Missouri senators seek to bar kids from accessing pornographic materials from libraries

by Annelise Hanshaw, Missouri Independent
March 4, 2025

The Missouri Senate Education Committee discussed legislation Tuesday seeking to ban materials deemed explicit from digital libraries and hold library boards responsible for the content made available to minors.

State Sen. Mary Elizabeth Coleman, an Arnold Republican, filed legislation applying safety measures to “digital library catalogs” after hearing about explicit material available on a state-subsidized application used by public schools.

Her bill adopts the state’s current definition of “pornographic for minors,” which includes “has a tendency to cater or appeal to a prurient interest of minors.”

Sora, an app school districts provide to students through a program run by the Missouri Secretary of State, allows students to check out books digitally. But Coleman said some resources have inappropriate content and link out to explicit material.

“It provides access to a really broad variety of titles, many of which are fantastic, and allows educators to provide books they otherwise couldn’t afford,” Coleman said. “Unfortunately, there are a lot of other materials that are available, including sexually explicit material.”

She contacted both the Secretary of State’s office and the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education last year. Both told her it was a problem for school boards to handle.

Since 2003, libraries have been responsible for blocking access to pornographic content on their computers and internet terminals. Coleman’s bill would add digital resources, which can be accessed from home, to the existing statute and create accountability measures.

Schools would have to publish a list of required reading materials on their websites and allow parents access to digital library resources.

Parents would be able to challenge resources as inappropriate, with results of such claims available online. They could sue school personnel, including librarians, for not following the law as a result of “gross negligence” or intentional conduct.

Coleman said school districts should stop using Sora if they cannot thoroughly monitor its catalog.

Mary Catherine Martin, an attorney with conservative law firm Thomas More Society, said she helped draft the legislation to put the onus on schools.

“What we need is an enforcement mechanism that requires school districts to get ahead (of the content) and gives them the obligation of screening things before they hand them to the children,” she said.

State Sen. Rick Brattin, a Harrisonville Republican and chair of the education committee, said some content is “definitely not G-rated.”

“To me this is no different than if a school district just left a gun laying somewhere and then wants to act dumb,” he said.

The committee also heard a bill sponsored by state Sen. Nick Schroer, a Republican from Defiance, that would hold library board members accountable for material accessible to children. The bill would add board members to a 2022 law that makes providing explicit sexual material to a minor a class A misdemeanor.

When the law was passed in 2022, some expressed concerns that it would lead to “book banning” and suppression of LGBTQ+ literature.

Schroer said his bill would “protect the innocence and integrity of children’s learning environment.”

The legislation would keep the existing definition of explicit sexual material, which only applies to visual material.

Brattin, who helped draft the bill, said it didn’t include literature because of opposition.

“I think this is just a common sense approach to things,” he said.

The American Library Association included Schroer’s legislation in a list of 98 “adverse” bills. The organization noted a legislative push in recent years to “impair” librarians from providing diverse materials.

These bills come less than two years after a rule by former Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft that requires libraries to create policies preventing minors from accessing obscene materials. Thousands of public comments opposed the rule, calling it censorship.

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].

Legislation would prohibit transgender Missourians from changing birth certificates

by Annelise Hanshaw, Missouri Independent
March 5, 2025

A Republican push to bar transgender Missourians from changing the sex on their birth certificates was briefly debated Wednesday morning by a state Senate committee.

The bill’s sponsor, Republican state Sen. Mike Cierpiot of Lee’s Summit, said birth certificates reflect “facts on the day you were born” and should be unchangeable except in cases of sex development disorders.

Cierpiot filed the same bill in 2023, but it was never debated by the full Senate. He did not file the bill last year.

The bill was inspired, he said, by a lawsuit in his district where a transgender student sued the Blue Springs School District in 2015 after being barred from locker rooms and multi-stall bathrooms. A jury awarded the student $4 million, but the case was appealed and is currently awaiting a Missouri Supreme Court opinion.

“The reason this (bill) is needed is because some courts are making decisions partly because of modified birth certificates,” Cierpiot said.

State Sen. Rick Brattin, a Harrisonville Republican, mentioned that some transgender Missourians have changed their gender marker on their driver’s license. The Department of Revenue recently rescinded that policy after pressure from lawmakers.

Cierpiot said he was less worried about driver’s licenses.

“A birth certificate is a historic document,” he said. “If someone wants to change things later in life, this is quiet on that.”

A Senate committee room was full of people waiting to testify on the bill, but the public hearing was cut short after 30 minutes with three speaking in favor and four able to speak in opposition before the committee chair moved to the next bill.

