additional Republican opposition on the floor.

STate Rep. Jamie Gragg, an Ozark Republican, said the credits would pit the school system in competition with day cares. State Rep. Terry Thompson, a Lexington Republican, also spoke in opposition to the measure, citing a bill he said he planned to propose. This is the third year Shields has introduced tax credits for child care costs.

“Right now,” Shields said, “child care costs more than your freshman year at university.”

This story originally appeared in the Columbia Missourian. It can be republished in print or online. 

Missouri Independent is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Missouri Independent maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jason Hancock for questions: [email protected].

Missouri Republicans consider delaying voter-approved minimum wage hike, paid sick leave

by Rudi Keller, Missouri Independent
February 5, 2025

A bill changing the terms of the Missouri minimum wage law approved by voters four months ago will leave all the promised benefits in place but may delay their implementation, the chairman of a House committee looking at the law said Wednesday.

State Rep. David Casteel, a High Ridge Republican, told members of the House Commerce Committee during a hearing that they will rewrite the several bills seeking to change Proposition A. That process will take time, he said, telling them not to expect a vote at the panel’s regular meeting next week.

“No one in this body is trying to overturn the choice of the people,” Casteel said.

In an interview, Casteel said he’s considering ideas that would delay a minimum wage increase set for Jan. 1, 2026, or the provision requiring most employers to offer paid sick and family leave.

“We’re going to get into the nitty gritty of everything within the bill,” Casteel said. “There’s a lot we don’t like, and there’s a lot we do like, about all the bills that have been and will be presented.”

Republicans who control the legislature must find a sweet spot between the 58% majority who approved Proposition A and the major business groups who opposed the measure and are among the GOP’s most reliable supporters.

Proposition A increased the minimum wage in Missouri to $13.75 an hour on Jan. 1 and $15 an hour next year. In future years, the wage would be adjusted for changes in prices, a provision that has been in state law since 2006. It also requires employers with business receipts greater than $500,000 a year to provide one hour of paid sick and family time for every 30 hours worked.

The paid leave provisions take effect May 1.

On Wednesday, the Commerce Committee held public hearings on two of the five bills on its agenda that would alter aspects of Proposition A.

One of the bills, filed by state Rep. Carolyn Caton, a Republican from Blue Springs, would repeal the inflation adjustment. It would also allow employers to pay workers younger than 20 the federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour and exempt all employers with business receipts less than $10 million annually.

“It isn’t that we don’t want to pay people,” Caton said. “We want to pay people well, but we need to do so in a manner that is going to protect our small businesses.”

The other bill, filed by state Rep. Scott Miller, a Republican from St. Charles, would exempt workers under 21 from the state minimum wage and businesses with fewer than 50 employees. It would also allow employers to reduce the final paycheck of anyone who doesn’t give at least two weeks notice before quitting, or any employee who violates the provisions of the employer’s worker handbook.

“If a business is going to be obligated by law to pay a minimum wage, which is, frankly, the government is price-fixing labor, then the government ought to performance-fix the employees,” Miller said.

The campaign to pass Proposition A drew no large-scale opposition prior to the vote. But a court challenge filed in early December by major business advocacy groups asks the Missouri Supreme Court to invalidate the vote. The court has set the case for arguments on March 12.

At the same time, those business groups — Associated Industries of Missouri, the Missouri Chamber of Commerce and Industry and industry groups representing retailers, restaurants and grocers — are urging lawmakers to repeal portions or delay their implementation.

“In an ideal world, we would love to roll it all back,” Kara Corches, president and CEO of the Missouri Chamber of Commerce and Industry, said in a recent webinar. “But part of the legislative process, or the sausage making process as we say sometimes, you don’t always get, in the end, what you started with.”

Ron Berry, lobbyist for one of Proposition A’s biggest backers, Missouri Jobs with Justice Voter Action, said during Wednesday’s hearing that the proposals to exempt businesses with fewer than 50 employees would cover 96% of all private businesses.

Responding to a question about the difficulty employers will have covering the additional cost, Berry said labor isn’t the only thing driving up prices.

“Whether it’s wages or it’s the cost of energy, all of you know inflation is higher, and we’re all having to tighten our belts,” Berry said.

Buddy Lahl, CEO of the Missouri Restaurant Association, told the committee that his members want the exemption threshold raised to 100 employees as well as implementing the $10 million revenue floor.

He also said the sick leave provisions should not allow hours to be carried over from one year to the other.

“It should be a use it or lose it thing,” Lahl said.

Business lobbyists also warned of job losses, or even businesses that won’t survive, if the increased minimum wage stands.

State Rep. Steve Butz, a Democrat from St. Louis, said he didn’t believe that argument, noting that Missouri voters increased the minimum wage twice before without sinking the state’s economy. 

“We’ve had other increases in minimum wage,” Butz said. “We always have been told that it’s going to kill jobs and jobs continue to grow in the state.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Missouri Independent is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Missouri Independent maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jason Hancock for questions: [email protected].

Missouri House speaker says ‘bounty hunter’ immigration bill has little chance of passing

by Jason Hancock, Missouri Independent
January 30, 2025

There is no appetite among House Republicans for a bill that would put a bounty on undocumented immigrants, Speaker Jon Patterson told reporters Thursday. 

The legislation, which was debated Tuesday in a Missouri Senate committee, would award a $1,000 bounty for tips that result in the arrest of a person present in the United States without authorization. The sponsor of the bill also wants to to authorize bounty hunters to track down people identified in tips.

No one in the House has filed a similar bill, and Patterson said it stands little chance of getting any traction in the chamber even if it does clear the Senate. 

“We are committed to making sure that we have legal immigration but that we don’t tolerate illegal immigration,” said Patterson, a Lee’s Summit Republican. “I have not heard any enthusiasm from our members about doing any sort of bounty.  I don’t think that’s something that you’re going to see on this side.”

Missouri bill putting a bounty on undocumented immigrants faces fierce resistance

Patterson said the issue is being handled by the federal government, noting that President Donald Trump recently signed legislation that requires the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to detain certain non-U.S. nationals who have been arrested for burglary, theft, larceny or shoplifting.

It also authorizes states to sue the federal government for “decisions or alleged failures related to immigration enforcement.”

Gov. Mike Kehoe signed executive orders on his first day in office earlier this month designed to prepare Missouri to assist the federal government in immigration enforcement. 

“A lot of it’s being addressed at the federal level,” Patterson said. 

State Rep. Bridget Walsh Moore, a St. Louis Democrat, called the Senate bill authorizing bounty hunters “fear mongering” and “a very bold step towards fascism.”

“Any talk of rounding up and getting your papers,” she said, “especially during the same week as Holocaust Remembrance Day, is incredibly disrespectful, and honestly, should terrify anyone who calls himself a patriot.”

Missouri Independent is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Missouri Independent maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jason Hancock for questions: [email protected].

Open enrollment bill gets public hearing after winning praise from Missouri governor

by Annelise Hanshaw, Missouri Independent
January 29, 2025

A Republican lawmaker from Sedalia has once again begun his push to allow some students to enroll in schools outside the district where they live.

