Missouri Press Association
Serving Missouri Newspapers Since 1867
Missouri News Network: Statehouse News for MPA Members
This report is written by Missouri School of Journalism students for publication by MPA member newspapers in print and online.
-----------------------------------------------------
Missouri News Network coverage this week focused on Senate agreement on rules that will make it more difficult to cut off debate, hearings on school and health issues and some of the first votes on bills in the full House.
If you have thoughts or questions, contact Fred Anklam at anklamf@missouri.edu.
-----------------------------------------------------
THURSDAY
Lawmakers want to strengthen child care allergy safety
By Ryan Brandt, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — Legislators are attempting for the third year in a row to require child care facilities to have plans for dealing with childhood allergies.
The House Health and Mental Health Committee on Thursday held a hearing on the latest attempt, House Bill 2365.
The bill also establishes “Elijah’s Law,” requiring licensed child care providers to adopt a policy on allergy prevention and response, with priority given to addressing deadly food-borne allergies. The bill was named after Elijah, who had a dairy allergy.
While in day care, eating a grilled cheese sandwich is what ultimately took his life. Bill 2365 aims to enforce precautions to protect other children who have allergies, potentially saving lives.
If passed, this bill would add child care facilities to the list of authorized entities for which a physician can prescribe an epinephrine delivery device.
This bill has been heard for three years and has gained bipartisan support. There is a worry among day care operators regarding affordability.
The bill includes grants that can lower the cost substantially for the EpiPens that the bill requires all child care facilities to possess.
Many representatives have expressed support for the bill, reinforcing the bipartisan support this piece of legislation has gained.
“I am very glad you brought this bill because this really does detail nicely, we have the epinephrine delivery device that we will be voting on, and I think together they can really help,” said Rep. George Hruza, R-St. Louis.
“Why has this not passed in the last three years?” he asked.
“Thank you for bringing this bill; it’s a good one. It’s nice to have a good, simple single bill,” said Rep. Burt Whaley, R-Clever.
Bill sponsor Rep. Emily Weber, D-Kansas City, noted after the hearing that “this is a bipartisan bill; everybody loves it. It continues to get voted out unanimously out of committees.”
But the crush of other demands at the end of the session has left the bill hanging in recent years.
“What we always say is it died in the Senate,” she said. “Usually has nothing to do with the bill; it just has everything to do with what’s going on in that moment. The bill just didn’t get pushed.”
The bill requires the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education to develop model plans for dealing with food allergies by July 2027. Child care facilities would need to implement the plans by July 2028 if the bill becomes law.
The bill dictates that a physician can prescribe epinephrine in the name of an authorized entity, not just an individual.
Pharmacists and other authorized dispensers may fill those prescriptions. Authorized entities, including teachers working in day cares across Missouri, may also stock epinephrine on-site for emergency usage under the bill.
Training is required for personnel working in these day care facilities. Employees must understand how to recognize anaphylaxis — a severe reaction to an allergy — and properly use epinephrine.
Parental or guardian verbal consent is required to administer epinephrine to someone under the age of 18 when the parent/guardian is present. If the parent isn’t present, and the child is in immediate danger, epinephrine may be administered without consent.
The bill also creates immunity from ordinary negligence lawsuits, thus providing a layer of protection for caregivers.
-----------------------------------------------------
Boone County representatives push to expand agriculture education statewide
By Samantha Jackson, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — House Reps. Adrian Plank and John Martin of Boone County are collaborating on a bipartisan effort to expand agriculture education in elementary and secondary schools.
House Bills 2097and 1905, introduced by Martin and Plank respectively, would enable schools across Missouri to incorporate agriculture-based lessons into their classrooms, provided they receive guidance and support from the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education.
The program was first tested in select schools before the COVID-19 pandemic, teaching students where their food comes from through gardening, caring for small animals and other hands-on activities.
Under the bills, DESE would oversee the curriculum and provide training and resources for teachers. The bill is designed to be flexible for teachers and not add to their workload, said Plank, D-Columbia.
The bills include approximately $116,000 in funding specifically for DESE staff to help direct and manage the program statewide.
Plank said his motivation for the bill is rooted in both his upbringing and concerns about food insecurity and agricultural monopolies.
“We’ve lost a lot of different strains of corn and other things that we grow because we’ve monopolized them so badly,” Plank said. “After all, they’re going to grow the one that makes the most profit, instead of what’s good for our health.”
Plank believes teaching children how to grow food without chemicals and how to compost can help preserve local farming and food diversity.
Growing up, Plank said he learned about agriculture simply by “playing in the dirt,” an experience he wants to make available to students statewide.
Combating food insecurity is a central goal of this legislation, and the bills’ sponsors hope this curriculum will teach students across the state to develop resourcefulness.
Plank also hopes the program will encourage earlier involvement in organizations like Future Farmers of America and Head, Heart, Hands and Health, two of the largest youth development organizations in the U.S. that focus on STEM.
Martin, R-Ashland, joined Plank last year to support similar legislation and shares the belief that the program would benefit students, teachers and the community.
Martin, who grew up on a farm, said agriculture education can open doors beyond farming, including careers in soil science, crop research and business.
“Kids enjoy learning by doing,” Martin said. “So, if schools can implement that in the classroom and then maybe have a garden or things like that, I think that those are all positives for nutrition, for health, for them learning about the agriculture field.”
Select schools currently implement agriculture curriculums but if passed, each lawmaker’s bill would give all Missouri schools the option to adopt agricultural education to their curriculum.
-----------------------------------------------------
MSHSAA responds to Missouri Senate bill and lawsuit
By Jack Schouten, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — The Missouri State High School Activities Association is feeling pressure from lawmakers and the attorney general this week.
Some lawmakers are intent on creating a state commission with oversight over MSHSAA, while Attorney General Catherine Hanaway filed a federal lawsuit Wednesday describing the organization’s board selection process as discriminatory.
MSHSAA executive director Jennifer Rukstad released a statement Wednesday afternoon urging members to rally against Senate Bill 863.
Hours later, Hanaway announced her lawsuit, compelling another statement by Rukstad on Thursday.
The Senate bill has been on MSHSAA’s radar for multiple weeks because it would turn control of the activities association over to a Board of Directors appointed by the governor.
An amendment that has been proposed to the original bill by its sponsor, Sen. Jason Bean, R-Holcomb, provides significant detail of how MSHSAA’s authority would be reduced under the proposed commission. The commission would oversee day-to-day operations and the appeals process and would force the activities association to present comprehensive financial statements to the board of directors three times a year.
“For a century, our member schools have governed their association. It is time to fight for the future of high school sports and activities in our state,” Rukstad said. “If our 724 member schools want to retain their ownership and governance of their association, we must engage.”
MSHSAA presented an offer Tuesday hoping to negotiate a new resolution that would be substituted for the bill. However, Rukstad said it feels there were no efforts or intention by the lawmakers to negotiate.
“I felt like the negotiations they had and that offer they paid to us didn’t really fit what we were looking to accomplish in this bill,” Bean said in an interview Thursday.
