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 this week focused primarily on the state budget and action as legislators started loading up bills with related amendments as the last week of the session looms.
If you have thoughts or questions, contact Fred Anklam at anklamf@missouri.edu.
-----------------------------------------------------
FRIDAY
Senate passes bills related to artificial intelligence and abortion
By Peter S. Pynadath, Missouri News Network
Along with giving final approval to the state’s operating budget Wednesday night, the Missouri Senate passed legislation regarding artificial intelligence regulation and children “born alive” during attempted abortion procedures.
Senate Bill 999, sponsored by Sen. Brad Hudson, R-Cape Fair, otherwise known as the “Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act,” requires medical professionals to provide care to any child born alive during an abortion procedure. Under this legislation, attempting to kill a born-alive infant could qualify a person for first-degree murder.
A born-alive abortion occurs when the fetus shows signs of life after an attempted abortion. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, these cases make up a fraction of abortions and are extremely rare. Out of 9.3 million abortion procedures conducted from 2003 to 2014, around 143 infants were born alive.
Before the Senate gave preliminary approval Tuesday, Senate Democrats filibustered to express their dissent. On Wednesday, concerns were still raised by some Republican senators, even after a long day of budgeting. Dissenting Republicans argued that the bill could be challenged in court for violating the one-subject rule, which requires all changes implemented in a piece of legislation to be related to the same topic.
Some of the dissenting Republicans agreed with the underlying premise of the bill but worried that potential court challenges could sink the legislation.
“I’m reluctantly voting against a pro-life bill,” Sen. Mary Elizabeth Coleman, R-Arnold, said. “I think that this is a bill that is going to waste resources in the attorney general’s office.”
Sen. Mike Moon, R-Ash Grove, echoed that sentiment, arguing that the bill violates the Constitution.
“The underlying bill is a good bill,” Moon said. “I’ve consistently voted against bills that appeared to violate the Constitution and ultimately the oath I swore to uphold.”
Despite four Republicans joining the chamber’s 10 Democrats, the bill was passed in an 18-14 vote.
This bill is part of a larger discussion in Missouri. Republicans have long championed anti-abortion legislation, including the nation’s first trigger law banning abortion after Roe v. Wade was overturned. In the 2024 general elections, a constitutional amendment was placed on the ballots and approved by 51.6% of voters, legalizing abortion in the state.
But in November, Missourians will again vote on a constitutional amendment passed by the General Assembly last May, which, if approved by voters, would reverse many of the protections voters approved in 2024.
AI bill
Although it did not receive debate on floor, Senate Bill 1012, sponsored by Joe Nicola, R-Grain Valley, was passed in a 20-10 vote. This bill mandates that AI cannot gain legal personhood and declares AI a non-sentient entity. Among other limitations, this bill means AI cannot be recognized as a spouse or domestic partner, and cannot hold a position of power in state departments, corporations or any legal entity.
Operators of companion chatbots would be required to make annual reports to the Department of Mental Health about instances and interactions of a user exhibiting suicidal ideation under the bill. The Director for the Department of Mental Health would additionally prepare a report analyzing all information reported under this legislation.
Additionally, this bill mandates that agencies must disclose when they are using AI. This same standard of transparency applies to advertisements for political campaigns on TV, radio or print.
Language in the bill notes that the intent of this bill is not to prohibit or restrict the use of AI as a tool in a professional setting, and these policies only apply to a licensed professional providing regulated services. Some examples of regulated services include accountants, architects, professional counselors, psychologists and physicians, among others.
Both bills were sent to the House Thursday morning.
-----------------------------------------------------
THURSDAY
House, Senate send $48.7 billion state budget to governor
By Anika Austvold and Jackson Cooper, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — The House and Senate gave final approval to the state’s $48.7 billion operating budget Wednesday without an increase to the public school funding formula.
The final budget, pieced together after conference negotiations rectifying differences between the House and Senate, was approved two days before the constitutional deadline for finalization of 6 p.m. on Friday.
The 13 budget bills are now headed to Gov. Mike Kehoe, who will review them for signing.
The K-12 budget was passed in the House and Senate after contentious debate over potential underfunding of the public school formula and uncertainty on revenue projections.
House Bill 2002, which funds the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, passed 83-68, just one vote above the minimum needed to pass a budget bill. The Senate followed suit hours later, passing the bill by a vote of 20-13.
Much of the debate centered on lawmakers’ decision to reduce the amount of proposed funding from the Capitol Commission Fund used to support education spending in the Senate’s version of the budget.
After work by a joint House and Senate conference committee, budget leadership instead decided to rely more heavily on projected revenue from the Blind Pension Fund, lottery proceeds and future sports betting revenue, which some believe are more unstable sources of funding.
The Senate originally proposed using $118 million from the Capitol Commission Fund, money traditionally reserved for long-term Capitol improvement projects, to help fund the state’s public education formula.
During negotiations between the House and Senate, lawmakers lowered that amount to about $73 million and replaced the remaining $45 million with projected revenue from the Blind Pension Fund.
Those opposed to the proposal criticized the shift away from money that is already available in the Capitol Commission Fund.
“This is a $45 million mistake,” said Rep. Betsy Fogle, D-Springfield, who serves on the House Budget Committee.
Fogle later unsuccessfully moved to send the bill back to conference committee.
“We are underfunding the formula that we passed to calculate what our schools need,” said Rep. Kathy Steinhoff, D-Columbia, who also serves on the budget committee.
Steinhoff criticized legislators for appropriating with what she called “maybe money,” as revenue streams from sports betting and lotteries are unpredictable.
