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 included coverage of bills concerning education, the environment and gender issues as well as a look at key state Senate races.
If you have thoughts or questions, contact Fred Anklam at anklamf@missouri.edu.
-----------------------------------------------------
FRIDAY
Legislation targeting trans Missourians moves forward at Capitol
By Erin Hynes, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — Several bills targeting transgender Missourians are making their way through the House and Senate, including policies on bathroom usage and transgender participation in sports.
Action can be expected on the bills, as the legislature has returned from its midterm break and has just a few weeks before the session ends May 15.
Two House bills aiming to prohibit the use of a public bathroom not aligned with a person’s biological sex passed out of the House Emerging Issues Committee before the legislature went on break and await House floor action.
House Bill 1893, sponsored by Rep. Wendy Hausman, R-St. Peters, allows K-12 private schools to restrict facilities such as multi-occupancy bathrooms and locker rooms to a person’s biological sex.
House Bill 2075, sponsored by Rep. Brandon Phelps, R-Warrensburg, restricts certain facilities, such as bathrooms, locker rooms and changing rooms, from being used by more than one biological sex. This would bar transgender Missourians from using the bathroom aligning with their gender identity.
Kansas has introduced a similar bill, Senate Bill 244, which would restrict all multi-occupancy bathrooms to a single biological sex. That bill was vetoed by Kansas Gov. Laura Kelly on Feb. 13 but overridden by the legislature on Feb. 18.
Both Missouri bills passed committee 10-4, despite more than three hours of public testimony against them. Neither bill has been added to a House calendar.
House Democrats and many community members expressed concerns about the feasibility and implications of these bathroom policies, including Luna Trask, a student from Columbia College.
“Would someone physically inspect my body? That seems like a waste of resources and an invasion of privacy,” Trask said during a committee hearing. “This isn’t about safety or making people feel comfortable. It’s about control and forcing trans people like me out of public spaces.”
The House also approved making the restriction on transgender athletes’ participation in high school and collegiate sports permanent under House Bill 1663.
Sponsored by Rep. Brian Seitz, R-Branson, the bill would remove the 2027 expiration date on the initial legislation from 2023. No other text is changed in the bill.
The bill, which passed the House on a 98-37 vote, has gone to the Senate and was referred to the Senate Education Committee.
The effects of these proposals are already being seen among the trans community across Missouri, including in Columbia.
Mel Constantine Miseo, a board member at the Center Project in Columbia, said in an interview that many people who access services at the Center Project are feeling scared and targeted by this legislation.
The Center Project has seen an increase in mental health stressors due to the legislation, even seeing some leave the state, Constantine Miseo said.
“We have had one or two youths participating in sports who have been affected by these bills,” Constantine Miseo said. “We actually had a family who moved because of these bills.”
If passed, the bills would create an unsafe environment for trans people, Constantine Miseo said.
“As a trans person myself, it makes me feel unable to engage in my community like everyone else,” Constantine Miseo said. “I have every right to use public facilities, just as everyone else does.”
There are more than 50 bills regarding gender submitted in Missouri this year, according to an independent research organization, Trans Legislation Tracker. Despite the string of anti-trans legislation, community members like Constantine Miseo express that the community is here to stay.
“We aren’t going anywhere, regardless of how much they try to remove us from public life and kick us out of the state of Missouri,” Constantine Miseo said.
Neighboring states like Illinois, Kansas, Iowa and Kentucky also have introduced anti-trans legislation this session.
-----------------------------------------------------
WEDNESDAY
Kehoe's A-F school report card plan gets Senate hearing
By Nolan Haberstroh, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — A bill set to implement Gov. Mike Kehoe’s proposed A-F school report cards got mixed responses Tuesday before the Senate Education Committee.
House Bill 2710, sponsored by Rep. Dane Diehl, R-Butler, would mandate the State Board of Education to implement an accountability report card system for public schools.
The system, if implemented, would grade every institution on a one to 100 scale, simplified to an A-F letter grade and made publicly available on the school’s website. School districts would also receive overall grades.
The grading system would apply to both charter and traditional public schools, according to the bill.
The bill “remains true to (the) merits of a simplistic program that most all of the parents are accustomed to across the state,” Diehl said. “An A-F grading scale, one that we think will drive proficiencies across the state and lead to better outcomes.”
