Oxford: Call to Action Around Senate Bill 188

Friends, Allies, and Constituents,

I am pleased to share the news that Gov. Jay Nixon will have announced (or will shortly announce) his plans to veto Senate Bill (SB) 188 by the time you receive this. SB 188 and House Bill 205 are steps backward on civil rights protections in Missouri. To read a letter to the editor about these bills by Missouri Legislative Black Caucus Chair Rep. Steve Webb of Florissant, go to:

http://www.stltoday.com/news/opinion/mailbag/article_4605704b-444e-5631-a348-6edca9f10369.html

You also may learn more about what's at stake in these bills by watching the video at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57wEaIyiqMc

Please take time to contact Gov. Nixon to thank him for his planned veto of SB 188. You can do this by e-mail, regular mail or telephone, using the following contact information:

E-mail: http://governor.mo.gov/contact

Mail:
Office of Governor Jay Nixon
P.O. Box 720
Jefferson City, MO 65102

Phone:
573-751-3222

SB 188 and HB 205 were pushed by the Missouri Chamber of Commerce as part of their "Fix the Six" so-called pro-business agenda. See that full agenda at:

http://mochamber.com/mx/hm.asp?id=010411fixthesix

Instead of "Fix the Six" as the St. Louis Post-Dispatch editorial board recently wrote, we need to "Nix the Six" - there is nothing pro-business about this attack on human rights and Missouri workers. Let Daniel Mehan, president and CEO of the MO Chamber, know that you recognize the "fix the six" platform as bad for Missouri, not pro-business. (His contact information is at the webpage indicated just above.) Companies that are growing recognize the need for a diverse workplace with office policies that protect the rights of all. The Missouri Chamber ought to be supporting bills like the Missouri Non-Discrimination Act if they want to improve Missouri's business image instead of putting forward a platform like "Fix the Six" that looks like it is stuck in the worst of the 1950's.

In addition to contacting Mehan and Gov. Nixon, let Sen. Rob Mayer, President Pro Tem of the Missouri Senate, and Speaker of the House Steven Tilley know that they should not seek to override Gov. Nixon's veto of SB 188 because Missourians do not support this retreat from civil rights protections. Mayer's e-mail is rob{dot}mayer{at}senate{dot}mo{dot}gov, and Tilley's e-mail is steven{dot}tilley{at}house{dot}mo{dot}gov.

In other recent political news in MO

Competing Sides Rally on Dog Breeding Regulations:

As Gov. Jay Nixon sought to build support for alternative legislation to overhaul new voter-approved regulations on the dog breeding industry, hundreds of Missourians on both sides of the issue rallied at the Capitol and Governor's Mansion on April 20 urging him to either sign into law or veto a bill on the issue that the General Assembly has already passed.

Lawmakers on April 13 granted final approval to SB 113, which would repeal all significant regulations on commercial dog breeders contained of Proposition B, a ballot measure 52 percent of Missouri voters approved in November. On April 18, however, Nixon announced that he had brokered a so-called compromise on the issue with representatives of the industry and animal welfare advocates. While Nixon's proposal would still largely repeal Proposition B, it wouldn't go quite as far in doing so as SB 113 in doing so.

Nixon's plan was quickly denounced by the Humane Society of the United States and the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, the two groups primarily responsible for funding the effort to put Proposition B on the ballot. Those organizations are also pushing Nixon to veto SB 113. A group of 70 state lawmakers and 10 agriculture groups sent Nixon a letter strongly urging him to sign SB 113, while leaving the door open to follow-up legislation if he does so. Nixon faces a constitutional deadline of May 3 to act on the bill.

Senate Approves $23.2 Billion State Operating Budget:

The Senate on April 20 approved the 13 appropriations bills that make up the $23.2 billion state operating budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1 to set up negotiations with the House of Representatives, which passed its version of the bills in March. Both chambers must agree on final budget for the 2012 fiscal year by a constitutional deadline of May 6.

The Senate and House versions of the budget are for the most part similar, although they differ in the details. Here are some of the difference reported by the Missouri Budget Project:

The Senate-

• Gave modest increases to each State Department for administrative costs

In HB2 (Department of Elementary and Secondary Education)

• Eliminated $1.3 million in grants for drop out recovery and math and science tutoring in St. Louis, as well as an early literacy program offered at Southeast Missouri University, but restored $300,000 for the Missouri Scholars and Fine Arts Academies
• Cut more than $2.5 million from Independent Living Centers, which constitutes more than 50 percent of their funding and will jeopardize the existence of the smaller centers.

Total increase (compared to the House proposal) amounts to approximately $13.5 million.

In HB3 (Department of Higher Education)

• Reduced the overall cuts in the core budget of higher education institutions to 4.8 percent. The Governor proposed a 7 percent core cut for higher education institutions.
• Used $1 million from the Nursing Board Fund to support 4 year nursing degree programs.
• Eliminated $2 million that funded a pharmacy doctorate program at Missouri State University in collaboration with the University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Pharmacy

Total increase (compared to the House proposal) amounts to approximately $7.2 million.

In HB10 (Departments of Health & Senior Services and Mental Health)

• Made additional reductions in funds for services in almost every service area. (The withholds made in last year's budget have already been assumed as permanent cuts.)
• Increased funds for overtime payments.
• Cut about $1.6 million from the Division of Community and Public Health.
• Cut $24 million from senior services (respite care, homemaker, personal care, adult day care, home-delivered meals and other related services).
• Cut about $1.5 million to Area Agencies on Aging for services including meals.

Total cut (compared to the House proposal) amounts to approximately $27.2 million in the Department of Health & Senior Services, and $5.5 million in the Department of Mental Health.

In HB11 (Department of Social Services)

• Cut $1 million from early childhood programs.
• Eliminated funding for the MO Rx program (assistance with pharmacy costs for low income individuals)
• Added $10 million to fund medical homes affiliated with public entities.

Total cut (compared to the House proposal) amounts to approximately $25 million.

For more on urgent budget issues, see: http://www.mobudget.org/. I continue to believe that now is the time for Missouri to recognize and address our outdated, unfair, and inadequate individual income tax system, as well as gathering needed information as to whether corporations are paying a fair share for the resources that they receive from the common good. Obviously we need to fund K-12 and higher education adequately, but we should not take from elders, peoples with disabilities, and families in poverty in order to do so.

House Endorses Industry-Friendly Payday Loan Bill

The House of Representatives on April 19 voted 96-58 in favor of legislation that would change state regulations on the payday loan industry. While supporters labeled the bill "reform," opponents said the measure wouldn't do anything to prohibit predatory lending practices and was little more than a love letter to the industry. The bill now goes to the Senate.

A key criticism of the measures, HB 656, is that it fails to limit excessive interest rates in a meaningful way. Under existing law, lenders are permitted to charge $75 per $100 borrowed for an annual percentage rate of 1,955 percent. HB 656 would allow lenders to charge $60 per $100 borrowed for an annual percentage rate of 1,564 percent. Critics also say the bill would weaken existing consumer protections. All of the support for the bill came from Republicans. Democrats unanimously opposed the bill as merely the pretense of reform and were joined by six Republicans.

JMO