“We’re looking for transparency. We’re looking for fairness, and we feel what MSHSAA has done over the last not just few but many years has not accomplished that.”
Hanaway’s lawsuit claims MSHSAA violated federal antidiscrimination laws by refusing to consider a nominee for a leadership position based on the person’s race and sex.
“No organization, and certainly not a policymaking entity in charge of our children’s activities, will be allowed to defy and ignore federal antidiscrimination laws,” Hanaway said in a press release.
The lawsuit stems from a November investigation that confirmed MSHSAA policy ties eligibility for its two at-large board spots to race and sex, according to Hanaway in a press release.
“The lawsuit filed by the attorney general seeks to impose state control over the internal governance of a private association,” MSHSAA said in its statement. “Missouri did not create MSHSAA, does not fund it and does not oversee its operations.
“Nonetheless, the state now asks a federal court to dictate who may serve on MSHSAA’s volunteer Board of Directors and how its 724 member schools structure their leadership.”
MSHSAA says it is now a matter pending before the court so it will not litigate through the press.
-----------------------------------------------------
House bill would broaden law enforcement authority over drones
By Faith Jacoby, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — A House bill would put more authority in the hands of law enforcement in battling suspicious drones.
The House Committee on Crime and Public Safety held a hearing Tuesday on House Bill 2587, moving towards providing law enforcement officers more authority over drone threats in alignment with federal law.
The bill, sponsored by Rep. Mike Jones, R-Platte, would allow officers to take necessary precautions “against an imminent threat posed by an unmanned aircraft system to public safety or when the unmanned aircraft system is involved in criminal activity."
In addition, the bill “amends the offense of unlawful use of an unmanned aircraft to include when one is flown over a critical infrastructure facility.”
Jones emphasized the importance of new technology, and with it the threats it imposes.
"To keep Missourians safe at major events and in everyday public spaces, our laws must reflect today's threats," Jones said. "And this bill moves us in that direction."
The bill was supported by Lt. Alexander Vivas, testifying on behalf of the Missouri State Highway Patrol and Department of Public Safety, who described it as a modernization bill, aligning Missouri law with the Federal Safer Skies Act passed in December.
The Federal Safer Skies Act was passed to "expand the authority to use counter-unmanned aircraft system technologies to state, local, tribal and territorial law enforcement and correctional agencies, and for other purposes."
"House Bill 2587 updates Missouri's definition of critical infrastructure to address drone activity over sensitive facilities and large gatherings," Vivas said. "It allows Missouri law enforcement to access federally authorized training and tools to respond to credible threats."
Vivas stressed the technological and electronic tactics law enforcement officers would use in situations involving drones, utilizing tools released by the Department of Defense.
"We're going to be using highly technical tools that we're going to be trained on," Vivas said. "This is not an officer coming out with an 870 shotgun and shooting a drone down."
The bill allows the use of "detection, tracking, and identification methods" against drones. If seen as a threat law enforcement would be allowed to take steps including "jamming, hacking, use of force, or physical force" against a suspect drone.
-----------------------------------------------------
Golf cart regulations may be coming down the road
By KJ Drazen, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — A bill that would increase safety demands for golf cart operations in Missouri was heard and passed by the House Transportation Committee this week.
House Bill 1939, sponsored by Rep. Jim Murphy, R-St. Louis, would institute more precautions on the use of golf carts for streets and highways. These include that the carts must be insured, must have the proper equipment installed, will be required to travel on the farthest right side of the road and the driver must have a valid driver’s license.
State law allows any governmental entity to establish regulations for golf carts to be operated on streets and highways inside of its jurisdiction.
Murphy said he wrote the bill in hopes of creating a safer environment for these vehicles, as they are becoming more popular. He expressed his concerns for this issue by speaking from personal experience.
“We have a road that has a 40 mile per hour speed limit, it’s two lanes, hilly, and I came over the hill and there were four kids in a golf cart, two of them hanging off the back,” Murphy said in an interview. “How about something like seatbelts, especially when kids are flying off the back?”
A main section of this bill is focused on golf carts having the proper equipment installed, similar to automobiles, such as front and rear lights, working turn signals, an exterior mirror attached and safe tires.
This bill also states that golf carts will be prohibited from driving on roads with a speed limit that exceeds 25 mph and on sidewalks or bicycle trails. Local ordinances will be allowed to make their own rules regarding what paths are acceptable to be driven on.
The bill now awaits debate on the House floor.
-----------------------------------------------------
WEDNESDAY
House committee okays streamlined felony sentencing guidelines
By Jackson Cooper, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — A Missouri House committee voted to advance a bill that tightens prison sentencing standards in the state.
House Bill 3155, sponsored by Rep. Bennie Cook, R-Houston, sets new minimum terms to be served before someone is eligible for parole. It was presented to the House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday.
Currently, Missouri’s felony parole system utilizes flexible, earned-time mechanisms to shorten both incarceration and supervision time. Nonviolent offenders in the state can become eligible for parole after serving as little as 15% of their sentence. This program is typically accessible for those convicted of drug offenses and lower Class D and E felonies, excluding those convicted of violent crimes and sexual offenses.
Cook’s legislation designates a new, higher minimum percentage of each sentence that must be completed before the offender is eligible for parole — for example, 70% of a Class A felony is to be served before applying for parole. This percentage varies depending on the class of felony, but is higher across all five felony classes than the 15% time served threshold, where nonviolent offenders can currently become eligible for parole.
HB 3155 previously contained a range of acceptable percentages for each class of felony. However, the final, amended version of the bill passed by the committee has simplified those ranges to flat rates, Rep. John Black, R-Marshfield, said.
The bill would also remove the court’s ability to retroactively reduce prison terms, probation and conditional release for nonrepeat offenders.
Cook told the committee that this standardization would improve clarity in criminal courts while ensuring that high-class felons face time.
“I think longer sentences can help certain offenders,” Cook said. “Those folks who commit these dangerous felonies need to be serving longer sentences ... and they need to be rehabilitated the best we can.”
Colleagues across the aisle did not disagree with the notion that serious crimes deserve strong penalties. Instead, they argued that the bill would result in more time served for Class D and E convictions.
“I don’t think our concern is those higher crimes,” Rep. Anthony Ealy, D-Grandview, said. “It’s those lower offenses that give us concern.”
Members of the public also testified against the bill, citing experience in Missouri prisons as proof that depriving prisoners of a way out inhibits rehabilitation efforts.
“I’ve watched what happens when people are told at the very beginning of their sentence that no matter how much they change, grow, comply or take responsibility, nothing they do will ever matter,” said Sheena Rogers, executive director of the advocacy nonprofit Show Me Justice for All.
“When hope is taken away, behavior worsens,” she told the committee.
However, some still maintained that there was no evidence that the bill disproportionately impacts nonviolent, lower-level offenders.
Locke Thompson, the prosecuting attorney of Cole County, testified in support of the bill on behalf of the Missouri Association of Prosecuting Attorneys. He rebuffed the notion that the bill would unfairly target low-level felons, arguing that first-time offenders at the Class D and E levels are rarely sentenced to prison terms.
