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 took readers up to the midterm legislative break as a crime bill was sent to the governor and a proposal to end the state income tax advanced.
If you have thoughts or questions, contact Fred Anklam at anklamf@missouri.edu.
-----------------------------------------------------
FRIDAY
Legislators reflect on first half of session before their spring break begins
By Kennedy Voss, Jack Schouten, Emily Skidmore and Anika Austvold, Missourian News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — A resolution calling on voters to eliminate the state income tax was passed by the Missouri House of Representatives on Thursday as legislators headed for a weeklong break.
Republican leaders in both chambers speaking at the halfpoint of the annual legislative session hailed the steps they are taking to provide economic relief to Missourians. Democrats raised concerns about how to fund state operations if the income tax disappears.
The talk reflected much of the discussion during the legislature’s first two months. Work resumes March 23.
House priorities
House Speaker Jon Patterson, R-Lee’s Summit, said lawmakers have advanced several bipartisan bills and GOP priorities at the midpoint of the 2026 legislative session.
“In terms of what we’re doing in the chamber, it has been the best I’ve seen in my eight years here,” Patterson said. “We’ve passed a number of pieces of bipartisan legislation that’s gone in the Senate that I think has a good chance of passing.”
One piece of partisan legislation is combined House Bills 1908 and 2337, sponsored by Rep. Cecelie Williams, R-Dittmer, and Rep. Raychel Proudie, D-Ferguson. The bills clarify Missouri law to allow pregnant women to get a divorce, which is commonly stalled by state judges.
Similar bills had widespread support last year but died when the Senate adjourned early. Passed by wide bipartisan margins, the bills head to Gov. Mike Kehoe’s desk to be signed into law.
House Democratic Leader Ashley Aune, D-Kansas City, said she agrees there has been more bipartisanship this session but added there also was a large focus on dividing issues as well.
“When the speaker points to bipartisanship, I just can’t help but remind everyone that there is another side to that point, and the other side to that is hyper-partisanship,” Aune said. “That is most of what we spend our time on in this building, which is unfortunate and does a huge disservice to the average Missourian.”
One Republican triumph was the House passage of House Joint Resolutions 173 and 174, which would eventually fade out individual income tax in the state. Senators will take up the issue when they return.
“If you look at what people are talking about back home ... taxes are probably the number one thing people talk about, especially people in Jackson County,” Patterson said.
Democrats said they worry the elimination of income tax would leave a large hole in the state’s $50 billion-plus budget, as more than two thirds of Missouri’s general revenue is from individual income taxes.
The bill language that would appear in front of voters in November currently lists “the modernization of sales tax” as one of the provisions. Critics say this language is confusing and the raising of sales tax will increase overall taxes on Missourians.
“The income tax elimination will come first, but that sales tax hike is the only solution to recoup those dollars,” Aune said.
As lawmakers return for the second half of the session, Patterson emphasized that the House’s main priorities will be finalizing the state budget and working with the Senate to pass legislation that has been approved by the House.
“The budget environment that we’re experiencing now going forward is much different than the environment that we’ve been under for the past five years,” Patterson said. “We’ve only known surpluses.”
“Our budget chair and the governor have made cuts, but you will need future cuts to make sure that in two years, we still have a balanced budget,” Patterson said.
Senate priorities
Senate Republican leaders said they feel they have been “focused” and moved “meaningful” legislation through the first half of the session.
“Our caucus remains united around a clear set of priorities and we’re going to see them through,” Sen. Cindy O’Laughlin, R-Shelbina said.
Much of the first half of the session has featured Democrats filibustering most bills. That prompted an angry outburst on the Senate floor Wednesday by one of the chamber’s most conservative members, Sen. Rick Brattin, R-Harrisonville.
According to O’Laughlin, the biggest priority for the Senate Republicans continues to be tax relief for Missouri families.
“Missourians work hard for their money, and we believe they should keep as much of it as they can,” O’Laughlin said.
Senate leadership pointed to the approval of five members of the St. Louis Board of Police and legislation passed Tuesday that allows pregnant women to file for divorce as successes from the session so far.
One thing not on the list of priorities for Senate Republicans in the second half of the session is education reform.
“I don’t think we have any major overhauls of education that we’re trying to achieve this year,” O’Laughlin said.
Sen. Stephen Webber, D-Columbia, received praise from Republican leadership for his work so far this session.
“Senator Webber has really been good to work with, and he has helped us, you know, reach across the aisle and try to find common ground,” O’Laughlin said.
Democratic senators emphasized their continued priorities in passing legislation focused on public education and affordability.
Democrats said they remain open to negotiations as members of the House and Senate push legislation to reform property tax.
“(Our caucus) recognizes that no person should be taxed out of their home,” said Sen. Maggie Nurrenbern, D-Kansas City.
However, concerns were raised by the minority caucus regarding income tax breaks.
Nurrenbern said the budget of the state is in trouble and passing legislation like HJR 173 will hurt Missourians further.
“We’re very concerned about affordability in the state,” Nurrenbern said.
Democrats are seeking more legislation passed in the Senate after the break and emphasized a need for every senator to be heard on bills.
Leadership noted the absence of Sen. Steven Roberts, D-St. Louis, from the passage of criminal justice bill SB 888, despite Roberts’ prominence in criminal justice reform with the minority caucus. He was serving overseas with Missouri’s Air Force National Guard when Republicans brought the bill up for a vote.
“We all are here, and we have priorities that we want to advance for our constituents, for the good of Missouri,” said Nurrenbern, who took the brunt of Brattin’s anger about Democratic tactics on the floor Wednesday.
-----------------------------------------------------
House sends crime bill to governor
By Kennedy Voss, Missouri Independent
JEFFERSON CITY — The Missouri House of Representatives gave final approval Thursday to a bill that would change the classifications of and punishments for juvenile offenders and mandate more time served before any felon is eligible for parole.
Senate Bill 888, sponsored by Sen. Nick Schroer, R-Defiance, would classify older juveniles who commit crimes as adults and loosen fingerprinting privacy for minors.
It also allows counties to impose a 1% sales tax to allow for the construction of additional juvenile detention centers. Those centers can be located near regular jails as long as there is spatial separation to prevent mixing of those held, according to the bill.
The bill increases the percentage of time in a sentence that an inmate would serve before parole eligibility based on the severity of the crime. The new minimums:
Rep. Brad Christ, R-St. Louis, handled the bill on the House floor as his bill, HB 2498, was combined with Schroer’s due to similarities. Christ said that this bill will help juveniles, who are currently not being held after committing a crime and sometimes commit similar crimes on the same day.
“This system is not working for our youth,” Christ said. “Perpetual release, with no accountability and no rehabilitation.”
Opponents of the bill worry that the legislation was rushed. Rep. David Tyson Smith, D-Columbia, voiced his frustrations with the quick passage of the bill.
“Why are we voting out bills this big that have such a huge magnitude on our criminal justice system, is going to impact so many for so long — in the middle of the night?” he asked.
The bill has seen a lot of quick action in the past week, which left some lawmakers upset as they were unable to fully read the 89-page bill. They also had frustrations about the unclear fiscal note, leaving lawmakers unsure how much this would cost Missourians.
Other opponents said this bill would negatively impact juvenile offenders.
“How do you treat (juvenile offenders), and how do we get them out to the other side and turn them into taxpayers, not tax takers?” said Rep. Gregg Bush, D-Columbia.
Supporters of the bill highlighted community and law enforcement safety as a result of keeping young criminals off the streets.
“Bottom line in this bill, if you want safe communities, justice for victims of the most heinous crimes, accountability, transparency, and you want to support safety of our law enforcement, you should hammer this yes button,” Christ said.
And hammer they did: The bill passed 97-53. The bill will now go to the governor’s desk to be signed into law.
-----------------------------------------------------
Special committee passes two property tax bills
By KJ Drazen, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — The Missouri House Special Committee on Property Tax Reform passed two bills Thursday.
House Bill 2925, sponsored by Rep. Ron Fowler, R-Blue Springs, originally would have changed the date when property tax proposals could be voted on.
Originally, the bill stated that, beginning Jan. 1, 2027, any question on a tax levy for real property or personal property tax must be submitted to voters on a general election day only. However, the bill was sent back to committee to make a change to that rule.
Those opposed to the bill expressed concern that flooding the ballot with all these questions would cause voter fatigue and more stress for election authorities.
That provision was eliminated by the committee. A substitute was added that stated these questions may be presented to voters at the time of the next annual election, a primary election, a general election or if a special election is called.
The bill lays out specific language that should be on the ballot for any change to property taxes. The bill mandates that all property tax changes be described in terms of impact per $100,000 of assessed value.
This bill passed on a 12-1 vote.
House Bill 3253, sponsored by Rep. Kathy Steinhoff, D-Columbia, was also discussed during the hearing. A part of this bill was designated to extending training hours for assessors and assessors-elect.
Currently, the State Tax Commission requires a total of at least 32 hours of training for each course an assessor or assessor-elect would take.
This bill would extend that to at least 40 hours of training before assuming office.