For the fifth year in a row on Wednesday, the House Elementary and Secondary Education Committee debated an open enrollment bill sponsored by state Rep. Brad Pollitt. 

As he introduced the legislation, Pollitt called it the “only school-choice bill that allows students to make a choice and stay in the public school system.”

In the previous four years that Pollitt filed the bill, state lawmakers have prioritized programs allowing families to use state funds for homeschooling and to attend private schools. The state’s K-12 tax credit program, dubbed MOScholars, passed in 2021, and it was expanded last year in a sweeping education package.

Pollitt’s bill has cleared committee and made it out of the House four times. But it has never been debated by the Senate.

He addressed his bill’s four-year purgatory in Wednesday’s committee hearing, saying good legislation doesn’t completely please anyone.

“All four years I’ve passed this bill, neither side was happy. It didn’t go far enough or it went too far,” he said. “Sometimes Missouri does a disservice by looking for perfection and bypassing what is better.”

Pollitt’s legislation has evolved through the years of deliberation. The current version has a cap of 3% on the portion of students allowed to leave a district annually.

He also added language suggested by the Missouri High School Activities Association, which oversees competitive athletics in Missouri schools, that would restrict students who transfer into a new district from competing in sports for one year.

The bill does not require school districts to accept students living outside the area but, instead, has an opt-in structure. Receiving districts would get state funding for the students coming in, but local funds would remain with the district of residence.

Some testified Wednesday that they are concerned the legislation would become mandatory for school districts in the future.

“Our worry is in the future. A lot of (laws) tend to start as voluntary and become mandatory,” said Tammy Henderson, who represents the North Kansas City School District. “We are concerned about losing some of the local control.”

Steve Carroll, a former lawmaker who now lobbies for school districts, cited his experience in the Missouri House in critiquing the bill.

“If this bill passes, within two or three legislative sessions, there is going to be a bill that is going to mandate this,” he said. “Mark my word.” 

A majority of public comments were against the bill, and 220 school districts sent in a letter opposed to the legislation.

Gov. Mike Kehoe begins his State of the State address Tuesday afternoon in the House chamber (Annelise Hanshaw/Missouri Independent).

However, Pollitt’s proposal is not without its supporters — including Gov. Mike Kehoe, who included the bill in his State of the State speech Tuesday.

“To expand school choice, I urge the General Assembly to pass voluntary open enrollment in public schools,” he said.

Jordan Zachary, representing a national education nonprofit started by Jeb Bush called ExcelinEd, said Missouri’s neighbors already have open enrollment.

“We believe open enrollment to be one of those student-centered policies,”’ he said. “We do believe in giving students an opportunity to attend a school that best fits their needs.”

The bill would not require school districts to add accommodations for incoming students, and some worry the program would exclude students in special education.

Pollitt said he would work with Rep. Matthew Overcast, a Republican from Ava who serves on the education committee, to revise the bill to help students requiring accommodations. Overcast is an attorney with experience assisting students in special education.

The updated version would be presented to the committee before a vote.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Missouri Independent is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Missouri Independent maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jason Hancock for questions: [email protected].

House speaker fight, battles over abortion rights and taxes loom as Missouri lawmakers return

by Rudi Keller, Missouri Independent
January 8, 2025

Republican factional fights are nothing new in the Missouri General Assembly. 

But what is new this year is the venue — the House of Representatives, where a sophomore lawmaker accusing his colleagues of corrupt politics seeks to upset the usually routine election of a speaker.

State Rep. Justin Sparks of Wildwood admits history is against him in his attempt to prevent state Rep. Jon Patterson of Lee’s Summit from becoming speaker. Patterson, who was majority leader in the previous General Assembly, was designated as the GOP candidate for speaker months ago.

In videos posted online and in an interview with The Independent, Sparks accused Patterson and the GOP House leadership of demanding large campaign contributions in exchange for plum committee slots.

“The uncomfortable truth is, power is for sale. In Jefferson City,” Sparks said in the first video of his speaker’s bid. “If you want to be a chairman of a powerful committee, you got to pay.”

If elected speaker, he said, he wants to change House rules so committee chairs are elected by committee members.

Patterson did not respond to a request for an interview.

No speaker nominee has been denied election since 1996, when 11 Democrats voted present and four backed the Republican floor leader.

“It’s certainly a long shot by all standards, but it had to happen, and that’s why I was convinced that I had to do it,” Sparks said in an interview with The Independent.

With 111 Republicans, Sparks will need 29 other party members to join him to prevent Patterson from receiving the 82 votes needed to make a majority. 

Sparks would not say how many members have committed votes to him. 

To actually win, Sparks, a leader of the far-right Freedom Caucus, would need the 52 Democrats to abandon their party leader, state Rep. Ashley Aune of Kansas City, to create a coalition majority.

Sparks has not asked for Democratic votes, Aune said.

“As far as I can tell,” she said, “it’s a political suicide mission.” 

The action begins at noon Wednesday when Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft brings the gavel down to open the House session. This year’s session concludes on May 16.

As of Tuesday, lawmakers had prefiled more than 1,250 bills, 725 in the House and 539 in the state Senate. House members have also offered up 44 proposals to change the Missouri Constitution, while the Senate has 50 ready for opening day.

The only bills lawmakers must pass are appropriations to fund state government. 

Issues expected to receive extensive debate include:

Proposals to alter or repeal the provisions of Amendment 3, which protects abortion rights.Constitutional amendments to make it more difficult to pass measures by initiative petition.Bills to cut or eliminate the income tax.Measures that address crime and police, including a proposal backed by Gov.-elect Mike Kehoe to put the state back in control of the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department.

Patterson, if he survives the challenge from Sparks, will set the House agenda in a speech prepared for delivery on opening day. 

In the Senate, incoming President Pro Tem Cindy O’Laughlin has said she wants direct elections of appeals court judges and to make the director of the Department of Transportation an appointee of the governor instead of the state Highways and Transportation Commission.

How many bills will reach Kehoe’s desk will depend on how well the GOP supermajority works together. Last year, out of more than 2,300 non-budget bills and 170 proposed constitutional amendments, only 28 were passed — making 2024 the least productive legislative session in recent history

The low numbers, despite bipartisan support for some major bills and intense grassroots pressure for partisan GOP proposals, was due to factional warfare in the Senate, which had upset regular business for several years.

With 10 newly elected senators, replacing some of the most vocal critics of the leadership, O’Laughlin said she is “optimistic” the chamber can function without rancor.

“We have an opportunity to work together, set aside past conflicts, and focus on addressing the needs of Missourians,” O’Laughlin said. “I’m committed to fostering collaboration and ensuring that we deliver meaningful results for the people of this state.”

The Democratic floor leader, state Sen. Doug Beck of Affton, said a Senate free of factional fights would be good if the focus is on broadly supported proposals such as tax credits for child care and better teacher pay. 

“But if that leadership, the Senate leadership, decides instead to focus on partisan politics and overturning the will of the voters, then the Senate’s reputation for dysfunction may save it from itself,” Beck said.