“When you’re someone who has picked up three or four or five felonies at that point, that’s when people start going to prison on those offenses,” Thompson said.
Thompson also clarified that the bill does not address the minimum sentencing requirements for felonies, but rather requires a certain percentage to be served before parole.
Beyond modifying sentencing guidelines, HB 3155 adds several crimes to the list of “dangerous felonies,” including sex trafficking, child sex trafficking, abuse through forced labor and a third offense of failing to register as a sex offender. Crimes categorized as dangerous felonies already see offenders serve longer prison terms with fewer opportunities for early release.
Cook’s bill was combined with an identical bill heard last week by the committee, HB 2637, into a substitute version that was then advanced. Voting proceeded on party lines, with the Republican majority advancing the bill 8-3.
The substitute version of the consolidated bill is now eligible for debate on the House floor.
-----------------------------------------------------
House shows bipartisan support for bill to help victims of child sex trafficking
By Anika Austvold and Noah Symes, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — The House gave preliminary approval to a bill that aims to protect children and vulnerable persons from trafficking and exploitation.
House Bill 2273 is sponsored by Rep. Ed Lewis, R-Moberly, who said on the House floor that he wants to use this bill to save lives.
The bill allows victims of child sex trafficking up to 20 years after turning 21, or within three years of discovery, to recover damages from injury or illness caused by child sex trafficking. Additionally, it would increase criminal penalties for crimes related to child sex trafficking and broaden eligibility for expungement of prostitution convictions regardless of age at the time of the offense.
Rep. Jeff Myers, R-Warrenton, said he supported the bill, citing concerns that under the current law, the wrong people are charged.
Meyers recalled testimony from a victim of human trafficking: “She made the brave move to seek justice against her attacker,” Meyers said. “If the officer opened up a case, she was gonna have to be charged, since she was engaged in the act of prostitution.”
Myers explained that many people coerced into engaging in prostitution are not children, but there remains a power dynamic. This bill removes the requirement that a person be under the age of 18 to have their record expunged of prostitution charges in the instance that they were coerced.
“There is no accountability for those who drive the market, the buyer of the person. And I’ll say it again, the buyer of the person,” Myers said. “We now recognize that so often the burden of criminal prosecution has fallen on the victims.”
The bill would increase penalties for child-related sex crimes, including life imprisonment for second-degree child sex trafficking committed by a parent or guardian, and raise penalties for patronizing prostitution involving minors.
The bill garnered wide support from both sides of the aisle. Rep. Michael Johnson, D-Kansas City, said he encourages the body to support this bill.
“We need to make sure that our top priority is to continue to love and protect our children; this bill falls in line with exactly that,” Johnson said.
The bill would create a Committee on Sex and Human Trafficking Training to set and review statewide training standards annually until 2031. It would also replace the existing trafficking council with the new Statewide Council Against Adult Trafficking and the Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children, and establish a dedicated Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children Education and Awareness Fund.
“This (bill) helps people,” Myers said. “If it takes one person, one person out of the lifestyle of being a modern-day slave, and puts them back on their feet, and allows them to recover and to go on to live a life of happiness ... I would encourage the body to support that.”
-----------------------------------------------------
Bills push limits on tech in elementary schools
By Nolan Haberstroh, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — Several representatives have proposed bills to require cursive instruction and limit technology use in elementary schools.
HB 1876 and HB 2115, sponsored by Reps. Renee Reuter, R-Imperial, and Peggy McGaugh, R-Carrolton, respectively, would require schools to include cursive instruction so that students can read and write legibly in cursive by the end of the fifth grade.
Those bills were passed Wednesday by the House Committee on Elementary and Secondary Education.
“Most people under the age of 18, now, cannot read or write cursive, or even sign their names,” McGaugh said during testimony Jan. 21. “Signing your name has been proof of identity for hundreds of years.”
Reuter in an interview Wednesday offered a historical argument for the necessity of the bill: “The most solid foundational documents of our country are handwritten, and they’re written in cursive.”
Rep. Kathy Steinhoff, D-Columbia, a former Columbia Public Schools teacher, agreed with the aims of the bill but had worries about implementation.
“Unless we can do this with full intentionality and the resources and the training, it is gonna add to the plate, and that plate is not just the teacher plate, it’s the student plate,” Steinhoff said.
“We’re going to have kids that are trying to learn to read, and we’re going to take them away to teach them cursive?” she asked. “It’s the timing that I’m concerned about.”
Also heard Wednesday were two bills concerning limitation of technology in the classroom.
A law passed last year banned use of cellphones during the school day. That law has been cited by House members as a success and an encouragement to go further in limiting technology.
HB 2230 and HB 2978 sponsored by Reps. Tricia Byrnes, R-Wentzville, and Marlene Terry, D-St. Louis, respectively, would require at least 70% of schoolwork at the elementary level to be done on pencil and paper, or with no reliance on devices for learning.
The bills would also prevent required work from being assigned using digital materials, limit screen time per student to 45 minutes per day and require explicit cursive instruction to begin by second grade.
Byrnes made clear in an interview last Wednesday her reasoning behind the bill, pointing the finger at technology for both behavioral and educational issues in schools.
“Teachers know it’s hard to teach them when kids are staring at screens, when they don’t have access to books. The behaviors are really a symptom of this screen usage, lack of focus, it’s all kind of coming together,” Byrnes said. “And ultimately it’s hurting education, behaviors, focus, and down the road, mental health.”
Terry spoke on the lack of evidence for technology improving learning, emphasizing teachers’ willingness to increase their involvement.
“We need to go back to basics,” Terry said. “Teachers do want to teach.”
Mary Byrne, executive director for the Joint Committee on Education spoke last Wednesday of the connection between handwriting, cursive, literacy and education as a whole.
“(Cursive) integrates sensory motor information into the brain that coordinates with what you’re seeing visually, and what you rehearse auditorily,” she said. “So it’s an integration of all that sensory input, and tapping on your keyboard does not get you that.”
-----------------------------------------------------
Bill would lower minimum wage for minors in Missouri
By Sawyer Bess, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — A bill that would lower the minimum wage for minors was pitched by its sponsor Wednesday as a way to help small businesses and young workers.
Senate Bill 1325 would create a separate minimum wage for those under age 18 who are employed in Missouri. The new minimum wage rate for minors would be $12.30 per hour, down from the state rate of $15 per hour.
The bill’s sponsor, Sen. Joe Nicola, R-Grain Valley, is aiming to protect both small businesses and teen workers, as he has seen a decrease of teen employment in his district.
“Labor is often the single largest expense when wages rise too quickly,” Nicola said. “Owners are forced to make hard choices, reduce hours, raise prices, automate jobs like installing kiosks instead of having teens employed or stop hiring inexperienced workers altogether.”
Missouri’s minimum wage has nearly doubled in the past decade, increasing from $7.65 in 2016 to $15 in 2026.