Steinhoff spoke on what pushed her to make this decision.
“One common theme that kept occurring is that, particularly when they were new in the role, many of them didn’t feel confident in what they were doing,” Steinhoff said in an interview.
The bill passed on a 11-0 vote.
Both bills await debate on the House floor.
-----------------------------------------------------
Lawmakers push for government oversight in high school sports
By Brandon Lorenz, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — Missouri government officials could soon have some oversight of high school sports and other activities.
A bill passed out of the House Government Efficiency Committee on Thursday would create a new state-appointed appeals board for all high school activities associations in the state.
House Bill 2403, known as the Rue Wells Act, states that appeals boards for any activity association in the state would be appointed and approved by members of the Statehouse. The most obvious organization affected by this would be the Missouri State High School Activities Association, MSHSAA.
The bill establishes a "transfer board" to review appeals of decisions made by the association. The board would be comprised of seven members: three appointed by the speaker of the House, three appointed by the president pro tempore of the Senate and one appointed by the governor with approval from the Senate.
The point of the new "transfer boards" are to prevent organizations like MSHSAA from acting as their own "appellate body" for appeals from student athletes.
"Bottom line we want to make it good for the kids in the state of Missouri," said Rep. Wendy Hausman, R-St. Peters, committee chair.
Under the bill, students will be allowed to make an appeal to the transfer board on any decision or ruling. The board would then have five days to meet about the appeal and 24 hours to make their decision.
Others committee members expressed support before the 11-7 vote passed the bill out of committee.
"(MSHSAA) hears 1,200 appeals, and 99.9% of them are settled at MSHSAA, and then there's a small percentage that becomes controversial," said Rep. Jim Murphy, R-St. Louis.
"Sometimes there is hardening of the back of 'these are our rules and we're going to keep them' and they lose sight of the children," Murphy said. "They're the ones that end up in court."
There was pushback.
"As a precedent, the government coming in and creating oversight with any nonprofit, whether that's MSHSAA today, maybe the NAACP tomorrow, I just have a lot of pause with that," said Rep. Ray Reed, D-St. Louis.
"We keep speaking about this independent board as if there is going to be no bias, but they are appointed by the governor," argued Rep. Michael Burton, D-Lakeshire. "I really have a problem with this because we've seen, in the past, what we're trying to do in certain situations regarding our schools in the state."
The bill, now ready for House floor debate, is similar to Senate Bill 863.
-----------------------------------------------------
THURSDAY
Hawley introduces bill in U.S. Senate to ban abortion pill
By Molly K. Gibbs, Missouri News Network
WASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., wants Congress to ban mifepristone, a drug that, according to many experts, is used for over half the abortions in the nation.
Hawley announced the legislation at a Wednesday news conference with his 5-year-old daughter, Abigail, on his hip and his wife, Erin Hawley, close by. Erin Hawley is a lawyer who led a challenge to mifepristone’s Food and Drug Administration approval. The case went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court in 2024.
The court rejected the case on technical grounds, but Missouri, Kansas and Idaho revived the case. It now sits before a federal judge in St. Louis.
Hawley’s announcement came five days after the Trump administration frustrated anti-abortion activists by filing a motion asking the court to postpone or dismiss the case until the FDA can complete a new safety study of mifepristone.
Hawley called the study “a dead end” after a meeting with FDA director Martin Makary in February.
Instead of taking issue with President Donald Trump, Hawley called on his colleagues to step up. He said Congress “is where the fight to protect women’s health and safety and to protect life is. This is it. This is the fight.”
Any legislation must overcome a 60-vote filibuster hurdle to pass the Senate. Republicans only control 53 votes in the chamber.
Hawley’s proposal is a total ban on the use of mifepristone, which was used in 63% of abortions in the U.S. in 2023, according to Guttmacher, a reproductive health policy and research nonprofit. Hawley’s news conference highlighted his concern about the drug’s potential impact on women’s health.
Emphasis on safety
About 20 women surrounded the podium where Hawley stood with signs that read, “Protect life. Protect women,” and “abortion drugs hurt women.”
Through tears, Elizabeth Gillette said that she took mifepristone after being pressured by her then-boyfriend and Planned Parenthood practitioners. Gillette said she was not adequately prepared for what the chemical abortion would — physically or mentally — entail.
“This is not easy,” she said. “This is not something that our women need to be experiencing.”
The World Health Organization recommends using mifepristone, followed by misoprostol, as a safe and effective method to terminate pregnancies up to 12 weeks. Abortion-rights groups often promote the product as a way to expand abortion access to those who may not be able to visit a doctor in person or who want a nonsurgical option.
In 2022, after the Supreme Court overturned its own landmark case, Roe v. Wade, which made abortion legal nationwide, medication abortions became a lifeline for many women, said Liz Wagner, senior federal policy counsel at the Center for Reproductive Rights.
“That is precisely why anti-abortion politicians want to take mifepristone off the market or make it harder to access — they know that would drastically disrupt much-needed abortion care nationwide,” Wagner said in a statement.
Still, a number of Hawley’s guests shared stories of their own medication abortions that resulted in physical and mental health problems similar to what Gillette experienced.
Hawley also took aim at one of the most prolific manufacturers and distributors of mifepristone, Danco Laboratories LLC. The New York-based company, with ties to the Cayman Islands, operates in relative secrecy. Danco has previously stated its anonymity is due to fear of retribution from anti-abortion advocates. Hawley said he thinks otherwise and called on the private company to publicly disclose its investors.
“It’s because their drug is inherently dangerous, and they know it, but it is so, so profitable,” Hawley said. “No amount of profit justifies what’s happened to these women.”
Abortion in Missouri
In 2024, Missouri voters approved Amendment 3 by a vote of 51.6% to legalize abortions in the state. However, state legislators proposed an Amendment 3 of their own, set to be on the ballot in November. The new Amendment 3 would reinstate a near-total ban on abortion in Missouri with an exception for survivors of rape or incest up to 12 weeks gestation.
“I’m gonna be out there making the case that we need to protect life in the state of Missouri,” Hawley said. “We currently have abortion on demand. We have to fix it. We’re gonna have the chance to do that this fall.”
Hawley said as long as mifepristone is widely available, a vote won’t make a difference.
“So long as this drug can be mailed into every state of the union, with no safeguards to speak of, it’s not gonna matter,” he said.
-----------------------------------------------------
House passes several bills ahead of legislative spring break
By Anika Austvold and Sawyer Bess, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — More than a dozen bills passed through the Missouri House on Wednesday, with most receiving bipartisan support.
“Today was a good day in general,” said Rep. Adrian Plank, D-Columbia. “I voted for probably 98% of them.”
One of the few measures Plank opposed was House Bill 3146, sponsored by Rep. John Simmons, R-Washington, which would change how ballot summary statements for measures proposed by the General Assembly are written and challenged.
The bill, which passed the House 90-55, would give the secretary of state a larger role in writing ballot summaries than the courts.
Under the legislation, the secretary of state would have three attempts to draft ballot language before courts could step in to make changes. Only circuit court judges would have the authority to rewrite ballot language themselves.
Legal challenges to official ballot titles or fiscal notes would have to be filed in Cole County Circuit Court. If the court determines a summary statement is fair and sufficient, it must be placed on the ballot.
If the court finds the language insufficient or unfair, the court may suggest revisions and require the secretary of state to create a new summary that meets those standards.
Higher courts, including appeals courts and the Missouri Supreme Court, would not be able to directly rewrite the language under an amendment to the bill. Instead, they could only send the ballot summary back to the circuit court for revisions.
Rep. Eric Woods, D-Kansas City, criticized the bill, calling it “a temper tantrum reaction to Senate Bill 22 being struck down.”
The bill was signed into law last year with some of the same provisions but was struck down by the Missouri Supreme Court earlier this year. HB 3146 follows the vow of some legislators to re-enact the restrictions.
“It came back around the corner, which is not the way we should be in the business of doing things. We know it’s not going to pass this year,” Woods said.
Lawmakers also passed House Bill 1664, sponsored by Rep. Brian Seitz, R-Branson, which is a package of many House bills. One part would reduce Missouri’s statute of limitations for personal injury cases from five years to three years.
Representatives said that the five-year window is outdated and too long. Missouri currently has the third-longest personal injury statute of limitations in the country, behind South Dakota and Maine, which each allow six years.
The legislation would also double the time survivors of childhood sexual abuse have to seek damages. Under the bill, victims would have 20 years after turning 21 to file a claim, up from the current 10 years.
Many Democrats and some Republicans voted “present” or “no.” Though they supported extending the window for childhood sexual abuse cases, there were arguments over decreasing the statute of limitations.
“You’re closing the door for people that are victims of a crime being able to come back and get redress for their grievances in a civil action,” said Rep. Will Jobe, D-Independence.
Jobe previously worked in a personal injury firm and was a public defender working in criminal law. While he supports the part of the bills that would benefit victims of child sexual abuse, he is against decreasing the statute of limitations, saying all victims need to have their day in court.