Abortion and initiatives

Supporters of Amendment 3 celebrate on Sept. 10 on the steps of the Missouri Capitol after the state Supreme Court ruled the abortion-rights measure could remain on the ballot (Anna Spoerre/Missouri Independent).

Republicans know key party constituencies are demanding action to limit or repeal Amendment 3, which restored abortion rights in Missouri. But there is no consensus on what that will look like.

Although Amendment 3 took effect Dec. 5, no clinic is offering abortion services because of a December court decision that left licensing laws in place. The dozens of abortion-related bills filed by Republicans range from proposals to re-impose Missouri’s abortion ban with another statewide vote as well as smaller measures attempting to set parameters around Amendment 3, including by defining fetal viability.

“In the district I represent, Amendment 3 is very problematic,” said State Rep. Dane Diehl, a Butler Republican.

Diehl and other Republicans interviewed said they will go as far as possible to limit abortions. But with the strong presumption included in the Constitution that such laws are off-limits, the options are few.

“How can we work around the edges on the abortion issue is definitely going to be there,” state Rep. Bill Owen of Springfield said.

The most conservative members will be pushing for a full repeal, but Democrats warn that could backfire at the polls.

“They’re not content with just being re-elected into the supermajority,” Aune said. “They want to also control every aspect of our lives, and this is just one additional way they’re going to do it.”

Amendment 3 received 51.6% of the vote and every Republican running statewide received at least 55% of the vote. That means there are many thousands of Republican voters who also supported Amendment 3, Beck said.

“It only passed because of support from Republican voters who believe their elected officials respect the outcome of the election,” he said.

Republicans acknowledged that a full repeal is unlikely. And a ballot measure putting tighter limits on when a woman can seek an abortion could generate opposition from the right for not going far enough.

O’Laughlin said she’s uncertain what path the Senate should pursue.

“We owe it to voters to address this issue in a way that reflects the values of our state,” she said. “Whether that means pursuing a full repeal or making adjustments—such as including exceptions for certain cases—I’m committed to ensuring the laws governing this issue are both transparent and reflective of what Missourians truly want.”

Aune said she’s cautiously optimistic about the chances for preserving all of Amendment 3.

“My concern would be higher if it seemed that these folks had any clear plan to attack this issue,” she said.

Last year, a proposal to make constitutional amendments proposed by initiative harder to pass failed in the Senate because of factional fighting among Republicans. A priority for years, it is certain to be pushed again.

“I strongly believe we need to protect Missouri’s constitution from being influenced by outside interests,” O’Laughlin said.

A better idea, Beck said, would be to limit the ability of lawmakers to enact changes to statutory proposals put on the ballot by initiative. There are already efforts underway to rollback portions of the minimum wage increase law passed in November as Proposition A.

“I would really love to see something put forward that says, hey, you know, the voters passed this and you can’t touch anything for five to 10 years, or something like that,” Beck said.

Budget and taxes

Members of the House Budget Committee work in 2023 on spending bills that will fund state government operations in the coming year (Rudi Keller/Missouri Independent).

The consensus revenue estimate issued last month projects that during the current fiscal year, tax receipts will decline $70 million for the first time in living memory that has happened in a growing economy.

But that decline is just about one-half of 1% from record revenue in fiscal 2024 and, even with the decline, revenues will be more than $13.3 billion, about $200 million more than anticipated a year ago.

And when Kehoe delivers his first budget proposal Jan. 28, he will be able to tap the largest surplus ever enjoyed by an incoming governor. The state held $5.7 billion in the general revenue and other funds on Dec. 31, with another $2.6 billion stashed but unspent on major projects like expanding Interstate 70 or renovating the Capitol Building.

Spending from all funds should decline because, through December, the state has spent about half of the federal money received through the American Rescue Plan Act. But flat general revenue has lawmakers talking about the potential for cuts or limitations on earmarked funds.

“We’ve got less money coming in from the federal government,” Aune said. “We have revenues that are lower than we wish they were, and so that is going to mean that we’re gonna have to tighten our belts.”

Owen said the sluggish revenue will help focus attention on earmarks. Some items make it into the budget one year and they stay there because no one takes a close look, he said.

“There are some good things, but I mean, they need to be one time things,” Owen said.

Kehoe has promised to try to eliminate the state income tax, which provided 65% of state revenue in the fiscal year that ended June 30. The top rate now is 4.7%, which could drop next year if revenue growth returns.

Several lawmakers have proposed a 4% flat tax, followed by step-down reductions. 

Discussions of a tax cut when revenues are falling and the budget is being cut doesn’t make sense, Beck said.

“I hear how these budgets are gonna get tough, and then they’re having conversations on the other side about getting rid of the income tax,” he said. “I don’t understand how this all works. Maybe we’re rooted more into running for the next election than we are to actually run the state of Missouri.”

O’Laughlin priorities

Sen. Cindy O’Laughlin, R-Shelbina, motions to adjourn the Missouri Senate in May 2024 amid bitter personal fighting (Annelise Hanshaw/Missouri Independent).

Since 1940, the Nonpartisan Court Plan has governed the selection of appellate and some trial-level judges. A panel made up of attorneys elected by other lawyers and residents appointed by the governor screen candidates and recommend three names for appointment by the governor.

Once appointed, the judge is put on the next general election ballot for a vote on whether they should be retained. During their tenure on the bench, judges are subject to regular retention votes, with members of the Missouri Supreme Court on the ballot every 12 years.

O’Laughlin is pushing to replace that process with direct election of all judges. For the courts of appeal and the Supreme Court, the panel would remain in place to recommend three candidates for the ballot, but others could run outside that process.

In social media posts, she said voters know very little about the judges when they vote on retention. And she is upset that several recent decisions did not go the way she wanted, including a last-gasp attempt to keep abortion rights off the November ballot.

“Judicial impartiality is critical to maintaining public trust in our courts,” O’Laughlin said in an email to The Independent. “I believe that electing judges can increase accountability by giving the public a direct voice.”

Beck, however, said he will defend the system in debate.

“I hate to bring in more and more politics into these things, because a lot of times, I don’t think you get the best person in that case,” he said.

O’Laughlin also wants to eliminate the Highways and Transportation Commission, which controls spending on highways and selects the director of the Department of Transportation. The commission has shown its independence by pursuing a lawsuit over how much it can spend on employee salaries and drew ire from O’Laughlin when it picked Ed Hassinger, a 40-year veteran of the department, as the new director.

“For far too long, the department has operated in isolation, shielded from public accountability by unelected commissioners and guaranteed revenue streams,” O’Laughlin wrote in a social media post. 

Kehoe, a former member of the commission, opposes the move, saying putting selection of the head of the Department of Transportation into the hands of the governor injects politics into road construction decisions and “could be a disaster,” the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported. 

O’Laughlin said she is pushing ahead with her proposal.

“While I understand Gov.-elect Kehoe’s concerns, I believe this proposal remains a priority because of its potential to improve transparency and oversight,” she said.

