MPA Capitol Report

Thursday

Osage casino amendment on the table in House committee

BY EMMET JAMIESON

missouri news network

JEFFERSON CITY — A House committee considered a bill Wednesday evening that would put a constitutional amendment before voters to expand casino gambling.

House Joint Resolution 23 would put a measure on the ballot that, if passed, would allow the Missouri Gaming Commission to grant a license for a casino on the Osage River. Missouri has 13 casinos on the Mississippi and Missouri rivers.

The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Jeff Knight, R-Lebanon, cited projections that a casino in the Lake of the Ozarks area could net about $100 million in revenue annually. The gaming commission taxes 25% of casinos’ revenue, which means the state would take in about $25 million a year.

Mayor Dennis Newberry of Lake Ozark, a city of 2,000 along the Osage River considered the most likely site for a casino, said the city needs about $25 million in capital improvement projects it cannot afford. He blamed few local taxpayers and a lack of ”meaningful reinvestment” in the city’s hospitality industry in 40 or 50 years.

Newberry said the $2.5 million his city would secure in casino tax revenue yearly would bring his community many opportunities.

Krista Watts, one of Lake Ozark’s aldermen, said that when she attended a state municipal league convention, the only four representatives in the room who said they were not struggling to generate revenue had casinos in their communities.

“The challenge that we have before us with 2,000 people but yet seeing millions of visitors a year is: How do we fund our infrastructure?” she said.

Watts said a casino would also benefit the seasonal Lake Ozark economy by creating more year-round jobs.

Don Abbett, a Miller County commissioner, said his community did not seek casinos — they were dropped in its lap. He said he only supports HJR 23 because he would rather have a state-approved casino in Lake Ozark than the alternative.

The Osage Nation is vying to build a casino in Lake Ozark, but HJR 23 does not affect its development directly because Native American tribes are not subject to state law. Kimberly Pearson, CEO of the Osage Nation Gaming Enterprise Board, said the Osage have purchased land in Lake Ozark and have started the process of clearing it for development.

Abbett said he did not support having an Osage casino in Lake Ozark because it would not have to pay taxes, giving it an unfair advantage over a possible state casino and not supporting the community.

Pearson said the Osage would make up what they are not paying in taxes with charitable donations to the community. She said the Osage have made several donations.

Rocky Miller, a former state representative from Lake Ozark, backed a previous version of the bill but said he was against Knight’s version because it would enshrine gambling license provisions in the state constitution. Miller, who is Native American, said the assertion that the Osage would take away from the community was insulting.

“To say that one does not contribute to the community and the other one does, that’s an out-and-out lie,” Miller said.

Bryce Crowley, legal counsel for the Osage Nation Gaming Enterprise Board, said tribal casinos have been an economic boon in Oklahoma, where all casinos are owned by tribes.

“’The number of gaming tables in an Oklahoma county is significantly related to large increases in median household income and large decreases in the unemployment rate, level of violent crime and level of property crime,’” Crowley said, reading a 2013 study of tribal casinos in the state.

Several lake-area residents testified against the bill for fear of a casino bringing crime. Pam White said a casino would attract criminals and erode safety. She criticized putting the issue up as a statewide ballot measure.

“What right do the citizens of Kansas City and St. Louis have to dictate how we live here at the Lake of the Ozarks?” she asked.

Rep. Josh Hurlbert, R-Smithville, and Rep. Jamie Johnson, D-Kansas City, said they do not believe the three casinos in the Kansas City area have created any additional crime in their districts.

Rick Moss, former mayor of Lake Ozark, said he believed a large casino would attract customers more easily than local businesses and drive them out of the market.

Rep. David Tyson Smith, D-Columbia, argued a casino would help local businesses because it would bring more tourists to town.

-----------------------------------------------------

Wednesday

Missouri voting law changes continue a national trend

KONRAD STRZALKA

missouri news network

JEFFERSON CITY — While Missouri residents are still adjusting to last year's voting changes, members of both parties are pushing for more changes this legislative session.