“If schools were the priority, we would fully fund them first,” Steinhoff said.
Those opposed also pointed out the proposal falls about $190 million short of the number originally requested by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education for the state’s foundation formula. The formula is the primary source of state funding for school districts around the state.
This comes at a time when Missouri ranks 48th in the nation for average teacher salary, according to the National Education Association’s 2026 report.
However, those in favor defended the proposal as fiscally responsible while arguing schools are still receiving historically high funding levels.
House Budget Chair Dirk Deaton, R-Seneca, defended the bill during a news conference before floor debate began, and said Kehoe opposed using too much Capitol Commission money for operating expenses unrelated to preserving the Capitol.
“The governor made public and private comments that he doesn’t want to see Capitol Commission money set aside for the state Capitol spent on one-time things, other things, and not the state Capitol,” Deaton said.
Deaton described the broader state budget proposal as an effort to slow spending growth while balancing uncertain future revenues.
“It’s a budget that starts to take a critical look at making sure that the Missouri state government (is) living within its means, just like Missouri citizens have to do around a kitchen table,” Deaton said.
He also defended the use of projected revenues in the budget process.
Rep. Darin Chappell, R-Rogersville, pushed back on criticism that the proposal cut education funding.
“Only in government is the lack of an increase considered a cut,” Chappell said.
Additional education-related investments in the budget package include $15 million for school transportation funding from the Capitol Commission Fund, a provision added by the Senate in committee that ultimately received bipartisan support in the House.
When the bill reached the Senate early Wednesday afternoon, Democratic senators echoed many of the same concerns voiced by their House colleagues.
Sen. Maggie Nurrenbern, D-Kansas City, a former high school teacher and a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, said this was the first time in nine years that the foundation formula had not been fully funded.
“For the first time since 2017,” Nurrenbern said, “Republicans here, who have the majority, are telling our neighborhood schools that they’re not good enough.”
Nurrenbern and Sen. Doug Beck, D-St. Louis, also took aim at what they saw as dishonesty from Deaton on the education budget throughout the legislative session.
“Disappointed is the word that comes to mind right now on how this all went down,” Nurrenbern said. “I know we can do better, and I hope, moving forward, there will be a different person at the helm of the House budget, and I hope that person will lead with more integrity.”
“You can’t do business like that,” Beck added.
Several senators also identified regulating video lottery terminals, or VLTs, as a potential alternate source of revenue that could help fund education. Senate leadership, they said, should have kept that in mind before declining to act on bills that would have regulated VLTs.
“These machines are out here,” said Sen. Jason Bean, R-Holcomb, who sponsored VLT legislation this spring. “We have such an opportunity to bring to the people of the state of Missouri.”
Bean also mentioned that Illinois has seen over $1 billion in revenue generated from VLTs since regulating the gaming devices in 2010.
Public schools in Missouri are already funded in part by proceeds from the state’s Lottery Proceeds Fund, meaning there is precedent for revenue from forms of gambling going toward education funding.
Higher education
The House also approved House Bill 2003, which funds higher education and workforce development programs, by a 119-28 vote later on Wednesday.
Earlier proposals to overhaul Missouri’s higher education funding formula were ultimately removed from the final budget package during negotiations between the House and Senate.
The proposal would have shifted more university funding toward enrollment and performance-based metrics, which supporters argued would better reflect where students are attending school.
However, the plan faced bipartisan pushback from legislators and higher education leaders who worried it could significantly reduce funding for some regional universities and was being advanced too quickly without enough long-term planning.
Despite the proposal’s removal, Deaton said during an earlier news conference that Missouri’s current higher education funding structure remains “unsustainable.”
The Senate approved HB 2003 on Wednesday by a vote of 29-4. Democratic senators largely mirrored their House counterparts in celebrating the return of higher education funding.
Nurrenbern and Sen. Lincoln Hough, R-Springfield, both took issue with a clause tacked onto the end of the bill during conference.
The added language, which would require that a new higher education funding formula be established by Dec. 1, was decried by both senators as an attempt to legislate from the budget. At least in principle, budget bills deal solely with appropriations and contain no policy.
“We don’t do that here,” Hough said. “Appropriations bills are about funding things, right?”
President Pro Tem Sen. Cindy O’Laughlin, R-Shelbina, said in floor dialogue with Hough that the clause’s inclusion was justified because it concerns future appropriations.
“I believe that we all agreed that we need to look at the funding for colleges,” O’Laughlin said. “We need to develop a system of determining (if) we continue to fund as many colleges as we have, and if not, what is it we want to do about that?”
Other budget provisions
Mental health
The governor’s initial budget included significant cuts to funding for self-directed supports and day habilitation programs for people with developmental disabilities provided by the Department of Mental Health. Self-directed supports help families employ and manage their own staff to help around the house, whereas habilitation programs are centers that provide structured activities.
A majority of these funds were later restored in the House’s version of the budget. Representatives on both sides of the aisle took time Wednesday to celebrate the bipartisan effort to restore funding. The restored funding passed in both chambers and now heads to the governor’s desk.
Medicaid
The budget also includes changes brought down by House Resolution 1, which was signed by President Donald Trump on July 4, 2025. The federal resolution implemented increased vetting and work requirements for Medicaid recipients.
To implement changes required by the resolution, the state is expected to spend $294 million in combined state and federal money. Another $62 million was approved in order to move the computer systems for Missouri’s Medicaid program, known as MO HealthNet. These two changes would total roughly $54 million in general revenue spending.