Beck said he’s willing to consider measures to make the department more accountable, but sees the same danger of politics if lawmakers set the department’s budget.

“If you move it under the control of the governor or the legislature,” Beck said, “it’s going to become very, very partisan.”

YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.

SUPPORT

Missouri Independent is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Missouri Independent maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jason Hancock for questions: [email protected].

Missouri education package establishes long-time priorities, stomping smaller bills

by Annelise Hanshaw, Missouri Independent
June 3, 2024

During Missouri’s 2024 legislative session, 338 bills addressing education were filed: a mix of proposals to change curriculum, increase funding, boost oversight and others.

The House appeared poised to expedite more K-12 legislation by forming a Special Committee on Education Reform in addition to its usual Elementary and Secondary Education Committee.

Chair of the existing education committee Rep. Brad Pollitt, a Republican from Sedalia, told The Independent that the beginning of session was “hot and heavy” for his bill dubbed open enrollment.

The bill, which sought to allow students to enroll in neighboring school districts that opt in to the program, passed the House for the fourth year in a row.

But soon, it was “radio silence,” as he describes it, for his bill.

Pollitt’s bill, like many others, died behind closed doors as lawmakers negotiated what would become just two education bills signed into law this year.

The vehicle

One of the themes among the few hundred bills filed on education was the expansion of tax-credit scholarships for private schools, a program called MOScholars in Missouri.

MOScholars allows taxpayers to donate up to half of their tax burden to scholarship-distributing nonprofits and get a refund come tax time. The nonprofits, who report to the State Treasurer’s Office, give the money to private schools they partner with. Currently, the program is only in the state’s most populated areas.

Sen. Andrew Koenig, a Republican from Manchester, proposed to open MOScholars statewide and allow wealthier families to qualify for the scholarships. He also sought to raise the cap on tax credits for the program.

When his bill made it to the Senate floor, Democrats held a lengthy filibuster, and negotiations began. The closed-door deal brought the originally 12-page bill to over 150 pages.

Missouri State Sen. Lauren Arthur, D-Kansas City, and Sen. Doug Beck, D-Affton, kick off a filibuster of a bill that would expand the state’s K-12 tax-credit scholarships (Annelise Hanshaw/Missouri Independent).

Sen. Lauren Arthur, a Kansas City Democrat, was a key negotiator for Senate Democrats. She told The Independent that large education changes in Missouri seem to require an omnibus bill, and her job was about balancing policies her caucus favored with changes others demanded.

“I think as a result of this law, what our schools are capable of and the support we are giving our teachers will hopefully be better as a result of some of the changes we’ve made,” she said.

Her priority was changing the formula that funds public schools. A provision added in negotiations will change a multiplier in the formula to slowly switch from funding based on just attendance to splitting between attendance and enrollment. A study commissioned by the state’s education department last year recommended an enrollment-based funding model.

The change to 50% attendance and 50% enrollment is estimated to bring an additional $47 million annually to public education, according to the fiscal note.

“​​I am sure there were great bills that tackled smaller problems,” Arthur said. “But in terms of really trying to address some of the major issues, these were the right provisions to do that.”

Priorities

Pollitt was part of the negotiations, too. Although he has spent years refining his open-enrollment legislation, he knew it wouldn’t make it onto Koenig’s bill. He said his bill “wasn’t a priority on either side of the aisle.”

“The side of the aisle that I’m on wanted educational choice that was more extensive than open enrollment, and the other side of the aisle didn’t want any school choice necessarily,” he said.

He said Senate Democrats could stomach the expansion of MOScholars, since it was already available in Democratic areas, but wouldn’t sit down for a new program in their areas like he was proposing. Arthur confirmed this to be true, adding that the new law’s expansion of charter schools into Boone County was unfavorable but was a long-time priority for Senate President Pro Tem Caleb Rowden — a Republican from Columbia who has announced his retirement from state politics.

When the House was ready to debate Koenig’s bill on the floor (now loaded with the caucuses’ priorities), movement on other K-12 education bills stopped. Some of the bills didn’t move because they were completely incorporated into the larger education package, but others lacked support.

​​“In order to move that big bill, there was a lot of political capital spent on that,” Sen. Jill Carter, a Granby Republican, told The Independent.

She attempted to place her educational priority onto the bill after Senate leaders had completed negotiations and distributed the thick stacks of the legislation.

Her bill sought to remove school accreditation authority from the state’s education department by allowing school districts to use nationally recognized accrediting agencies instead. It also proposed replacing the Missouri Assessment Program, or MAP test, with a summative assessment “that meets federal requirements.”

The legislation received bipartisan support in committee and passed unanimously, but the committee’s vote was never reported on the Senate floor — a step required to come up for debate.

When she attempted to add it as an amendment to Koenig’s bill post-negotiations, she was advised against unbalancing the education package.

Sen. Curtis Trent, a Springfield Republican, told her the bill was “highly negotiated.” He had filed a bill that also sought to change the way school accreditation is done in Missouri, though his approach focused on performance and growth scores. His proposal would focus more on standardized testing, whereas Carter’s had a decentralized approach.

“This is a highly crafted, highly balanced, fine-tuned piece of legislation,” Trent said on the Senate floor. “Inserting it like this in the 11th hour… risks derailing this very important piece of legislation in a way that I don’t believe is fair to the underlying bill sponsor and everyone involved in the process.”

He indicated that he had an amendment to Carter’s legislation, and she withdrew her bill.

Arthur said she didn’t see enough support behind Carter’s bill, so it wasn’t likely to pass.

Both Carter and Pollitt are planning to refile their legislation.

Arthur, who has termed out of the Senate, said she recommends watching how new laws affect education before passing more large changes.

“(Koenig’s bill) is a major education omnibus bill, and it contains a lot of provisions that can shape and reshape education in Missouri,” she said. “I would recommend that the legislature let those things get fully implemented and see how they’re working before moving forward with anything else as substantial.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

SUBSCRIBE

Missouri Independent is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Missouri Independent maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jason Hancock for questions: [email protected]. Follow Missouri Independent on Facebook and Twitter.

Legislative interns help Missouri school districts claim over $1 million in federal funds

by Annelise Hanshaw, Missouri Independent
May 21, 2024

In March, the phone in state Rep. Deb Lavender’s office in Jefferson City started ringing constantly, but the calls weren’t for her.

They were for her interns, Santino Bono and Alanna Nguyen.

The interns, along with Dylan Powers Cody, who was interning for state Rep. Peter Merideth, had spent months cross-checking spreadsheets to pinpoint school districts who had not yet claimed pandemic-era federal funds for homeless students.

Those federal dollars are part of the American Rescue Plan and must be budgeted by September. A large part of the interns’ project was calling districts to notify them that they had money that could expire if they didn’t act quickly.

State Rep. Deb Lavendar, D-St. Louis, speaks about her work on the state budget in a press conference May 10 (Annelise Hanshaw/Missouri Independent).

The office got so many calls back from schools about the interns’ project that Lavender’s legislative assistant needed to create a voicemail folder just for them.