The bill aims to create report cards that are easily understood by the public, with plans to include a summary intended for parents and guardians that avoids technical terms.
This summary would identify an institution’s strong suits and weaknesses, show year-to-year progress in student growth and include info on how guardians can engage with their student’s education.
The bill also includes the “Show Me Success Program,” a set of incentives that would grant additional funding to schools excelling in the categories graded by the system, such as academic growth and sustained improvement over time.
Dava-Leigh Brush, a representative for the Missouri Equity Education Partnership, spoke in opposition to the bill, in particular to the financial incentives it intends to offer schools.
“We believe it’s going to widen the equity gap because the incentives are upside down,” Brush said.
The program as currently proposed would reward schools already succeeding while ignoring schools receiving lower grades, a system Brush refers to as a “competition model.”
“(Schools) are a service, so to take the incentive to give more money to schools that are being successful, the money has to come from somewhere,” Brush said. “And that’s going to hurt the schools that are struggling, that need the support.”
“To pit one school against another school, especially when funding is on the line, that is not a sustainable model. It’s going to harm public education across the board,” Brush said.
Rissa Gray, a retired public school teacher and representative for Activate Missouri, an educational assistance nonprofit organization, spoke in favor in of the bill.
“Parents deserve clear and simple information so that they can make informative decisions about their child’s education,” Gray said. “An A-F system makes it easy to see when schools are doing well, and where improvement can be used.”
Sen. Maggie Nurrenbern, D-Kansas City, raised concerns that the bill would increase administration cost without meaningfully impacting classrooms.
“My fear is that we continue to grow bureaucracy, we continue to grow administration, overhead for administration,” Nurrenbern said. “Administration has been frameworking less resources directly to the classroom.”
The senator, a former teacher, also questioned the efficacy of the grading scale.
“As somebody who taught for 13 years, A-F is a terrible system as we have it, right?” Nurrenbern said. “I could have a kid that knew way more that was getting a C in my class than the kid that got an A.”
“We want to see growth, we want to see students perform at higher levels, and I’m not sure this bill does anything to get us there,” Nurrenbern said.
-----------------------------------------------------
TUESDAY
State reps file for competitive Senate seats
By Jackson Cooper, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — State Senate races are beginning to take shape with only a week left for candidates to file, presenting some interesting contests among House members seeking to move to the upper chamber.
Election to the Senate is a logical next step for many House members, whether term limited from the House or not.
The Senate is a more exclusive club than the House, with about a fifth as many seats and correspondingly larger districts to represent. It is often regarded as the more prestigious and deliberative of the two legislative bodies, and senators have more individual influence on legislation than individual representatives.
Only two seats are considered competitive this election cycle — the 8th District, centered around the Kansas City suburbs of Lee’s Summit and Blue Springs in southeast Jackson County, and the 30th District, containing the city limits of Springfield.
Term-limited Republicans currently hold both seats, offering Democrats a chance to flip two seats without incumbents. If both seats were won by Democrats, the Senate would be without a Republican supermajority for the first time in 14 years — a 22-12 party line split would require help from Democrats to override vetoes.
8th District
This suburban Kansas City district has long been thought of as vulnerable by Missouri Democrats. It is being vacated by outgoing Sen. Mike Cierpiot, R-Lee’s Summit, who is term limited.
The district has trended to the left in general elections since the last time the seat was open, in a 2017 special election won comfortably by Cierpiot. Despite that, it still leans to the Republican Party.
A narrow majority of Lee’s Summit voters opted for Kamala Harris in the 2024 presidential election, reflecting decades of demographic shifts in the 8th District’s largest city.
However, Democratic advances in Lee’s Summit were not enough to flip the entire district, as next-door Blue Springs voted for Donald Trump by about 13 percentage points. When combined, the two cities elected Trump by about 3 percentage points.
While she faces an uphill battle, Rep. Keri Ingle, D-Lee’s Summit, is confident that she will be the one to flip the 8th District. Ingle is running uncontested for the Democratic nomination.
She said a Senate bid made sense given the current political climate and the fact that she is term limited from seeking another two years in the House.