The bill passed with 95 representatives in support, 12 in opposition and an unusually high number of 39 voting “present.”
The House also unanimously voted to recognize the first week of June as “Rare Pediatric Disease Week,” also called “June’s Week,” in honor of June, the granddaughter of Rep. Mike Steinmeyer, R-Sugar Creek.
June is living with an atypical teratoid rhabdoid tumor, a rare pediatric cancer.
She received a round of applause from the full House chamber and later ran from the speaker’s dais toward the chamber doors to high-five several representatives moments before the resolution passed 147–0.
-----------------------------------------------------
Herbicide linked to Parkinson's could be banned by bill
By Nolan Haberstroh, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — A bill that would ban the use of paraquat, a highly toxic herbicide linked to the development of Parkinson’s disease, was heard Wednesday in the Missouri House Committee on General Laws.
House Bill 2844, sponsored by Rep. Sherri Gallick, R-Belton, would ban all use of paraquat in the state starting Jan. 1, 2027. The bill would allow the Department of Agriculture to continue its use in limited quantities for research purposes.
“Paraquat is a herbicide that is highly toxic and has come under intense scrutiny,” Gallick said. “It has been linked to serious health risks that are dangerous if misused.”
During her testimony to the committee, Gallick made clear the bill is not intended to be anti-agriculture.
“I wanted to make sure that this bill was very narrow in scope,” Gallick said. “It is about paraquat and paraquat only. I am very much against any bleed over or any other herbicides or pesticides coming into this.”
Missouri is one of 10 states considering a paraquat ban. While the substance is federally legal, paraquat-based products are considered “Restricted Use Pesticides” by the Environmental Protection Agency, meaning personal use and acquisition are illegal. Paraquat is limited to commercial agricultural use by certified applicators. The herbicide is currently banned in over 70 countries.
While paraquat is lethal if ingested in small doses and has no antidote, deaths from ingestion of the substance are rare. The primary concern is the herbicide’s link to the development of Parkinson’s disease, a condition that causes negative symptoms for both physical and neurological health. Studies have linked the use of paraquat to a significant increase in the development of Parkinson’s disease.
Grant Niver, senior state government relations manager with the Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research, spoke in favor of the bill, citing years of research identifying the herbicide’s risks and the fact that paraquat’s use is banned in the same countries that manufacture it.
“Over four decades of research have shown that people who work or live near areas where paraquat is applied have a higher risk of developing Parkinson’s,” Niver said. “This is not abstract risk. It affects farmers, farm workers and families and communities in rural Missouri.”
The bill saw opposition from several organizations representing farmers, as well as Rep. Doyle Justus, R-Troy, a farmer himself, who cited the use of paraquat in the production of his best soy bean crop.
“Today it’s paraquat, last year it was another chemical,” Justus said. “Farmers need to have tools in their toolbox to raise their crops.”
Maxine Gill, policy coordinator for the Missouri Coalition for the Environment, also spoke in favor of the bill, noting that the herbicide is already banned from use entirely in some places, such as golf courses.
“If it’s too dangerous for golfers, it’s certainly too dangerous for our farmers and rural residents,” Gill said.
-----------------------------------------------------
House committee hears joint resolutions changing judicial appointments
By Eric Hughes, Missourian News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — A Missouri House committee held a contentious hearing Wednesday on two joint resolutions that would change the way judges in the state are appointed.
House Joint Resolution 153 and HJR 119, introduced by Rep. Darin Chappell, R-Rogersville, and Rep. Cathy Jo Loy, R-Carthage, would require judges to be appointed by the governor with the advice and consent of the Senate.
“(This) House joint resolution is not about weakening the courts,” Loy said. “It’s about examining whether the current system of selecting our judges best serves Missourians and maintains public confidence in the judiciary.”
Currently, under what is known as the Missouri Plan, Missouri Supreme Court judges, Court of Appeals judges and judges in the city of St. Louis and the counties of St. Louis, Clay, Jackson, Platte and Greene are appointed by the governor. They face retention votes at periodic intervals.
When a judicial vacancy occurs, a selected nonpartisan judicial commission interviews and selects three qualified nominees for the governor to appoint one within 60 days. If the governor doesn’t appoint one within the 60-day window, then the committee appoints the nominees themselves.
“Although the Missouri court plan’s official title includes the word ‘nonpartisan,’ it is anything but,” Chappell said. “It is entirely partisan.”
Chappell said he is introducing this resolution because he believes the courts have been making poor decisions recently.
“Maybe some of the decisions that have been handed down lately would not have been so politically motivated if the courts were populated differently,” he said.
The resolutions faced questions from Democrats and Republicans on concerns that the proposed system would increase partisanship in the judicial branch.
“This is a supermajority Republican state, you all control every branch of government,” Rep. Keri Ingle, D-Lee’s Summit, said. “The governor and the commission that he puts together in order to pick a judge panel is comprised of Republicans and because the rulings from the courts aren’t conservative enough for you, you want to throw out the entire plan.”
Loy noted that the judge panel is not all Republican.
Rep. Rudy Veit, R-Wardsville, asked the sponsors what would happen if they disagreed with the rulings made by judges appointed by their proposed system.
“I want to be clear, even though the representative suggested that I’m wanting to do this because of my partisanship, I never said that,” Chappell said. “I believe the system itself is not reflective of the people.”
Chappell added that the proposed resolution would be more reflective of the people, and not inherently partisan, because the governor and Senate in charge of appointments were elected by the people.
“One of the roles of government of the judiciary branch is actually to protect a minority from the majority, isn’t it?” Veit asked.
The resolution received testimony from people both in support, and against the bill.
“I think we have poor decision making, poor quality of judges and something needs to change,” said Samuel Lee, director of Campaign Life Missouri.
Eric Jennings, government relations counsel for the Supreme Court of Missouri, testified in opposition to the resolution because he believes the Missouri Plan is a structured process and professional evaluation that provides accountability to voters.
“(The resolution) would bring a very different process in place here in Missouri, and would reintroduce many of the elements that the Missouri Plan originally sought to filter out,” Jennings said.
Jennings faced criticism from Rep. Mark Matthiesen, R-O’Fallon.
“So the Supreme Court sent their attorney here to say ‘yeah we like it as it is,‘” Matthiesen said.
Jennings clarified that he was testifying on behalf of the Judicial Conference of Missouri, but Matthiesen interjected, “No, no, no, don’t interrupt me. We’re done.”
HJR 153 would also change all judicial terms to seven years.
Currently, state Supreme Court judges and Court of Appeals judges serve 12 year terms, circuit judges have six year terms, and associate circuit judges serve four years.
The resolutions will require a majority vote in both the House and Senate before being placed on a general election ballot to be voted on.
-----------------------------------------------------
Over 100 EMS professionals take concerns to the Capitol
By Emma Farrel, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — Emergency medical service workers gathered at the Capitol on Wednesday to speak with lawmakers about some of the biggest challenges facing their districts.
More than 140 EMS professionals traveled to the Capitol as part of an advocacy effort organized by four statewide associations. The groups met with legislators to discuss the challenges facing emergency response agencies and the policies they say are necessary to support EMS providers and patients.
The issues at the forefront were this year’s proposed property tax changes and the expansion of mobile integrated health programs across the state.
House Bill 1979 would expand the use of community paramedics, also known as mobile integrated health providers. The bill outlines how certified paramedics could provide non-emergency care outside of the traditional 911 system, including services delivered in patients’ homes.
Mobile integrated health programs allow paramedics to provide preventative or follow-up care for patients who may otherwise rely on repeated emergency calls or hospital visits. Supporters say the programs could help reduce strain on both ambulances and emergency departments.
Advocates also argue that the programs reduce costs for patients and hospitals by preventing expensive medical emergencies through more consistent care.
Justin Duncan, president of the Missouri Emergency Medical Service Association, said he felt confident about the positive changes the legislation could bring.
“Our biggest bill is around mobile integrated health care. The community paramedic bill … it’s good legislation, it’s bipartisan, it’s good for patients and it’s good for the providers,” Duncan said.
Matt Bowen, director of the Missouri Ambulance Association, said the approach represents a major shift in how EMS services operate.
“Specifically, the community paramedic mobile integrated health bill, that’s kind of the future of EMS in my mind,” Bowen said.
Historically, Bowen said, only larger EMS districts in Missouri have been able to implement community paramedic programs because of the costs involved.
“The only services in Missouri that were able to do community paramedic programs were very large services, and the reason they did it was simply to give their 911 trucks a break because they were getting called so many times — the same issues over and over again,” Bowen said. “So, now we are trying to get a source of funding for this, other than grants and just using their general budget.”
Bowen said programs like these can also reduce the strain on hospitals and EMS workers. He said the bill could prevent hospitals from being overrun with patients and ambulances constantly being on the road.
On top of the relief for hospitals, Kat Probst, executive director of the Ambulance District Association of Missouri, said the program is important in preventing burnout among EMS workers.
“For those of us that go out every single day and deal with repetitive patients over and over again, it affects burnout,” Probst said. “It’s not because we are burnt out of seeing that patient, it’s because we’re burnt out of feeling like the system doesn’t seem to support the patient.”