Sharon Dunski Vermont, a pediatrician from the St. Louis area, told committee members that the bill is dangerous for transgender people.

“People have been attacked, bullied and even killed because their documents don’t reflect who they see themselves to be,” she said.

Brattin asked Vermont about the Washington University Transgender Center, which was the subject of a whistleblower’s affidavit in 2023 and closed after state law made gender-affirming care illegal for minors.

Brattin criticized the center, calling treatments “detrimental to (children’s) health.”

Dunski Vermont, who worked there, said the allegations were untrue.

“I don’t tell you how to be a senator, and I would appreciate if you don’t tell me how to be a doctor,” she said, as Brattin interrupted.

Keith Rose, who is a legal advocate with nonprofit law firm Center for Growing Justice, said he has assisted people changing their birth certificates as part of his work.

He called birth certificates “living documents,” instead of historic.

“It is common sense that birth records should reflect your lived reality,” he said.

Few judges are willing to issue court orders to change birth certificates, Rose said, and it has grown more difficult in the past three years.

The committee did not take action on the bill Wednesday.

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].

Tax cut push by Missouri Republicans begins with $300M capital gains legislation

by Rudi Keller, Missouri Independent
January 22, 2025

Missouri Republicans took their first legislative steps toward a promised tax cut on Tuesday, with a Senate committee debating a $300 million exemption for  profits from the sale of a farm, business or assets like cryptocurrency.

The proposal to exempt long-term capital gains from Missouri income tax would help bring investment and jobs to the state, said state Sen. Curtis Trent.

“The capital gains tax is a tax that punishes investment,” said Trent, a Republican from Springfield. “It makes it more difficult to attract dollars, and with the jobs and business growth into the state of Missouri, it disincentivizes savings and investment by individuals.”

Trent presented the bill to the Senate General Laws Committee, which he chairs. No vote was held.

The bill is the first of many ideas for cutting taxes expected to get traction this session. Gov. Mike Kehoe campaigned for office on a promise to reduce, and eventually eliminate the state income tax.

Flat tax proposals aim to put Missouri on path to eliminate income tax

Kehoe has not discussed the details of his plan publicly, but is expected to include his ideas when he presents his budget and policy message on Jan. 28 to the General Assembly.

On Wednesday, the Missouri House will hold its first hearing on tax proposals, with bills to eliminate all tax brackets to create a flat tax, to repeal the corporate income tax and to create a fund to finance future tax cuts before the Special Committee on Tax Reform.

Missouri has healthy fund balances in the treasury — $4.1 billion in just the general revenue fund as of Dec. 31 — but tax receipts are expected to fall slightly or remain flat for at least the coming 18 months.

The capital gains tax cut would reduce general revenue — about $13.4 billion in the year that ended June 30 — by about $300 million annually, the fiscal note for Trent’s bill states.

Repealing the corporate income tax would reduce revenue by about $900 million annually. 

No fiscal note has been prepared for the proposal to eliminate tax brackets and charge all taxpayers the current top rate, 4.7%, for all taxable income. The major impact of that change would be to increase, by about $70, the tax each individual pays on portions of taxable income below $9,000.

Trent’s bill heard Tuesday would eliminate the state income tax on capital gains by allowing taxpayers to deduct the portion of their income reported as long-term capital gains on their federal returns. For someone with about $50,000 in capital gains income, the savings would be more than $1,500, which is what someone who only had wage income of that amount would pay in state income tax.

Income from long-term capital gains is easily identifiable from federal returns because it is treated differently than income from wages. Under federal tax law, profits on assets held for more than a year are taxed at lower rates than wages or the gains from assets sold after a short period.

“It unfairly taxes inflation, and we have been in a high inflation environment for the last several years,” Trent said. “The increase in the value of an asset is not necessarily because of true gains in that asset’s value, but just in the devaluation of the currency.”

Only eight states, including Tennessee, exempt all capital gains from income taxes. Two states that border on Missouri, Arkansas, and Oklahoma, have special treatment for some capital gains. For example, Oklahoma exempts capital gains on the sale of Oklahoma property owned for at least five consecutive years, or the sale of stock in an Oklahoma company or partnership held for at least two consecutive years.

Business and farm groups testified that eliminating the tax on capital gains would promote the transfer of agricultural land from retiring farmers to new owners, encourage small business owners to expand and preserve family fortunes.

“This would be very helpful for small businesses that have had a rough few years,” said Brad Jones, lobbyist for the National Federation of Independent Businesses.