“It’s also a Trump midterm election year,” Ingle said. “We’ve been seeing the changing demographics in my district for a while.”
Ingle said that she would focus on working across party lines to find areas of common agreement, noting that her background in social work prepares her for building relationships. She plans to continue working on issues like child welfare reform and public safety if elected.
“There are a lot of conservative senators that I served with in the House,” Ingle said, “so I already have pre-existing relationships with them.”
Ingle faces the winner of the Republican primary, which will pit House Speaker Rep. Jon Patterson, R-Lee’s Summit, against Dan Stacy, who served in the House from 2017 to 2025.
Despite Patterson’s stature in Missouri politics, Ingle said she is not making any assumptions about her opponent prior to the August primary.
“In eastern Jackson County, the Republicans in the primaries tend to be very conservative,” Ingle said. “And (Patterson’s) voting record is not.”
Patterson’s moderate positions can be seen in his mixed votes on hot-button issues over the last year.
Last spring, Patterson voted in support of the legislature’s repeal of voter-approved paid sick leave measures, which was a Republican priority.
He was, however, the only Republican representative to vote against a proposed constitutional amendment to outlaw abortion in the state. He also joined 10 other Republicans in voting against the controversial midterm redistricting of the state’s congressional districts.
Patterson has faced rebukes from the Jackson County Republican Party for what the party termed “a lack of commitment to the Republican Party’s Platform values.”
In a 2024 release, the local chapter denounced Patterson and endorsed a rival’s bid for the speakership. The release cited qualms with Patterson’s departures from the party line on issues like transgender health care, firearms, abortion and initiative petition reform.
Ingle also pointed to the 2024 race in the adjacent 11th Senate District as evidence that suburban Jackson County voters will not blindly elect from the party establishment. In that race, then-Rep. Aaron McMullen fell in the Republican primary to the grassroots campaign of Joe Nicola, who now represents the district.
Patterson declined to comment on his Senate bid at this time, writing in an email to the Missourian that politics is “the furthest thing” from his mind amid the ongoing legislative session.
However, his campaign website offers some insight into potential priority areas if elected to the Senate.
Affordable child care, school safety and sex trafficking have all been issues targeted by Patterson throughout his House tenure.
On his website, he calls himself an “independent voice for Jackson County.”
30th District
The 30th District, containing all of Springfield proper and some adjacent bits of unincorporated Greene County, has demonstrated itself as potentially vulnerable to a Democratic flip.
Sen. Lincoln Hough, R-Springfield, represents the district and is leaving office after eight years due to term limits.
Running to replace Hough on the Republican side is Rep. Melanie Stinnett, R-Springfield, who is currently serving her second term in the lower chamber. She will face third-term Rep. Betsy Fogle, D-Springfield, in November.
Both face relatively straightforward paths to the general election, as neither have a primary challenger. Libertarian candidate Cecil Ince also has filed for the seat.
Springfield has demonstrated volatility in recent election cycles, oscillating between a Republican lean and toss-up status over the past three election cycles.
Just over half of Springfield’s electorate — 51.76% — voted for Donald Trump in the 2024 presidential election, about 5 percentage points higher than the share received by Kamala Harris. Trump won the city by about 12 percentage points in 2016, but took a narrow win by a fraction of a point in 2020.
While all three were a victory for the Republican ticket, Springfield each time featured much closer races than Greene County at large. The county traditionally votes about 60% Republican in presidential races.
Fogle is optimistic that shifting demographics combined with nationwide frustration toward the Republican Party could propel her to the Senate.
“Everyone can look at national headwinds the same that I can,” she said. “And Springfield, every cycle, is turning one to two-percent more blue.”
In running, Fogle said she hopes to bring balance to the political environment in the Capitol.
“I have spent the last five years working in an environment where one party has complete and unchecked power in this building,” she said. “And I don’t think that’s good policymaking for anybody.”
Fogle has made a name for herself as the ranking minority member on the House Budget Committee, making her the Democratic Party’s point-person on appropriations.
Fogle also has experience winning tight races in Springfield. She first won election to the House in 2020, defeating her Republican opponent by just 79 votes.
She faces a stiff challenge from Stinnett, who is leaving a safe House seat behind in hopes that winning the Senate seat will better allow her to impact policy.