Corrections
Included in the funding for the Department of Corrections was language banning the use of funding for “any cross-sex hormones, or gender transition surgery undertaken for the purpose of any gender transition.”
Rep. Wick Thomas, D-Kansas City, spoke out against the language, calling it “unnecessary” and “ridiculous.” The bill passed in both the House and Senate.
MOScholars
Another budget bill passed by both chambers would add $10 million in funding to the MOScholars voucher program, which provides money for students to attend private schools.
The budget for the scholarship program would increase 20%, from $50 million to $60 million under the budget approved by the House.
The funding for the program was criticized by Democrats in both the House and Senate over the program’s alleged lack of transparency.
Capital projects
Another budget bill passed out of the legislature Wednesday would allocate over $4 billion in funding toward capital improvement projects not included in the state’s operational budget.
The bill would fund several building or maintenance projects handled by various departments, including the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, Department of Agriculture and Department of Natural Resources.
Among the largest allocations is for the Department of Transportation, which will receive over $1.3 billion in continued funding to expand Interstate 70 to three lanes across the state.
Direct capital improvement funding was also allocated for projects including repairs and renovations to the Capitol complex’s southern lawn fountain and refurbishments to the Capitol building’s plumbing.
Nolan Haberstroh, Maggie Stewart and Peter Pynadath contributed to this report.
-----------------------------------------------------
Windfall or gamble? Missouri lawmakers explore benefits, drawbacks of data centers
By Jana Rose Schleis, Missouri News Network
Everyday use of artificial intelligence tools is growing, and with it, plans to build power-hungry data centers to support them. On Wednesday, Missouri lawmakers on the House Utilities Committee explored the potential benefits and pitfalls of the forthcoming data center boom.
Ameren Missouri officials told lawmakers Wednesday that the company plans to increase energy generation capacity by 50% in the next four years, largely in response to anticipated data center usage.
Rob Dixon is vice president of regulatory and legislative affairs for Ameren Missouri and lobbies on behalf of the company before the Missouri legislature. The corporate utility has contracts to provide 2.2 gigawatts of electricity to large energy consumers, such as data centers — approximately the amount of energy needed to power 1.6 million homes.
Dixon said due to a utility law passed last year, residential customers won’t be charged for the cost of investments corporate utilities need to make to serve energy-intensive data centers.
“We are not providing them with discounts or incentives, and those large customers help everybody by contributing to the fixed costs of the system, the infrastructure that we all use, and they help keep rates lower for everybody else,” he said.
Missouri regulations require data centers to pay for their costs to connect to the grid and sign a minimum 12-year contract for the electricity they’ll use. Dixon said data centers will also pay higher electricity rates when demand is up.
“When a large data center comes into our area, they must sign that contract, or, frankly, they can look elsewhere,” he said.
Many policymakers touted both the jobs and the tax revenue they believe data centers could bring to Missouri communities during the informational hearing.
That benefit was echoed by Matt Enloe, vice president of the International Union of Operating Engineers Local 513. He said the two data centers being built in Montgomery County have provided jobs for his members.
“This year alone, I personally sent 200 Missourians to work as operating engineers on these projects,” Enloe said.
Enloe told Missouri House members that, given current labor shortages, encouraging data center development could help retain the state’s workforce.
“Make no mistake, information is going to be the currency of the future. So if someone wants to store it here in Missouri responsibly, I think we need to welcome them to Missouri,” he said.
However, consumer advocates expressed concerns that residents would be charged for new power plants built to serve data centers.
“The rest of us are paying for power plants before the data centers are here, but obviously, the power plants are being built for the data centers that are in the future,” said John Coffman, attorney for the Consumers Council of Missouri. “It’s a real mismatch.”
Coffman encouraged lawmakers to consider stricter consumer protections for energy-intensive businesses, such as data centers.
“We know that in Missouri, about 40% of residential customers are living paycheck to paycheck. They say they can’t stand another increase to their bills,” he said.
-----------------------------------------------------
Immigrant-related bills make progress in the legislature
By Kate Leverenz, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — Bills affecting immigrants in Missouri remain alive with a week left in the session, and one bill has already been sent to the governor.
House Bill 2366, sponsored by Rep. Jeff Vernetti, R-Camdenton, passed with limited opposition. Once signed, it would hold employers and contractors accountable for hiring undocumented workers and would give the state stronger enforcement powers.
Current Missouri law protects contractors who use subcontractors that employ illegal immigrants, but under this bill, general contractors could be held liable if a subcontractor hires an unauthorized immigrant — if the general contractor knew about it.
Vernetti said he proposed this legislation because there are contractors across the state that are not following the law as it relates to hiring immigrants without proper documentation, which has been hard to combat due to no enforcement ability.
“The biggest thing is you have firms paying people in cash — they’re stacking illegal immigrants in a hotel, eight and 10 people in a room, they’re paying in cash — so they’re not paying workman’s comp, they don’t have insurance on them, they’re obviously not paying any payroll tax, either to the state or to anybody, and they’re able to undercut those that are doing it right,” Vernetti said.
The attorney general would have much stronger enforcement powers against suspected violations under this bill’s framework. If a violation or suspected violation occurs, the attorney general can file an injunction to stop the practice, impose monetary penalties up to 10 times the wages paid to unauthorized workers and ask the court to suspend licenses or permits.
Currently, the attorney general has 72 complaints about a firm “doing it wrong,” Vernetti said.
There is little the attorney general can do about these complaints under current law. Under this bill, however, the attorney general has subpoena power to pursue these investigations.