So far, they helped districts claim $1.15 million in funds in four months that can be used for a range of services for homeless students — from buying washers and dryers to temporary hotel stays and transit cards.

“We had multiple school districts call back and say, ‘We have twenty grand in the bank that we can use to help homeless students? No one really told us,’” Bono said in an interview with The Independent.

Most of the districts the interns reached had no idea they had funding available, Nguyen said.

“Then, they wanted more information on it,” she said. “Once they got the information on it, they were able to kind of kickstart it up and get things moving along.”

Bono expected the internship might be more menial, including the “intern trope of having to get coffee for people,” he said.

“To know that I could have potentially a much bigger impact on actual students, as a student myself, I’m really proud of that,” Bono said.

SUPPORT NEWS YOU TRUST.

DONATE

Missouri received an infusion of $9.6 million in the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 for students experiencing homelessness, and schools were able to start using it in 2022.

But many of those schools had never received federal dollars to support homeless students before.

Tera Bock, director of homeless education for Missouri’s Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, said the agency alerted school districts to the funding but that several challenges emerged.

“It is not funding that most districts are used to having, so they usually are supporting their students experiencing homelessness without any funding specific to that,” she said. “The extra funding creates the need for a shift in mindset as far as what they provide for those students.”

School districts have until the end of September to budget the remaining $6.1 million or lose out on it. 

Most schools received a few thousands dollars in federal aid for homeless students. The largest allocation, based on its homeless student population, went to St. Louis City which received $850,000.

The funding is best used for one-time costs, Bock said, like a vehicle to transport students with housing insecurity or to meet emergency needs.

“The district should really consider how they can use it in a way that is not going to create a financial burden in the future whenever they don’t have the funds anymore,” Bock said.

She said rural districts with a smaller population of students experiencing homelessness are the most likely to struggle to spend the money.

Bock has been in her role for a couple months, and the position was vacant briefly.

Part of her job is to contact each district’s homeless liaison, a position every district is federally required to have. But sometimes, the liaisons have multiple positions in schools, and Bock doesn’t hear back from them.

“Especially in the districts where they don’t typically see a large population of homeless students, they get multiple roles, and it just gets lost in the shuffle,” she said.

“We don’t have very many (districts) here in Missouri where that person is completely designated as their entire job for the most part,” she said. “They are wearing lots of different hats.”

Bock said she sends “lots of communication,” so “they should be aware” of the funds but wonders if liaisons are properly connected to district administration to get the money budgeted.

With more communication and activities planned, Bock is not concerned about being able to get more money claimed by districts.

“This is definitely a big piece of what I’m working on right now,” she said. “And our sights are set on Sept. 30.” 

Bock said the interns were “super helpful” in the process.

“There has been good communication whenever they need some backup information to support questions that are coming up,” she said. “So they’ve been great to work with.”

The interns are hopeful schools will continue allocating the funds.

“There’s still a lot to be done by September and session’s ending,” Bono said. “I’m going off to law school. I can’t keep calling school districts. So we’re just hoping that more awareness can be given to school districts to kind of get them to keep working towards this.”

Lavender said the funds might look modest in terms of the state’s overall budget but the impact on students is large. In Webster Groves, she said, the schools “got another $8,000 that I don’t think they knew was sitting there.”

Lavender’s legislative assistant Dustin Bax chimed in: “And $8,000 of backpacks, non-perishable foods, fuel cards — that goes a long way.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

SUBSCRIBE

Missouri Independent is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Missouri Independent maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jason Hancock for questions: [email protected]. Follow Missouri Independent on Facebook and Twitter.

House sends bill to governor renewing taxes critical to funding Missouri Medicaid

by Rudi Keller, Missouri Independent
May 15, 2024

A set of medical provider taxes that fund a large portion of Missouri’s Medicaid program won quick approval Wednesday in the House, two weeks after it took 41 hours for the bill to pass in the state Senate.

The controversies that stalled the bill in the Senate received scant attention during Wednesday’s debate, except for being cited as an example of what to avoid in the future. The bill taxes hospitals, pharmacies, nursing homes and ambulance services to raise about $1.3 billion for Medicaid services and leverage nearly $3 billion in federal matching funds for the $17 billion program.

“This shouldn’t be used as a hostage in a terrorist negotiation,” said House Minority Leader Crystal Quade, a Springfield Democrat.

The renewal bill extends the taxes for five years, one of the longest sunsets since the tax was first enacted in 1991. Since then, the levies have been renewed 17 times, most recently for three years in 2021 during a special session.

For the second time, renewal of the taxes became enmeshed in the debates over abortion and whether Planned Parenthood can receive reimbursements for services covered by Medicaid. Members of the Missouri Freedom Caucus tried, and failed, to delay action on the provider taxes until a bill targeting Planned Parenthood was signed by Gov. Mike Parson and a proposal making it harder to pass a constitutional amendment is finished and set for a vote later this year.

Parson did sign the Planned Parenthood bill, but almost a week after the filibuster ended. And the record set by the Freedom Caucus, by holding the Senate floor for 41 hours, has been surpassed by Democrats this week as they block a vote on the constitutional majority changes.

As he asked for support, House Budget Committee Chairman Cody Smith, a Carthage Republican, said the bill’s importance to financing Medicaid was the only issue to concern members.

The taxes, he said, “have become an integral part” of the Medicaid program and renewal “is very critical” to balancing the $51.7 billion budget passed last week 

The debate and 136-16 vote took about five minutes. Quade said there was no controversy in the House on the bill. 

“Most of us…  absolutely, desperately want this passed today,” she said.

Missouri Independent is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Missouri Independent maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jason Hancock for questions: [email protected]. Follow Missouri Independent on Facebook and Twitter.

Key lawmakers say Missouri budget talks close to completion as deadline approaches

by Rudi Keller, Missouri Independent
May 8, 2024

The most difficult Missouri budget process in years entered the final 48 hours before the constitutional deadline for spending bills with no final agreement on how much the state should spend in the coming year.

Missouri House Republicans, who hold an overwhelming majority in the lower chamber, caucused behind closed doors Wednesday afternoon for about 30 minutes for a progress report from Budget Committee Chairman Cody Smith. When he emerged, he said there are still several points of contention with the state Senate that need to be resolved.

“We are moving in a good direction,” said Smith, a Republican from Carthage running for state treasurer. “My priorities are the balanced budget, the bottom line, those types of things, and  as long as we can work within those parameters, working towards a solution, I think we’re in a good place right now.”

Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Lincoln Hough said the remaining differences were over the wording of restrictive provisions, some of which set maximum rates for services such as child care and others that are more general, including a provision penalizing cities that enact immigration sanctuary policies.

Hough, a Springfield Republican running for lieutenant governor, said he still expects to meet the 6 p.m. Friday deadline for spending bills.

“I don’t know what the timeframe is or I would tell you, but I think we’re gonna be in really good shape,” Hough said. “We’ll be in really good shape getting to the numbers that we all want to be at, like within the (consensus revenue estimate) and a healthy cash balance to carryover for next year.”

