|
Missouri House to hold public hearing on governor’s $52.7 billion budget proposalby Rudi Keller, Missouri Independent 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: info@missouriindependent.com. Follow Missouri Independent on Facebook and Twitter.
0 Comments
Missouri House and Senate OK two plans making it harder for voters to amend the state constitution2/29/2024 Missouri House and Senate OK two plans making it harder for voters to amend the state constitutionby Meg Cunningham, The Beacon 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 amendmentsMissouri 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 amendmentsThe 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. This is an editorial: An editorial, like news reporting, is based on objective facts, but shares an opinion. The conclusions and opinions here have been derived by the guest contributor and are not associated with the news staff.
Tightening Down Immigration Laws In a recent session of the House Special Committee on Homeland Security, discussions centered around several immigration bills and how to strengthen border security while ensuring that individuals entering the state are doing so through lawful ports of entry. HB 2470 addresses illegal entry, categorizing it as a class B misdemeanor with potential escalation to a class E felony for repeat offenses. The bill introduces additional offenses for illegal aliens and outlines penalties. Certain individuals enforcing these offenses are protected from arrest or detention in specific locations. HB 2523 defines the offense of trespass by an illegal alien, classifying it as a class E felony for individuals aged 18 or older committing certain offenses on public or private land. The bill exempts federally authorized individuals, and a violation does not establish probable cause for any other offense. HB 2367 specifies that illegal aliens committing offenses are guilty of trespass, with severity depending on the initial offense. Trespass is a class E felony for infractions and a class C felony for misdemeanors or felonies. The punishment for trespass is in addition to the initial offense's penalty and does not apply to federally authorized individuals. The discussions reflect heightened concerns over immigration and border security at both the federal and state level. Within days of the hearing, Governor Mike Parson announced the deployment of resources and personnel to the southern border in support of Texas Governor Greg Abbott's Operation Lone Star mission. Defending Religious Freedom The Special Committee on Government Accountability recently conducted a hearing on two bills seeking to defend Missourians’ First Amendment rights concerning their faith and religion. HB 1959, also known as the "Missouri Religious Freedom Protection Act" focuses on protecting religious freedom. The bill would prevent public officials from shutting down meetings or services held by religious groups. However, it clarifies that this prohibition does not apply to religious groups planning or committing acts of violence. The bill also exempts emergency evacuation orders in cases of imminent danger, such as floods, fires, tornadoes, earthquakes, terrorist threats, civil unrest, or hazardous material incidents. Once the imminent danger has passed, religious services are permitted to resume. Notably, the bill emphasizes that this prohibition does not exempt places of worship from complying with applicable building and fire codes. Presenting his bill before the committee, the bill sponsor stressed the importance of places of worship, especially during times of crisis. “Our places of worship operate in a very unique way in this state, and we as government should not be in the business of trying to shut them down,” he said. HB 1518 focuses on safeguarding belief-based student associations within public institutions of higher learning. Its primary objective is to prevent public institutions from taking actions or implementing policies that would deny belief-based student associations the benefits available to other student groups. The bill explicitly prohibits discrimination against these associations based on their leaders adhering to sincerely held beliefs, practice requirements, or conduct standards. Furthermore, it grants belief-based student associations the authority to seek relief through judicial or administrative proceedings against institutions that violate the bill's requirements. The hearing provided an opportunity for committee members to deliberate on the merits and implications of both bills. The testimonies and discussions covered a range of perspectives, including concerns about potential conflicts between religious freedom and institutional policies in educational settings, as well as the balance between ensuring freedom of worship and protecting public safety during emergencies. Further deliberations and considerations are expected as the bills progress through the legislative process. Both bills passed through committee and now await an opportunity to be heard on the House floor. Debate on DEI Funding The House Committee on General Laws recently discussed five bills centered on the use of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) language. The primary objective of these bills, as highlighted by their sponsors, is to cease the allocation of taxpayer funds towards DEI initiatives within state bureaucracy. The intention is to defund DEI efforts and prevent the state from encouraging private sector adoption of DEI practices to secure state contract bids. One notable bill, HB 2567, introduced the "Do No Harm Act," which imposes limitations on DEI initiatives in medical higher education institutions. It bars funding for DEI offices, requires the redirection of these funds to merit scholarships, and mandates reporting on compliance. Additionally, the legislation outlines academic standards, necessitates transparency in courses, and establishes criteria for admissions tests. It also places restrictions on DEI requirements for licensing boards, disallows state contracts for entities mandating DEI, and permits legal action for violations, waiving sovereign immunity for a year post-violation. Another bill, HB 2569, prohibits state departments from utilizing funds for DEI programs that endorse preferential treatment or necessitate private sector DEI adoption for state contracts. Two other bills, HB 2619 and HB 2448, share similar provisions by preventing state departments from funding intradepartmental DEI initiatives and limiting mandates on private sector DEI programs for state contracts. Similar to HB 2569, HB 2365 bars state departments from financing intradepartmental DEI initiatives and enforcing private sector DEI programs for state contracts while emphasizing adherence to employment laws. The attempt to restrict the use of DEI language, as reflected in these bills, reflects a larger societal and political discourse. While DEI initiatives aim to address systemic inequalities and promote equal opportunities, critics express concerns about potential overreach, ideological bias, and encroachment on individual freedoms. Supporters of the legislation heard in committee argued that limiting funds for DEI initiatives in medical institutions is a response to concerns about enforced ideological conformity. They contend that such initiatives may impose specific viewpoints and restrict academic and professional freedom. Opponents emphasize the significance of DEI initiatives in addressing historical disparities, fostering inclusivity, and ensuring a diverse workforce. They see restrictions as obstacles to efforts in creating equitable and inclusive environments, particularly in educational and healthcare settings. Legislators Raise Concerns about Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission In a recent session, the House Transportation Accountability Committee delved into proposed legislative changes aiming to reform the governance of Missouri's transportation system. The bills raised concerns about appointments to the Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission, suggesting potential amendments to its structure or complete elimination. The legislative efforts followed a contentious situation in 2021 when the Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT) sought to grant pay raises to its employees without prior legislative approval, resulting in a legal dispute. Among the proposed changes were measures altering the selection process for commission members. The Highways and Transportation Commission, overseeing the Department of Transportation, became a focal point of tension between the legislature and MoDOT due to the pay raise controversy. A lawsuit in 2021 arose from MoDOT's decision to increase wages without legislative consent, sparking political discord over transportation issues. The dispute primarily revolved around the allocation of funds, with MoDOT funded by appropriations under legislative control and revenues from transportation-related taxes beyond legislative reach. While not all committee members agreed on the proposed changes, there was a shared belief in the need for some reform. Committee members acknowledged concerns about MoDOT's responsiveness to constituents and discussed potential changes to the Transportation and Highways Commission. “Most of us feel like MoDOT’s not very responsive to our constituents’ concerns,” one member of the committee said. “No