“This is not about putting people in jail, necessarily,” Vernetti said. “This is just about, ‘Okay, you’re doing it wrong, you can continue working, but you have to do X, Y, Z, and here’s your fine.’”
Sarah Berry, a witness who testified during a committee hearing, said this legislation would create a state-level enforcement regime for federal immigration law.
“Missouri cannot turn employers into immigration police,” she said. “Immigration enforcement is a federal responsibility, not a state one.”
Vernetti said the initial language of the bill had concerns because he didn’t want to put any more burden on the contractors.
“We fixed all of that language to make sure subcontractors weren’t the responsibility of the contractors,” Vernetti said. “Once they sign an affidavit or a contract, the contractor’s responsibility is done. If the subcontractor continues to break the law, then they can go immediately after that (subcontractor) and not impact the contractor itself.”
He added that if the contractor knowingly hires a subcontractor engaging in illegal practices, this bill would hold the contractor liable.
“It’s taking jobs away from folks, and there’s nothing wrong with hiring folks that are not of this country, but there’s just ways to do it,” Vernetti said.
The bill received only six “no” votes in the House. Rep. Wick Thomas, D-Kansas City, was one of them.
“I am always going to stand up for my immigrant and refugee neighbors, with the ICE presence in Kansas City, the talks of a mega-detention facility and just the violence from federal agents,” Thomas said. “There is no bill targeting immigrants or refugees that I am willing to support in this moment.”
House Bill 2481
House Bill 2481, sponsored by Rep. Jamie Ray Gragg, R-Ozark, would tighten eligibility rules for MO HealthNet and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP.
Under current Missouri law, people are eligible for SNAP if they live in Missouri, have or have applied for a Social Security number, do not make more than the current income limit or do not own more than $3,000 in assets.
The bill would prohibit individuals who are not U.S. citizens or nationals from receiving assistance through SNAP or through MO HealthNet, unless those individuals meet federal definitions of both an “eligible alien” and “qualified alien.”
The bill would also require the Missouri director of social services to request a waiver from the U.S. Department of Agriculture that authorizes the state to operate SNAP in a manner prioritizing healthy foods.
One of the most substantial parts of the legislation is that a database match or electronic database verification is not sufficient to prove eligibility. Applicants must document proof of United States citizenship, United States national status or alien status eligible for such public benefits.
Gragg proposed this legislation primarily to overhaul the SNAP program and restore it to its original intention, he said.
“It is now where it’s no longer a supplemental nutritional assistance program, it’s now your whole entire food budget, and you can buy things that are not nutritious. … It doesn’t reflect any original purpose anymore,” Gragg said.
Applicants who cannot provide the documentary proof required under this bill can sign an affidavit under oath attesting to either United States citizenship or classification by the United States as an alien lawfully admitted. People who use this option can receive temporary benefits for 90 days, or the minimum time period defined by federal law.
The bill would require the MO HealthNet Division, which is the Medicaid program in Missouri, to include a field for citizenship or immigration status on all eligibility applications. It requires all hospitals, clinics and other qualified entities to conduct presumptive eligibility determinations.
If any agency administering public benefits cannot determine an applicant’s lawful presence after authorized verification, the agency has to suspend those benefits and refer the case to the Department of Homeland Security for investigation.
Gragg added the eligibility portion of the bill because it seemed like an all-encompassing portion of the SNAP process, he said.
“When you renew your car, you always have to bring the proper documentation, when you go to the airport, when you fly, you always have to bring (proper documentation), when you have to do things, you always have to bring the right documentation,” Gragg said.
When discussing the amendment to the bill creating new requirements for Medicaid on the floor, Rep. Pattie Mansur, D-Jackson, noted there are already laws in place at the federal level that do not allow noncitizens to qualify for Medicaid unless they have a qualified immigration status.
“We already have guidelines, both at the federal government level and at the state level, that spell out very clearly what noncitizens can qualify and not,” Mansur said. “This amendment is in fact superfluous, and I encourage people to vote it down.
The amendment was adopted with a vote of 91-46.
Also on the House floor were questions on whether people without proper documentation even have access to public benefits. Rep. Barry Hovis, R-Whitewater, noted a case of SNAP fraud he discovered when working in law enforcement in Cape Girardeau.
“Democrats always say, ‘Oh, we’re trying to take money away from the poor people,’” Hovis said. “When I was up on the floor, I said, ‘Look, we’re not talking about the people that really need these, this money, to help them. We’re talking about the people that are stealing, that are involved in fraud.’”
Hovis added that because the bill would require certain things to be checked, he hopes it will help with the fraud aspects of SNAP.
In a committee hearing for the bill, witness Michael Dreyer testified that this legislation operates under the false premise that Missouri’s public benefit systems are overrun with illegal immigrants.
“In reality, federal law already strictly limits immigrant eligibility for these programs,” Dreyer said. “These bills do not close a loophole. They build a wall of paperwork and bureaucracy that will hurt U.S. citizens’ children, the elderly and people with disabilities who need help the most.”
Vernetti acknowledged that if immigrants have trouble accessing proper paperwork, it is a separate problem that needs to be addressed.
The bill was passed by the House 95-44. It had a Senate committee hearing on April 29.
House Bill 2412
Another piece of legislation, House Bill 2412, sponsored by Rep. Ben Keathley, R-Chesterfield, would prohibit money transfer companies from initiating a foreign money transfer unless they have verified the sender is not an “unauthorized alien” as defined in federal law.