Throughout Wednesday, there was anticipation that the Senate budget debate was at hand. The Senate convened at 9:30 a.m., then quickly recessed until 2 p.m. with Majority Leader Cindy O’Laughlin saying the debate would commence “if the budget is ready.”

It was not ready when the chamber reconvened. After several hours of work on other bills, and another recess, the Senate adjourned for the night without action on any spending bill.

The chamber is scheduled to return at 9 a.m. At that time, there will be 33 hours left to complete spending bills.

This week’s negotiations began with significant differences between the House and Senate on how much to spend overall, whether to dip into the massive state surplus for ongoing programs and which of more than 300 earmarked items will make the final plan.

The House-passed budget spends $50.8 billion, including $14.9 billion in general revenue. The Senate Appropriations Committee approved a $53 billion spending package, with $15.7 billion in general revenue. In the budget proposed in January, Gov. Mike Parson called for $52.7 billion in spending, with $15 billion coming from general revenue.

If the regular process was being followed, the full Senate would have already debated the budget and this week would be the time for final negotiations in a formal bipartisan conference committee with members from both chambers.

Instead, the rapidly approaching deadline means Smith and Hough have been negotiating behind closed doors, keeping Republican leadership informed but leaving House Democrats complaining they have been frozen out.

Democrats have been told nothing about the negotiations between Hough and Smith, said state State Rep. Peter Merideth of St. Louis, the ranking Democrat on the House Budget Committee. 

“This is just one more step in what has been the least transparent budget process in my time here,” said Merideth, who joined the House in 2017.

Democrats complained during committee work that Smith delivered his plan late, with little time to go over the details before being forced to vote. Republicans knew going into the session that the budget would have to navigate through the political ambitions of key players and the stall tactics of the Senate Freedom Caucus, Merideth said.

“We’ve known from the time we were elected what the deadline was,” Merideth said. “They’ve known from the beginning how to get it there. And again, Republicans have failed to do that.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

SUBSCRIBE

The deadline, a week before the end of the session, has been in place since 1988. Only once, in 1997, have lawmakers missed that deadline and been forced to complete the budget in a special session.

This year, the deadline is looming despite efforts that began in December to prevent last-minute votes. House appropriations subcommittees began meeting Dec. 5. But instead of sending its proposals to the Senate before spring break in mid-March, the House completed its initial votes on April 3, almost a week later than it did so last year.

Factional warfare in the state Senate, including a 41-hour filibuster last week, means the Senate has yet to vote on any spending bills except one that provides $2.2 million to support a National Guard deployment to the Texas-Mexico border.

Hough has been responsive to House Democrats, Merideth said, but the lack of participation in budget talks means they will be forced to choose between voting for the bills to help meet the constitutional deadline or voting against them because of uncertainty about what is included.

“We’re all aware that we’re likely to have to vote on something that we don’t know the details of,” Merideth said. “And that’s not good government and I think any one of us would be justified in a no vote.”

Hough said the process isn’t very different from previous years, lacking only the formality of a conference committee.

“Essentially, we’ve been conferencing right since last week,” Hough said. “We just didn’t go through the show of a formal ‘let’s all sit down and show you this’ conference on all these differences.”

 A key point for Smith has been to set ongoing general revenue spending at or below expected revenue for the coming year. After more than two years of double-digit growth in revenues, receipts slowed last year.

Growth continued, but at the reduced rate of 2.7% in the year that ended June 30.

The consensus when the year began was that revenues would decline slightly in the current fiscal year and remain essentially flat the following year. 

Growth so far has defied that estimate, with revenues growing at 2.7% through April 30. If that rate is sustained until June 30, it would add about $500 million in unexpected revenue to the state’s coffers and again in the following year.

Despite slower growth, the surplus of all funds available to lawmakers has not declined considerably in the past year. The state had $6.4 billion on hand on April 30, down from $7.8 billion at the end of the 2023 fiscal year. That does not include $1.4 billion set aside for construction on Interstate 70 or $300 million in a fund for major construction at the state Capitol Building.

One way Smith got the House budget total for ongoing spending below the estimated revenue is by designating $807 million in the operating budget as one-time expenditures. The list includes big items, like $373.5 million for improvements on Interstate 44 and $100 million for low-traffic rural roads, as well as small ones, like $18,395 for operational expenses of the Agriculture Business Development Division in the Department of Agriculture.

SUPPORT NEWS YOU TRUST.

DONATE

Smith also designated the 2% boost his budget included for higher education institutions and about $14 million for public school transportation costs as one-time spending. That is a signal that the money may not be included in the following year’s budget.

“Sustainability is the name of the game for me this year,” Smith said. “We need to have a balanced budget and by that I mean we need to balance our expenditures, our ongoing expenditures within the revenue estimates.”

Missouri Independent is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Missouri Independent maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jason Hancock for questions: [email protected]. Follow Missouri Independent on Facebook and Twitter.

Bills making it harder to amend state constitution proceed in Missouri House

by Anna Spoerre, Missouri Independent
April 3, 2024

Two bills seeking to make it more difficult to amend the state constitution through the initiative petition process advanced through the Missouri House this week. 

On Wednesday, legislation sponsored by Republican state Rep. John Black of Marshfield was approved on a 106-49 vote. The only Republican to vote against the measure was House Majority Leader Jon Patterson of Lee’s Summit. 

Earlier in the week, a House committee approved a different version of the bill sponsored by state Sen. Mary Elizabeth Coleman that the Senate passed last month. 

If either version is approved by both chambers, the question would go on the statewide ballot in either August or November.

Citizen-led initiative petitions currently require signatures from 8% of voters in five of the state’s eight congressional districts. To pass once on the ballot, a statewide vote of 50% plus one is required — a simple majority vote.

Both the House and Senate versions make the process harder, but in very different ways. 

The House joint resolution would:

Require signatures from 8% of registered voters in all eight congressional districts to qualify for the ballot. Establish a forum hosted by the Secretary of State for voters to review and comment on proposed amendments before they head to the ballot.Require a ballot measure receive a majority of votes in all eight of Missouri congressional districts to pass.Require the General Assembly to have the approval of at least four-sevenths of the members in each chamber to make any modifications to citizen-led constitutional amendments within two years of when they go into effect.

The Senate joint resolution would: 

Require that constitutional amendments pass by both a simple majority of votes statewide and a majority of votes in at least a majority of the votes in Missouri’s congressional districts. Require the General Assembly to have the approval of at least four-sevenths of the members in each chamber to make any modifications to citizen-led constitutional amendments within two years of when it goes into effect.

‘This is about reproductive freedom’

Last May, House Speaker Dean Plocher, a Republican from Des Peres, said his party anticipated an initiative petition to legalize abortionwould be brought forward and would pass. 

Since then, acampaign to legalize abortion to the point of fetal viability in Missouri has raised millions of dollars, most recently bringing in internationally-known model and Webster Groves native Karlie Kloss to campaign on their behalf.