Though EMS leaders support the legislation, the bill has not yet been assigned a committee.
EMS workers also warned lawmakers that broader discussions about property tax reductions could significantly affect ambulance districts.
“We’re extremely concerned about what the solution is going to be if, at a legislative level, they change the ability of us to collect property tax, when over 60% of your districts in the state leverage a property tax and it’s 50% of their budget,” Probst said.
The issue comes as legislators debate several property tax reform proposals, including legislation from Rep. Tim Taylor, R-Bunceton, that aim to increase rollbacks on certain property tax levies. Taylor’s bill passed in the House last week.
“We understand how it has the potential to help the individuals that are dealing with the economy,” Probst said. “But we also understand that we want ambulances to show up, we want law enforcement to be able to show up.”
Rep. Cecelie Williams, R-Dittmer, who is a member of the Special Committee on Property Tax Reform, met with EMS leaders from her district. She said maintaining stable funding for local public safety agencies is a priority.
“My goal is to make sure that we protect the services that receive property tax as their funding mechanism,” Williams said. “These services are crucial to our counties, to our local government and our citizens. Without public health safety, we will be nothing; there will be mass chaos everywhere.”
-----------------------------------------------------
Missouri lawmakers debate 'No Shari’a Act' in House committee
Kavya By Ramesh, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — Missouri House of Representative lawmakers debated legislation Wednesday that would prohibit courts from applying Shari’a law or certain foreign legal systems in the state.
House Bills 2139 and 2175 would create the "No Shari'a Act," which would bar courts from enforcing foreign laws or religious codes that conflict with rights guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution.
The identical bills are sponsored by Rep. Steve Jordan, R-Advance, and Rep. Chad Perkins, R-Bowling Green.
Jordan said the bills aim to ensure that foreign or religious legal systems do not override constitutional protections in Missouri.
"What we're trying to do here is to stop any foreign law or religious law that does not fall within the Constitution of Missouri or the United States to be invoked on the people in the United States of America," Jordan said. "It's a pretty simple bill."
Under the legislation, courts would be prohibited from enforcing rulings or contractual provisions that rely on Shari’a law or foreign legal systems if they conflict with constitutional rights. The bill would also void contracts that grant jurisdiction to foreign tribunals.
"I just want to try to stop the application of any foreign law, not just Shari'a, not just the Muslim law, to keep from superseding any state's law or the United States Constitution," Jordan said.
Perkins said he believes developments overseas could eventually reach the United States.
"You certainly see this becoming a trend in European countries," Perkins said. "I think any reasonable person watching would say if that is the intent to do those in those European countries, that ultimately would be the intent to do it here."
Several lawmakers raised concerns about the legislation and its potential effects.
Rep. Bridget Walsh Moore, D-St. Louis, said the measure is unnecessary.
"The First Amendment already prohibits U.S. courts from imposing religious law as civil law, so this measure is completely unnecessary," Walsh Moore said. "Religions, freedom, equality, they're fundamental values of the U.S. and the state of Missouri, so these principles are enshrined in our Constitution and it's what makes our country great."
Walsh Moore also argued the bill could also create unintended legal consequences.
"A couple married abroad moving to Missouri could have their marriage invalidated," Walsh Moore said. "If we say their country's laws on marriage aren't as good as ours, so you could come here and have your marriage invalidated."
Rep. Jeff Hales, D-St. Louis, questioned why the legislation singles out a specific religious legal tradition.
"I have a very Jewish community, orthodox community, follow Talmudic law or Halakha law. There's also a Dharma law, Hindu and Buddhist law," Hales said. "I don't see where this should be singling out one. And I don't think it frankly should be singling out any individual religious belief or laws."
Rep. Colin Wellenkamp, R-St. Charles, said he represents a rapidly growing immigrant community and worries the bill could discourage participation in civic life.
"I want them to be open, I want them to contribute to our community," Wellenkamp said. "Otherwise, if they feel like they need to solidify, there's a risk of them concentrating their wealth inside their community instead of with the rest of my city."
Religious leaders also weighed in during public testimony.
Brian Kaylor, a Baptist minister and president of Word&Way, a Christian nonprofit, urged lawmakers to reject the legislation.
"This legislation is bigotry in search of a problem," Kaylor said. "The singling out the targeting of one religious tradition is highly problematic, and we should say no to that, because once we start threatening the religious liberty rights of one group by targeting like this, we put everyone's religious liberty rights at risk."
The bills remain in committee.
-----------------------------------------------------
Brewers plan to make hemp-derived soda for as long as it is legal
By Jana Rose Schleis, Missouri News Network
It’s happy hour at Logboat Brewing Co. in Columbia, and bartender Mark Alexiou is doing what he’s done for the better part of 35 years — serving beer, seltzer, cider and cocktails to about two dozen thirsty patrons.
“I’ve had some people come in who know exactly what they’re ordering, other people who are curious, and maybe actually a third group who are, like … secretive about it,” he said. “They’re just like, yeah I heard you guys have that … that one drink.”
That one drink is Logboat’s newest product, Garden Club. Launched in January, it isn’t a beer and it doesn’t even contain alcohol. It’s a grape or orange-flavored soda infused with 10 milligrams of THC — the psychoactive compound found in cannabis.
Consumer behavior is changing in the beverage industry, and Alexiou said more of his customers want to unwind with an alcohol alternative.
“Especially this last year or two, I don’t feel that people are maybe drinking as much as they were before, or even drinking beer like they were before and so they’re looking for other options,” he said.
Missouri breweries are now getting into the THC business by creating hemp sodas and seltzers that can result in a marijuana-like high. But, due to a congressional ban, these products — and potentially the entire industry — now have an expiration date.
Loophole or opportunity
Hemp-THC beverages started hitting the market in 2022 after the 2018 farm bill removed a decadeslong ban on growing the plant, opening the door to a new industry of hemp-derived products. Unlike marijuana, hemp products that contain THC can be sold outside of dispensaries in places such as liquor stores, grocery stores, bars and breweries. This is often referred to as the hemp loophole.
“Some people like to call it a loophole. We like to call it an opportunity,” said Christopher Lackner, Hemp Beverage Alliance founder and president.
The organization of hemp entrepreneurs advocates for regulating hemp-derived THC beverages the same way alcohol is — with age restrictions, proper labeling, dosage limits and product testing.
But late last year, through the bill Congress passed to end the longest government shutdown ever, the hemp loophole was closed.
Unless Congress acts again, or state lawmakers get involved, all hemp-THC products will again become illegal this November. For Lackner, that started the clock.
“Most people took that as a call to action,” he said. “We have one year to create a regulatory framework that satisfies the concerns of the folks who voted in support of this ban.”
Rebuilding an industry
Since becoming legal in 2018, the hemp industry has slowly regrown — with ups and downs. It takes time for farmers to cultivate the reintroduced crop, for producers to create products from it and for consumers to get acquainted with new offerings.
Although hemp can be used in a wide variety of products, consumable hemp-THC has been among the quickest to make it to market after the ban was lifted.
Missouri lawmakers have expressed concerns over the proliferation of these products and the unregulated nature of the new industry — and how to keep hemp-THC out of reach of kids.
Former Gov. Mike Parson attempted to ban THC consumables from being sold outside dispensaries in Missouri. Local governments, including St. Louis, have also considered limiting the sale of hemp-THC products to marijuana dispensaries.
Instead of letting a ban on hemp go back into effect, hemp industry leaders want Congress and state lawmakers to set guidelines and standards for these products — something they’ve been asking for over several years.
“That’s what’s wild about this space is that with the 2018 Farm Bill, it was made legal to make a hemp derived beverage, but there were no regulations. There were no guidelines,” said Tyson Hunt, Logboat Brewery co-founder and CEO.
Josh Rein is Logboat’s head brewer and is in charge of product development. The company has been working on developing a grape soda for a while. Once he got in touch with a producer of liquid hemp-derived THC, it took the soda recipe in a new direction, Rein said. Brewers were excited, despite the forthcoming federal ban.
“We definitely knew what was going on policy-wise and knew that it could not be a long-term thing,” Rein said. “But it wasn’t stopping us from wanting to mess around with it.”
Without federal or state guidelines on how hemp-THC products should be made, tested or sold, Logboat set its own benchmarks and is following FDA soft drink standards voluntarily.
The hemp policy desert
The federal farm bill, generally passed every five years, is the massive piece of legislation that handles everything from crop insurance to conservation programs to food stamps. The 2018 bill legalized growing the hemp crop, but didn’t regulate any products that could be made from the plant.
Lackner said it’s like saying getting the OK to raise pigs but there’s no information about how the bacon should be served. So, he formed the Hemp Beverage Alliance in 2023 to help producers self-regulate and establish legitimacy in the industry, he said.
“Everybody was wandering the desert on their own,” he said of producers of hemp products.
Lackner now hosts a regular group phone call that brings producers together to discuss self-imposed best practices. He said it’ll take time to build guidelines for a new industry, but using regulations similar to those on alcohol products is a good place to start.