Currently, companies that allow individuals to send money overseas do not have to verify immigration status.
Senders would become verified under the Missouri Division of Finance, and money transmitter licensees would be required to keep records of verification, report compliance twice a year, and hold records for three years.
Keathley proposed this legislation to ensure that Missouri is not inadvertently incentivizing illegal immigration, he said.
“It really is insulting to people who come here to be productive, law abiding and want to be Americans, to watch other people jump ahead of them … not just with the ability to do it, but also do so with the approval of our governing structures and laws,” Keathley said.
Keathley said one of the most difficult parts of creating this legislation was tracking the frequency of foreign money transfers from illegal aliens.
Companies that perform foreign remittance transfers do not track legal status, so it is unknown what amount of money leaves Missouri to other countries from illegal aliens, he said.
“If we can figure out the number, then let’s put the mechanisms in place to start figuring it out,” Keathley said. “If it’s a problem with documentation, then we should have a law regarding that documentation.”
Keathley also emphasized that enforcement isn’t against the person wiring, but is on the financial institution. If a company sends money without verification, it would pay a fine equal to 25% of the transfer amount, which would then be used for public school funding in Missouri.
State Treasurer Vivek Malek helped develop this legislation. Keathley said Malek was instrumental in helping determine how the transfer process works through different agencies, and how much foreign remittance Missouri actually does.
Gabby Eissner, advocacy strategist at the Migrant and Immigrant Community Action Project, testified in a committee hearing that HB 2412 targets immigrants and families that need to support their loved ones, extracting hard-earned pay from a group of mostly low-income workers who already pay taxes.
“Not only will HB 2412 impact immigrants, it will impact all Missourians,” Eissner said. “It will require everyone to verify their immigration status before sending a payment, a process that was once quick and easy will become bureaucratic and onerous.”
The legislation was referred to the House Rules Committee on March 25 and has not been addressed since. With full House and Senate action required by May 15, the bill’s prospects seem dim.
-----------------------------------------------------
WEDNESDAY
CWIP stirs Republican energy funding debate
By Jana Rose Schleis, Missouri News Network
Energy demand has been growing and is expected to shoot even higher in the coming years, but the debate over how to pay for new nuclear power plants is likely stalled in the Missouri legislature for now.
As electricity demand has increased, so have utility bills — which has caught the attention of customers and lawmakers alike. Some Missouri policymakers are looking toward nuclear power to fill that need. But finding a way to pay for multi-billion dollar nuclear facilities has been a sticking point in the state legislature this year.
Many Missouri Republicans favor nuclear energy. Speaking at the Capitol in April, Sen. Curtis Trent, R-Republic, called nuclear power plants “wonderful feats of technology” that “harness the power of the atom to give us cheap and reliable and safe electricity.”
However, Republican lawmakers strongly disagree on who should pay the costs for building more power plants and when. There have been debates on both the House and Senate floor over what’s called construction work in progress, or CWIP.
CWIP allows utility companies to charge customers for new power plants as they’re being built and before they generate any electricity. This essentially shifts the financial burden to customers, and away from utility companies, as a project is under construction.
Some lawmakers say the policy can jumpstart investment in more energy production in Missouri. They — and utility companies — also say it can save residents money on utility bills in the long run, by keeping power producers from incurring as much debt and having to ask for rate increases to pay it off.
Others, such as Sen. Joe Nicola, R-Grain Valley, say the opposite — that it’ll place the burden of risky investments on Missourians, and utility bills will still shoot higher.
“I don’t agree with using my constituents, rate payers, as a bank for a free interest loan,” Nicola said.
Paying sooner or later
Last year, the Missouri legislature passed a bill allowing energy companies to use CWIP to build gas power plants.
In April, one day after the Missouri House passed CWIP for small modular nuclear reactors, the state Senate — by one vote — approved an amendment to a larger energy bill that would ban CWIP for all nuclear power.
John Coffman, an attorney for the Consumers Council of Missouri, a consumer advocacy organization, said his group supports utilities’ ability to invest in nuclear power on their own.
As power plants go, nuclear facilities take much longer to construct, cost more and often run over budget. Coffman contends that, for these reasons, nuclear power plants are a dicey investment, and Missourians shouldn’t have to bear that risk.
“It seems kind of the worst of all possible worlds,” he said. “We’re paying for power plants that are no longer serving us, and they’re asking us to start paying for power plants that are coming in the future.”
Corporate utility companies are overseen by the Missouri Public Service Commission, which would approve or deny the use of CWIP, as well as adjudicate any price hikes that investor-owned utilities seek. Last year’s CWIP bill included a number of consumer protections that would be enforced by state utility regulators.
Ameren lobbyist Rob Dixon compares CWIP to how the company’s customers might budget for their own big purchases.
“Like paying for something as you go, rather than putting it on a credit card,” Dixon said. “It’s going to keep costs lower because you’re not paying higher interest over time, and that means utility customers pay less.”
Jonathan Kim has been researching utility profit margins for the Energy and Policy Institute, a national nonprofit utility watchdog. He said CWIP might not make sense for Missourians who are used to getting a good or service when they pay for it.
“When I go to the grocery store, I’m not paying for bananas that I’ll get to eat in three years. I’m paying for the bananas I get to eat today,” Kim said.
He said, in theory, corporate utilities should be able to invest in new power plants without customers’ footing the bill upfront.
“Generally, if utilities are making a lot of profit, it means they’re doing well for their shareholders and their shareholders are going to provide them more readily with capital to spend on new generation,” he said.