one is actually faulting MoDOT for the (employee) shortage because we all understand it. What we do see, however, is a seeming priority on things that aren’t necessary.” During the session, frustration was expressed regarding transportation issues in the district, with an emphasis on the need for accountability. There was advocacy for direct legislative oversight of the department, potentially eliminating the commission for increased accountability. “I do not have any issues personally with the members of the commission,” another member stated. “My issues are with the nature of the process, its lack of accountability and consistency.” Still, others argued against the complete dismantling of the commission, emphasizing the need to improve the existing system rather than destroy it. The Missouri Transportation Commission, established in 1921, operates on a bipartisan basis with members appointed by the governor, ensuring a balanced political representation within the commission. Closing Remarks In closing I would like to encourage my readers to continue to be involved in the affairs of government. Thomas Jefferson once stated that liberty is best preserved by the people themselves stating that they are the “only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty”. I whole heartedly agree with Thomas Jefferson on this issue. It is always my intent to keep my constituents informed and to retain open transparency. If you have any questions or concerns please contact my office at any time. You can reach my office by calling 573-751-1487 or via email at jeff.coleman@house.mo.gov Open enrollment legislation wins initial approval in Missouri Houseby Annelise Hanshaw, Missouri Independent A bill that would allow students to enroll in neighboring school districts won initial approval in the Missouri House for the fourth year in a row Tuesday on an 83-69 vote. It is the first bill to be debated by the full House this legislative session. It must be approved one more time by the House before it is sent to the Senate for consideration. Bill sponsor Rep. Brad Pollitt, a Republican from Sedalia, described the proposal as “minor compared to what others want to do.” “The status quo says the bill goes too far. The reform side says it doesn’t go far enough,” he said in his introduction of the bill. A nearly identical bill narrowly passed the House in a 85-68 vote last year, just three more than a constitutional majority of the chamber. New to the legislation this year is the creation of an online portal that would track the number of students who have applied to enroll in accepting districts. If passed, the legislation would allow students to leave their local school to enroll in districts that opt into the open enrollment. Districts are not required to add staff or programs, such as special education, for the program. Transportation would be parents’ responsibility, unless the child qualifies for free or reduced lunch or has transportation under an individualized education plan. The bill calls for a fund to pay for bussing these students. Pollitt placed a 3% cap on the number of students who can leave a district annually under open enrollment. He proposed a 1% cap for districts with a high number of students qualifying for free or reduced lunch, describing it as a compromise for the Senate. He removed the 1% cap upon advice from a caucus policy committee. Some worry that, without that provision, open enrollment could lead to resegregation in some areas. Rep. Kathy Steinhoff, a Columbia Democrat, complimented Pollitt but said the lack of “diversity protections” and other negatives “outweigh the positives.” “One of the concerns is that it’s going to create a slow drain for several schools and districts,” she said. Rep. Marlene Terry, a St. Louis Democrat, said the legislation would “destroy (her) school.” “We do agree that parents should have choices, but what I keep hearing is a better environment or a better education,” she said. “Until you can tell me how you’re going to fix the environment and the education in the public school system to where my children stay, I’m going to continually be against this bill.” Rep. Barbara Phifer, a Democrat from St. Louis, described open enrollment as a “patch on a big problem.” The problem, she said, is unequal funding of public schools. “We pretend that there is no school choice, but we have made an economic decision here in the state of Missouri that those who are wealthy get better education than those who are not wealthy,” Phifer said. “We can argue about that, and we can actually change the way that we fund public education so that we have more equity.” Rep. Peter Merideth, a St. Louis Democrat, said school funding was a timely topic. Earlier in the day, he had discussed the formula that determines state funding of public schools in the budget committee. He said the state funding has lagged behind inflation. Wealthy communities’ local funding has allowed schools to be better equipped, and those without deep pockets may lose students under open enrollment. Rep. Stephanie Hein, a Springfield Democrat, attempted to amend the bill to raise the base teacher pay to $46k statewide by the 2027-28 school year. The bill title would also change to “elementary and secondary education.” Her attempt to change the title failed on a 44-109 party-line vote after Pollitt said it opened the bill “to anything else to do with public education.” Pollitt said he was in favor of increasing teacher salaries but wanted his bill to stand alone. Last year, Pollitt’s bill died waiting to come to the floor of the Senate. He told The Independent Senate leaders attached his legislation to a bill about teacher recruitment and retention in an attempt to avoid a filibuster. GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
SUBSCRIBE
Missouri Independent is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus 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: info@missouriindependent.com. Follow Missouri Independent on Facebook and Twitter. Capitol Perspectives: The legacy of Missouri’s 2023 legislative sessionby Phill Brooks, Missouri Independent As Missouri lawmakers prepare for the 2024 legislative session, they should consider how many of their major 2023 accomplishments received limited public attention. The 2023 legislative session focused on divisive issues like restricting transgender medical procedures for minors and restricting students from participating on school sports teams designated for a sex different than the student’s birth certificate. Another major issue was a failed GOP effort to make statewide ballot issue initiatives more difficult. The measure was filed in response to the abortion-rights constitutional amendment. Yet, reviewing the legislature’s full record, there were many significant issues passed into law that directly impact Missourians beyond the ideological and partisan issues that often dominated the attention of legislators, the public and reporters. One major exception that did get public attention is the multi-billion dollar project to expand Interstate 70 to three lanes between Kansas City and St. Louis. It will take years to complete, but could have a huge impact on interstate transportation. GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
SUBSCRIBE
Other successful proposals that got less attention involved tax breaks. Counties or county voters would empowered to award tax credits for property assessment increases on the homes owned by the elderly. The bill also expands income tax exemptions for pension benefits and Social Security. Legislative staff estimated the state tax cuts would reduce state tax collections by about $300 million per year when fully implemented. Lawmakers also passed a measure that provides tax credits for businesses that hire student interns. That new law also establishes rights for college athletes to receive private compensation for use of the student’s name or image. Tax credits would be provided for child adoption costs under another bill signed by the governor which also adds additional provisions for advanced health care directives. Non-tax laws include giving physical therapists the power to provide treatment without a doctor’s prescription. An education bill would expand the right of public schools to teach children religious topics including the Bible and Hebrew Scriptures. Equal-parenting time would be defined as in a child’s best interest in child-custody cases. Beyond that, the new law provides that parents who fail to meet their child support obligations will be given additional rights to seek keeping various licenses including driving and professional licenses. Medicaid coverage for mothers of new borns will be extended from 60 days to one year after birth. That new law includes a number of other significant health issues. One unrelated provision restricts examination of the pelvic regions by a health care providers of an anesthetized patients without prior approval or a court order under another new law. Another provision expands coverage of do-not-resuscitate orders for minors. There’s a new law to expand to adults the restriction on texting while driving a motor vehicle. The bill also contains provisions to toughen the requirement for a driver to have auto insurance. Another new law provides consumer protections in civil lawsuit awards on how much the lawyer contracted by a party in the case can get from a court award. SUPPORT NEWS YOU TRUST.