Stinnett cited her collaborative approach to legislating as an asset for her potential future in the Senate.
“I’m someone who really tries to build relationships with people and operate from a space of collaboration,” she said. “The best way that you do that is when you’re really working with others and making sure that you’re hearing all the points of view on a piece of legislation.”
“I think I’ve been pretty successful in the House because that’s how I approach things here,” Stinnett added.
Both Stinnett and Fogle spoke highly of their working relationship, noting that Springfield representatives tend to work together across party lines for the betterment of the city.
-----------------------------------------------------
MONDAY
House bills address tax credits for food donations
By Hannah McDonough, Missouri News Network
Missouri residents can receive state income tax credits on donations to food pantries, homeless shelters and soup kitchens.
Two House bills seeking to make adjustments to those credits were being heard Monday afternoon.
House Bill 1782, introduced by Rep. John Voss, R-Cape Girardeau, would get rid of the sunset law that would set current legislation to expire on Dec. 31, 2026.
HB 2457, introduced by Rep. Pattie Mansur, D-Kansas City, would increase the amount allocated to these tax credits and offer tax credits on food bank donations, something previously left out of bill language on this topic. The bill would create two areas of funds for tax credits, one that offers tax credits for donations to food pantries, homeless shelters and soup kitchens, and another that does the same for donations to food banks. If not all the funds in one area are used, it can be transferred to the other area.
Kim Buckman, director of advocacy and communication for Feeding Missouri, said this clarification in bill language is important because food banks collect and hold food to be distributed to many organizations, whether that be a food pantry or a homeless shelter.
“Supporting food banks supports all of those entities,” Buckman said. “It supports the pantries that are community based, the pantries that are faith based that are in our network and we also provide and distribute to school pantries, backpack programs, senior centers, shelters.”
Additionally, the amount of funds dedicated to these tax credits would increase under HB 2457. For local food pantries, homeless shelters and soup kitchens, $2.75 million would be made available for tax credits on donations. According to the Missouri Department of Revenue, that represents a $1 million increase annually.
For food banks, $1.25 million would be allocated to tax credits on donations. “We’re very supportive of any legislation that’s going to help bring in more funding or more resources, in general, for food banks,” said Katie Adkins, chief communications officer for The Food Bank for Central and Northeast Missouri.
Adkins said that currently, “need is high” and so is spending to meet those needs.
“Anytime we can incentivize folks to make donations of funds to us, that’s going to help us continue to meet the high need that we’re seeing,” Adkins said.
Both these bills will go to public hearing in the Ways and Means Committee on Monday.
Missouri residents can receive state income tax credits on donations to food pantries, homeless shelters and soup kitchens. Two House bills seeking to make adjustments to those credits were being heard Monday afternoon.
House Bill 1782, introduced by Rep. John Voss, R-Cape Girardeau, would get rid of the sunset law that would set current legislation to expire on Dec. 31, 2026.
HB 2457, introduced by Rep. Pattie Mansur, D-Kansas City, would increase the amount allocated to these tax credits and offer tax credits on food bank donations, something previously left out of bill language on this topic.
The bill would create two areas of funds for tax credits, one that offers tax credits for donations to food pantries, homeless shelters and soup kitchens, and another that does the same for donations to food banks. If not all the funds in one area are used, it can be transferred to the other area.
Kim Buckman, director of advocacy and communication for Feeding Missouri, said this clarification in bill language is important because food banks collect and hold food to be distributed to many organizations, whether that be a food pantry or a homeless shelter.
“Supporting food banks supports all of those entities,” Buckman said. “It supports the pantries that are community based, the pantries that are faith based that are in our network and we also provide and distribute to school pantries, backpack programs, senior centers, shelters.”
Additionally, the amount of funds dedicated to these tax credits would increase under HB 2457.
For local food pantries, homeless shelters and soup kitchens, $2.75 million would be made available for tax credits on donations. According to the Missouri Department of Revenue, that represents a $1 million increase annually. For food banks, $1.25 million would be allocated to tax credits on donations.
“We’re very supportive of any legislation that’s going to help bring in more funding or more resources, in general, for food banks,” said Katie Adkins, chief communications officer for The Food Bank for Central and Northeast Missouri.