“When we came out of prohibition (in the 1920s), the laws that we had then are not the laws that we have now for alcohol, right? They change. They improve after testing, after we get to see what works and what doesn’t,” he said.
Bills have been proposed in both Washington, D.C., and Jefferson City to create the type of regulations the Hemp Beverage Alliance is asking for or to delay the ban by two more years.
A new kind of happy hour
Last fall when local mortgage underwriter Maureen Harriman was prescribed a new medication to prevent migraines, it also meant that in order for the drug to be successful, she must abstain from alcohol.
“Anytime I want to socialize and just relax and mellow out, I don’t have the option to drink alcohol anymore,” Harriman said. “So when Logboat came out with the THC soda, it was intriguing. I decided to try it.”
Harriman, a mom of two, drank a can of Garden Club at a neighborhood game night.
“I just kind of felt relaxed and mellowed out and it was a really fun night,” she said.
Lackner said the typical hemp beverage customer is not the typical marijuana consumer — they buy hemp products at grocery or liquor stores where they already shop and are often looking for a relatively lower dose of THC.
“They’re picking up a pinot grigio, and they’re picking up a hemp beverage,” he said. “They’re not picking up a marijuana drink and a marijuana cigarette.”
Logboat strategically launched the product during “dry January” — a trend where adults limit or quit drinking alcohol after the new year.
Lackner believes as adults “recalibrate their relationship with alcohol,” banning these products outright or limiting them to dispensaries would wipe out a blooming industry.
Waiting for the wind down
Logboat completed a major expansion of its facilities in 2024. Since opening 12 years ago, the beer company has expanded into making seltzers, offering original cocktails in the taproom and started a sister cider company.
Rein said that commitment to innovation made creating a THC soda the natural next step.
“We are in the business of making beer, but we’re also a beverage company as well,” Rein said. “If we can produce a beverage that people want to have, then it’s worth it to look at that.”
Logboat is currently distributing its THC sodas throughout central Missouri and working to expand statewide — as long as it’s allowed.
“We’re going to continue to make this until someone says that we can’t,” Rein said.
Rein heard from the company’s distributors in the Lake of the Ozarks region that customers there are interested in a lower-dose THC option.
Now, the brewery plans to launch two more flavors of Garden Club — lemon lime and grapefruit — at the end of March with 10 and 5 milligrams of THC, respectively.
Hunt is monitoring the federal hemp legislation daily. He also spent a day at the Missouri State Capitol in early March trying to convince state lawmakers to step in.
“When I started the company, I didn’t think I’d get into government affairs, but here we are,” he said.
It only takes Logboat brewers 48 hours to create a batch of Garden Club, a much shorter timeline than producing beer. Since the brewery launched the hemp product in January, Hunt said it’s been a one of the top three sellers in the taproom, with many customers buying packs to-go. He and Rein are hoping for guardrails to be put around these products’ sale and use, rather than bringing back the ban.
“We are asking for regulation. We need regulation in this space. We want to see this category grow,” Hunt said. “With regulation comes confidence and trust from the consumer.”
The company is currently brewing 60-barrel batches of its THC sodas. But if lawmakers don’t act soon, Hunt said he’ll reconsider.
“We’ll see, it might shrink down to 30 barrels if nothing’s happening by mid-summer, and then if we don’t have any movement by September, I think we’ll wind it down,” Hunt said.
If a law doesn’t pass by November, the return of hemp will have been short-lived.
-----------------------------------------------------
Senate considers expanding DNA collection to all felony arrests
By Noah Symes, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — The Senate Judiciary Committee heard a bill Wednesday that would mandate collecting DNA for all felony arrests.
Currently, DNA collection at the point of arrest occurs only for certain felonies and burglary. Senate Bill 1458 would change this to require DNA collection from anyone 17 or older for all felonies and burglary arrests.
Bill sponsor Sen. Nick Schroer, R-O’Fallon, said the bill provides clarity to an inconsistent system.
“There’s a little confusion with our law; (DNA collections) are taken in some instances,” Schroer said. “It’s kind of sporadic.”
Schroer clarified that collected DNA would be thrown out if charges were dismissed or the arrested person was acquitted.
Ashley Spence, founder of the DNA Justice Project, testified in support of the bill. Spence recounted her experience of rape and how a DNA swab led to her rapist’s arrest.
“While I was asleep in my bed, an intruder came into my apartment, into my bed, and began to rape, beat and nearly killed me,” Spence said. “He got away. I never saw his face.”
Spence said the only reason her rapist was caught was because of a DNA swab.
Spence said the man was arrested attempting to break into the home of three young women in California, one of 31 states that mandate DNA collection at the point of arrest. The rapist was convicted to 137.5 years in prison, with DNA used as leading evidence in the case.
Spence said that if her rapist had been arrested in Missouri, “he would still be free raping and terrorizing his victims, because he would have not swabbed his cheek.”
Collected DNA is submitted to the FBI’s Combined DNA Index System, known as CODIS. This system helps law enforcement identify DNA matches. It is also the system that caught Spence's rapist.
John Roman, director for the Center on Public Safety and Justice at NORC at the University of Chicago, also testified in support of the bill. He said the bill would help expand CODIS and increase its use in solving crimes.
“Eligibility is largely limited to people convicted of the most serious offenses,” Roman said.
Roman said that DNA is often only added for those likely to receive longer sentences, limiting CODIS’s ability to help law enforcement link small-time offenders to their possible more serious crimes.
-----------------------------------------------------
Senate hears bill to modify General Assembly members term limits
By Sam Jackson, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — A bill increasing term limits for lawmakers to 16 years was heard by the Senate Committee for Rules, Joint Rules, Resolutions and Ethics on Wednesday.
Senate Joint Resolution 97, sponsored by Sen. Joe Nicola, R-Grain Valley, would double the time members could spend in one chamber, which is currently capped at eight years in both the House and Senate.
Nicola said the past 15 months in his role, he has seen “the negative consequences of term limits.” He said his bill would allow the state to benefit from experienced legislators while still preserving clear limits.
“The body doesn’t have the historical experience that some of our lobbyists and bureaucrats have, and that’s a huge problem, and far too long, it puts them in the driver’s seat, versus the representatives of the people,” Nicola said.
Members are currently allowed to serve for eight years in each chamber, but this resolution would allow a member to serve up to 16 years total in the General Assembly in either the House, Senate or any combination of time in both chambers.
“They could spend four years in the House, 12 in the Senate; 12 in the House, four in the Senate; eight in the House, and eight in the Senate, as it is currently, or all 16 years in either chamber,” Nicola said.
He said this bill will work to support term limits and hold politicians accountable, but not punish them for their experience.
“When members are forced out too quickly, the people’s branch loses valuable knowledge and experience,” Nicola said. “And when that happens, influence tends to shift away from the elective lawmakers and towards staff, lobbyists, and bureaucratic systems that are not directly accountable to the voters.”
If voters approve this bill, members of the General Assembly will not be allowed to serve more than 16 years total in both houses starting Dec. 3.
-----------------------------------------------------
Seckman students push to limit energy drink sales
By Chase Pray, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — The House General Laws Committee heard a bill Wednesday that would eliminate the sale of high-caffeine energy drinks in Missouri public and charter schools.
House Bill 1880, introduced by Rep. Renee Reuter, R-Imperial, would prohibit schools from selling beverages containing more than the American Academy of Pediatrics daily recommended 100 milligrams of caffeine to students.
Conversations about the bill began last year when Seckman High School senior Sabrina Formby gave a presentation to several representatives, including Reuter, about the dangers of overconsuming caffeine.
According to a National Institute of Health study found on the National Library of Medicine, caffeine is the most consumed psychoactive drug in the world.
“It’s been 15 years since my youngest child graduated from high school, so I had no idea that they even had energy drinks,” Reuter said. “So it’s important that the experts (students) who live it every day came and talked to me about it.”
Formby and four other Seckman students testified about their personal experiences and observations regarding energy drink consumption at their school.
One of those students, junior Addison Burnett, spoke about the reliance she’s seen students develop for energy drinks.
“I had my first energy drink around age 13 and I still remember how shaky and on edge I felt,” she said. “Once students start drinking caffeinated drinks and experience a caffeine crash, they may try to stop it by consuming more and more.”
Rep. Doyle Justus, R-Troy, expressed support for the bill, discussing behaviors he witnessed during his 26 years as an educator.
“If I had a dollar for every student who showed up in the morning with a 24-ounce energy drink in their backpack, I could buy everyone in this room a really nice dinner,” he said. “So it’s definitely an issue.”
Several committee members, including Rep. Holly Jones, R-Eureka, questioned whether energy drinks should be sold in schools at all.
“While I really love the bill, 100 milligrams seems like a threshold that is still too high,” she said. “I don’t think there should be Red Bull or Monsters with 80 milligrams of caffeine in high schools either.”
Emily Wilkerson, a spokesperson for substance use prevention agency PreventEd, spoke on the effects that overconsumption of caffeine has on teenagers and young adults.