DONATE
Another bill signed into law by the governor expands to the relatives who can delegate control of the final disposition of a deceased person There’s a new law that creates a crime for tampering with an automated teller machine (ATM) and also allows school safety officers to carry fire arms in public schools. While reporters covered many of those issues, I sense our coverage was obscured by the intense ideological and political battles on the major controversies in the General Assembly. Maybe we need to adjust our coverage efforts. However, statewide public officials also share some of the blame for distracted public attention. In my earlier years as a statehouse reporter, Gov. Kit Bond, Gov. Mel Carnahan and Attorney General John Danforth were laser focused in public presentations on consumer and education issues that directly impacted a majority of Missourians. Their support of these issues helped the public, lawmakers and reporters focus on the major issues before the legislature. On the other side, the legislature itself has obscured attention to the major issues before the General Assembly. The legislature’s growing practice to throw completely unrelated amendments onto bills in the hectic closing days of the legislative session made many of the enacted bills confusing legislative smorgasboards. Public confusion and reporting difficulties are inevitable if lawmakers themselves cannot limit focus on the key issue of a bill in the closing days of the session. Missouri Independent is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus 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: info@missouriindependent.com. Follow Missouri Independent on Facebook and Twitter. by Rudi Keller, Missouri Independent
Gov. Mike Parson on Thursday signed the tax cut he said a week earlier was responsible for his decision to veto most of the 201 spending items he cut from the state budget. The bill, exempting Social Security benefits and public pension payments from income tax, would reduce state general revenue by an estimated $309 million annually. It would also allow counties to hold a vote on whether people 62 or older should be exempt from increases in their annual property tax bills. The bill passed with broad bipartisan support – only two House members voted against it – but not without some misgivings among Democrats, said Rep. Peter Merideth, D-St. Louis. Under current law, exemptions allowed for retirement income are phased out for single taxpayers earning more than $85,000 and married couples with incomes above $100,000. “I was not thrilled with it,” Merideth said. “But honestly, to me, it was the best of the options presented.” The Republican House leadership was pushing for a $1 billion cut in corporate and income taxes. The bill’s property tax language began as a cap on increases in assessments for all property owners. “Many of us agree that there is a real problem with seniors right now that are on fixed incomes dealing with inflation and property taxes are a big part of that,” Merideth said. Homeowners around the state, especially in metropolitan areas, are seeing massive increases in their assessments due to the recent rise in real estate prices. And while provisions in the constitution require rates to be rolled back when overall assessment increases exceed inflation, individual property owners could still see big increases if their property assessment went up more than the general average. Parson’s decision to cite the tax cut for retirement benefits as a reason to veto spending items is not playing well with lawmakers. Budget leaders from both chambers said this week they will consider overrides, and said fiscal policies pushed by the governor, more than the retirement exemption, are doing more to reduce state revenues. “Maybe the governor’s concerned about what possible, further tax reductions that the legislature may be looking at, but that’s not necessarily how, in my opinion, you build this budget,” Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Lincoln Hough, R-Springfield, said in an interview this week. Missouri took in $13.2 billion in general revenue in the year that ended June 30. The state was also holding surplus funds of nearly $8 billion. Parson vetoed $555 million in spending, including $365 million in general revenue appropriations, from the $16 billion in general revenue items in the budget. Growth in state revenue slowed, however, to 2.7% during fiscal 2023 and is expected to be just 0.7% in the current fiscal year. It is a large income tax cut passed last year, not the retirement exemptions, responsible for slowing growth, Merideth said. “It’s one thing to blame this tax cut,” Merideth said, “but really, the real tax cut that’s gonna be costing us money is the other one.” State Sen. Tony Luetkemeyer, R-Parkville and sponsor of the bill, could not be reached Friday morning for comment. Automobile sales tax Tucked into a bill that will ban texting while driving for all motorists is a provision requiring automobile dealers to begin collecting sales tax at the time of a purchase. At a February hearing, Missouri Association of Auto Dealers lobbyist Jay Reichard estimated that up to $60 million in auto sales taxes were delinquent. The dealers are paying an extra administrative fee for the new computer system, estimated to cost $120 million, and the system is designed for dealers to collect the tax. Every motorist on the road knows if a fellow driver has paid the sales tax on a vehicle by looking at their license plate. If it is a paper temporary tag, the tax is still due because it must be paid at the state license office at the time a person registers their ownership of the vehicle. “We think this is a great thing for our customers,” Reichard said in a May interview. “They want to go to one place and get the job done.” Auto dealers are the only retailers who do not collect sales tax at the time of sale, he noted. For an article in May, The Independent found a half-dozen temporary tags in a short period in Columbia, including one that had expired on Christmas Day. The texting provision, which currently applies only to drivers under 21, will take effect on Aug. 28. A driver could not be cited for a violation, however, unless the officer stops the car for another reason. That is similar to the law governing seat belt violations. by Jason Hancock, Missouri Independent After two years of drama and gridlock, the Missouri Senate showed up in January determined to put the conflict between the conservative caucus and GOP leadership in the past. Submerged but ever-lurking, factionalism finally torpedoed the apparent comity in the session’s final week, and the Senate sank into the depths of filibusters and procedural hijinks. More than 3,000 non-budget bills were introduced during the 2023 session of the Missouri General Assembly. Only 43 found their way across the finish line. But while a host of big-ticket policy proposals died in the session’s waning days, lawmakers did manage to sign off on the largest budget in state history, promising historic investments in infrastructure projects, public education and the state’s social safety net. So who were the big winners and losers of the legislative session? WINNERS Lincoln HoughNo one had a bigger impact on the state’s $50.7 billion budget than Sen. Lincoln Hough. The Republican from Springfield took over as chairman of the powerful Senate Appropriations Committee this year. And after the House made massive cuts to the governor’s proposed budget, a bipartisan parade of lawmakers found their way to Hough’s fourth-floor office with hat in hand. Not only did Hough restore nearly all the money the House removed, he tripled the funding to rebuild Interstate 70. Then for good measure, in one of the rare moments when the conservative caucus wasn’t killing bills in the final week, Hough decided he’d take a turn by upending a virtual schools bill that many saw as a vehicle for more sweeping education measures. Hough just won re-election to a second term. That means he could be shaping