The main opposition to major tax cuts this year is likely to come from groups concerned about possible future spending cuts.

Brian Colby, a lobbyist for the liberal Missouri Budget Project, testified in opposition, citing the “large fiscal note and no offset on revenue losses.” 

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:

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

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

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

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.”

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 Chamber backs Democrats in two swing state Senate districts

by Jason Hancock, Missouri Independent
October 10, 2024

Democrats hoping to chip away at the GOP supermajority in the Missouri Senate got a big boost last week when its candidates in two swing districts won the endorsement of the state’s largest business advocacy group. 

In a third hotly contested district, the Missouri Chamber of Commerce and Industry chose not to weigh in at all. 

The Missouri Chamber, an historically Republican-leaning organization, formally endorsed Democrat Robert Sauls in Senate District 11 and Joe Pereles in Senate District 15. 

In a third race — for the 17th Senate District in Clay County — the chamber declined to endorse Republican Jerry Nolte or Democrat Maggie Nurrenbern. 

Of the 17 Senate races taking place this year across the state, the 11th, 15th and 17th are widely considered the most competitive. 

Sauls, a Democrat from Independence, is taking on Republican Joe Nicola of Grain Valley for the seat vacated by former Democratic state Sen. John Rizzo. 

Both Pereles and his GOP rival, David Gregory, are from Chesterfield. They’re vying for the seat being vacated by Republican state Sen. Andrew Koenig. 

Nurrenbern, a state representative from Kansas City, and Nolte, a former state lawmaker and presiding county commissioner, hope to replace former Democratic state Sen. Lauren Arthur. 

In announcing its endorsements, the chamber pointed to “political dysfunction” that has derailed the Senate and “stalled key business priorities, harming Missouri employers and families.”

Factional infighting between Republican members of the Freedom Caucus and the Senate’s GOP leadership has derailed the chamber for the last four years.The bad blood came to a head during the 2024 legislative session, when members of the Freedom Caucus waged a 41-hour filibuster that nearly upended the state budget. 

The 2024 legislative session was the least productive in living memory, surpassing even the COVID-shortened 2020 session in futility.

Nicola is widely expected to join the Freedom Caucus if he wins next month. Gregory is a trial attorney, a group that has bankrolled Missouri’s Freedom Caucus in recent years. 

“Ultimately, the Missouri Chamber PAC chose to endorse Sauls and Pereles because we believe they are strong candidates and will work with the business community to move Missouri forward,” said Kara Corches, the chamber’s interim president and CEO. 

In addition to its endorsement, the chamber’s PAC reported earlier this month spending $25,000 to support Pereles in the race. 

Republicans currently hold 24 of the Senate’s 34 seats. 

Democrats are expected to pick up one seat currently held by Republicans — the Boone County-based 19th District.  

Success in the 11th, 15th and 17th would give the Democrats 12 seats in the Senate, denying the GOP a supermajority for the first time since 2008. 

Sauls vs. Nicola

Senate District 11 in Jackson County includes eastern Kansas City and Independence. While held by a Democrat for the last few election cycles, former President Donald Trump carried the district in 2020 and 2016. 

Nicola, a pastor, overcame a massive fundraising disadvantage to defeat state Rep. Aaron McMullin in the August GOP primary, spending roughly $100,000 this cycle compared to $500,000 for McMullin. 

His last report, filed in September, shows only $15,000 cash on hand. 

Sauls, an attorney and former prosecutor, was unopposed in the Democratic primary and reported $202,000 cash on hand in September. Since that report was filed, a political action committee supporting his candidacy — called Independence Leadership PAC — has received $130,000 in large contributions.

Sauls began airing television ads this week, spending $134,520 so far. Nicola has not purchased broadcast time.  

Nicola brushed off the chamber’s endorsement, saying that he will be a “pro-business senator” who will “work to cut taxes, slash governmental red tape and let the free market do what it does best: promote entrepreneurship and create wealth.”

But he mostly chalks up the Missouri Chamber’s endorsement to his opposition to “vaccine mandates, China owning our farmland and taxpayer-funded DEI indoctrination.”

“I completely disagree with these positions,” he said, “and the fact that my opponent is endorsed by a group with these radical policies is telling and completely out of touch with my district.”

Pereles vs. Gregory

The 15th District includes a large portion of suburban St. Louis County, including Chesterfield and Ballwin. It has historically been a Republican stronghold, but has slowly trended towards Democrats in recent years. 