Adkins said that currently, “need is high” and so is spending to meet those needs.
“Anytime we can incentivize folks to make donations of funds to us, that’s going to help us continue to meet the high need that we’re seeing,” Adkins said.
Both these bills will go to public hearing in the Ways and Means Committee on Monday.
-----------------------------------------------------
Here are some key environmental bills filed this session
By Hailey Sanford, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — With the Missouri General Assembly returning after a one-week break, many bills await hearings and votes.
Here are some of the environmental bills that have been filed this session and their status:
Sponsor: Sen. Cindy O’Laughlin, R-Shelbina
What would it do: Stop construction of solar projects until December 2027. Require the Department of Natural Resources to create rules and regulations concerning environmental concerns — placement and operation. If these rules and regulations are not put in place before the end date, the halt on construction will continue.
Status: Awaiting Senate floor action
House Bill 2122, Missouri Nuclear Clean Power Act
Sponsor: Rep. John Black, R-Marshfield
What would it do: Allow utility companies to charge customers based on the costs of in-process construction of nuclear and natural gas plants. The amount of the charges would be determined by the state Public Service Commission.
Previous proposal: 2025
Status: Awaiting House floor action
Sponsor: Sen. Kurtis Gregory, R-Marshall
What would it do: Provides all pesticides that are labeled in compliance with EPA regulations have sufficient warning labels regarding cancer. It would not grant full immunity to pesticide companies.
Status: Awaiting Senate floor action
House Bill 2844, Paraquat Ban and Environmental Research Act of 2026
Sponsor: Rep. Sherri Gallick, R-Belton
What would it do: Prohibits paraquat, a toxic pesticide, in Missouri starting in January 2027. The Department of Agriculture would be required to compile a list of how paraquat has been used and publish it.
Status: Awaiting House committee vote
House Bill 3528, Missouri Environmental Exposure Early Cancer Detection Act
Sponsor: Rep. Tricia Byrnes, R-Wentzville
What would it do: Would put a program in place to detect cancer in people who have been exposed to toxins. This is for people residing, attending school or working in contaminated areas. It would also create an advisory council to identify at-risk populations.
Status: Awaiting House Committee hearing
Sponsor: Sen. Kurtis Gregory, R-Marshall
What would it do: It would repeal provisions against owning, maintaining or operating water contaminants.
Status: Awaiting Senate committee hearing
Sponsor: Rep. Brad Christ, R-St. Louis
What would it do: Stop vehicle emissions checks and emission programs by January 2028.
Status: Awaiting House committee hearing
Sponsor: Sen. Tracy McCreery, D-Olivette
What would it do: Repeal provisions that local government cannot enact rules on the agriculture sector that are different or more stringent than the state government's regulations.
Status: Awaiting Senate committee hearing
Sponsor: Sen. Doug Beck, D-Affton
What would it do: Prohibit the manufacturing, distribution and selling of firefighting or fire-suppressing foams that PFAs, long-lasting chemicals, have been intentionally added to beginning in January 2028.
Similar bill: HB 2270
Status: Awaiting Senate committee referral
Sponsor: Rep. Steve Butz, D-St. Louis
What would it do: Add provisions to the selection of committee members for the Clean Water Commission of Missouri — one member knowledgeable about agriculture, one member knowledgeable about mining or industry, one member knowledgeable about publicly-owned wastewater treatment sites and four members representing the public.
Status: Awaiting House committee referral
-----------------------------------------------------
WEEKEND
Education bills tackle a variety of topics
By Sophia Gromowsky and Kate Leverenz, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — School choice, curriculum and student expression have been top focuses for Missouri lawmakers proposing education legislation in the 2026 session.
While Republican leaders in the Senate have indicated that large-scale education reform is not a main priority for the second half of the session, numerous smaller bills relating to specific issues have been voted through House and Senate committees.
“I don’t think we have any major overhauls of education that we’re trying to achieve this year,” said state Senate President Pro Tem Cindy O’Laughlin, R-Shelbina.
Eight bills related to elementary and secondary education have been passed by the House and now await Senate consideration.
School choice
Several bills have been introduced in the Senate relating to school choice for Missouri students.