the budget for the next three years — a lifetime in the age of term limits. Missouri DemocratsWith less than a third of legislative seats and no statewide office, Missouri Democrats couldn’t have asked for a better legislative session. The budget pumped money into a host of programs Democrats championed — expanded pre-kindergarten programs, raises for direct care workers, increases in child care subsidies and more. On the policy side, a years-long effort to expand postpartum Medicaid coverage from 60 days to one year finally came to fruition. In the Senate, Democrats got to sit back for the third year in a row as Republican infighting killed a host of bills they hated. Changes to the initiative petition process, a corporate tax cut, state control of the St. Louis police department, education bills targeting “critical race theory” and a host of others fizzled out despite being priorities for the GOP supermajority. ‘Gray market’ slot machinesAs video lottery machines proliferated in convenience stores, truck stops and other locations across the state, the companies that owned them made high-profile enemies. The Missouri Gaming Commission deemed the machines gambling devices, which are prohibited outside of licensed casinos. The state highway patrol considers them illegal. And in the Missouri Senate, the president pro tem and appropriations chair —Dave Schatz and Dan Hegeman — vowed to legislate them out of the state. But term limits drove Schatz and Hegeman out of office last year, and debate this year over these slot-machine-like games was focused on how to establish regulations instead of whether they should be allowed at all. That debate once again became latched to the push to legalize sports wagering, dooming both proposals and leaving the status quo in place. Sen. Caleb Rowden, the current president pro tem of the chamber, said as the session ended that a host of priority bills met their demise because a small group of legislators “want slot machines in gas stations.” With few local prosecutors willing to bring illegal gambling charges, and the attorney general’s office recusing itself from litigation filed by a gray-market gaming company, the question of the machine’s legality seems unlikely to resolve any time soon. Heavy constructorsHighway contractors were already in line for years of work under the limited plan for I-70 proposed by Gov. Mike Parson but the $2.8 billion for widening the highway statewide, plus a study in preparation for doing the same on Interstate 44, promise decades of work. There’s also money for building construction projects that include a $26 million state warehouse in Jefferson City, a $43 million veterinary hospital at the University of Missouri and a $300 million psychiatric hospital in Kansas City. Kansas CitySometimes the best bet is to fly under the radar. Republican ire this year was focused like a laser on St. Louis. Efforts to return to state control of the city’s police and allow the governor to appoint a special prosecutor to step in for the city circuit attorney continued to pick up steam as the session wore on. The only thing that stopped the bills was Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner’s decision to resign. Meanwhile, fresh off a Chiefs Super Bowl victory, Kansas City saw $50 million added to the budget for improvements at Arrowhead Stadium in advance of the 2026 FIFA World Cup. There was also $300 million appropriated to replace an aging psychiatric hospital in the city. When the push to usurp local control of the St. Louis police was set aside, it cleared the path for legislation containing Blair’s Law — a longtime priority of Kansas City lawmakers that bans celebratory gunfire and is named after a local girl who was killed by a stray bullet in 2011. LOSERS LGBTQ+ communityNo issue garnered more legislative attention this year than the push to limit access to puberty blockers, hormone therapy or gender-affirming surgeries for transgender minors. Multiple marathon committee hearings, along with impassioned — and at times ugly — debate in both the House and Senate ended with legislation making its way to the governor’s desk. Lawmakers also mandated student athletes compete as their sex assigned at birth. As debate raged, Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey launched an investigation into clinics that provide gender-affirming care and pushed for an emergency regulation that would block access to care for children and adults. While most didn’t pass, Missouri led the nation in the number of anti-LGBTQ bills introduced this year, causing advocates to label 2023 “the most dangerous legislative session in recent history.” Democrats are already sounding the alarm for next year, with Senate Minority Leader John Rizzo of Independence proclaiming on the session’s final day: “When you throw red meat to rabid people, they don’t stop being hungry.” Tort reformersRepublican efforts to enact changes to the judicial system have historically run into a wall of Democratic opposition. But with GOP supermajorities, those Democrats rarely held off legislation for long. But this year, when a bill seeking to modify the statute of limitations came up for debate in the Senate, a handful of Republicans joined the opposition. Trial attorneys have had GOP legislative allies in the past. But in recent years, they’ve begun supporting more Republicans, especially those aligned with the conservative caucus, who have found common ground defending the 7th amendment of the U.S. Constitution protecting the right to trial by jury. “Some people say we’re for trial attorneys,” Sen. Mike Moon, R-Ash Grove, said during Senate debate earlier this year. “No, we’re for people. They should have a chance for redress.” MoDOT employeesFor the third year in a row, lawmakers rejected the Department of Transportation’s request to implement a market-based pay system to stem turnover. A decision in a court case filed by the Highways and Transportation Commission asserting it has authority to implement raises even without legislative approval has been pending since February 2022. While the court mulls the question, lawmakers pushed for a constitutional amendment stripping the Highways and Transportation Commission of its long-standing control of the multibillion-dollar state road fund. The effort faltered, but if the court sides with MoDOT it could give the proposed amendment renewed momentum. ‘School choice’ advocatesLast year saw lawmakers create a scholarship program for private schools and a funding increase for charter schools. Most anticipated supporters would build on those wins this year, and those expectations grew after the school testing data showed Missouri students doing worse across the board from pre-pandemic scores. But even a modest open enrollment bill barely squeaked out of the House before stalling in the Senate. And a bill seeking to fix the state’s virtual school law ran into a buzzsaw of opposition. Proponents aren’t going anywhere, are well funded and are eyeing 2024 legislative elections. But 2023 proved resistance hasn’t softened, and any changes to the state education system faces an uphill fight. The Independent’s Rudi Keller contributed to this story. Members of the Missouri House throw paper into the air to celebrate the end of the 2023 legislative session on Friday (Annelise Hanshaw/Missouri Independent).
This is an editorial: An editorial, like news reporting, is based on objective facts, but shares an opinion. The conclusions and opinions here have been derived by the guest contributor and are not associated with the news staff. As the 2023 legislative session wrapped up Friday afternoon, lawmakers from both chambers left Jefferson City with a long list of accomplishments. During the session that began in January, House and Senate members worked on numerous policy proposals ranging from tax relief for seniors to improved access to health care to enhanced support for Missouri’s most vulnerable citizens. In total, the legislature gave final approval to more than 60 pieces of legislation.