Voting rights continue to be a national debate and a number of Missouri legislators have introduced legislation to restrict access to the polls, while others hope to expand access to voting and rollback some of last year's legislation.

On Monday, Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft announced that he was ending Missouri's membership in the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC), a nonprofit, interstate organization tasked with helping states maintain accurate voting rolls.

In a letter to ERIC's executive director, Ashcroft cited the lack of addressing multi-state voter fraud, a requirement to reach out to individuals not registered to vote, and the lack of participation from neighboring states among the reasons for leaving the organization. Thirty-two states and the District of Columbia remain as members.

Missouri’s departure from ERIC is disappointing, said Boone County Clerk Brianna Lennon, telling the Missouri Independent that the state's voter rolls have gotten cleaner as a result of the membership in ERIC.

Voting changes enacted last year

In 2022, the Missouri General Assembly passed HB 1878, a package of new election laws which included a new photo ID requirement in order to vote.

Missourians now need to present an ID issued by the state or federal government to cast a ballot, which opponents fear will disadvantage elderly and low-income voters.

Among the other provisions in the package were rules banning paid solicitation of voter registration applications, banning non-Missouri voters from being volunteer solicitors, banning people from soliciting voters into obtaining an absentee ballot application, as well as a requirement that volunteers who attempt to sign up more than 10 voters must register with the state. A circuit judge placed a preliminary injunction on these sections of the bill ahead of last November's midterm. The preliminary injunction remains in place until a final decision is issued.

Another part of the bill created a two-week period of no-excuse absentee voting. Prior to this, voters needed a valid excuse to vote absentee. However, this change only applies to those who vote absentee in person.

State Republican leadership lauded the legislation as a way of protecting Missouri elections.

Ashcroft, an outspoken supporter of HB 1878, said that he believes the new laws made the voting process more credible without hurting accessibility.

“We’ve made it easier with the expansion of in-person voting ... I think we’ve made it more secure with the photo ID requirements, and I think we added credibility with all sorts of things," he said in an interview with the Missourian.

Ashcroft said that he believes that voter fraud is enough of an issue to warrant the new photo ID requirements.

“I don’t think it happens frequently and ... I don’t want to be someone that’s saying every election is at risk, but I also don’t want to be someone that’s saying voter fraud never happens — it does," he said.

Nevertheless, voting rights activists still say that HB 1878 makes voting in Missouri more difficult than it should be.

A national trend

Missouri was not alone in passing restrictions to voting.

Several states have already passed voter ID laws and limited absentee voting. Many states have voter registration deadlines of 30 days before an election, the earliest cut-off permitted under federal law.

In 2021, Texas passed sweeping legislation prohibiting safe voting methods implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic, such as drive-thru voting and 24-hour voting; requiring new ID mandates for voting by mail, which was already limited; prohibiting the unsolicited mailing of vote-by-mail applications; adding new requirements for assisting disabled voters; empowering partisan poll watchers; and requiring monthly citizenship checks on the voting rolls.

CNN reported that 18 states passed restrictive voting laws in the period between the 2020 election and July 2021.

After former President Donald Trump lost the 2020 election, some leaders on the far right publicly expressed doubts about the integrity of elections across the country and began pushing for further restrictions, some of which are incompatible with federal law.

The National Voter Registration Act prohibits states from making registered voters re-register, but that didn’t stop Pennsylvania state senator Doug Mastriano from proposing it in his 2022 gubernatorial campaign.

The Republican, who made a name for himself by aggressively promoting Trump's version of the 2020 election, wanted to throw out all 8.7 million voter registrations in his state and start over.

While Mastriano's proposed plan would have certainly been struck down by the courts, other states have successfully completed lesser-scale purges of the voting rolls.

An infamous case occurred in Georgia in 2017, when then-Secretary of State Brian Kemp removed 560,000 people from the rolls in the lead-up to his 2018 gubernatorial campaign.

According to public radio station WABE, Kemp maintained that this was important for preventing fraud. His team argued that most of the people purged in 2017 had likely moved away or died.