“Their brains are still developing so it’s our jobs as adults to protect them,” she said.
For the Seckman students who testified, passing this bill represents a step toward raising awareness about caffeine consumption and encouraging healthier choices in schools.
“People will want to know why energy drinks are being taken out of vending machines, which is a perfect opportunity to share the dangers and discourage high caffeine consumption levels,” Formby said.
-----------------------------------------------------
A bill changing cancer warnings on pesticides passes in Senate committee
By Abigail Didonna, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — A bill that would change pesticide regulation requirements passed out of the Senate Agriculture, Food Production and Outdoor Resources committee Wednesday.
Senate Bill 1005, sponsored by Sen. Kurtis Gregory, R-Marshall, states warning label protections for pesticides registered by the Environmental Protection Agency are sufficient to meet state standards for cancer warnings. Some argue the provision could potentially limit liability lawsuits, but the bill states that the labeling rules would not fully grant manufacturers immunity from liability.
Much of the debate revolved around the German company, Bayer. The company has been the target of tens of thousands of lawsuits claiming that its product, RoundUp, causes non-Hodgkin's lymphoma because of the ingredient glyphosate.
In December of 2025, a landmark study from 2000 proving that glyphosate wasn't linked with cancer was retracted after evidence that the company's employees were involved in writing it came to light.
Currently, the EPA's own research does not find glyphosate to be a carcinogen. Under the bill, state law would not require a warning label until the EPA does.
Supporters of the bill said it would create consistency across states and ensure farmers' access to a product they need to do their job.
Mark Fiegenbaum, representing the Missouri Farm Bureau, said that his organization trusts the federal agency to adequately label pesticide products.
“We believe the EPA has the process and resources available to determine whether or not a product is deemed safe and effective, and that when they assign a label to a product, that label should be able to satisfy warning needs and use for that product,” he said.
The opposition's arguments primarily revolved around state sovereignty. Ben Mook with the Missouri Association of Trial Lawyers said that the EPA shouldn’t be the end-all be-all when it comes to protecting our farmers.
“Five years ago, this body would have laughed at the notion that we should be relying on the EPA to tell Missouri how to do anything, but now we’re embracing the federal government to come protect us and save us,” he said.
Byron Keelin, representing Freedom Principle, said there should be an ability to set safety standards outside of federal government regulation.
“Missouri has unique farms, rivers, soils and communities that demand state-level oversight, not blind deference to federal agencies that prioritize national agendas over our sovereignty,” he said.
Those testifying in opposition had concerns that warning labels could cause pesticide companies to be immune from legal action. Jamie Blair, representing the Missouri Rural Crisis Center, said the right to seek justice when you believe you have been harmed is fundamental.
“The idea that we would curtail that right for some of the hardest working, most dedicated and least likely to complain people in our state is an insult to injury if I’ve ever heard one," Blair said. “Industry doesn’t want to curtail that right because it’s frivolous or being found without merit. They are trying to change the rules mid-play because they are losing.”
Dusty Collins, a farmer from Howell, spoke about how vital glyphosate is to his farm. During a shortage of the product, Collins said he had to use mixtures of alternative pesticides that were less effective.
“The elimination of glyphosate access would consequently compromise agronomic, environmental and financial liability of agricultural operations, while paradoxically increasing the per-acre pesticide product used, thereby elevating potential exposure to produce. We’re going to have to use more products to do what we’re doing now, so that’s not limiting our product exposure, right?”
The committee members thanked Collins for taking the time to testify. .
-----------------------------------------------------
Senators clash over sluggish bill proceedings
By Jordan Davis and Erin Hynes, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — After weeks of Democratic filibusters in the Senate, a Republican senator vented his frustration that conservative legislation was not being passed quickly enough.
Sen. Rick Brattin, R-Harrisonville, expressed his frustration with Senate Democrats to Sen. Maggie Nurrenbern, D-Kansas City, during debate on Wednesday after she and other senators filibustered for over three hours in an attempt to get Brattin to come onto the Senate floor.
Nurrenbern’s seven-line bill that prompted a filibuster, Senate Bill 1544, would designate a portion of State Highway 9 in Platte County as “Firefighter Paramedic Graham J Hoffman Memorial Highway.”
Nurrenbern said that she had been trying to speak with Brattin all day after she received a letter from his office Wednesday morning explaining that her bill was being taken off the agenda. She was not able to speak with him about the bill until Sen. Steven Roberts, D-St. Louis, formally called for senators to return to the Senate floor.
When Brattin reached the floor, he criticized Nurrenbern for halting Senate action over her bill, stating multiple times that he does not want her to receive a “Willy Wonka golden ticket” to add her bill back on the calendar. Brattin also vented his frustration that Senate Democrats have held up numerous bills every week since the session started through filibusters and extended debate.
“We have a supermajority of Republicans that have been elected to advance conservative policy and day in, day out, week after week after week, we’ve had you and a few members literally torching every single bill that we do,” Brattin said.
At the start of their conversation, Nurrenbern asked if Brattin had read SB 1544 before taking it off the Senate Transportation, Infrastructure and Public Safety Committee agenda. Brattin responded that he had not read the bill. Rather, he said that his rejection “has to do with the actions and the bigger picture.”
Brattin said he believes that Nurrenbern has been blocking “good conservative policy” and did not want to go forward with her bill.
“I want to protect the unborn. I want to cut taxes. I want to stop the illegals from obtaining all these other measures and do the things people send us here to do,” Brattin said. “But yet you prevented that in every aspect.”
Brattin went on to comment on Nurrenbern’s filibuster Wednesday.
“You think you get to come up here, and again, go on your little temper tantrum, and get your way,” Brattin said, banging on his desk.
Directly following this comment, presiding Sen. Travis Fitzwater, R-Holts Summit, called for “a little bit of decorum” among the two senators and to “respect the chamber.”
The two Senators’ arguments became heated at times, with each talking over the other. At one point, Nurrenbern exclaimed, “For the love of all that’s good in this world, just let me say my piece!”
“You have said your piece for three months on this floor,” Brattin responded.
Brattin went on to admonish Nurrenbern for her filibuster after not supporting Senate Bill 1221, establishing the “Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act.” Nurrenburn said that she would be willing to work with any legislation that comes across her desk.
“You want to sit here and talk about, ‘Oh we need to give all this grace to a certain family,’ yet the unborn child on an operating table gets to be slaughtered, and you’re gonna filibuster that and we’re supposed to be OK with it,” Brattin said.
In 2024, Brattin was among four members of the Freedom Caucus who were stripped from their committees due to repeated filibusters directed at Senate leaders. They claimed that Republican legislation was not being passed promptly.
On Wednesday, Brattin again expressed his concern that conservative legislation was not moving fast enough, but this time, Brattin was opposed to those filibustering. Brattin and Nurrenbern argued for over 40 minutes about the filibuster before Brattin left the chamber. The Senate proceeded with its agenda.
“There’s a time for political shenanigans and then there’s a time to do what’s right, Senator,” Nurrenbern said.
-----------------------------------------------------
Advocates push for permanent suicide hotline funding
By Erin Hynes and Jordan Davis, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — Suicide is the ninth leading cause of death in Missouri, according to the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention. Foundation members spoke to over 60 legislators Wednesday in hopes of changing that.
House Bill 2763, sponsored by Rep. John Black, R-Marshfield, and Senate Bill 1562, sponsored by Sen. Patty Lewis, D-Kansas City, aim to provide permanent funding for operating Missouri crisis services, such as 988 and mobile crisis response services. A committee heard SB 1562 Wednesday.
These bills would implement a 65-cent surcharge on retail purchases for wireless internet devices or services to fund the "988 Crisis Continuum Fund." The fund would finance emergency communication through call, text or chat.
Foundation members spent Wednesday afternoon at the Capitol talking to 64 legislators about the importance of 988 funding.
According to the foundation, Missouri has no laws in place to maintain 988 infrastructure. Missouri also has no laws requiring regular training on suicide assessment, treatment and management for mental health and medical professionals or school personnel.
Lauren Ross, the Missouri chapter secretary and advocacy chair, said the foundation received positive feedback from legislators, including Sen. Maggie Nurrenbern, D-Kansas City, and Sen. Stephen Webber, D-Columbia.
Ross's personal experience with the hotline drove her to be a proponent of the legislation.
"They are trained to help a mental health crisis situation, whereas a dispatcher, when calling 911, is just trained to dispatch emergency services," Ross said. "I feel like if 988 had been around in 2002 when I lost my dad, there's a chance that he would be here with us today."
Missourians can call or text 988 to talk with trained crisis specialists when experiencing a mental health or substance abuse crisis at no cost.
In 2022, the 988 number replaced the previous 1-800 number for mental health crises. The Missouri Department of Mental Health also determined 988 would have 24/7 coverage, providing mental health support to Missourians and preventing more costly responses like emergency medical services and hospitalizations.
Missouri had about 100,000 calls to 988 in 2025, nearly 20,000 more than the national average, according to previous Missourian reporting.