He worries CWIP will incentivize corporate utilities to take risks and disincentivize them from keeping costs down.
“It’s not their money that they’re playing with. They’re playing with customer money. They’re playing with the house,” Kim said.
The CWIP debate is likely on hold for now. A staffer for Senate bill sponsor Sen. Mike Cierpiot, R-Lee’s Summit, confirmed to KBIA that the senator does not plan to bring the bill up for a final vote due to Nicola’s CWIP amendment.
Energy and economy
Ameren’s Callaway Energy Center is Missouri’s only nuclear plant. Dixon said nuclear power is a worthwhile investment for the state, evidenced by the fact that the Callaway reactor has been producing energy for more than 40 years.
“Nuclear energy is going to continue to be a vital part of our safe and clean and reliable generation mix now and well into the future,” he said. “I think that continues to receive strong backing from state leaders, both in the executive branch and in the legislative branch.”
Rep. John Black, R-Marshfield, sponsored the House bill to enable the use of CWIP for building small modular nuclear reactors — a relatively novel version of nuclear power wherein the infrastructure is physically smaller than traditional nuclear power plants and produces less power. He told his colleagues in April he’s confident this technology will take off, and he doesn’t want Missouri to miss out.
“They’re going to be built. They have to be built to provide the power that we need for the data centers, the growth of industry,” Black said. “We need those in Missouri. We want the construction jobs to build those plants. We want the jobs to operate those plants.”
Avery Frank analyzes energy policy at the Show-Me Institute, a conservative think tank. He agrees Missouri is poised to be a player in a nuclear renaissance, if one were to happen. But he said since small modular reactors are still in development, there will be a lot of first-of-a-kind costs associated with them.
“We’re trying to build next generation nuclear technology that we’ve not really put on the grid before,” Frank said.
Large tech companies have shown an interest in nuclear power to fuel their energy-intensive artificial intelligence data centers. Frank said Missouri should consider allowing businesses such as these to invest in and build their own power.
“Instead of having us ratepayers pay to test out this new technology and absorb all the costs, we could let the private market, who has a lot more to gain from testing one of these new technologies, pay these costs,” he said.
While developing new nuclear power plants could enhance Missouri industry, some worry about the impact it could have on other sectors. Diana Plescia is an attorney for companies that use large amounts of energy, such as Anheuser-Busch, Bayer and Boeing.
Plescia said if lawmakers, and the Missouri Public Service Commission, allow CWIP, it could raise costs for large employers and ultimately hurt economic development.
“It doesn’t look good for Missouri to be anti-competitive when it comes to the cost of manufacturing, because that is the base of any economy,” she said.
Plescia said keeping electricity prices low is in Missouri’s best interest and would disincentivize companies from taking their business elsewhere.
“Companies that can move to a state with lower costs, those that are that energy intensive, very well may do it,” Plescia said.
-----------------------------------------------------
Gambling machine bill shut down in Senate
By Emma Farrel, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — The Senate Select Committee on Gaming voted unanimously against a bill Wednesday that would have regulated “no chance” slot machines that are popular in gas stations and convenience stores.
The move effectively ends efforts to provide a legal pathway for the machines to operate in the state.
House Bill 2989, sponsored by Rep. Bill Hardwick, R- Dixon, would have created a statewide system to regulate video lottery terminals, often described as “slot machine-like” devices found in gas stations, bars and truck stops.
Under HB 2989, the “Missouri Video Lottery Regulatory Act,” would have established a regulatory licensing and taxing system for these machines. It also would have authorized the State Lottery Commission to license distributors, operators and retailers.
The bill narrowly passed in the House in February after significant debate, reflecting mixed opinions from lawmakers over whether regulation or prohibition is the best approach.
The issue has gained urgency following legal scrutiny of the machines’ status with courts and regulators questioning whether the devices truly operate without chance.
Missouri Attorney General Catherine Hanaway has prioritized enforcing a ban on the illegal machines. She said in an interview Wednesday that she will enforce the law, and it’s up to the legislature to change it.
Hanaway estimates the illegal slot industry makes $1 billion annually, which she said attracts organized crime.
“Where these machines are located, you also tend to find, not always, but you do tend to find 7-OH or illegal hemp or cannabis being sold, and then they become gathering places for people who are engaged in some of those more violent crimes,” Hanaway said.
Hanaway started enforcement actions earlier this year against companies that own the machines and convenience stores that allow them in their places of business. Torch Electronics agreed to shut down its machines early last month to avoid prosecution.
Despite passing in the House, the bill was shut swiftly down in the Senate, where legalization or regulation efforts have failed over several years.
Senate President Pro Tem Cindy O’Laughlin, R-Shelbina, chaired the special Senate committee. She is a fierce opponent of general gambling. She had expressed no appetite for the proposed legislation.
With the legislative session ending May 15, the committee’s decision likely marks the final movement for the proposal this year.
Sawyer Bess contributed to this story.
-----------------------------------------------------
TUESDAY
Senate gives first approval to 'born-alive' abortion bill
By Kaleb Anderson and Jackson Cooper, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — The Missouri Senate gave initial approval Tuesday to a bill mandating that children born during failed abortion procedures must receive the same medical care as other newborns.
Senate Bill 999, sponsored by Sen. Brad Hudson, R-Cape Fair, also provides clarity on both the criminal and civil liability of individuals assisting in abortion procedures.
“That child would be given the same care, the same treatment, of any other child of the same gestational age,” Hudson said. “That child is under the law to be treated like the human being that he or she is.”