However, 65% of Georgians who re-registered after being purged did so in the same county, WABE reported, meaning they never should have been removed in the first place.

Missouri to purge voters?

Currently, several bills are being considered in the Missouri General Assembly regarding voting rights.

Among these is SB44, which would require local election authorities to canvass the registration records of all precincts in its jurisdictions every two years. At the authorities’ discretion, the bill states, the canvass may include “only those voters who did not vote at the last general election and those voters who registered since the last general election.”

Voters who fail to respond to notices and do not engage in voter activity by the second general election after the date of the notice will have their names removed from the list of eligible voters, under the bill.

While proponents argue that this legislation is necessary to ensure the accuracy of the voter rolls, opponents fear it would lead to people unnecessarily losing their voter registration status.

Joyce Elliott, a Democrat and former Arkansas state senator, knows the risks of enacting this legislation. Clerks in her state employ similar methods to those outlined in SB44 for voter roll maintenance.

“It’s just a white piece of paper that looks like any other throwaway mail,” she said. “There just has to be something better than that.”

Arkansas is considered one of the most difficult states in which to vote, partially due to strict regulations governing absentee ballots. Harvard's Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation notes that Arkansas had by far the highest rate of mail ballot rejection of any state, at 6.4%.

In December 2021, Elliott founded Get Loud, Arkansas, an organization to help mobilize Arkansas voters.

Prior to the 2022 midterms, Get Loud, Arkansas reached out to Arkansas voters who had been purged from the rolls. They helped 1,700 voters re-enroll, Elliott said.

“Some people didn’t even have any idea [they had been removed from the rolls] until they went to vote,” she said.

Elliott is skeptical of the intentions of those who propose stricter voting laws.

“People will say that it's not meant to be suppressive of poor people or people of color, but that’s what the effect generally is,” she said.

The pushback

Some leaders in Missouri agree with Elliott's assessment.

The League of Women Voters was party to lawsuits on HB 1878.

Missouri chapter president Marilyn McLeod firmly believes that voting should be as accessible as possible, and that voter fraud is too rare to warrant restrictions.

“Putting any kind of roadblocks to stop from voting is not healthy for our democracy," McLeod said.

Lennon, the Boone County Clerk, has taken a proactive stance at keeping voters informed in the midst of changing laws.

Lennon has advocated for transparency in the process, encouraging local residents to become election judges and volunteers.

She also co-hosts the Higher Turnout Wide Margins podcast which airs locally on KBIA with Eric Fey, the Democratic director of elections for St. Louis County. In each episode, Lennon and Fey discuss issues like voter education and election integrity with various experts.

“The more that we put rules in place that voters don’t understand, the harder it is for people to participate in our democracy, and I don’t think that that’s the direction we should be going," Lennon said.

Lennon is adamant that Missouri elections are already secure and well-run, and that any legislation assuming the contrary is not necessary.

The future for Missouri

A number of bills filed in the Missouri General Assembly this year by members of both parties are intended to enhance voting rights, not restrict them.

Rep. Eric Woods, D-Kansas City, sponsored HB740, which would repeal the voter registration deadline. Currently, state laws require prospective voters to register by the fourth Wednesday before the election — effectively 27 days, just three days short of the earliest deadline allowed under federal law.

Same-day registration is allowed in 21 states and Washington, D.C., while North Dakota does not require voters to register at all.

Other bills recently filed by members of both parties would enact automatic voter registration, remove provisions prohibiting convicted non-dangerous felons from voting while on parole or probation, and expand the list of acceptable IDs with which Missourians can vote.

These likely face an uphill battle in the legislature.

Meanwhile, Ashcroft has his own vision for the future of voting in Missouri.

Ashcroft would like to tighten the language regarding residency for people with multiple properties, as well as encourage more mail-in absentee voters to show up in person.

"I’d love to see more of those people going and voting in person. That helps strengthen our elections … but it also helps to make sure that those people’s votes count."