Nicola said the bill takes into account that entry-level jobs are “fundamentally different” from adult employment and that Missouri’s wage laws should remain fair.
“These are entry level positions that require training, supervision, patience from employers,” Nicola said.
David Overfelt, president of the Missouri Retailers Association, and Dan Shaul, the executive state director for the Missouri Grocers Association and president of Midwest Retail and Grocery Alliance spoke in support of the bill.
Those opposed said age discrimination should not be legislated in Missouri and that some families rely on teenagers’ wages.
A member of the public testified that, when he was a youth worker, his family depended on his paycheck after the death of his father. He found it insulting to say that lower wages would be in his best interest.
Jake Hummel, president of Missouri AFL-CIO, disagreed with SB 1325 on the basis that it would be creating a two-tiered system. The lower wage would also make it harder for teens to afford the costs of living given they already face higher car insurance prices.
Hummel said that Missouri’s relatively high minimum wage attracts out-of-state employees.
“I’m kind of excited to hear that the citizens of Kansas are coming over for employment in the state of Missouri to pay taxes here in the state,” Hummel said. “And last I checked, we were trying to attract workers to Missouri, not do the opposite.”
Nicola rebutted by saying that the out-of-state minors would be working jobs that Missouri minors could instead have.
-----------------------------------------------------
Investment fund proposed as way of eliminating state taxes
By Emma Farrel, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — A proposal to create a long-term investment fund that could eventually eliminate all state taxes was heard Wednesday by a Senate committee.
The joint resolution, SJR 95, sponsored by Sen. Adam Schnelting, R-St. Charles, would create the “Show-Me Prosperity Fund,” which Schnelting described as a generational shift in how government operations are financed.
“I want to reimagine how we fund government operations,” Schnelting told the Senate Economic and Workforce Development Committee. “For generations we’ve kind of thought like consumers, rather than investors.”
“I’m proposing a monumental shift in how we view government, kind of taking it from the taker column and putting it into the caretaker column,” he said.
The fund would be written into the constitution and built using money given by the Missouri General Assembly, donations, grants and gifts from any sources. The state treasurer would invest the money into exchange-traded funds tracking the performance of the Standard & Poor’s 500 or a comparable index. This would allow the balance to grow over decades.
The proposed constitutional amendment comes as the legislature is considering eliminating the state income tax amid concerns that other taxes might need to be raised to support government functions.
Schnelting emphasized the importance of long-term investing, using a retirement fund as an example. He explained to the committee that steady investing over time can turn relatively small contributions into large sums using compound growth.
“This would be over several lifetimes,” Schnelting said. “This would be something that we’d be doing for our grandkids, our great grandkids and so on.”
The amendment would restrict use of the funds until Jan. 1, 2127, or until the fund reaches $2 trillion in value, or until the state treasurer notifies the General Assembly that the balance in the fund is sufficient to eliminate state taxes, whichever occurs first.
Schnelting said the legislature would decide how much to deposit in the fund, but he offered unclaimed property funds as one possible source. He said that Missouri is sitting on over $1 billion in property that could potentially be used as seed money for the fund.
Supporters testified that the measure represents a long-term, growth-focused approach to public finance. Byron Keelin, president of the advocacy group Freedom Principle, told the committee the fund would help reduce reliance on taxes and make Missouri more economically competitive.
“Government should not perpetually extract wealth from its citizens through income tax, sales tax, property taxes, and endless fees that punish productivity and drive families and businesses away,” Keelin said.
Lawmakers on the committee expressed interest in the concept, however it was emphasized that the proposal is in an early and conceptual phase.
-----------------------------------------------------
Senate hears bill to make smoking marijuana in public spaces a misdemeanor
By Samantha Jackson, Missouri News Network
A bill to increase the punishment for use of marijuana in public spaces was heard Wednesday morning in the Senate Committee on Families, Seniors and Health .
Senate Bill 1187, sponsored by Sen. Mary Elizabeth Coleman, R-Arnold, would make the offense of consumption of marijuana in public spaces a Class B misdemeanor.
Coleman said that children and adults should not be exposed to secondhand smoke in public settings.
“You smell it everywhere, you smell it driving down the street, you smell it at the park, you smell it in courthouses. It’s everywhere,” Coleman told the Families, Seniors and Health Senate Committee.
In Missouri, marijuana and cigarette use are not permitted in select public locations like commercial buildings, health care facilities, libraries and most indoor buildings used by the general public, like theaters, gyms or indoor swimming pools. Exceptions are made for some bars and restaurants to permit cigarette smoking if they seat fewer than 50 individuals.
Cigarette smoking is permitted on most publicly maintained outdoor property, like streets, sidewalks and alleys, but marijuana is a fineable offence in these same public spaces. Coleman’s bill would go further for marijuana, increasing the punishment from an $100 fine to a misdemeanor for use on publicly maintained property.
The bill would only extend misdemeanor charges for public use of marijuana, not cigarettes.
There are currently no misdemeanor charges for smoking cigarettes in public, but underage possession and illegal sale or distribution can result in a Class B misdemeanor charge.
In Missouri, a Class B misdemeanor can include up to six months in county jail and a fine of up to $1,000, or both jail time and fines.
Marijuana use has boomed since it was legalized in 2023. According to recently released data, Missouri cannabis businesses reported nearly $1.52 billion in medical and recreational marijuana sales in 2025. This marks the highest annual total sales since recreational marijuana was legalized in the state.
Coleman said the bill aims to provide similar rules to marijuana that are already in place for public alcohol consumption, which prevents people from being intoxicated or in a disorderly condition in front of prohibited places such as churches, schools or courthouses. The only difference is that Coleman’s bill would apply to all public areas, not only prohibited spaces.
Historically, Black people have been disproportionately arrested for misdemeanor and criminal charges related to marijuana. In 2023, The Beacon reported on the marijuana possession arrests in Black communities across Missouri. In areas such as Clay County, Johnson County and Lafayette, Black people are 10 times more likely to get arrested than white people for marijuana possession.
-----------------------------------------------------
Bill restricting recurring donations to politicians moves forward
By Margaret Stewart, Missouri News Network
The Missouri House of Representatives gave initial approval Wednesday to limit recurring donations to politicians in the state.
Under HB 1788, affirmative consent, such as checking a box rather than unchecking one, is required to allow recurring donations to a political figure.
Rep. Jim Murphy, R-St. Louis, asserted during floor debate that “you have to opt into it, not out” of recurring donations and “when election happens, they have to stop.”
Violators of the bill are required to return contributions and are subject to civic penalties.
Rep. David Tyson Smith, D-Columbia, asked during chamber discussion if the legislation will impact political groups, parties or initiatives. Donations to political parties will not be affected.
The bill was sparked by reports from the Missouri Independent last fall that 141 individuals across the nation had been hit with recurring donations to the gubernatorial campaign of former state Sen. Bill Eigel, some after the election was held. Eigel's campaign has not commented.
-----------------------------------------------------
Missouri won't have U.S. 250th anniversary commemorative license plates
By Hannah McDonough, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — Some states are releasing specialty license plates in celebration of the 250th anniversary of the U.S.