The General Assembly officially adjourned on Friday, May 12, which concluded the portion of the legislative session when bills can be passed. The governor will now have the opportunity to act on the various bills sent to him. He has the option to sign bills into law or veto legislation he finds problematic. The legislature will return in September for an annual Veto Session in which members could potentially override any vetoes made by the governor. Bills of Interest Passed During the 2023 Session Include: Providing Tax Relief to Seniors – SB 190 will provide substantive tax relief to Missouri’s older population. The legislation will eliminate the state income tax on social security benefits. It will allow all seniors regardless of their adjusted gross income or filing status to deduct 100% of their social security benefits. The House handler of the bill said, “Missouri is one of only 11 states in the country that still taxes social security. With the rising cost of consumer goods, it’s more important now than ever to put money back in the pockets of Missouri’s seniors, particularly those on fixed incomes. It’s time for Missouri to join the other 39 states that have already eliminated the tax on social security.” Saving Adolescents from Experimentation (SAFE) Act - SBs 49, 236 & 164 is legislation supporters say will protect Missouri’s children from unnecessary and harmful sex change drugs and surgeries. The SAFE Act would prohibit health care providers from performing gender transition surgery on young people under the age of 18. Until August 28, 2027, it would also prohibit a health care provider from prescribing or administering cross-sex hormones or puberty-blocking drugs to a minor for a gender transition, unless the minor was receiving such treatment prior to August 28, 2023. A violation of the provisions would be considered unprofessional conduct and would result in the revocation of the health care provider's professional license. One supporter of the bill said, “This is not against transgender people. This is just to make sure that children do not make decisions that could affect the rest of their lives, that they may not have all the information, that all of us may not have all of the information, and we want to make sure that they get that information.” Promoting Fairness for Female Student Athletes – SB 39 is meant to promote fairness in competition and opportunity for female student athletes. The bill would prohibit a private school, public school district, public charter school, or public or private institution of postsecondary education from allowing any student to compete in an athletics competition designated for the opposite sex, as determined by the student's official birth certificate. The bill clarifies that biological sex is only correctly stated on birth certificates if it was entered at or near the time of birth or modified to correct scrivener's error. The bill also makes it clear a female student may be allowed to compete in an athletics competition designated for male students if there is no such athletics competition for female students offered. The bill’s handler said the legislation is important because, “Biological males are bigger, they are stronger, and they are faster. The majority of women simply cannot compete. Years of competing against biological males will wipe out female sports as we know it. We must protect the gains women have made in the last 50 years.” Developing Missouri’s Workforce - HB 417 will help employers develop and retain skilled workers. The bill creates a competitive grant program that will be administered by the Department of Economic Development to reimburse employers who help their employees earn short-term certificates or credentials in vital areas for Missouri’s economy. Examples of short-term credentials that would be eligible for reimbursement through the program include manufacturing technology, cybersecurity, welding, certified nursing assistant and HVAC certification. The sponsor said, “It gives businesses the chance to grow their own workers.” He noted that many businesses are having a hard time finding the workers they need and the workers they do have may not have the skills a business would like. The bill would give companies the opportunity to “grow their own by using a program through the Department of Economic Development where they can send them to upskill their credentials.” Encouraging Businesses to Recruit and Train Interns and Apprentices – HB 417 will encourage employers to train the workers of the future by offering paid internships and apprenticeships. The bill would create the Intern and Apprentice Recruitment Act to incentivize businesses to increase the number of internships and internship opportunities in the state. Under the act, employers would qualify for a tax credit of $1,500 for each intern or apprentice hired at a pay rate equal to or greater than minimum wage. Interns would have to work a minimum of 60 hours per month for two consecutive months to qualify. Apprentices would need to complete a minimum of 2,000 hours of on-the-job training and 144 hours of technical instruction. An employer could not receive more than $9,000 in tax credits in a single year and the program would have a total cap of $1 million in tax credits each year. The House sponsor of the provision noted Missouri is already a national leader in new apprenticeships and completed apprenticeships. However, the state continues to be an exporter of potential workers as Missouri loses approximately 20,000 undergraduates to jobs outside the state each year. He said the legislation will further promote a job training system that will help keep more of the talent produced by Missouri’s universities in the state. Attracting Economic Activity to Missouri - SB 94 would help attract revenue-generating film and entertainment projects to the state. Dubbed the “Show MO Act,” the legislation would establish tax credits for film projects starting at 20 percent of specified costs, with opportunities for additional credits as other criteria are met. The bill would allow film productions additional credits when at least half of filming is done in Missouri; at least 15% takes place in rural or blighted areas; at least three of a project’s departments hire a Missourian ready to advance in their field; or the project positively portrays the state or something in it. The film tax incentives would expire at the end of 2029 unless the legislature votes to extend them. The House handler said that because Missouri currently lacks incentives to attract film and television projects, “there is great business leaving this state.” He said that by passing the bill, “We’re going to be an economic driver. There’s going to be a bunch of money coming into this state, and I believe [this bill] is a long time coming and we’re going to join the club of growth and economic opportunity.” Bringing Music Industry Dollars to the State - SB 94 aims to bring more music industry dollars to the state by authorizing credits for rehearsal and tour expenses for live tours and associated rehearsals. The credits would be for 30% of tour or rehearsal expenses, capped at $1 million if expenses are less than $4 million. No taxpayer could get a credit greater than $2 million for expenses between $4 and $8 million; nor greater than $3 million for expenses exceeding $8 million. Combined credits are limited to $8 million per fiscal year. The tour and rehearsal credits would expire at the end of 2030 unless extended. The House handler explained, “There must be at least $1 million spent with Missouri music vendors, they’ve got to rehearse in a qualified facility for a minimum of ten days, they also have to then do two concerts within the State of Missouri.” Expanding Access to Physical Therapy - HBs 115 & 99 and SB 51 promote individual choice in health care decisions through the elimination of unnecessary and burdensome regulations to allow patients to have direct access to physical therapy. The legislation would allow physical therapists with a doctorate of physical therapy or five years of clinical experience to evaluate and initiate treatment on a patient without a prescription or referral from an approved health care provider. The bills also state physical therapists must refer to an approved health care provider patients with certain conditions, including those with conditions beyond the scope of practice of physical therapy, as well as any patient who does not demonstrate measurable or functional improvement within ten visits or 30 days, whichever occurs first. The House sponsor of the provision said, “This legislation allows Missourians to have direct access to physical therapists. Currently, patients must visit a physician before they can make an appointment with a physical therapist. This costs the patient additional money and delays them from returning to their life before the injury.” Helping People