Gregory, a former state legislator, won a three-way Republican primary in August, emerging with only $30,000 in his campaign committee and $4,000 in a PAC supporting him called Show-Me Growth PAC, according to disclosure reports filed last month. 

Pereles, a retired Drury Hotel executive, was unopposed in the Democratic primary. His campaign reported $650,000 cash on hand last month, with a PAC supporting him — called Fearless PAC — receiving more than $400,000 in large donations since the primary. 

Pereles is up on TV, spending $53,000 so far on ads hammering Gregory’s support of Missouri’s abortion ban and mocking his push to build a castle in Jefferson City for his family to live in if he were to win the Senate seat. 

The Missouri Senate Campaign Committee, which supports GOP candidates, launched an ad this month trying to tie Pereles to U.S. Rep. Cori Bush and arguing that Pereles is soft on crime. 

Nurrenbern vs. Nolte

The 17th District covers Clay County and was held by Republicans until 2018, when Arthur captured the seat in a special election and cruised to an easy re-election in 2020. 

Both Nolte and Nurrenbern were unopposed in the August primary. 

Nolte reported nearly $70,000 in his campaign account in a disclosure filed last month. 

Nurrenbern reported $375,000 cash on hand as of last month in her campaign committee and another $200,000 in a PAC supporting her candidacy. 

Since the primary, the pro-Nurrenbern PAC — called Northland Forward — has received around $200,000 in large contributions. 

Nurrenbern’s campaign has spent $440,295 on TV ads, while Nolte is currently not on the air. Majority Forward, a PAC organized to support Democratic Senate candidates, has also spent $264,885 so far running a TV ad in the district. 

The Independent’s Rudi Keller contributed to this story. 

Correction: This story was updated on Oct. 11 to note that Lauren Arthur was re-elected to the Missouri Senate in 2020. 

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 X.

50-hour filibuster forces more negotiations on GOP-backed initiative petition changes

by Anna Spoerre, Missouri Independent
May 15, 2024

A 50-hour Democratic filibuster forced the Senate’s divided GOP majority to finally yield Wednesday evening, stalling a vote ona bill seeking to make it more difficult to amend Missouri’s constitution.

Democrats have blocked all action in the Senate since Monday afternoon, demanding that the legislation be stripped of “ballot candy” that would bar non-citizens from voting and ban foreign entities from contributing to or sponsoring constitutional amendments, both of which are already illegal. 

The Senate passed the bill without ballot candy in February. The House added it back last month.

Senate Minority Leader John Rizzo, an Independence Democrat, on Tuesday said the situation presented an existential crisis for the Senate, as Republicans openly considered a rarely-used maneuver to kill the filibuster and force a vote on the bill. 

“Are the bullies going to win?” Rizzo asked. “Or is the rest of the Senate finally going to stand up for itself and say ‘no more.’” 

He got an answer just before 4:30 p.m. Wednesday, when state Sen. Mary Elizabeth Coleman, an Arnold Republican and the bill’s sponsor, surprised many of her colleagues by asking that the Senate send the bill back to the House for more negotiations on whether to include “ballot candy.” 

Republicans simply didn’t have the votes to kill the filibuster, she said, and Democrats showed no signs of relenting before session ends at 6 p.m. Friday. 

“These policies are too important to play political games with,” Coleman said, adding that going to conference to work out a deal with the House was the only way to keep it alive in the face of unrelenting Democratic opposition. “In a perfect world, we would not be between a rock and a hard place.”

The sudden change in tactics was not well-taken by members of the Freedom Caucus, who argued sending the bill back to the House with only two days left before adjournment puts its chances at risk. 

Tim Jones, a former Missouri House speaker and current director of the state’s Freedom Caucus, wrote on social media Thursday evening that Coleman “effectively killed her own bill today.”

Ultimately, the Senate voted 18-13 to send the bill to conference, with nine Republicans joining nine Democrats in support of the move.

If the bill passes, Missourians would have the opportunity to vote later this year on whether or not to require constitutional amendments be approved by both a majority of votes statewide and a majority of votes in five of the state’s eight congressional districts. 

Right now, amendments pass with a simple majority.

A possible vote on abortion in November is a catalyst behind the battle over the bill, as a campaign to legalize abortion up to the point of fetal viability is on the path to the statewide ballot. 

Republicans have said that without raising the threshold for changing the state’s constitution, a constitutional right to abortion will likely become the law of the land in Missouri. 