Republicans in support of changing the initiative petition process have said their motivation is more wide-reaching than abortion and pre-dates the 2023 session, anti-abortion groups have been some of the main champions of the legislation.

But the bulk of Wednesday’s conversation centered on the most recent citizen-led amendment to pass.

In 2022, Missourians legalized recreational marijuana with53% of voters in favor of the amendment.

In that election, Black said, 15 counties carried the “yes” vote, arguing that urban voters “basically imposed their will on the rest of the state.”

Republicans in favor of changing the initiative petition process have repeatedly pointed to the length of the state constitution, which includes 134 amendments, as a reason for reform. 

State Rep. Robert Sauls, a Democrat from Independence, countered that only 19 of the amendments came from initiative petitions. The rest came from the General Assembly. 

“This idea that the constitution has gotten out of control, well look in the mirror,” Sauls said. “We’re the reason that it has. Not these 19 amendments that the people have put on.”

An analysis by The Independent found that under the concurrent majority standard, as few as 23% of voters could defeat a ballot measure. This was done by looking at the majority in the four districts with the fewest number of voters in 2020 and 2022.

“You want a minority to be able to block a majority,” said state Rep. Joe Adams, a Democrat from University City. “That is shameful.”

State Rep. Doug Richey, a Republican from Excelsior Springs, said with a simple majority, it’s possible for those leading initiative petition efforts to “ignore” congressional districts and still succeed. 

“That is a significant move to value the voices of people in the state of Missouri no matter where they happen to live,” Richey said. “No matter what their perspective is.” 

Reference to the current abortion initiative petition wasn’t raised until late in the debate by state Rep. Patty Lewis, a Democrat from Kansas City. 

Volunteers with Missourians for Constitutional Freedom collect signatures in support of putting forward a ballot measure that would legalize abortion up to the point of fetal viability in Missouri. More than 500 people signed up for a campaign event on Tuesday, Feb. 6, 2024, in Kansas City (Anna Spoerre/Missouri Independent).

“This is about reproductive freedom,” Lewis said. “And it’s about taking away our vote to restore reproductive freedom in the state of Missouri.”

In approving Black’s legislation on Wednesday, the House made little mention of the “ballot candy” written into the resolution. 

The ballot candy, which refers to provisions added to ballot measures in order to win over voters, has become a major point of contention between Republicans and Democrats. In the proposed initiative petition bills, language has been included that would ask voters if they want to define legal voters as citizens of the US who live in Missouri and are registered to vote and whether they want to prohibit foreign entities from sponsoring initiative petitions.

Democrats argue the inclusion of the ballot candy is an attempt by Republicans to mislead voters and distract from the effort to weaken the initiative petition process. In the Senate, a 21-hour filibuster ended with Republicans agreeing to remove the ballot candy in exchange for Democrats allowing the bill to come up for a vote. 

The House restored the ballot candy at Coleman’s request, setting up a potential showdown in the Senate if the bill makes its way back to that chamber. 

Missouri Independent is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Missouri Independent maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jason Hancock for questions: [email protected]. Follow Missouri Independent on Facebook and Twitter.

Missouri House again votes to cut corporate income taxes

by Rudi Keller, Missouri Independent
March 27, 2024

The Missouri House sent a bill repealing the corporate income tax to the Senate on a party-line vote Wednesday, with Republicans saying it will boost economic growth and Democrats calling it a business giveaway.

The bill sponsored by state Rep. Travis Smith of Dora would cut the tax rate, currently 4%, to 3% on Jan. 1 and make another one percentage point cut each year until the tax is eliminated in 2028.

“When you reduce the corporate income tax you are helping workers more than anything else because the corporation is not going to be paying those taxes,” Smith said. “They’re putting it back in improving their facilities and paying wages.”

The corporate income tax is paid by larger companies with many stockholders. A fiscal note for the bill estimates it would reduce state revenues by at least $884 million when fully implemented. The state collected $13.2 billion in general revenue in the fiscal year that ended June 30.

The bill passed on a 100-50 vote with Republicans voting for it and Democrats opposed. 

“We are one of the lowest corporate income tax states in the nation,” said state Rep. Joe Adams, a University City Democrat.

Legally, Adams noted, corporations are people with many of the same rights as humans.

“As people they should pay part of the freight for the operation of the government of this state,” Adams said.

Missouri’s corporate income tax for decades was 5%. In 1993, in a bill that increased revenue to pay for education needs, the tax was boosted to 6.25%. The rate was cut to 4% in 2018.

This is the second year in a row that the House has voted to cut the corporate tax. Last year, the House voted to cut the rate in half but the Senate did not go along. A similar bill is awaiting debate on the Senate. 

Lawmakers in the past 18 months have cut the top rate on income taxes and excluded Social Security and other retirement income from the state income tax. Those cuts, when fully in effect, will reduce annual revenue by more than $1 billion.

The state is sitting on one of its biggest surpluses in history, with about $6.4 billion on hand on Feb. 29. Revenues for the year, however, are lagging 1.45% behind collections for the previous fiscal year.

To soften the impact of repealing the tax, the bill also bars corporations holding state tax credits from claiming them against corporate tax liability in years after the rate is cut to zero. Smith said he received information from the Department of Revenue that there are $600 million to $700 million in outstanding tax credits that could be claimed by corporations.

“It just means no new tax credits will be given out and they will not renew the existing tax credits,” Smith said.

The fiscal note for the bill, however, reports that tax credit redemptions applied to corporate income taxes totaled $89.7 million in the most recent fiscal year and that redemptions would shift to other taxes if the corporate tax is repealed.

“Many of the state tax credits are allowed to be sold, transferred and assigned and it is assumed corporations would continue that practice,” the fiscal note states.

The corporate tax rate isn’t a priority for businesses, said Rep. Kemp Strickler, a Democrat from Lee’s Summit. Corporations want well-educated workers and access to materials and services, Strickler said.

“Is this a good return on investment?” Strickler asked. “Is that really helping or  is this just a giveaway?”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

SUBSCRIBE

Missouri Independent is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Missouri Independent maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jason Hancock for questions: [email protected]. Follow Missouri Independent on Facebook and Twitter.

Missouri House to hold public hearing on governor’s $52.7 billion budget proposal

by Rudi Keller, Missouri Independent
March 13, 2024

The first – and perhaps only – chance for the public to tell Missouri House members what they think of Gov. Mike Parson’s $52.7 billion budget proposal will be Thursday.

The timing is upsetting Democrats on the House Budget Committee, who said public input should have occurred weeks ago. Scheduling one hearing on all 17 spending bills for the day before lawmakers take a week-long spring break doesn’t allow for adequate deliberation, they argue.

“Because we are so far along in the process, for anything to change in the budget because of public testimony would be highly unusual,” said Rep. Deb Lavender, a Manchester Democrat who began pushing for hearings at the end of January.

At the hearing, Budget Committee Chairman Cody Smith will reveal how he wants to change Parson’s spending plan. Votes on the budget will be held the week of March 25 with floor debate tentatively scheduled for the following week.