off of State Assistance - SB 106 and SBs 45 & 90 authorize a transitional program meant to help people get off of state assistance gradually as their income increases. Supporters say the state’s assistance programs for low-income Missourians trap people in poverty because if they accept a raise that puts them above a program’s limits, they could lose more in state benefits than they gain from a raise. One supporter of the measure said it will let people incrementally transition off of state assistance. He said, “Trying to create this transitional system that encouraged people to work, that encouraged people to take those raises and to start to work their way up the income ladder and to hopefully, once this goes into effect, actually reduce the number of people receiving benefits in the state.” Empowering Missourians with Disabilities - SB 106 and SBs 45 & 90 could allow individuals with disabilities to finally be able to advance in their careers without worry of losing state assistance. The bills authorize changes to the state’s Ticket to Work health insurance program that would increase the limit to how much a person can earn before they lose benefits, and would not count up to $50,000 of a spouse’s income toward that limit. The legislation would also direct state agencies to have policies to recruit and keep employees with disabilities and create competitive ways to integrate them into workforces. “These are people who are actually begging us to work, who want to work, who want to get promotions, who want to seek new jobs,” said one of the measure’s supporters. She went on to say the provision addresses “the fiscal cliff, making sure that you don’t have to do quite as much of a tap dance that too many people in our state are doing, where you’re allowed to make so much money but only to a certain point.” Extending Post-Partum Care Coverage – SB 106 and SBs 45 & 90 would extend post-partum coverage under MO HealthNet or Show-Me Healthy Babies from 60 days to a year. MO HealthNet coverage for low-income women in the program will include full Medicaid benefits for the duration of the pregnancy and for one year following the end of the pregnancy. The sponsor of the provision said, “In 2019, 75-percent of pregnancy-related deaths in Missouri were determined to be preventable; those deaths that were attributed to things like embolism, hemorrhage, infections, concerns with cardiovascular health, chronic health conditions, and there’s one common denominator that can save these women’s lives, and that’s healthcare access.” Ensuring Access to Life-Saving Exams – SB 106 ensures coverage for diagnostic breast examinations and supplemental exams will not have a copay or deductible in an effort to ensure women have access to these life-saving exams. The bill specifies that any health carrier or health benefit plan that offers or issues health benefit plans that provide coverage for diagnostic breast examinations, coverage for supplemental breast examinations, low-dose mammography screenings, breast magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasounds, or any combination of such coverages cannot impose any deductible, coinsurance, co-payment, or similar out-of-pocket expense with respect to such coverage. “If we do not offer diagnostic testing without a copay, we will not receive the benefits of early cancer diagnosis. Diagnosing breast cancer early benefits us all. First and foremost it saves the lives of women that we care about and the mothers of our children. It reduces overall cost of healthcare,” said the House sponsor of the provision, who noted a study found the national cost savings with early diagnosis would be $26 billion each year. Protecting Missourians from Unauthorized Medical Exams - SB 106 and HB 402 and SBs 45 & 90 would ensure Missouri patients are not subjected to invasive medical examinations performed while they’re unconscious and without prior knowledge or consent. Legislators were told that medical students and residents have been allowed and even directed to perform anal, prostate, or pelvic examinations on unconscious patients as part of their instruction, sometimes without those patients’ consent. The legislation would specify that such exams on unconscious patients may only be conducted when that patient or their authorized representative has given consent; the examination is necessary for medical purposes; or when such an exam is necessary to gather evidence of a sexual assault. Removing Financial Barriers to Adoption - SB 24 would expand Missouri’s adoption tax credit, which offers a nonrefundable tax credit for one-time adoption-related expenses such as attorney fees, up to $10,000 per child. That credit is capped at $6-million a year. SB 24 would remove that cap, makes the tax credit refundable, and would have the per-child limit adjust with inflation. Supporters say more than 2,200 Missouri children are awaiting adoption and the bill will help remove financial barriers to allow more families to afford the cost of adoption. The House handler of the bill said, “We’re just saying, ‘Hey, we’re here to make sure that we invest in these kids and these families, help get them across the line, get them out of the system, get them building their futures together as a family.’” Combating the Opioid Epidemic – SB 189, SB 186, SB 24, and HB 402 would allow Missourians to have an easily accessible means to ensure their medications aren’t contaminated with the highly dangerous opioid, fentanyl. Currently in Missouri, fentanyl test strips are not legally available to test drugs or pills for the deadly substance. The legislation will allow the test strips to be legally available as they are in many other states. Supporters say the state has seen an increase in the number of overdose deaths from synthetic opioids such as fentanyl. According to the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services, more than 2,000 drug-related overdoses occurred in the state in 2021, with approximately 70% of those involving a synthetic opioid. Improving Protections Against Cyberstalking - SB 189 would create the Cyber Crimes Task Force with the intent of strengthening state law to better protect Missourians who are targeted and stalked online. The task force would be made up of law enforcement, victim advocates, victims of stalking, and forensics experts. The group will work to develop best practices regarding the treatment of victims of cyberstalking or harassment and actions to stop cyberstalking and harassment when it occurs. Cracking Down on Distracted Driving - SB 398 creates the "Siddens Bening Hands Free Law" to prohibit a number of uses of electronic communication devices while operating motor vehicles. Current Missouri law bans texting while driving for anyone under the age of 21. SB 398 would prohibit individuals over 21 from texting while driving. The bill would also prohibit drivers from holding an electronic communication device, making any communication on the device, using the device to search online, or using the device to watch a video or movie. The penalty for violating the ban would be a fine, but a driver could be charged with a felony if they kill someone while driving and improperly using a cell phone. Drivers would still be able to use their voice-activated or hands-free functions on their devices. The bill specifies that law enforcement cannot stop a driver solely for using their phone. Simplifying Vehicle Sales Tax - SB 398 simply states that licensed motor vehicle dealers would collect and remit sales tax on all motor vehicles sold. The sponsor of the bill noted that vehicle sales tax is the only sales tax not collected at the point of sale. He said his legislation would put Missouri in line with the other 47 states who require dealerships to collect the vehicle sales tax. The sponsor said, “The way the process will work is that you will go into the dealership, you’ll do all of your paperwork. You will leave with a temp tag, but that will start the ball rolling for the Department of Revenue to issue your plates and you will receive them in the mail.” Closing Remarks In closing I would like to encourage my readers to continue to be involved in the affairs of government. Thomas Jefferson once stated that liberty is best preserved by the people themselves stating that they are the “only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty”. I whole heartedly agree with Thomas Jefferson on this issue. It is always my intent to keep my constituents informed and to retain open transparency. If you have any questions or concerns please contact my office at any time. You can reach my office by calling 573-751-1487 or via email at jeff.coleman@house.mo.gov This is an editorial: An editorial, like news reporting, is based on objective facts, but shares an opinion. The conclusions and opinions here have been derived by the guest contributor and are not associated with the news staff.