Senate Bill 971, sponsored by Sen. Curtis Trent, R-Green County, would establish the “Public School Open Enrollment Act,” enabling students to transfer from their charter schools or resident school districts to a nonresident school district.
Under this proposed legislation, school funding follows the students from their home districts to their new districts. This means districts losing students will also be losing the corresponding state funding.
Fiscal notes for SB 971 indicate some districts could see annual losses ranging from $43,000 to $2.9 million. Local property tax revenue will stay with the resident district.
Under Missouri law, students can only transfer to a nonresident district in specific circumstances: If a district is classified as “unaccredited” by the state, if a district does not offer grades through 12, if districts have voluntary mutual agreements or if there are specific hardships or boundary disputes for individual families.
If passed, open enrollment would begin in the 2027-2028 school year.
Senate Bill 1653, sponsored by Sen. Curtis Trent, R-Republic, establishes new accountability measures for public schools, charter schools and school districts.
The main feature of this bill is the standardization of report cards on public schools through a mandatory A-F grading scale. The bill would also require the State Board of Education to publish a single, standardized accountability report each year.
A similar bill has been passed by the House. House Bill 2710, sponsored by Rep. Dane Diehl, R-Butler, aims to implement a standardized A-F grade system made publicly viewable on any given school’s website.
Gov. Mike Kehoe signed an executive order in January directing the State Board of Education to have the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education develop an annual A-F grading framework for every public school and district.
The Senate Committee on Education passed SB 1653 bill in February, and if it passes in the Senate and House, Kehoe’s executive order provisions would become law.
Sen. Stephen Webber, D-Columbia, introduced Senate Bill 923, which would repeal provisions authorizing the establishment of charter schools in Boone County. This proposal is identical to previous proposed legislation Senate Bill 88 in 2025 and House Bill 298 during the same year.
The bill has been referred to the Senate Education Committee, and if passed, would roll back the legal pathway for charter schools to open in Boone County, meaning districts like Columbia Public Schools would not face new charter competition.
Curriculum
Several bills that would introduce new curriculum in public schools have made progress in both chambers.
A House bill sponsored by two Columbia lawmakers that would expand an optional agricultural education program in elementary schools passed through the House in early March and is now being considered in the Senate.
A combination of two bills proposed by Rep. John Martin, R-Columbia, and Rep. Adrian Plank, D-Columbia, House Bill 2097 expands upon a pilot program that ran from 2020 to 2023. Public schools across the state would have the option to opt into the program that would teach students about topics related to farming and where the food they eat comes from, potentially partnering with agricultural nonprofits and education programs to build curriculum.
Similar versions of this bill were introduced in the House during the 2025 session, but stalled after passing through committee.
A similar bill, Senate Bill 1383, was introduced in the Senate by Sen. Barbara Washington, D-Kansas City. If passed, it would transition the current pilot program for agricultural education into a statewide initiative for elementary schools. This bill is currently on the formal calendar for Senate bills for consideration.
A House bill that would require public and charter schools to provide instruction in cursive writing passed through committee and is scheduled for perfection on the House floor. House Bill 2115 combines two pieces of legislation sponsored by Rep. Peggy McGaugh, R-Carrollton, and Rep. Renee Reuter, R-Imperial.
Beginning in the 2028-2029 school year, students would be required to take a teacher-constructed test to demonstrate their competency in reading and writing cursive by the end of fifth grade.
Bills requiring cursive writing instruction in schools have been introduced in the House numerous times in every regular legislative session since 2018 without being passed through to the Senate.
Personal finance and social media usage could also become subjects for new curriculum under bills that passed through House committees this month.
House Bill 2303, sponsored by Rep. Philip Oehlerking, R-Ballwin, would make it a requirement for public school students to complete a half unit of credit in personal finance in order to graduate high school, beginning in the 2027-2028 school year.
To develop curriculum for the course, the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education would convene a work group consisting of various experts in the field, including personal finance educators, entrepreneurs and members of the banking, investment, student loan and insurance industries.
Students could also begin receiving annual instruction on responsible social media usage under House Bill 3077, sponsored by Rep. Melissa Schmidt, R-Eldridge. The bill would require school districts to develop curriculum for grades 6 to 12 to teach about the social, emotional, physical and mental effects of social media on teens and the risk of sharing materials online.