What to know for the municipal elections

Wednesday is the deadline to register to vote in the April municipal elections.

Denise Lieberman of the Missouri Voter Protection Coalition said a preliminary trial date regarding the photo ID portion of the bill has been set for November, with a hearing in April.

This means that, despite the lawsuit, voters must still demonstrate a proper state or federal photo ID to vote in the municipal elections on April 4.

However, the preliminary injunction on the voter solicitation portions of the bill remains in effect.

-----------------------------------------------------

Senate committee hears proposals for gun rights and restrictions

BY CHARLES BOEHME

missouri news network

JEFFERSON CITY — A Senate committee listened to pitches Wednesday for three firearm-related bills.

The bills include allowing individuals with concealed carry licenses to carry on public transportation, legal liability for businesses that ban guns and the criminalization of celebratory gunfire.

One of two bills introduced by Sen. Nick Schroer, R-St. Charles, would allow an individual to carry a concealed firearm onto public transit.

“Despite the fact that this has been prohibited in the law for quite some time, criminals are not abiding by the law,” Schroer said while introducing the bill to the Senate Committee for Transportation, Infrastructure and Public Safety.

While a permit is not required to carry a concealed handgun in the state of Missouri, the bill would require a concealed carry license to take the weapon on public transit. This change would provide more flexibility for those wishing to carry a weapon at all times.

“The problem may not be on the transportation, but the trip from your home to the bus stop, from the bus stop to your place of business and return,” said Carl Smart, vice president of the Western Missouri Shooters Alliance, in support of the bill.

“We don’t feel that allowing the passage of a bill like this is going to do anything to really establish more safety,” said Michael G. Winter, the state affairs consultant for the Missouri Public Transit Association.

Winter went on to say that due to the confined spaces of public transit, a civilian attempting to defend themselves with a firearm could potentially harm other passengers.

The second bill introduced by Schroer would require businesses that do not allow firearms in their facility to be liable for the safety of their customers. If a person were to suffer bodily harm or property damage while on the premises of a business that does not allow firearms, they may file a civil suit against the business seeking damages.

The bill specifies that the cause of the bodily injury or harm must be something that could reasonably be stopped by the possession of a firearm, including criminal action or attacks from dangerous animals.

Opposition for the bill came from representatives for Chamber of Commerce organizations. Kara Corches, a lobbyist for The Missouri Chamber of Commerce & Industry, said that her organization was concerned about the legal burden that would be put on businesses.

“Not only is our concern on any type of new mandate on businesses but also the opportunity for massive lawsuits against businesses,” Corches said.

A bill introduced by Sen. Greg Razer, D-Kansas City, is another attempt to criminalize the negligent discharge of a firearm within municipal limits. Referred to as Blair’s Law, the bill would criminalize celebratory gunfire.

Blair Shanahan Lane was an 11-year-old girl who was killed by celebratory gunfire in 2011. Her mother, Michele Shanahan DeMoss, has since worked with legislators to outlaw celebratory gunfire.

The bill has been introduced to the legislature in past sessions with bipartisan support, though it failed to be passed before the end of the session.

DeMoss spoke on how frequently she has been to the Capitol to support past versions of Blair’s law, saying the first iteration had been introduced over 10 years earlier.

“I’m just going to keep it short and simple, it’s common sense,” DeMoss said.

Following DeMoss’ testimony, many of the witnesses on every bill spoke in support of the effort.

-----------------------------------------------------

Tuesday

Transgender bill fills Senate session with talk — no action

BY OLIVIA SKLENKA

missouri news network

JEFFERSON CITY — State Democrats tied up the Senate for over five hours Tuesday afternoon, delaying action on bills restricting transgender youth rights.

Bill sponsor Sen. Mike Moon, R-Ash Grove, began discussing gender-affirming care — known as the SAFE Act — and his desire to protect minors from what he refers to as mutilation.

The bill would limit transgender youth’s access to gender-affirming care and participation in sports matching their gender identity.

“The intent of this bill is to protect youngsters to allow them to mature,” Moon said.