House and Senate Give Final Approval to the State Operating Budget (HBs 1-13) The House and Senate have reached final agreement on a fiscally responsible state spending plan that provides record funding for K-12 education, makes major investments in the state’s infrastructure, provides strong support for law enforcement and public safety, and boosts funding for state programs that serve the state’s most vulnerable citizens. Ahead of the constitutional deadline, lawmakers gave bipartisan support to the various budget bills that make up the Fiscal Year 2024 state operating budget. The budget as it left the House in March appropriated approximately $45.6 billion. The Senate then added several additional spending items to bring the total price tag of the plan to roughly $49.9 billion. The final version approved by the two chambers cuts the Senate total by more than $1 billion to bring the total funding allocated in the budget to nearly $48.8 billion. Record Funding for K-12 Schools Included in the budget is more than $9.8 billion in funding for K-12 public schools in Missouri. That total includes $3.6 billion to provide full funding for the school foundation formula, which determines funding levels for public schools across the state. The funding for public education also includes an additional $233 million to provide a total of $347 million to fully fund school transportation for the second time in as many years. The House and Senate also agreed to provide an additional $29 million to raise the minimum public school teacher salary to $38,000 annually. Additionally, the two chambers agreed to allocate $50 million in funding for Close the Gap grants that will help Missouri families address the learning loss that occurred as a result of the pandemic. Increased Support for Higher Education Lawmakers also expressed their ongoing support for higher education with their funding decisions in the budget. The finalized version of the spending plan allocates more than $1.4 billion for higher education and workforce development. Included in that figure is a 7% funding increase for the state’s public colleges and universities. The FY 2024 budget also includes full funding for the state’s scholarship programs such as Bright Flight, Access Missouri, and the A+ Scholarship Program. Legislators also approved $38.3 million for MoExcels workforce development projects on college campuses. Funding Increases for I-70 Expansion and Infrastructure Improvements The House and Senate also addressed one of the major spending items requested by Governor Mike Parson, who had originally called for the legislature to spend $859 million to expand Interstate 70 to six lanes in several areas between Kansas City and St. Louis. The final version of the budget expands that proposal to provide sufficient funding to widen Interstate-70 to at least three lanes in both directions from Blue Springs near Kansas City to Wentzville near St. Louis. The budget plan checks in with $2.8 billion in funding for the project, which includes $1.4 billion in general revenue and $1.4 billion from bonds. The House Budget Committee Chairman said, “This represents the single greatest investment into our transportation network in the state’s history.” Lawmakers also included $25 million for environmental studies for Interstate 44 and U.S. Route 63, and $50 million for safety improvements at railroad crossings. Strong Support for Law Enforcement and Public Safety Another point of emphasis in the spending plan is support for law enforcement and public safety. The budget provides a 20% pay increase for the Missouri State Highway Patrol and Capitol Police. It also includes $50 million for school safety grants for Missouri schools to make physical security investments on their campuses, develop safety plans, establish school resource officer programs, and increase active threat trainings. Additionally, the budget provides $2 million to the Missouri National Guard to assist with recruitment. Improved Care for Missouri’s Vulnerable Population House and Senate members also approved several spending items that will improve health care outcomes and improve services for some of the state’s most vulnerable citizens. The budget includes $300 million to build a new mental health hospital in Kansas City. Lawmakers also approved $171 million to boost pay for workers who provide residential and other support services to Missourians with developmental disabilities. The funding increase will bring their base pay to approximately $16 an hour. The budget also provides a $33.3 million funding increase for the state’s Children’s Division, which manages the state’s foster care system and investigates allegations of child abuse and neglect. The additional dollars will boost staffing levels by 134 employees. The bills that make up the budget now head to the governor’s desk for his consideration. Gov. Parson has the option to sign the bills into law or to use his authority to issue line item vetoes to reject certain spending items in the budget. Items of note in the budget:
Missouri House Approves Bills to Support Working Missourians and New Mothers (SB 106) This week the members of the Missouri House and Senate gave final approval to a Senate Bill containing proposals that would assist Missourians with disabilities, as well as individuals with low income and new mothers on state assistance. One of the provisions included in SB 106 is a transitional program meant to help people get off of state assistance gradually as their income increases. House members say the state’s assistance programs for low-income Missourians trap people in poverty because if they accept a raise that puts them above a program’s limits, they could lose more in state benefits than they gain from a raise. The sponsor of the measure said it would let people incrementally transition off of state assistance. He told his colleagues, “Trying to create this transitional system that encouraged people to work, that encouraged people to take those raises and to start to work their way up the income ladder and to hopefully, once this goes into effect, actually reduce the number of people receiving benefits in the state.” One of the supporters of the provision said it is the result of years of work and that it has “been a bipartisan effort to essentially wean folks off of assistance, whether it’s TANF or SNAP, and make it easier for Missourians to get what they need to be successful working citizens while at the same time making sure that all of their needs are being met.” The House also voted to add language to SB 106 that could allow individuals with disabilities to finally be able to advance in their careers without worry of losing state assistance. The changes to the state’s Ticket to Work health insurance program within MO HealthNet would increase the limit to how much a person can earn before they lose benefits, and would not count up to $50,000 of a spouse’s income toward that limit. It would also direct state agencies to have policies to recruit and keep employees with disabilities and create competitive ways to integrate them into workforces. “These are people who are actually begging us to work, who want to work, who want to get promotions, who want to seek new jobs,” said one of the measure’s supporters. She went on to say the provision addresses “the fiscal cliff, making sure that you don’t have to do quite as much of a tap dance that too many people in our state are doing, where you’re allowed to make so much money but only to a certain point.” The same supporter said the benefits that individuals stand to lose often enable them to have a job in the first place. She noted, “A personal care attendant, your health insurance, your additional services and equipment that you receive through the state that allow you to work. This would address and allow you to make more money, put that money back into the economy because if you make more money you’re going to spend more money.” Also included in the bill is a bipartisan plan to extend post-partum coverage under MO HealthNet or Show-Me Healthy Babies from 60 days to a year. The sponsor of the provision said, “In 2019, 75-percent of pregnancy-related deaths in Missouri were determined to be preventable; those deaths that were attributed to things like embolism, hemorrhage, infections, concerns with cardiovascular health, chronic health conditions, and there’s one common denominator that can save these women’s lives, and that’s healthcare access.” Supporters of the measure said it is an important pro-life provision. One supporter said, “We who talk about being pro-life, I don’t know how we do that and then cut off the most vulnerable of our society after 60 days.” He added, “I believe if we’re ever going to spend money [on benefits programs] it ought to be for those most vulnerable among us. Those very ones that we fought for them to be able to be born. We have to take care of them.” SB 106 now moves to the governor’s desk for his consideration. House Once Again Supports Tax Relief Package (SB 247) As the Missouri General Assembly heads into the final week of the legislative session, House members have once again given their approval to a legislative package that would reduce the tax burden on Missouri families and businesses. The House approved SB 247 with several changes that would reduce personal income tax, phase out corporate income tax, exempt social security benefits from taxation, and protect vehicle owners from excessive property tax assessments. The House had previously approved similar measures in the form of House Bills that were sent to the Senate. However, the other chamber has failed to take substantive action on the tax relief measures sent to it by the House. With the final day to approve legislation rapidly approaching, the members of the House expanded SB 247 in the hope of giving the Senate another opportunity to approve a tax relief package. The bill, as modified by the House, would reduce the state income tax burden on Missouri taxpayers. Under the bill, the state’s top personal income tax rate of 4.95% would drop to 4.5% on January 1 of next year. The bill preserves triggers put