Missouri isn't one of them.
Several states, including Michigan, Florida, Indiana, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts and South Carolina, are introducing a specialty license plate for America’s birthday.
Members of the House Transportation Committee say it has not heard any propositions to offer a commemorative plate.
“There's probably a lack of interest, as far as I know, (no) opposition," said Rep. Eric Woods, D-Kansas City, and ranking minority member of the committee. "I guess it just hasn't come before us.”
According to Rep. Josh Hurlbert, R-Smithville, the committee chair, it is not very likely that Missouri will be getting a U.S. 250th Anniversary specialty license plate.
To have a commemorative license plate, a proposal should have been introduced two years ago in order to be passed into law.
With few exceptions, laws take effect on Aug. 28 each year. Even if a law was passed by the time the license plates could have been made, the year will likely be over.
If Missourians are interested in a specialty plate, they can submit a proposal to the Department of Revenue or to their local representative in the legislature.
-----------------------------------------------------
TUESDAY
Senate passes rule changes making it harder to end debate
By Kaleb Anderson, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — Senate Democrats struck a deal Tuesday, opting to end their filibuster of gubernatorial appointments in exchange for changes to the Missouri Senate’s rules that make it more difficult to end Senate debate.
Democrats have filibustered the vote for Gov. Mike Kehoe’s gubernatorial appointments for the last two weeks, but as the Feb. 6 statutory deadline for the approval of the governor’s appointments neared, a deal was struck.
Ten Democrats and 13 Republicans passed the rule change that will increase the number of signatures needed for a previous question motion from 10 to 18, making it harder to end a filibuster. The motion is used to end debate on a bill and force a vote if signatures are collected.
The approved changes would also require amended bills coming from the House to “lie on the table” for one day before they could be passed.
Some Republicans argued that approving the changes validates Democratic efforts to slow the legislative process.
“I think that when we change the rules mid-process, we’re sending a signal that anything is able to be done,” said Sen. Mary Elizabeth Coleman, R-Arnold. “And I find it really ironic that the complaint that the Senate is operating more like the House is somehow going to be solved by adopting a House rule.”
The previous question motion has historically been used sparingly in the Senate to allow for increased debate, but it is often used in the much larger House.
The motion has been used four times in the past year to shut down Democratic filibusters and allow the Republican supermajority to pass key legislation.
The first two came during the last legislative session to put an abortion ban amendment onto the ballot and to repeal expanded sick leave laws approved by voters in the previous election.
The motion was used two more times during special sessions this fall. Once, to add an amendment on the ballot that would make it more difficult to pass initiative petitions. It was used again to approve a gerrymandered congressional map, which could potentially add another Republican seat in Congress.
Sen. Mike Moon, R-Lawrence, empathized with the Democrats, who he said have been “steamrolled” in the past year, but said he was frustrated that they slowed the sessions and his potential legislation for so long.
Moon noted that the changes would allow a minority to more effectively kill legislation.
“I’ve proposed rules over the years and never had one in this chamber see the light of day,” Moon said. “I understand that you may not agree with my position on these changes, and that’s okay. But why allow someone to kill on carte blanche? But that’s what we’ve done, and that’s what we’re doing.”
-----------------------------------------------------
Open enrollment for public schools proposed to Senate
By Anika Austvold, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — Two bills that would allow open enrollment in public schools across the state were heard by members of the Senate Committee on Education Tuesday morning.
Senate Bill 906, sponsored by Sen. David Gregory, R-St. Louis, and Senate Bill 971, sponsored by Sen. Curtis Trent, R-Springfield, which are identical, would allow any student to transfer to another public school, including transfers from a student’s district of residence to a public school in a district they do not reside in.
Current Missouri law allows students who reside in an unaccredited school district to transfer to an accredited school district in the same or an adjoining county only under certain provisions.
Trent emphasized that all other students who may want to change school districts either have to have relatives in the district or the financial means to physically move themselves to a different zip code in order to attend a different school.
The bill would modify those provisions, extending open enrollment to every student. The bills’ sponsors said that open enrollment would benefit students, allowing them to go to the school that would best suit their needs.
Under the act, the school board of each school district would determine the district’s capacity to accept student transfers in each grade level and in each school in the district.
Each transfer student would be counted as a resident of the district in which they are enrolled, bill sponsors said. Tuition would not be charged to any student or their families because of transfer status.
Parties testifying in opposition to the bill argued that the current funding model for Missouri schools is not organized to allow for open enrollment, and allowing student transfers could cause instability within school budgets.
This concern was echoed by Kenneth Southwick of the Cooperating School Districts of Greater Kansas City, who testified against the bills.
Cory Koedel of the Show Me Institute, a St. Louis-based think tank, testified in favor of the bills, attempting to counter claims that students transferring districts would be fiscally unmanageable.
“Open enrollment is a very cost-effective way to expand school choice because we’re leveraging infrastructure we already have in place,” Kodel said. “If you just put a kid in a classroom where there’s already a seat for them, that’s not as expensive as the average cost of educating a student in the district.”
St. Louis resident Reizhana Adams also testified in support of the bills, speaking from personal experience. Adams, whose high school lost accreditation when she was just 14 years old, was able to enroll in a high school out of her district through the current transfer program. She said this gave her “a stronger education and access to opportunities that were not available to (her) before.”
If passed, the act would take effect beginning in the 2027-28 school year.
The bill does not yet include a cap on the number of students that can enroll in a district or any provisions to increase that cap; however, both Gregory and Trent said they would be open to adding those provisions.
-----------------------------------------------------
Voting rights activists hold annual rally at Capitol
By Jack Schouten, Missourian News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — Signs lined the staircase and sat in the hands of volunteers gathered in the Capitol rotunda as Missouri organizations gathered to hold an annual rally Tuesday for their 2026 voting rights lobby day.
Opposing attacks on direct democracy, returning voting rights to felons who have served their time and expanding early voting rights in Missouri were the main issues on the docket for the day, said Denise Lieberman, the director of the Missouri Voter Protection Coalition, which organized the rally.
“We are here today to defend democracy in Missouri,” Lieberman said in a speech at the rally.
Volunteers shouted “that ain’t right” as Lieberman spoke about the special session in September of last year that ended with the approval of a new gerrymandered congressional district map.
“It’s a measure that is not only unconstitutional without new census data but it’s also illegal,” Lieberman said. State officials who pushed the new maps said the law does not prohibit additional redistricting between censuses.
Former Missouri Rep. Jamie Johnson, now with People Not Politicians, spoke about the process of collecting over 305,000 signatures to oppose the new congressional district map.
The number of signatures submitted is around triple the amount required by the Missouri Constitution to veto a measure passed by the legislature.
“Every single one of those signatures represents someone saying, ‘I am paying attention, I know what’s going on, and I am not going to be quiet while politicians rig the system,’” Johnson said.
Jerika White with Empower Missouri spoke to the crowd about restoring the right to vote for felons on probation and parole.