The final version approved Tuesday night came after an afternoon of closed negotiations and filibustering from Democrats on the floor.
Under the bill, knowingly killing a born-alive infant would be equated to first-degree murder. Earlier iterations of the bill would have also designated any health care workers involved in an abortion as mandatory reporters, exposing them to potential criminal penalties for failing to report a live birth abortion. But Hudson removed that provision in his substitute version.
The final bill also walks back earlier language outlining civil liability provisions, placing procedures in line with existing wrongful death statutes.
So-called “born-alive” abortions, also known as live birth abortions, occur when a fetus exhibits signs of life following an attempted abortion procedure. These cases are extremely rare, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
An estimated 143 infants were “born alive” following attempted abortions between 2003 and 2014 in the United States, out of a total of 9.3 million abortion procedures performed in that time period. That’s a chance of 0.0015%, or 1 out of every 66,667 abortions performed nationwide.
Data specific to Missouri is not available.
Senate Democrats made their opposition known immediately, filibustering the bill into the evening while compromise motions were negotiated.
Sens. Stephen Webber, D-Columbia, and Patty Lewis, D-Kansas City, spent about an hour combing through Lewis’ proposed amendment, which would place restrictions on vasectomies identical to those that restrict access to abortion. These include mandated requirements unique to abortion procedures, such as in-person meetings with the physician carrying out the procedure and mandatory 72-hour waiting periods.
“The legislature says, ‘We’re gonna regulate health care like this, what’s regular? Let’s not pick winners and losers … Let’s not say women’s health care should be safe, but men can be the Wild West,’” Webber said.
The amendment, which ultimately failed, was presented as an attempt to point out that abortion is more tightly regulated than other medical procedures in Missouri. It was not voted on and is not attached to the larger bill.
Sen. Brian Williams, D-St. Louis, was wary of the effects of SB 999, which he said did not clearly define what it means to be “born alive.”
“Regardless of the fact that we support women’s rights and access to health rights, what about providers that have no idea what this law means? And they’re expected to practice in a state that has a law that has not made clear what it even means, or even how you define a child born alive?” Williams said.
Sen. Joe Nicola, R-Grain Valley, spoke out against the revised bill at the tail end of debate Tuesday, lamenting that Republicans had indulged Democratic negotiation and weakened the bill.
“I talked with (Hudson), and I absolutely love his underlying bill, the original bill,” Nicola said. “But there’s no way I could support this (now). I think it’s an unconstitutional piece of legislation now, and it puts the Republicans in a very difficult position.”
SB 999 is just one facet of the wider abortion debate in Missouri. Republican legislators have long crusaded against abortion, passing in 2019 an abortion “trigger” law that effectively banned the procedure statewide after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade.
That ban went into effect almost immediately after the Court’s overturn of Roe in June 2022, making Missouri the first state in the country to restrict abortion post-Roe.
A constitutional amendment placed on the 2024 general election ballots via the initiative petition process was approved by 51.6% of voters, meaning that abortion is now legal under state law.
However, Republican lawmakers and statewide elected officials have worked extensively to limit implementation through injunctions and legal proceedings. The General Assembly last May passed a constitutional amendment largely reversing the protections approved by voters six months prior. The new proposed amendment, known as Amendment 3, will be on ballots this November.
-----------------------------------------------------
Missouri arts funding may see cuts in final week of budget negotiation
By Emerson Smith, Missouri News Network
The art community in Missouri is facing uncertainty over a potential $5.5 million cut to general revenue funds for the Missouri Arts Council in the 2027 fiscal year.
The Missouri Arts Council is a state-funded agency that provides grants and other financial support to arts organizations in all 163 Missouri House districts. Many festivals, art education programs and community performances rely on funding from the Missouri Arts Council.
“We’re not just in the large communities or in places that have the most arts, we make sure the arts benefit every community, and that is why 90% of our budget goes back to the communities,” Missouri Arts Council Executive Director Michael Donovan said.
Not only do these grants fund the arts, but Donovan said they also help keep many programs affordable at little to no cost. Nonprofit arts and culture brought in $1.7 billion to the Missouri economy, according to a 2022 study by The Americans for the Arts.
The arts council is funded through the Missouri Arts Council Trust Fund. Each year, the General Assembly transfers money from general revenue into the fund and approves a spending amount for the arts council on that money.
For fiscal year 2027, Gov. Mike Kehoe proposed reducing the amount of money transferred into the trust fund to $6.4 million compared to last year’s $12.7 million. Kehoe’s proposed budget would have kept the arts council’s spending limit at $10.1 million, the same as in fiscal year 2026. In committee, the House bumped the spending limit to $13.3 million and the amount transferred into the trust fund to $7.2 million.
According to end of April fund reports from the Office of Missouri State Treasurer, the trust fund currently sits at $12.1 million.
The general revenue transferred into the trust fund comes from the Nonresident Athletes and Entertainers Tax. This is a 2% withholding tax on compensation exceeding $300 for out-of-state artists and athletes performing in Missouri. The state estimates how much money is expected for the year and the Missouri Arts Council is supposed to receive 60% of it.
Although state statute says the money should be transferred to certain agencies, the money first goes into the state’s general revenue and transfers must be approved by lawmakers.
In fiscal year 2025, the most recent year with full annual reports, the estimated total revenue from the tax was $40.9 million, but the Missouri Arts Council only saw $15.6 million transferred to the trust fund of the $24.5 million it was due to see.