Ross said that 988 is currently a line item in the federal budget, so funding is not permanent. If it is not funded at the state level, then the service could be cut from the budget at any moment.
-----------------------------------------------------
WEDNESDAY
House gives first approval of resolution to eliminate income tax
By Kennedy Voss and Emily Skidmore, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — Three hours of heated debate on the House floor Tuesday preceded a vote granting initial approval for a joint resolution that would eliminate Missouri’s income tax.
House Joint Resolutions 173 and 174, carried by Rep. Bishop Davidson, R-Republic, and Speaker of the House Rep. Jonathan Patterson, R-Lees Summit, would phase out individual income tax while allowing the legislature to increase sales or use tax in the state to fill revenue gaps if approved by voters. If the General Assembly approves the proposal, residents in Missouri would vote in November on the resolution.
“We believe that as Missourians grow their economy, Missourians ought to benefit from the growth of that economy,” Davidson said.
The resolution would reduce the individual income tax each year by 0.01% for every $20 million in the state’s net revenue. These reductions would be capped at 1.6% per year.
The individual income tax would be eliminated after the rates reach 1.4%.
Supporters of the bill said the elimination of individual income taxes would be a major benefit to the average Missouri resident and could attract others to the state.
“(The resolution) gives us more time, powers, to stop the bleeding of our number one resource,” said Rep. Brian Seitz, R-Branson. “That being your citizens, entrepreneurs, and those who are struggling to make ends meet by moving to a different state.”
“It’s a win, it’s a win, it’s a win,” Seitz added.
Opponents of the resolution expressed concerns that Missouri residents may not be aware that sales or use taxes could be raised to offset the loss of individual income tax revenue.
“You are asking the average voter to vote to raise their taxes in ways and amounts that you will decide later without that vote,” said Rep. Mark Boyko, D-Kirkwood.
The resolution would allow the legislature to broaden sales and use taxes to certain services that are currently exempt.
The resolution also allows the legislature to make changes to sales and use taxes to make up for the loss of revenue from the individual income tax. Any increases or changes to sales taxes would be determined by the legislature in a future session if voters approve the resolution.
During his State of the State address, Gov. Mike Kehoe said the elimination of income tax was one of his top priorities for the year. He also said that he would like sales tax exemptions for agriculture, real estate and health care as part of the proposal. The current resolution does not include any exemptions.
Opponents of the bill said the ballot language was insufficient and could confuse voters. The current ballot language states that the resolution would “modernize the sales and use tax” without explaining that the resolution allows for sales and use taxes to increase.
Rep. Mark Boyko, D-Kirkwood, said the resolution was likely going to benefit the wealthiest Missouri residents. Boyko said wealthy Missouri residents are already benefiting from the elimination of the capital gains tax last year, and that the removal of individual income taxes would likely hurt the poorest populations the most.
“Last year we gave billionaires their break on capital gains, and this year we look to be giving multi-millionaires their break,” Boyko said.
The current top income tax rate in Missouri is 4.7%, and has been reduced over time from a 6% rate in 2015. During fiscal year 2025, income tax revenue was the state’s largest general revenue source, making up 65% of revenue.
Nine states have eliminated their income tax, including Texas, Tennessee and Florida.
Opponents of the bill said that while the elimination of income tax may work in other states, this taxation model would not work for Missouri. Rep. Ian Mackey, D-St. Louis, said that many states that have eliminated the income tax have more robust industries, which were taxed to make up revenue losses.
“When Tennessee eliminated their income tax, it made up 1% of their budget. One percent,” said Rep. Ian Mackey, D-St. Louis. “Our income tax makes up over 60% of our budget. What a silly analogy, folks.”
Though he opposed the bill, Mackey said that he hoped the bill would pass.
“I hope it passes here, I hope it passes the Senate, it goes on the ballot, and I hope voters approve it,” Mackey said. “And then I hope what happens is we go bankrupt, everything falls apart, we get what we deserve, and the Democrats come back to win.”
“It’s the best case scenario,” he added.
Supporters said they wanted to put the measure on the ballot so the average voter would be able to decide what they are taxed on.
“No one in this room is going to do anything other than put (the resolution) on the ballot and allow Missourians to determine what their tax structure will be,” said Speaker Pro Tem Chad Perkins, R-Bowling Green.
-----------------------------------------------------
Senate passes bills ensuring women can divorce while pregnant
By Ryan Brandt and Caroline Sweet, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — A bipartisan pair of bills banning courts from considering pregnancy as a reason to deny a divorce passed in the Senate by a vote of 29-0 Tuesday.
House bills 1908 and 2337 are sponsored by Rep. Cecelie Williams, R-Dittmer, and Rep. Raychel Proudie, D-Ferguson, respectively. In her statements to both the House and Senate Committees on Families, Seniors and Health, Williams spoke about her experience as a survivor of domestic violence and her inability to get a divorce while she was pregnant.
Under current Missouri law, a judge can delay granting a divorce if a woman is pregnant. The combined bills would prevent judges from taking pregnancy into account when deciding whether to grant a divorce.
Sen. Jill Carter, R-Newton, carried Williams’ bill forward in the Senate and thanked Williams for sharing her story with the Senate Committee on Families, Seniors and Health.
“We have this tremendous bill coming before us. One that, I think, spans the political divide in our state,” Carter said on the Senate floor Tuesday. “This is one piece of legislation, I think, that we are all excited to see get across the finish line.”
The bill passed unanimously on both the House floor on Feb. 12 and in the Senate Committee on Families, Seniors and Health on Monday. All senators present for the vote on Tuesday unanimously voted to pass the bill.
A similar bill, also sponsored by Williams, almost passed last year but died when the General Assembly adjourned ahead of schedule.
Carter expressed support for the bill not only because of its protections for women but also as an opportunity to prevent abortions in Missouri.
“In my opinion, it is a very pro-life bill where it would allow a woman to not feel compelled to get an abortion simply because she is married and seeking a divorce in cases of violence,” Carter said.
The bill now heads to the governor’s desk to be signed into law.
-----------------------------------------------------
Missouri House votes to change how kids learn to read
By Kaleb Anderson, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — The Missouri House passed a bill to change how students will learn to read on Tuesday.
House Bill 2872, sponsored by Rep. Cathy Jo Loy, R-Carthage, will require school districts and charter schools to notify parents that if their child’s substantial reading deficiency is not corrected by the end of third grade, the child will not be promoted unless the child qualifies for a “good cause” exemption.
While acknowledging the need for the restrictions, Rep. Mark Boyko, D-Kirkwood, asked how the bill would address parents who believe they can override the school district’s decision to retain the student. Loy said that parents will have to be understanding of those decisions.
“When you send your child into a public school or private school, you sign on to the policies that are in their schools,” Loy said.
“We don’t let parents come in and demand that their precious child gets an A when they come to D. And so if their child cannot read in the third grade, our policy is you’re going to retain the child,” Loy added.
In addition to changing reading requirements, the bill will prohibit educators from using the three-cueing system to teach students how to read.
The system utilizes visual and contextual clues to help students understand how to read words. The method has been widely viewed as ineffective by scholars and is often advised against by educators, who teach students to phonetically sound out words they cannot spell.
“This legislation offers the same types of reforms that help states like Mississippi move from near the bottom of the national reading scores to the middle of the country,” Loy said. “If a child cannot read, they cannot fully access math, science, history or any other subject.”
“The goal is not retention. The goal is literacy, making sure that children learn to read early so that retention becomes unnecessary,” Loy said.
The bill will allow the Evidence-Based Reading Instruction Program Fund to support reading tutoring programs during regular school hours, rather than only outside regular school hours.
The bill faces a final vote before going to the Senate, which is considering similar legislation.
-----------------------------------------------------
Statewide meetings next week over proposed income tax change
By Margaret Stewart, Missouri News Network
Missouri community members plan to host eight meetings across the state next week over proposals to eliminate the state income tax.
MO Coalition and collaborating groups will propose a “people’s budget” to compete with the state’s proposed elimination of income tax.
The meetings will be held in eight counties:
The state has proposed budget cuts up to $600 million for the upcoming fiscal year, starting in July. The meetings will propose an entirely new budget.
Groups such as Abortion Action Missouri and Missouri Jobs with Justice continue to advocate for policy changes.
They hope to “leave our children with a brighter future” by including fair wages for workers, access to abortion, public education and restricting corporate monopolies, according to a press release.
The groups oppose the proposed tax plan and aim to enhance services provided by the government “across gender, race, and place.”
The House is expected to pass resolutions before session break this week, placing a ballot question in November to eliminate income tax.
Opponents of the legislation claim Missouri taxpayers will actually pay more in sales tax, increasing the net total taxes paid. The increased sales tax could potentially harm Missouri workers and benefit those with higher income.
-----------------------------------------------------
Missourians protest at Supreme Court for fair congressional maps
By Emerson Smith, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — Missourians from all over the state gathered outside the Missouri Supreme Court to protest against gerrymandering on Tuesday.