“There are thousands of people today in Missouri who are living, working and raising families in our neighborhoods but they are locked out of our democracy,” White said. “They are doing everything we ask of responsible community members except they are denied the right to vote.”
Volunteers said they felt fired up and angry at politicians who they feel are chipping away at the fundamentals of democracy.
“A lot of people feel that their rights are under attack,” said Abby Herndon, representing Jobs with Justice, a nonprofit workers rights organization.
Lieberman ended the rally by speaking in support of two bills that would expand early voting in the state.
“This is a common sense, bipartisan measure to ensure that people can make their voices heard,” said Lieberman.
The rally drew more than 100 people.
-----------------------------------------------------
Senate hears bill to move School Board elections to November
By Noah Symes, Missouri News Network
A bill to move school board elections to November and extend members’ terms got a public hearing Tuesday in the Senate Committee on Education.
Senate Bill 1002, sponsored by Sen. Adam Schnelting, R-St. Charles, would align school board elections with four-year general elections and extend board members’ terms to four years, beginning in 2028
Schnelting said he aims to increase voter turnout by pairing school board elections with the general election.
“Our children deserve a school system that is more representative of the broader community,” Schnelting said. “Currently, a small contingent of our electorate is making decisions that affect our kids’ curriculum, their school budgets, the future of our school districts and our students.”
Sen. Maggie Nurrenbern, D-Kansas City, and Schnelting shared worries that over-bloating ballots with too many elections and measures could lead to voter fatigue. While both stated their desire to increase voter turnout for school board elections, Nurrenbern expressed concerns that partisanship from larger elections might trickle down into School Board elections.
According to a May 2025 report from Ballotpedia, 41 states, including Missouri, hold nonpartisan school board elections, meaning no candidate is presented with party affiliation.
Schnelting clarified that this bill would not include the party affiliation of school board candidates on the ballot to dissuade concerns of increased partisanship. Nurrenbern said that she was still concerned.
“When you think about the top issues, going into a general election, they are highly, highly, highly partisan,” Nurrenbern said.
Caitlyn Waley, a representative for the Missouri School Boards’ Association, testified against the bill, adding that she believes school board candidates won’t be able to compete for the attention of voters during a general election cycle.
“The amount of money that is spent in a November election, it would be very hard for the relatively meager amount of fundraising that most school board candidates do,” Waley said. “They wouldn’t be able to break through the conversations that are happening to talk about what’s happening in their local board.”
Chairman of the committee, Sen. Rick Brattin, R-Harrisonville, said during the hearing that increased partisanship in elections is what school boards need.
“I would say partisan elections are what needs to happen,” Brattin said. “Do you really not believe that a lot of the issues that they have to cover, like curriculum, things that are included in curriculum, really don’t fall on partisan lines?”
Waley emphasized her association’s view on partisanship in these elections.
“We do feel it is very important to keep partisan politics out of the boardroom,” Waley said. “Political affiliation actually makes it harder to have constructive conversations.”
-----------------------------------------------------
Hearing explores another pitch for presidential primary
By Emerson Smith, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — Two House bills are seeking to restructure election and voting processes along with establishing a statutory framework for a presidential preference primary.
The House Committee on Local Government and Elections held a hearing Tuesday on House Bill 2387 by Rep. Brad Banderman, R-St. Clair, and House Bill 2480 by Rep. Rudy Veit, R-Wardsville, to update and restructure how the election and voting processes work and to reinstate Missouri’s presidential primary.
“I believe that this bill maximizes participation in the process, it works to reduce overlap on the absentee window and encourages in person voting, which I believe is the most safe and secure way to vote,” Banderman said.
Banderman’s bill features many different changes to election and voting processes. However, the main points discussed included standardizing election dates so all public elections would be held on a Tuesday, modifying absentee voting rules to clarify when and how registered voters can cast absentee ballots in person and by mail and reinstating the presidential primary.
“We’ve seen the disasters we had with last year’s caucus when we didn’t have a presidential primary and that’s why we both are here testifying,” Veit said.
Republicans held caucuses during the 2024 presidential cycle, but many voters complained that the events were held in rarely-used locations and on a weekend, making it difficult for many to participate. Caucuses are meetings held at a specific time by the party where participants can indicate their support for individual candidates.
Both bills received overwhelming support from the Missouri Democratic and Republican parties, with testimonies from their respective members.
“The Missouri Republican platform states that we believe the legitimacy of our republic comes from the knowledge that every American has an equal say in the elections that determine the directions of our nation,” said former Republican Rep. Mike Haffner.
Similarly, a member of the Missouri Democratic Party also spoke in support of the bill.
“I think we have a real opportunity to really set a better process to elect the next president; I think that it’d engage more people here in Missouri,” said Russ Carnahan, chair of the state Democratic Party.
Not everyone in the room was on board, as a few members of the committee openly voiced their concerns.
“The presidential primary is interesting to me because I felt like I was lied to, to be honest with you. You go and vote and then nobody ever tells you about the caucuses, they don’t tell you about the convention, and I think that’s done on purpose,” said Rep. Mazzie Christensen, R-Bethany.
In the past, the presidential primary in Missouri has not been binding, meaning the winner does not necessarily get the state’s votes at the party convention. Several members termed the primary a “dog and pony show,” allowing party leaders to chose whomever they wanted regardless of the primary result.
The bills require the state to pay the estimated $9 million cost of the primary, which is another concern for some opponents.
Another bill proposing a presidential primary was killed by the same committee in a vote last week. Votes are pending on the bills heard Tuesday.
-----------------------------------------------------
House bill would establish Missouri Motor Vehicle Commission
By Sawyer Bess, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — A House bill proposes creating a state commission to oversee the licensing of motor vehicle dealers across Missouri, and accounts for boat, motorcycle, ATV and UTV dealers.
“Currently, the Department of Revenue kind of serves as the judge, jury and executioner all the way across on all this issue,” Speaker Pro Tempore Chad Perkins, R-Bowling Green, the bill’s sponsor, said at a hearing Monday. “This commission will serve as the jury for what ends up happening.”
The purpose of creating the Missouri Vehicle Commission is to let “experienced” board members deal with licensing-related matters, Perkins said at a hearing held by the House Special Committee on Intergovernmental Affairs. These responsibilities are currently held by the Department of Revenue.
“I do think it’s someone who has subject matter expertise versus someone who’s frankly, just worked for the government their entire life,” Perkins said.
Under HB 3051, the commission would consist of nine members, eight of whom would be licensed motor vehicle dealers and one who would be a public member with “no pecuniary interest in any motor vehicle or boat dealership.”
“We have doctors looking over doctors. We have nurses looking over nurses on boards,” Missouri Department of Revenue Director Trish Vincent said. “At the Department of Revenue, we can’t possibly be experts in every dealer’s situation.”
Board members would serve four-year terms and would employ a chair and executive director, both of whom would serve one-year terms.
Another responsibility of the new commission would be to hear disputes between customers and dealers. In certain cases, the commission would also decide punishment for dealers, if appropriate.
Both Republican and Democrat representatives expressed concerns about needlessly increasing government power.