into place when the General Assembly approved a tax relief package last year. If revenues grow at a healthy rate and all triggers are met, the top tax rate would be reduced to 4.05%. The bill also includes a reduction for the corporate income tax that currently stands at 4%. The bill would drop the rate to 2% beginning January 1, 2024. The plan includes additional triggers that could eventually phase out the corporate income tax entirely if state revenues grow at a robust rate. Another provision in the bill would exempt social security benefits from state tax. The House also added a provision that would change current state law that requires assessors to determine vehicle values by using the National Automobile Dealers’ Association Official Used Car Guide. The bill would repeal that requirement and instead have assessors use the manufacturer's suggested retail price (MSRP) for all vehicles for the original value of all motor vehicle assessment valuations. The bill establishes a 10-year depreciation schedule that would be applied to the MSRP to develop the annual and historical valuation guide for all motor vehicles. The House handler of the legislation told his colleagues, “It’s a great tax cut bill of the people’s money we’re giving back to them.” The bill is now in conference where members from both sides will work to iron out any differences and reach a final agreement. The legislature has until Friday, May 12 to give the bill final approval. Show MO Act Approved to Attract Economic Activity to Missouri (SB 94) Legislation is now on its way to the governor’s desk that would help attract revenue-generating film and entertainment projects to the state. The House handler said that because Missouri currently lacks incentives to attract film and television projects, “there is great business leaving this state.” He said that by passing the bill, “We’re going to be an economic driver. There’s going to be a bunch of money coming into this state, and I believe [this bill] is a long time coming and we’re going to join the club of growth and economic opportunity.” Missouri last had a tax incentive program for film and entertainment projects in 2013. In the years since, Missouri has seen major motion picture and television productions bypass the Show-Me State for states with better incentive packages – even productions that are set in Missouri. SB 94 would establish tax credits for film projects starting at 20 percent of specified costs, with opportunities for additional credits as other criteria are met. Dubbed the “Show MO Act,” the House handler of the bill said the program is well thought out. He told his colleagues, “Investments have to be made inside the state before the credits are handed out. The Department of Economic Development will kind of have the final say in whether or not the credit goes out if it meets the program.” Improved film tax credits have been considered by Missouri legislators for years. Supporters have noted that when the 2014 movie Gone Girl was filmed in Missouri it brought $7.8 million to the state while providing employment for more than 110 Missourians and more than one thousand more who appeared as extras. However, other states have frequently won out on productions of stories that take place in Missouri because they have better incentive packages. The Netflix series Ozark, even though it unfolded around the Lake of the Ozarks, was filmed in Georgia. Even scenes taking place in the Missouri State Capitol Building were filmed in Georgia’s Capitol building. The House handler said, “When film producers call the State of Missouri, call the state film office to say ‘We want to film this movie here,’ and they ask the next question, ‘What’s the incentive program in Missouri look like?’ and when our film office has to then say, ‘We’ve got really great locations,’ because they can’t answer the question on whether or not there’s incentives in Missouri, there’s great business leaving this state.” One supporter said the bill is long overdue. He said, “This would be a fantastic economic driver for our state, and I don’t know about everyone else in here, but I’m tired of watching a television show and at the end seeing that Georgia peach emblem knowing that could have been shot in Missouri.” SB 94 would allow film productions additional credits when at least half of filming is done in Missouri; at least 15% takes place in rural or blighted areas; at least three of a project’s departments hire a Missourian ready to advance in their field; or the project positively portrays the state or something in it. The bill also aims to bring more music industry dollars to the state by authorizing credits for rehearsal and tour expenses for live tours and associated rehearsals. Legislators laid out limits for these credits as well. The House handler explained, “There must be at least $1 million spent with Missouri music vendors, they’ve got to rehearse in a qualified facility for a minimum of ten days, they also have to then do two concerts within the State of Missouri.” Those credits would be for 30% of tour or rehearsal expenses, capped at $1 million if expenses are less than $4 million. No taxpayer could get a credit greater than $2 million for expenses between $4 and $8 million; nor greater than $3 million for expenses exceeding $8 million. Combined credits are limited to $8 million per fiscal year. The film tax incentives would expire at the end of 2029 unless the legislature votes to extend them. The tour and rehearsal credits would expire at the end of 2030 unless extended. The bill now moves to the governor’s desk to be signed into law. Other Legislation Given Final Approval HB 131 allows the salaries of state employees to be paid in biweekly installments, as designated by the Commissioner of the Office of Administration. Supporters say the bill allows for flexibility in pay structure by state agencies which will be an incentive for workforce attraction. The bill is common sense and promotes fiscal responsibility, helping struggling state agencies and employees. SCR 7 creates the America 250 Missouri Commission. The Commission's principal purpose shall be to plan, promote, and implement public celebrations and commemorations of the 250th Anniversary of the Declaration of Independence and the 250th Anniversary of the United States of America. SCR 8 designates Campbell, Missouri, as the Peach Capital of Missouri. HB 402 modifies several provisions relating to health care, including: (1) Rare Kidney Disease Awareness Month; (2) do-not-resuscitate orders; (3) patient examinations; (4) health care advisory committees; (5) health professional loans and grants; (6) the Missouri Parkinson's Disease Registry Act; (7) voluntary non-opioid directive forms; (8) licensing of certain health care professionals; (9) prescription labeling requirements; (10) pharmacy settlements; (11) rural emergency hospitals; (12) at-risk behavioral health patients; (13) surgical smoke plume; (14) county or township-owned nursing homes; (15) supplemental welfare assistance; (16) fentanyl testing; (17) mental health services for vulnerable persons; (18) notarization requirements for certain mental health detentions; and (19) lead poisoning. SB 24 creates the "Missouri First Responder Mental Health Initiative Act." The bill expands the voluntary caner benefits pool to allow other first responders, specifically emergency medical technician-basic, emergency medical technician-paramedic, and telecommunicators, to have access to benefits through the pool for exposure to a diagnosable trauma stress event, or diagnosable cumulative post-traumatic stress injury over the course of a career. The act creates new provisions relating to communications during peer support counseling programs for certain first responders. With certain exceptions, detailed in the act, a communication made by a first responder or peer support advisor in a peer support counseling session, as well as any oral or written information conveyed in the peer support counseling session, shall be confidential and shall not be disclosed by any person participating in the peer support counseling session or released to any person or entity. HB 15 is a supplemental appropriations bill that authorizes more than $2 billion spending for the Fiscal Year 2023 state operating budget. HB 17 re-appropriates nearly $431 million in funding for state parks around Missouri. HB 18 appropriates nearly $778 million for maintenance and repair of state property. HB 19 allocates approximately $606.3 million for capital improvement projects. HB 20 appropriates nearly $3.3 billion in funding from the American Recovery Plan Act. Closing Remarks In closing I would like to encourage my readers to continue to be involved in the affairs of government. Thomas Jefferson once stated that liberty is best preserved by the people themselves stating that they are the “only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty”. I whole heartedly agree with Thomas Jefferson on this issue. It is always my intent to keep my constituents informed and to retain open transparency. If you have any questions or concerns please contact my office at any time. You can reach my office by calling 573-751-1487 or via email at jeff.coleman@house.mo.gov Missouri’s governor made access to child care a top priority. Where do his proposals stand?5/4/2023
by Clara Bates, Missouri Independent Missouri Gov. Mike Parson made improving access to child care a major part of his 2023 legislative agenda, declaring during his annual State of the State address in January that “early childhood care is essential to our state’s success.”
Since then, lawmakers have worked to enact his recommendations, but the proposals have faced roadblocks on their way to his desk. The Missouri General Assembly adjourns for the year at 6 p.m. on May 12. Here are where Parson’s major child care priorities stand:
Unlike his budget proposals, the tax credits face a more uncertain future due to opposition from conservative lawmakers in the Senate.
|
Categories
All
Archives
March 2024
|
Grain Valley NewsGrain Valley News is a free community news source published weekly online. |
Contact Us |