State Sen. Rick Brattin, a Harrisonville Republican and a member of the Freedom Caucus, tipped his hat to the Democrats’ “wherewithal” before scorning some of his Republican colleagues. 

“Unfortunately, this Republican Party has no backbone to fight for what is right for life,” he shouted from the Senate floor. “ … They will have the blood of the innocent on their heads. Shame on this party.”

Coleman’s move also came as a surprise to state Rep. Alex Riley, a Republican from Springfield who sponsored the initiative petition bill in the House. 

“We’re going to have to have some conversations tonight to figure out what exactly it is they have in mind,” he said. “We will be having many conversations over the next few hours.”

House Speaker Dean Plocher said he was pleased to see the impasse broken, adding that the House is ready to work on a final version that can be passed. 

He didn’t promise to remove the “ballot candy” added by the House. 

Fate of ‘game changer’ women’s health care bill in hands of Missouri Senate

Asked if Coleman made a tactical mistake in telling the House to restore the items removed during the first Democratic filibuster, Plocher said he hadn’t spoken to Coleman and declined to speculate on whether the outcome would have been different had she not.

Democrats left the Senate Wednesday evening declaring victory. 

“This body by and large is a staunch supporter of democracy. That doesn’t just go for one side of the aisle. That goes for both sides,” Rizzo said. “This is not protecting the ballot for Democrats or Republicans or one issue or the other issue that you might like or dislike. This protects the ballot box for Republicans and Democrats alike for the future.”

Rizzo maintained that removing the ballot candy is still the only way Democrats will allow the bill to get through the Senate if it returns from the House. 

“If you haven’t figured that out in the last three or four days, I don’t know where you’ve been,” Rizzo said, adding: “Hopefully sleeping.” 

As the Senate prepared to vote, state Sen. Bill Eigel, a Weldon Spring Republican and Freedom Caucus member, warned his colleagues not to be optimistic that the Senate will come back Thursday and pass other bills waiting in the pipeline.

“If the hope is that this process is going to somehow lead us back to a place of engaging more legislation besides this, I’m gonna say this very clearly,” he said. “Don’t get your hopes up.”

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.”

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.

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.

Missouri Senate debate over state holidays devolves into shouting match

by Ezra Bitterman, Missouri Independent
March 6, 2024

The Missouri Senate became a convoluted mess Tuesday as a debate over ceremonial holidays quickly turned into an argument on transgender healthcare.

State Sen. Greg Razer, a Kansas City Demcorat, introduced a bill creating “Chris Sifford Day.” Sifford was a longtime staffer for former Missouri Gov. Mel Carnahan, a Democrat, before both died in a plane crash. Numerous amendments were attached to the bill by other senators, adding other ceremonial holidays.

Few senators were even present for the lengthy debate over what holidays to add and whether Missouri’s unofficial moniker “the Show-Me State” needs to be enshrined in law. State Sen. Lincoln Hough, a Springfield Republican, even watched some of the proceedings in the gallery among the public.

State Sen. Denny Hoskins, a Republican from Warrensburg, criticized the number of commemorative holidays the state has. There are over 100 ceremonial holidays in state law. Most of these are unknown to all but a few people, such as Jan. 16, which is set as Albert Pujols Day to honor the St. Louis Cardinal legend.

Hoskins offered an amendment that would to add an expiration date to the holidays included in Razer’s bill.

That amendment reopened debate from last year, when a bill blocking doctors from administering gender-affirming care to minors was only able to get through a Democrat filibuster when a 2027 expiration date was added. Hoskins has filed a bill this year that would remove that expiration date.

Razer, the Senate’s only openly gay member, opposed the amendment, saying he felt that Hoskins can’t, in good conscience, propose the expiration of a holiday when he can’t keep a promise on the deal made last year. Hoskins retorted that he never agreed not to file a law removing the expiration date on the transgender legislation at some point in the future.

After continuing back and forth, the debate reached a climax when Hoskins said: “We want to talk little kids having their private parts cut off?” in a reference to medical procedures for gender transition.

Razer responded: “How many times did you say that ridiculous lie last year?”

Then, after screaming at each other for a few seconds, Senate President Pro Tem Caleb Rowden banged his gavel and called the chamber to order. The bill was set aside, ending what was meant to be a procedural debate on ceremonial holidays that became a fiery referendum on gender policy.

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]. 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.

Capitol Perspectives: The legacy of Missouri’s 2023 legislative session

by Phill Brooks, Missouri Independent
October 4, 2023

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.

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.

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: [email protected]. Follow Missouri Independent on Facebook and Twitter.