“I just kind of see commissions like this to be growing government … they may know the industry, but it’s basically going to be another middleman, if you will, in between the people and the Department of Revenue,” said state Rep. Bryant Wolfin, R-Ste. Genevieve.
-----------------------------------------------------
House again moves to address failed abortions
By Emily Skidmore and Kennedy Voss, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — Heated discussions occurred on Tuesday in the House as Democrats cited worries over vague bill language before initial approval was given for the “Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act.”
House Bill 1667, sponsored by Rep. Brian Seitz, R-Branson, would make it illegal for health care providers to harm a baby that is born after a failed abortion, whether through negligence or malice. The bill seeks to establish civil and criminal acts such as first-degree murder.
Seitz said following Canada’s surgical abortion failure rate percentage of 0.21%, there is an average of 1,734 infants born alive after an abortion each year. Seitz noted there is not enough data on births in the U.S.
“We are talking about convicting medical professionals in the first-degree murder and maybe even sentencing them to death,” said Rep. Ken Jamison, D-Gladstone. “Don’t you think we owe it to them, and the state of Missouri, and 6 million Missourians, to exercise a modern effort to make the language clear.”
Democrats argued that the bill language needs to have more context on what qualifies as health care providers being “present” after an abortion attempt. They also raised questions about how a crime like this would be investigated, concerned that a woman who had suffered a miscarriage would have their body treated as a crime scene.
There were additional concerns about legal redundancies, as parts of the bill are already covered in several other existing statutes in state and federal law. Health care providers are legally obligated to help any patient, regardless of the type of procedure. The bill seeks to clarify actions specifically for abortion providers.
Supporters of the bill stated it was simply common sense and urged their colleagues on both sides to vote in favor.
“The fact that we’re debating this, effectively whether or not health care professionals can abandon a baby on the operating table, says a lot to me about how far society’s fallen,” said Rep. Bill Hardwick, R-Dixon.
A similar bill, HB 2294 by Rep. Holly Jones, R-Eureka, was incorporated into HB 1667.
Seitz presented a similar bill to House and Senate committees last year but failed to gain final passage.
The House voted 95-42 to approve the bill, setting up a final vote to send it to the Senate, where it died last year.
-----------------------------------------------------
MONDAY
House committee looks at Artificial Intelligence bills
By Eric Hughes, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — Two House bills are seeking to place responsibility for harm caused by misuse or proper use of artificial intelligence.
The House Committee on Emerging Issues held a hearing Monday on bills by Reps. Phil Amato, R-Arnold, and Scott Miller, R-St. Charles, to establish the “AI Non-Sentience and Responsibility Act.”
“The intended purpose of this bill is straightforward,” Miller said. “To establish that AI shall not have personhood, and to manage risk through responsibility and accountability.”
The acts would make it so that all artificial intelligence systems must be declared as nonsentient entities, meaning they legally would not be recognized as a person, spouse, legal entity or owner to any form of property.
The bill also states that any harm, direct or indirect, caused by intended use or misuse of AI systems will be the responsibility of the user who directed it.
“We need to hold people accountable, but we also need to recognize when people are trying to do the right thing,” Miller said when asked by Rep. Elizabeth Fuchs, D-St. Louis, about where liability lies with AI misuse and intentional wrongdoing.
Miller said that one of the changes they are working to make in the bills is identifying the Missouri AI risk standard that business will need to follow to be absolved from criminal or punitive damages. He said that the state standard is based on the National Institute of Standards and Technology’s AI risk management framework and it will be consulted where the Missouri standard is silent.
Rep. Wick Thomas, D-Kansas City, asked if the bill would conflict with President Donald Trump’s executive order to remove barriers to American leadership in AI. Miller said that he didn’t think there was any violation in their bills because it wouldn’t cost America it’s competitive advantage on the global landscape.
The hearing drew attention to the fact that legislation written in last year’s “Big Beautiful Bill” to prevent states from regulating AI for 10 years was struck before it was passed. One person testified that the state should work to be proactive with how it approaches AI, rather than waiting for something bad to happen.
Miller stated that similar bills had already been passed in Oklahoma, Idaho and Utah.
-----------------------------------------------------
Bill would allow parents to sue districts, teachers for violating pupil rights protections
By Nolan Haberstroh, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — A senator is proposing opening the door for parents to sue school districts and individual teachers who they say are violating federal pupil rights protections.
A federal law — The Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment — outlines eight categories of protected sensitive subject material that schools and academic professional are required to obtain written parent permission before discussing or including in academic material.
Protected subjects include politics, sexual behavior or attitudes, religious practices, illegal activities and income, among others.
SB 1315, introduced by Senate Government Efficiency Committee Chair Mary Elizabeth Coleman, R-Arnold, aims to allow parents to sue for violations of the federal protections, as well expanding these protections to materials not included in schoolwork, such as surveys sent home for counseling and assessment.
School districts, schools and individual employees would be expected to notify parents of the contents of any given survey containing protected materials at least 24 hours prior to presenting the material under the bill. They would only be able to proceed in presenting the survey to the student upon receiving explicit, written parental permission.
If a district, school or employee were to fail to meet these requirements, they would open themselves up to lawsuits from parents for failure to comply. This would apply to both paid and unpaid school associates, according to the bill.
Coleman commented at a hearing on the bill Monday on what she saw as a lack of enforcement of violations of federal student protections in schools, hoping that this bill would introduce enforcement.
“A statute that doesn’t have any way for it to be enforced is a statute that is just preparatory language,” Coleman said. “It’s something where we say ‘We wish you would do this,’ but there’s no way for a family to ensure compliance with it. There might as well be no rule.”
A defendant sued for a violation under the bill could be fined $500 dollars if guilty by negligence, and $2,000 if deemed to have violated intentionally.
Coleman provided an example of a case in which the bill might apply.
“If the school district was sending out a survey about sexual activity of teenagers, and there wasn’t a notice to parents first that this was going out so that they could opt out of it, then there would be a fine associated with that,” Coleman said.
Otto Fajen, the director of legislative policy at the Missouri National Education Association, spoke at the hearing and offered concerns from an educator’s perspective.
“Even today as we are sitting here, over 4,000 of our teachers are teaching in Missouri public schools without a certificate, and that’s partly because we’re not able to find amongst all the people who do have a certificate, people who are still willing to teach in the public schools,” Fajen said.
“One of the things we always watch out for when you all are considering legislation is the potential collateral impact of provisions,” he said.
Fajen made the point that while the violations described by the bill are rather rare, the impact made on educators by the mere threat of a lawsuit is far more prominent, potentially worsening the shortage on certified teachers.
“We think the direct language here is kind of restricted to activity that’s rare and would probably disappear,” Fajen said.
“When teachers across the state see the legislature passing bills to allow in this particular case, allow individual employees to be sued, that’s going to have an impact on how many young people decide to go ahead and pursue a career in teaching,” he said.
-----------------------------------------------------
Senate committee has tense debate over open carry bill
By Erin Hynes, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — A new bill making it more difficult for local government to limit open carry of weapons was heard in a Senate committee on Monday.