Sen. Denny Hoskins, R-Warrensburg, had sponsored a similar bill relating to gender-affirming care and vocalized his support.

“These types of procedures should not be performed on minors, whether it’s puberty blockers, whether it’s hormone treatments, whether it’s the surgeries,” Hoskins said. “We’ve seen and heard of examples where (medical professionals) been performing these on innocent kids.”

“All we’re asking is we put a pause on (gender-affirming care), so they can live as kids, develop, and then when they’re more mature, make a better choice,” he said.

In response to concerns voiced by several Democrats, Hoskins highlighted other age requirements that children face.

“We have other age restrictions. You have to be 21 years old to buy liquor or marijuana. You have to be 18 years old to vote,” Hoskins said. “But somehow we think that 8-year-olds, 6-year-old, 10-year-old kids are old enough to decide they want to transition.”

While the concept is not unique to Missouri, the focus of this legislative session stunned Democrats.

“I want to point out to anyone listening that there is not a single doctor serving in this chamber,” said Sen. Greg Razer, D-Kansas City.

Sen. Tracy McCreery, D-Olivette, expressed her discomfort over a legislative body making medical decisions.

“I’m extremely uncomfortable with us as a body saying we know more than physicians and healthcare providers with advanced degrees, advanced areas of expertise,” McCreery said.

Razer, an openly gay member of the legislature, said he believes the kids “are who they say they are” because he has gone through an experience he feels is very similar.

“I realized I was gay when I was five or six years old,” Razer said.

Razer attributes his original fear of coming out to the lack of support that was present within the local community and the dismissive statements that his feelings were “just a phase.”

“We’re going to hear a lot about ‘what about these kids that change their minds, that it’s just a phase they are going through, that it’s the cool thing to do now,’” Razer said. “There is not a high school in Missouri where it’s the cool thing for a 17-year-old boy to show up in a dress.”

Razer emphasized that issues surrounding gender identity, like lesbian and gay issues 30 years prior, cannot be disregarded as “just a phase.”

McCreery said that she believes the passing of this bill would create a group of “have and have nots.”

“We would be sending a message to Missouri families who came to talk to us at the committee level week after week after week,” McCreery said. “(Families) are going to have to decide to take their kid to another state for medical care. The only kids that won’t get it are the kids whose parents don’t have the ability to go to a state that provides life-affirming life-saving care.”

McCreery, Razer, and Sen. Lauren Arthur, D-Kansas City, all pointed out the irony of the situation.

Referencing the historical preferences of the Republican Party for limited government, McCreery said the actions that have unfolded in the chamber surprised her.

“This, to me, is the opposite of limited government,” McCreery said.

Over four hours later, Republican backers of the bill still dug their heels in.

“We need to protect our kids; this is what (the) bills are about,” Hoskins said.

-----------------------------------------------------

House moves open enrollment effort forward

BY CLAYTON VICKERS AND EMMET JAMIESON

missouri news network

JEFFERSON CITY — Open enrollment for Missouri schools is being given another try in the Missouri legislature.

An 82-67 vote in the House on Tuesday gave initial approval to HB 253 despite 24 Republicans voting against.

On an 85-69 vote Wednesday morning, the House gave final approval and moved the bill to the Senate for consideration.

The bill was amended during debate to place a permanent cap of 3% on student transfer volume and to prohibit considerations of race in transfer acceptances.

Rep. Raychel Proudie, D-Ferguson, underscored the stance of opponents, citing whether “the picking of winners and losers” will come to pass if open enrollment should become law.

Democratic lawmakers speaking in opposition focused on the needs of special education students, under-served and underprivileged students and those school districts from which students might depart.

Republicans in support of the bill spoke of the power of competition to improve outcomes, the durability and attractiveness of small schools, and the need for a new approach as more valuable than risk.

Rep. Jeff Knight, R-Lebanon, had an almost exasperated tone late in discussion, stating, “if you (a school) have more than 3% of students that want to leave every year, fix that problem.”