Inside the Supreme Court, justices were hearing arguments on Luther v. Hoskins about whether the legislature was legally allowed between census years to try and redraw congressional maps. Normally, after the U.S. Census occurs every 10 years, states will redraw their district maps.
Many Missouri voters gathered and said they believe under Missouri’s constitution, redistricting is only allowed after that census period.
“If they rule against us, what you’re basically gonna have is that legislature is going to be all Republican, because you know you have this state majority Republican already,” said Rev. W.T. Edmondson, who was there protesting.
With the new mid-census redistricting, some fear that Democratic districts are going to be manipulated into Republican districts.
“Taking away my vote and taking away the vote of the citizens of Kansas City, and just ... for no apparent reason other than they just don’t want a Democrat to win, that’s not right,” said Marsha Lerenberg, an affected Kansas City resident and protest participant.
At the urging of President Donald Trump, Gov. Mike Kehoe called the legislature into special session last fall to redraw the state’s eight congressional districts with the goal of adding an additional Republican-leaning district. The maps produced eliminated a former Democratic stronghold in the Kansas City area, leaving the congressional seats with a 7-1 tilt towards the Republican Party.
Many organizations joined together at the protest to stand against gerrymandering, including People Not Politicians, League of Women of Voters Missouri and clergymen from across Missouri.
Kay Park, the president of League of Women of Voters Missouri, spoke at the protest and also testified at the hearing. “Redistricting mid-cycle is unconstitutional based on the Missouri constitution, which I support very much,” Park said.
When asked why people should care about this issue, Park said, “It is affecting everybody, even if you don’t really realize it, so if we let this stand, they can do whatever they want.”
Luther v. Hoskins was filed September 12, 2025, and in December 2025, a court rejected the challenge. That decision was appealed to the Missouri Supreme Court, which set a hearing on arguments from both sides for Tuesday.
-----------------------------------------------------
TUESDAY
Bill changing writing of ballot summaries gets initial House approval
By Hannah McDonough, Columbia Missourian
JEFFERSON CITY — A bill that would change how ballot summaries are written won initial approval Monday from the House.
HB 3146, introduced by Rep. John Simmons, R-Washington, would give the secretary of state a larger role in writing ballot summaries than the courts. It also would increase the word limit for ballot summaries from 50 words to 100 words.
Currently, the courts can rewrite the ballot language if they find it to be unacceptable. A law passed last year that gave the secretary of state three attempts at writing ballot language before the courts could step in was struck down by the state Supreme Court earlier this year.
Legislators have vowed to attempt to restore that law. The bill reintroduces the ability of the secretary of state to attempt three revisions of ballot language challenged in court.
A new wrinkle offered as an amendment on the floor was met with heavy debate because it went further than last year’s law in restricting the role of the courts in rewriting ballot language.
Under the bill debated on the House floor Monday, only the circuit court judges would have this ability to rewrite ballot language. Appeals courts and the Missouri Supreme Court would only be able to send ballot language back to the circuit courts to be changed.
The vote on the amendment passed by just six votes: 88-51. The bill was given initial approval on a voice vote.
“The Supreme Court justices seem to have assumed on how they adjudicate and ... they don’t have that provision, they don’t have that authority,” Simmons said.
The bill faced strong opposition, namely from Rep. Eric Woods, D-Kansas City.
“The idea that a local judge would have more authority for a statewide ballot language than the Missouri Supreme Court is like, it’s a bizarre world,” Woods said.
Rep. Donna Barnes, D-Raytown, also opposed the bill, questioning how it helps the state.
Rep. Darin Chappell, R-Rogersville, raised a different concern with the bill. He said that he believes that no court has the authority to change ballot language, whether that be the Missouri Supreme Court or any lower court.
“The reality is there’s nothing in the Constitution, there’s nothing in the RSMO (Missouri revised statutes) that gives judges the authority to rewrite the ballot language,” Chappell said.
-----------------------------------------------------
House committee hears bill that would end the death penalty
By Eric Hughes, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — A Missouri House committee held a public hearing Monday for a bill that would repeal the death penalty.
Missouri is one of 27 states with a death penalty, and uses it, or life imprisonment without parole, as punishment for first-degree murder or other class A felonies.
House Bill 2153, sponsored by Rep. Jim Murphy, R-St. Louis, would eliminate the death penalty. The bill would not modify the sentences of anyone currently sentenced to death unless otherwise allowed by law.
Murphy acknowledged that the bill is controversial, and said he had changed his opinion on the issue years ago.
“At a time when violence continues to plague our society, the state should lead by example and demonstrate that justice should not be driven by revenge,” he said.
Archbishop Mitchell T. Rozanski spoke in support of the bill. He believes the church teaches the death penalty is inadmissible because it attacks the “inviolability and dignity” of the person.
“Modern society has the means of protecting itself without definitively denying criminals the chance to reform,” Rozanski said, quoting Pope John Paul II.
Rozanksi also said the justice system is capable of making mistakes and should not impose punishments that can’t be undone. He said that in the United States since 1973, over 200 people sentenced to death have later been exonerated.
“Missouri now has the opportunity to move towards a more just and humane criminal justice system,” he said. “One that protects society while respecting the value of every human life. Replacing the death penalty with life imprisonment without parole ensures accountability while avoiding the moral and practical harms of capital punishment.”
Another witness, Brian Kaylor, a Baptist minister and president of Word&Way, testified in support of the bill because of his religious beliefs as well. He said the death penalty is not fiscally responsible, not a deterrent to acts of violence and not just.
Rep. Keith Elliott, R-Doniphan, asked Kaylor how he processes Genesis 9:6-7 — “whoever sheds human blood, by humans shall their blood be shed.”
Kaylor said they should look to Jesus’ moral and ethical teachings in scripture as well.
“We can look at, well how does God actually act in these very cases like Cain, Moses and David?” he asked. “God doesn’t impose the death penalty, God doesn’t demand it. Quite the alternate.”
Matthew Crowell, director of the state public defender system, testified in support of the bill because of the death penalty’s cost to his agency.
“When death penalty cases go up, we have to further increase those offices, or the staffing of those offices, and we again lose our most experienced attorneys to handle a few cases,” Crowell said.
Rep. Kimberly-Ann Collins, D-St. Louis, asked Crowell about the execution of individuals who have mental illnesses. Crowell testified that it is cruel and unusual punishment to execute someone who is mentally ill, which Rep. Barry Hovis, R-Whitewater, disagreed with.
“To me, as a victim, it makes no difference if they’re mentally ill, or mean or evil or whatever if they kill me or kill my daughter, kill my wife, kill my neighbor,” Hovis said. “I have no regard for people that do that.”
Hovis asked witness Heidi Moore, the executive director of Missourians to Abolish the Death Penalty, how many people who are sentenced to life in prison without parole killed someone else while they were in prison.
“I don’t know (the number), but I don’t believe it’s probably as high as those that have a death sentence as those that are just serving life without parole,” Moore said.
Former Rep. Tony Lovasco, who introduced similar legislation during his time as a representative, testified in support of the bill. He said he does believe that some people deserve to be executed, but the law needs to focus on protecting everyone’s individual rights.
“Unfortunately, that means that the cost of that is some bad people get it a little better than they probably should. It means that the guy gets to grow old and die in prison when his victim didn’t get to grow old, and that’s very uncomfortable,” Lovasco said. “But it doesn’t matter. Because what matters is that we preserve a system that looks out for everybody.”
In a news conference after the hearing, Murphy said that the chairman has guaranteed the bill will get a vote in committee. Similar legislation last year died without a hearing or committee vote.
-----------------------------------------------------
Bill would simplify Jackson County food truck licensing
By Emma Farrel, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — A bill simplifying licensing for food trucks in Jackson County ahead of this summer's FIFA World Cup was heard in a Senate committee on Monday.
Under SB 1255, sponsored by Sen. Joe Nicola, R-Grain Valley, a license or permit issued by Jackson County would be valid for a mobile food business to operate under any municipality in the county. Any municipality requiring stricter permitting or licensing will be null and void.
The legislation also specifies that it would not weaken any existing health or sanitation regulations regarding food trucks.
Supporters told the Senate Local Government, Elections and Pensions Committee that the bill would help create a more consistent and simplified licensing process for food truck operators.
Danielle DuPree, executive director of Ennovation Center, a nonprofit small business incubator, spoke in favor of the bill. She said she worries the current system is causing food truck owners to take their business across state lines into Kansas, particularly ahead of the 2026 FIFA soccer matches being held in Kansas City.
“I feel like we’re pushing jobs, we’re pushing taxpayer dollars and we’re pushing good food across the state line,” DuPree said. “Also, too, we have FIFA coming, and I’m getting lots and lots of emails from food truck operators from all over the country wanting a little piece of the pie.”
Joohae Yoon, owner of food truck “GoChew” in Kansas City also testified in favor of the bill, stating that the current system requires food truck operators to obtain multiple municipal permits within the county.
“On top of all the fees, the wasted resources of time and energy for all parties involved to obtain three different licenses, just to operate in Jackson County, is very redundant,” Yoon said.
No one testified in opposition to the bill.