Smith defended the timing of the hearing. He’s heard from advocacy groups, other lawmakers and individuals in one-on-one meetings and will allow for more testimony after spring break if the Thursday hearing isn’t enough time for everyone who wants to speak, he said.

“If we had an objection or concern raised in my office about the opportunity to testify publicly, and the short notice about that, I would be open to making more time for that,” Smith said.

Parson’s budget includes raises for teachers, a 3% increase for higher education budget and childcare and funding to study improvements on Interstate 44. He’s also asking for a 3.2% pay raise for state workers, $1.5 billion in federal funds for broadband expansion and $314.7 million for new construction on college campuses.

The state is in a strong financial position. While the record surplus that has built up over the past three years is down from its peak of $8 billion, the treasury is holding $4.6 billion in surplus general revenue, with another $2 billion in funds that can be spent like general revenue. 

Surplus general revenue, under House rules, is off limits for budget committee members who want to push new or increased spending items. And Smith, who in past years has cut large sums from Parson’s spending plan, said he will do so again in his proposals coming tomorrow.

“I’m going to be looking to limit as much spending as I can and the management of general revenue certainly will be a part of the committee substitute process,” Smith said.

Smith has frustrated Democratic spending proposals in past years because they must cut in one place of the budget to increase spending on another line.

“I have no reason to think he hasn’t continued to excel at his skills to lock all of the money behind doors I don’t have access to,” Lavender said.

The timing of Thursday’s budget hearing isn’t unusual compared to past years, but it does represent a failure of an ambitious plan to move the budget along earlier in the year. House appropriations subcommittees began looking at department requests in December, with a stated goal of holding votes in the full House this week.

With factional fights tying up the Senate, timing could become critical. Lawmakers must pass spending bills through both chambers no later than May 10. Last year, the budget was finished only on the final day allowed by the constitution.

Members of the Missouri Freedom Caucus, a group of six conservative Republican senators, have vowed to debate the budget line-by-line on the Senate floor.

“That’s why they wanted to (finish earlier in the House) because everybody knows that there is a real risk that this has a problem in the Senate this year,” said state Rep. Peter Merideth, a St. Louis Democrat. “And we may find ourselves in a special session for the budget.”

Smith, however, said he’s confident that the potential embarrassment of missing the constitutional deadline will help move the budget in the Senate.

“Everyone on all sides of the warring factions within the Missouri Senate agree broadly that we should finish the budget on time, that that’s our one responsibility,” Smith said “That’s my impression.So, I’m hopeful that they’ll be able to get things together well enough to pass the budget on time.”

Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Lincoln Hough said he will be rushed but will get a budget to the Senate floor in time to hold the debate if it proves lengthy.

“With the House taking the amount of time that they’ve taken,” Hough said, “it puts us in a little bit of a jam on the Senate. So we’ve got to work a little more feverishly than I would really like to once we get their bills.”

Missouri Independent is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Missouri Independent maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jason Hancock for questions: [email protected]. Follow Missouri Independent on Facebook and Twitter.

Missouri House and Senate OK two plans making it harder for voters to amend the state constitution

by Meg Cunningham, The Beacon
February 22, 2024

The Republican-controlled Missouri House and Senate advanced two different proposals Thursday that would make it harder for voters to change the state constitution using a constitutional amendment.

The Senate passed a bill on a party-line vote that would dramaticallycrank up the difficulty of passing a constitutional amendment proposed by voters using an initiative petition process. The resolution would require a statewide majority — that’s already the rule — but also require majority support from five of Missouri’s eight congressional districts. That bill now awaits action from the House. 

Meanwhile, the House passed a bill backed by Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft that would add restrictions onto the signature gathering process for initiative petitions. That bill is now in the Senate for consideration. 

Both moves come as the effort to place a constitutional amendment allowing abortions in Missouri ramps up. Missourians for Constitutional Freedom, the group spearheading the effort, says it’s raised more than $3 million since launching the campaign. 

At least 13 states could vote on constitutional amendments regarding abortion in 2024. Ohio saw a similar effort unfold last year: Lawmakers there placed a question on an August 2023 ballot that asked voters to raise the voting threshold required for a constitutional amendment. Voters rejected that proposal and went on to pass a constitutional amendment enshrining the right to an abortion in the state’s constitution. 

Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose said that the effort to raise the threshold was “100% about … abortion,” though he later walked his statement back and said the effort was about any effort looking to amend the Ohio Constitution. 

Senate backs tougher standard for passing constitutional amendments

Missouri has two ways to amend its state constitution. Legislators can propose a change subject to a statewide vote. Or voters can collect signatures to put a change up for a statewide vote.

On Thursday, senators passed a resolution that would require more voter support for constitutional amendments. 

The approval came after an overnight filibuster from Senate Democrats. They were blocking a vote on a version of the bill that coupled popular ideas with the effort to raise the amount of voter support needed to pass an amendment, known as “ballot candy.” 

The resolution, sponsored by Republican Sen. Mary Elizabeth Coleman of Jefferson County, who recently announced a bid for Missouri’s 3rd Congressional District, originally included language that would bar non-Missouri residents or U.S. citizens from voting on constitutional amendments, something that is already illegal under Missouri law. 

It would have also prohibited foreign governments from financially supporting initiative petition efforts and placed a ban on constitutional amendments allowing lobbyist gifts to lawmakers. 

“There absolutely is ballot candy in the substitute,” Coleman said on the floor. 

After the filibuster and debate, Lee’s Summit Republican Sen. Mike Cierpiot offered an amendment that removed the extra language from the resolution. 

“This amendment is taking out all the things that we’re calling ballot candy today and just going back to this straight underlying amendment,” he said.

The amendment passed 18-12, with support from moderate Republicans.

In a press conference Thursday, House Minority Leader Crystal Quade, a Springfield Democrat, predicted House Republicans will work to get the ballot-candy language added back into the resolution. 

“It’s also finally nice that they’re saying it out loud of what they’re trying to do,” she said. “To deceive voters and put language in there that they specifically call candy because they know its intent.” 

Missouri House passes its own measure to restrict processes on signature gathering for constitutional amendments

The House on Thursday finalized a measure that would place a number of restrictions on signature-gathering efforts for constitutional amendments.

The proposal, sponsored by Pleasant Hill Republican Rep. Mike Haffner, would require the pages that voters sign to support a constitutional amendment to be issued by the secretary of state’s office. The bill would also require signatures to be recorded in black or dark ink. 

Signature gatherers would also be required to be residents of Missouri or physically present in Missouri for at least 30 consecutive days before collecting signatures. It would also ban paying people based on how many signatures they collect.

Haffner’s bill would also give the secretary of state and attorney general power to assess whether initiative petition efforts comply with the Missouri Constitution. 

Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft, a Republican running for governor, backs the measure. 

“These changes to statute will establish safeguards and enhance clarity and transparency in the process making it more efficient for Missourians,” Ashcroft said in a press release Thursday, adding that he will work closely with the General Assembly to finalize the bill. 

The Senate proposal is SJR 74. The House bill is HB 1749. 

This article first appeared on The Beacon and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.