HB 253 allocates $80 million to fund additional transportation for cross-district students broadly and to assist with the further accommodation of transferred special education students.

House Democrats, however, were not convinced this is enough to guarantee the equal treatment of students. Several members from both sides of the aisle questioned the real power of $80 million.

Rep. Gary Bonacker, R-House Springs, described the $80 million as “a waste of money,” especially when considering “programs for special needs kids that are upwards of $50,000 to $100,000 for a single special needs student.”

Democrats predicted a slew of consequences should the status quo be upended by open transfers, such as disparities in educational quality, the destabilization of communities due to school declines, and the unequal treatment of students due to selective transfer acceptances.

Rep. Marlene Terry, D-St. Louis, said, “If we want to help our schools, let’s properly fund them.”

“Our communities deserve, and our children deserve quality education” and “we deserve to be given that by any means necessary,” she said.

Senate committee considers school choice bills

A separate school choice bill, Senate Bill 226, was considered by the Senate Education Committee. Sponsored by Sen. Nick Schroer, R-O’Fallon, the bill would authorize a tax credit “equal to one hundred percent of tuition costs” for a parent sending their child to a private school or public school other than their own.

Schroer wrote in a Monday Twitter post that his bill would put kids first and put an end to the “one size fits all” philosophy of public education, which he said handcuffs families to their zip code.

Schroer said in committee that when he was in third grade in Ferguson, a teacher assaulted him and his parents moved him to a private school to keep him safe. His parents had to take extra hours at work to afford it. Schroer said he didn’t realize until he got to private school how far behind his public school had been on teaching core concepts.

“I was the kid that grew up in the bad part of town,” he said. “I was the kid that wouldn’t have had that choice if my parents didn’t work extra, and as a result, I ended up being the first member of my family to go to college, go to law school and ultimately serve this body.”

Jamie Morris, executive director of the Missouri Catholic Conference, said it is his organization’s “basic view” that parents “are the first and foremost educators of their children,” and Schroer’s bill would give parents the opportunity to guide their children’s education.

If adopted, the tax credit would cost the state up to an estimated $1.3 billion a year starting in Fiscal Year 2025.

Otto Fajen, legislative director of the Missouri National Education Association, said the cost was too high and would put the legislature’s budget committees into an “impossible situation.”

School choice bills sent to full Senate

The committee also passed three bills that would expand school choice options. These bills now move to the Senate floor.

Senate Bill 255 creates a fund parents can use to finance sending their children to a private school. It is sponsored by Sen. Rick Brattin, R-Harrisonville.

Senate Bill 304 would allow charter schools to operate in charter counties and municipalities of at least 30,000 people. The bill is sponsored by Sen. Bill Eigel, R-Weldon Spring.

Senate Bill 360 would remove a cap on the cumulative tax credit amounts granted by the Missouri Empowerment Scholarship Accounts program. This is sponsored by Sen. Andrew Koenig, R-Manchester.

-----------------------------------------------------

Senate bills take aim at MSHSAA home school policy

BY EMMET JAMIESON

missouri news network

JEFFERSON CITY — Judah, Matthew, Lydia and Melody Meredith made the three-hour trek to Jefferson City Tuesday morning with their mother Melisha to testify in support of bills that would make it easier for them to participate in school sports.

Melisha Meredith has home-schooled her children for the last 10 years. She said current Missouri State High School Activities Association policy that requires home school students to take at least two in-person classes to participate in school activities has reduced her children’s opportunities.

“It’s just been a frustrating experience for our family because I feel like we have a lot to offer the community and we’ve always been involved in the community, but now I feel like at this point, we’re being separated from the community,” she said. “We’re just trying to advocate not only for our family, but for other non-traditional and home school students in the state.”

Two bills before the Senate Education and Workforce Development Committee would restrict school districts from being a member of “any statewide activities association” that does not allow home school students to try out for or participate in sports and activities the district offers.