Districts would also provide resources to staff and families regarding technology use, including information on utilizing parental controls and time restrictions on devices and the negative effects of prolonged screen time and internet access.
A bill relating to instruction on human sexuality just passed out of Senate committee in February.
Senate Bill 978, sponsored by Sen. Nick Schroer, R-Defiance, would require school districts and charter schools to provide instruction on human growth and development no later than third grade.
The instruction would include a video illustrating the development of vital organs in early fetal development, as well as videos illustrating the process of fertilization and every stage of development in the womb until birth.
Missouri lawmakers have introduced bills with nearly identical language in 2025 with Senate Bill 587 and House Bill 461. The language in these bills are modeled after legislation promoted by anti-abortion groups, including Missouri Right to Life, which had a representative testify during a committee hearing on the bill.
Social issues, student expression
A bill that would make permanent the state’s restrictions on transgender athletes passed the House in late February and has been referred to the Senate Education Committee.
Sponsored by Rep. Brian Seitz, R-Branson, House Bill 1663 would remove the 2027 expiration date from legislation passed in 2023 which allows students to compete in athletic competitions designated only for the sex which they were assigned at birth. The law applies to public, private and charter schools, as well as public and private institutions of higher education.
Similarly, the Senate has introduced a bill prohibiting public school staff members from encouraging students to socially transition to a member of the opposite sex.
Senate Bill 1085, sponsored by Sen. Joe Nicola, R-Grain Valley, passed in the Senate Committee on Education last month.
Along with prohibiting support for students wanting to socially transition to the opposite gender, under this bill staff members are required to notify parents within 24 hours when their student requests to socially transition at school. Staff members will not face disciplinary action if they refuse to call a student by a name that is not their legal name, or a pronoun that is inconsistent with their sex assigned at birth.
Nicola said in a committee hearing that this bill is primarily about maintaining parental rights and transparency, asserting that keeping secrets from parents is harmful.
Opposition to the bill was expressed by several groups in committee hearings, including the Missouri Equity Education Partnership and the Missouri National Education Association.
These groups testified the bill would threaten the safety of transgender students, violate the rights of supportive parents and facilitate school-sanctioned bullying.
A bill that would expand protections for political and ideological expression in K-12 public schools passed the House in late February and has been referred to the Senate Education Committee.
The “Missouri Safeguarding Personal Expression at K-12 Schools (SPEAKS) Act,” sponsored by Rep. Darin Chappell, R-Rogersville, would grant students the right to express political and ideological viewpoints in public schools and give parents clear legal recourse if they believe their child’s right to free speech is violated.
In floor debate, Democratic lawmakers raised concerns that this bill would enable hate speech and discrimination to spread in schools without educators being able to intervene, according to prior Missourian reporting.
Another bill seeks to provide protections against discrimination and antisemitism in public schools passed the House in February and has since been voted through by the Senate General Laws and Fiscal Oversight Committees. A nearly identical bill has also been moving through the Senate.
House Bill 2061, proposed by Rep. George Hruza, R-St. Louis, establishes a definition for antisemitism to be used in codes of conduct for public schools and public institutions of higher education. It would require schools to prohibit antisemitic behavior in the same manner as it treats racial discrimination.
Additionally, any code of conduct violations relating to the new definition would have to be reported under Title IX, allowing researchers to track trends of antisemitism in the Missouri school system.
Several Democratic lawmakers expressed strong opposition to the bill in floor debate, fearing that it would prevent educators from discussing current events regarding Israel and Palestine and treat antisemitism as more severe than other forms of hate speech, according to prior Missourian reporting.
Senate Bill 1051, sponsored by Sen. Curtis Trent, R-Republic, would also require all public schools to treat discrimination motivated by antisemitism in an identical manner to racial discrimination.
Another bill proposed in the Senate, sponsored by Sen. Rick Brattin, R-Harrisonville, provides that a parent has a fundamental right to direct the upbringing, education, health care and mental health of their child free from government interference.
Senate Bill 948 was placed on the informal calendar Senate bills for perfection this month It outlines certain parental rights that are exclusively reserved to a parent without obstruction by or interference from government entities or other institutions.