Senate bill 908, sponsored by Sen. Brad Hudson, R-Cape Fair, provides more uniform open carry laws across the state of Missouri, superseding local ordinances that may already be in place.
The bill would lower the minimum age to obtain a concealed carry permit from 19 to 18.
“My intention to do with this legislation is to provide teeth to Missouri’s preemption law, to make sure our gun laws are consistent all across the state,” Hudson said at the hearing. This sentiment was echoed by Missouri Firearms Coalition political director Aaron Dorr.
Missouri law states that no political subdivision, including local and county governments, can regulate the possession of firearms, except to prohibit open carrying of a firearm.
Hudson’s bill would repeal that exception and add a $50,000 penalty per occurrence. If passed, the bill would allow anyone who is regulated by an open carry law to take their local government to court. If found guilty, the municipality would owe the gun owner $50,000.
Susan Myers, state director for Women for Gun Rights, testified in favor of the bill’s uniformity.
“I see this bill as a hammer, to be wielded, when necessary, when cities or counties choose to enact ordinances that violate state law,” Myers said.
The bill was met with criticism from Sen. Barbara Washington, D-Kansas City, who honed in on the bill’s impact on areas with higher gun related crime rates, who would no longer be able to make these decisions in their community.
Washington asked if Hudson feels a city or county should have a say in “protecting its citizens.”
“When you have a jurisdiction where crime is a significant factor ... the answer to that is not to infringe upon the rights of law-abiding citizens in that jurisdiction,” Hudson responded.
Laura Burkhardt, a St. Louis County resident, spoke on behalf of the Missouri Chapter of Moms Demand Action against the bill. Burkhardt emphasized that this legislation would override a 2023 St. Louis City law preventing open carry for those under 19, which was created to combat gun related issues with teenagers.
“This bill does no favors for young citizens, and it in fact endangers them and public safety at large in St. Louis city,” Burkhardt said.
Burkhardt voiced concerns on how the population difference across Missouri changes the purpose of this legislation.
“A 17-year-old carrying a gun hunting with their dad looks very different than a 17-year-old in my community, carrying a gun down the street,” Burkhardt said in an interview after the meeting. “I think the people closest to the problem are the people closest to the solution.”
Hudson proposed a similar bill, SB 74, in the 2025 legislative session, but it did not make it to the Senate floor.
-----------------------------------------------------
Senate bill seeks 75 mph speed limit on rural interstates
By Chase Pray, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — The Senate Transportation, Infrastructure and Public Safety Committee heard a bill proposing an increase to the maximum speed limit on Monday.
Senate Bill 1408, sponsored by Sen. Jamie Burger, R-Benton, would increase the state speed limit from 70 to 75 mph on rural interstates and freeways.
Burger noted his own experiences driving through neighboring states when testifying in support of the bill.
“I don’t see any more wrecks along the state of Arkansas’ highways than I do in the state of Missouri’s highways, and their speed limit is 75,” Burger said.
Jon Nelson, state highway safety and traffic engineer for the Missouri Department of Transportation, provided safety statistics for the committee to consider.
Speeding is the leading contributing factor in Missouri traffic crashes, and Nelson warned that increasing the speed limit would not just lead to more crashes, but more severe crashes as well.
Nelson attributed research from a 2019 Insurance Institute study that showed for every 5 miles per hour a state’s maximum speed limit is increased, there’s also a 8.5% increase in fatalities on interstates and freeways.
“This is the anticipated cost for a change that would save drivers about five minutes on 100-mile trips,” he said.
Data released by MoDOT last week shows there were 911 traffic fatalities in Missouri throughout 2025.
Burger acknowledged concerns regarding the proposed bill and reinforced that it would only focus on increasing speed limits for rural parts of interstates with a posted speed limit of 70 mph.
If passed, Missouri would join its bordering states of Arkansas, Kansas and Nebraska as recent states to increase their rural interstate speed limits.
-----------------------------------------------------
WEEKEND
Sen. Stephen Webber calls on Waymo to correct inaccurate testimony
By Kate Leverenz, Missouri Independent
Sen. Stephen Webber, D-Columbia, is calling on Waymo to retract and correct testimony provided to the Senate Transportation Committee on Tuesday regarding the company’s driverless vehicles.
Webber said in a letter to Waymo on Friday that the testimony given to the committee falsely claimed that the company’s driverless vehicles had never collided with a child.
During the hearing on Tuesday, Waymo’s Midwest Policy Manager, Lara Dailey, did not disclose an incident that occurred four days earlier, in which a child was struck by a Waymo driverless vehicle outside their school in Santa Monica, California. During the hearing, Webber asked the Waymo representative whether the company had experienced any incidents in which a driverless vehicle failed to stop properly around children or school buses.
The representative told the senators that the company’s vehicles had never hit a child, and had never experienced “near-contact incidents” involving children.
“None of these encounters have led to collisions or near contact events,” Dailey said.
But, four days before the hearing, a Waymo vehicle struck a child while they were on their way to school in Santa Monica. Waymo said in a news release the the child ran into the street from behind a double-parked SUV as the Waymo vehicle moved forward toward the school.
Waymo said the vehicle reduced its speed from 17 mph to 6 mph, something it said a human driver would not have been able to do. The child suffered minor injuries, according to Waymo’s statement.
In a statement to the Missourian, Waymo said the company "is committed to improving road safety and transparency in the communities we serve."
The statement said that the Waymo representative responded accurately to the questions from Webber, which were primarily focused on the ability of Waymo vehicles to properly navigate around school buses.
"During the testimony, our representative accurately responded to questions regarding our interactions with school buses – which have not resulted in any contact with pedestrians – and the associated NTSB investigation," Waymo's statement reads. "We will continue to cooperate with the committee as appropriate in response to this letter."
In his letter to Waymo, Webber asked for a full report on this incident.
Dailey testified on Waymo’s behalf in favor of Senate Bill 1050, a bill that would establish new provisions governing the usage of autonomous vehicles.
After last Friday’s incident, Waymo is now subject to two federal investigations related to child safety.
The National Transportation Safety Board has launched an investigation into failures to yield to stopped school buses, and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has launched an investigation into the incident involving the child pedestrian.
In response to the testimony provided to the committee, Webber is asking Waymo to correct the public record, disclose details about its remote call centers and law enforcement interactions and pause its advocacy for Missouri autonomous vehicle legislation until federal investigations are complete and child safety concerns are resolved.
Waymo’s remote call centers are utilized when law enforcement interacts with Waymo vehicles, Dailey said at the Tuesday hearing. Law enforcement officers are prompted to scan a QR code on the side of the vehicle, where they are connected to a representative from Waymo, she said.
Webber requested more information on the call centers, and asked where the operators are based.
“Missouri lawmakers expect complete and accurate testimony — especially when children’s safety is at stake,” Webber said in a letter to Waymo. “We do not need California big tech experimenting on families in the Show-Me State … nor do we accept assurances that later prove untrue.”