Sen. Ben Brown, R-Washington, spells out in Senate Bill 411 that districts also may not join an association that requires home school students to take a class to participate in a sport or activity. Senate Bill 230, sponsored by Sen. Jill Carter, R-Granby, carves out a small exception if the class is “directly related” to the sport or activity.

Thirteen-year-old Judah Meredith said this is the last year he can compete in wrestling before MSHSAA regulations force him out. He said the Joplin area where he lives does not have competitive club teams like St. Louis and Kansas City do, and his lack of options would make it difficult for him to earn scholarships or compete in college.

Eight-year-old Melody Meredith, the youngest sibling, said playing soccer helps her stay healthy and make friends.

“You have heard from my three older siblings that they’re not allowed to play sports,” she said. “If nothing happens about this, I also will not be able to play the sport that I love.”

Jonah Spieker, a 16-year-old home-schooled student, is able to play for Webb City’s football team because he takes the requisite two classes a day. However, many schools around him completely forbid home school students from participating in activities.

“You have the power to change the lives of school athletes across the state,” Spieker said. “I’ve worked on this issue for years, and I would love to see it cross the finish line.”

Timothy Faber of the Missouri Baptist Convention pointed out that parents who home-school their children help to fund public school programs with their property taxes, and therefore their children have a right to participate.

Carter, sponsor of one of the bills, said the issue of granting home-school students access to public school activities has generated bipartisan support in the past.

No one testified in opposition to either bill.

-----------------------------------------------------

House gives initial approval for stricter sex trafficking laws

BY EMMA J. MURPHY

missouri news network

JEFFERSON CITY — Missouri’s laws surrounding the trafficking of minors might be changing after a bill received initial approval by legislators Tuesday.

House members debated a bill proposed by Rep. Jeff Coleman, R-Grain Valley, that would modify the offense of “enticing a child.”

The current statute defines a victim as a child less than 15 years old, but this legislation would increase that age to less than 17.

Currently, penalty distinctions for patronizing prostitution are under the age of 14 and older than 14. This bill would increase the age to 15, and make the under the age of 15 distinction a Class B felony rather than a Class D felony.

According to World Population Review, Missouri ranks 5th in human trafficking with 4.3 cases per 100,000 people.

Rep. Barbara Phifer, D-St. Louis, questioned why 17 year olds are not included in this legislation. According to Coleman, they cannot be included because of Missouri’s current age of consent.

Under current Missouri law, the age of consent is 17 years old.

“It seems we could make an exception for the purposes of being sex trafficked,” said Phifer. “A child is a child.”

Coleman agreed that the law should include 17 year olds and said it is something the legislature should consider changing in the future.

Rep. Sarah Unsicker, D-Shrewsbury, said there is a difference between consent and consenting to commercial sex.

Unsicker said that any minor who engages in commercial sex is identified as a trafficking victim, referencing the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000.

“For commercial purposes a minor cannot consent to sex. A minor cannot say, ‘Yes, I’ll have sex with you if you pay me’,” said Unsicker.

The bill needs one more vote from the House before it officially moves to the Senate.

-----------------------------------------------------

Senate bills take aim at MSHSAA home school policy

BY EMMET JAMIESON

missouri news network

JEFFERSON CITY — Judah, Matthew, Lydia and Melody Meredith made the three-hour trek to Jefferson City Tuesday morning with their mother Melisha to testify in support of bills that would make it easier for them to participate in school sports.

Melisha Meredith has home-schooled her children for the last 10 years. She said current Missouri State High School Activities Association policy that requires home school students to take at least two in-person classes to participate in school activities has reduced her children’s opportunities.

“It’s just been a frustrating experience for our family because I feel like we have a lot to offer the community and we’ve always been involved in the community, but now I feel like at this point, we’re being separated from the community,” she said. “We’re just trying to advocate not only for our family, but for other non-traditional and home school students in the state.”

Two bills before the Senate Education and Workforce Development Committee would restrict school districts from being a member of “any statewide activities association” that does not allow home school students to try out for or participate in sports and activities the district offers.

Sen. Ben Brown, R-Washington, spells out in Senate Bill 411 that districts also may not join an association that requires home school students to take a class to participate in a sport or activity. Senate Bill 230, sponsored by Sen. Jill Carter, R-Granby, carves out a small exception if the class is “directly related” to the sport or activity.

Thirteen-year-old Judah Meredith said this is the last year he can compete in wrestling before MSHSAA regulations force him out. He said the Joplin area where he lives does not have competitive club teams like St. Louis and Kansas City do, and his lack of options would make it difficult for him to earn scholarships or compete in college.

Eight-year-old Melody Meredith, the youngest sibling, said playing soccer helps her stay healthy and make friends.

“You have heard from my three older siblings that they’re not allowed to play sports,” she said. “If nothing happens about this, I also will not be able to play the sport that I love.”

Jonah Spieker, a 16-year-old home-schooled student, is able to play for Webb City’s football team because he takes the requisite two classes a day. However, many schools around him completely forbid home school students from participating in activities.

“You have the power to change the lives of school athletes across the state,” Spieker said. “I’ve worked on this issue for years, and I would love to see it cross the finish line.”

Timothy Faber of the Missouri Baptist Convention pointed out that parents who home-school their children help to fund public school programs with their property taxes, and therefore their children have a right to participate.

Carter, sponsor of one of the bills, said the issue of granting home-school students access to public school activities has generated bipartisan support in the past.

No one testified in opposition to either bill.

-----------------------------------------------------

MONDAY

Cybersecurity expert outlines worries to House committee

BY EVY LEWIS

missouri news network

JEFFERSON CITY — A former U.S. Air Force cyber operations specialist reviewed digital concerns ranging from phishing attacks to TikTok for a House committee.

Cybersecurity has received attention this legislative session, with several bills proposed thus far in response to security concerns.

For example, Senate Bill 380 and House Bill 668, would create one-time grants of up to $15,000 to employers for the purpose of “enhancing cybersecurity.” HB 668 has been approved in two House committees, while the Senate equivalent has not yet had a committee hearing.

In his testimony, retired Maj. Kevin Keeney, who has previously testified before the U.S. Senate on cybersecurity threats, expressed concern about the vulnerability of critical infrastructure to cyber attacks, including water, power and agricultural industries.

“Planes, trains, and automobiles,” Keeney said. “The logistics supply chain would be great targets if you were trying to achieve disruption in the food supply.”

When Rep. Bill Allen, R-Kansas City, asked how often important Missouri infrastructure was being subjected to cyber attacks, Keeney answered, “Always, all the time, every second.”

Cyber attacks can take a variety of forms. One example Keeney gave is called distributed denial of service attacks, which occur when a digital target, such as a website, is barraged with more requests for information than it can handle.

Rep. Adam Schnelting, R-St. Charles, the committee chair, asked Keeney his thoughts on TikTok, which has received considerable attention because of its ownership by Chinese company ByteDance.

“First and foremost, I don’t allow it in my house,” Keeney said. “Or on any of my children’s phones, which they don’t like very much.”

House Bill 919, sponsored by Schnelting, would prohibit any apps that are owned by the Chinese government or by a company that shares user data with the Chinese government from being downloaded onto government devices. TikTok has denied allegations that it shares user data with the Chinese government.

The move would not be unprecedented. In February, TikTok was banned on all Canadian government devices. More than 20 states have already banned its use on state-owned phones.

Famously, former president Donald Trump tried to ban TikTok nationwide in 2020 on national security grounds. As the New York Times has reported, new efforts in that direction recently resumed in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Keeney said that firewalls were not effective against modern cyber threats, and that he supported more intense identity verification measures to prevent digital security breaches, including facial recognition and multi-factor authentication.

When asked by the Missourian, Keeney said he felt new cybersecurity legislation on both the state and federal level was important.

“I think it needs both,” Keeney said. “The good thing about our democracy is the 54 states and territories are all like little incubation cells of innovation. Sometimes states are going to come up with great ideas that drive federal policy.”

-----------------------------------------------------