“Everything that (state-funded programs) do is subject to appropriation and is at the discretion of the members of the budget committee and then the members of the body at large,” said Rep. Betsy Fogle, D-Springfield, the ranking minority member on the House Budget Committee.
On a national level, the arts aren’t seeing as significant of cuts as many states are, according to Americans for the Arts, a nonprofit organization for the advancement of arts and arts education.
The National Endowment for the Arts is an independent agency of the U.S. federal government that provides grants to state arts agencies. The NEA is tentatively receiving the same $207 million in 2027 as it has in the past few years. This year, it is hoping for an inflationary increase to $213 million.
“We’ve seen some real significant cuts in state legislative funding for arts agencies for a myriad of reasons, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act really cut some other state-level funding, such as Medicaid and SNAP. So, you’re seeing states cutting arts programs because they need to provide for some of those other essential needs,” said Tooshar Swain, director of Public Policy for Americans for the Arts.
The Americans for the Arts focuses on advocacy, research and education for the arts. They provide information sharing and collaborate with other nonprofit organizations, such as the National Association of State Arts Assemblies.
“We work very closely with state advocacy groups,” Swain said. “We have a state advocacy connection in all 50 states and we’re proud of that.”
The NEA, on the other hand, works to provide funding by allotting 40% of its entire budget to state arts agencies, including the Missouri Arts Council.
This year, the Missouri Arts Council isn’t the only state agency facing budget cuts.
This proposed cut to Missouri Arts Council funding is among $600 million in budget cuts originally laid out in Gov. Mike Kehoe’s proposed $54.5 billion budget. The governor has said these budget cuts are in place to address a projected $2 billion revenue shortfall. This decline is due in part to dwindling surplus funds and lower projected revenue resulting from tax cuts passed by the legislature.
“We saw cuts to services that are geared towards taking care of individuals with significant disabilities and allow them to live in their home and be cared for by a loved one,” Fogle said. “I’m hoping they restore some of the funding for individuals accessing developmental waivers for families who have loved ones with developmental disabilities”.
The budget is still subject to change as the House and Senate are currently negotiating the final budget in conference committee ahead of the Friday deadline.
-----------------------------------------------------
House packs Senate drone bill with public safety amendments
By Jordan Davis and Emerson Smith, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — With under two weeks left in the legislative session, House lawmakers are eager to push through legislation by amending bills with ideas that have not seen advancement as standalone bills.
Senate Bill 1421, which was debated and amended on the House floor Tuesday, is one such example. Originally, the bill focused on privacy parameters on unmanned aircraft such as drones operating near critical infrastructure, such as stadiums being used for the World Cup this summer.
But over the course of several hours, representatives attached over 40 amendments to the bill after amending its title to encompass the broad idea of public safety.
Amendments added ranged from firearm restrictions, death penalties, stricter rules in visiting rights in prisons and AI-generated content. Most of the amendments offered have been approved by the House as bills of their own or had been attached to other bills that have stalled in the Senate.
By attaching amendments to a Senate bill designed to address a pressing matter, like added security for the World Cup, the hope is that the Senate would accept the amendments and pass them on.
However, as expected, late in the day the Senate declined to accept the House amendments and requested a conference committee to potentially iron out differences between the two chambers.
A variety of changes were accepted in the House, usually on voice votes.
House Amendment 16, sponsored by Rep. Lane Roberts, R-Joplin, was highly debated on the floor. The amendment establishes that anyone impeding the work of first responders at the scene through harassment or threats within 25 feet can face repercussions.
Rep. Marty Joe Murray, D-St. Louis, and Rep. Ray Reed, D-St. Louis, spoke in opposition to the amendment. Both Reed and Murray were concerned about the implications it may have on bystanders trying to record and hold “bad actors” accountable.
House Amendment 13, sponsored by Rep. Darin Chappell, R-Rogersville, allows members of the attorney general’s office to carry and use firearms in the line of duty. It also encompasses other firearm laws that allow for concealed carry of weapons on public transportation and in self defense, greatly expanding those freedoms.
The amendment also strengthens the penalties for both serious and repeated firearm offenses. It also protects the rights of state employees to have firearms in their locked personal vehicles on state property. The amendment also provides exceptions on school regulations that ban weapons, allowing them for ROTC, school-sanctioned gun safety courses or school firearm clubs or events.
House Amendment 17, sponsored by Rep. Raychel Proudie, D-Ferguson, creates a new domestic violence offender registry.
It would list people who have at least two domestic violence related convictions and would start a state grant program to prevent domestic violence and provide intervention services.
House Amendment 21, sponsored by Rep. Barry Hovis, R-Whitewater, was one of the few amendments subjected to a roll call vote, passing 75-68. It changes post-conviction legal procedures in death penalty cases, seeking to speed up the process.
-----------------------------------------------------
Senate committee hears bills regulating commercial vehicles and guns
By Chase Pray and Caroline Sweet, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — Bills implementing English requirements for commercial vehicle licenses and legalization of firearm silencers were heard in a Senate committee on Monday afternoon.
House Bill 2741, sponsored by Carolyn Caton, R-Blue Springs, would require operators of commercial motor vehicles such as semi-trucks, delivery vans and school buses to speak and read English proficiently.
These drivers would be expected to hold conversations, understand traffic signage, respond to official inquiries and make entries on reports and records in English, Caton explained to the Senate Transportation, Infrastructure and Public Safety Committee.
These requirements are to be consistent with federal motor carrier safety regulations. Any driver who violates these requirements would be prohibited from driving a commercial vehicle until they met the requirements, receive a Class D misdemeanor and would be fined $1000.
Repeat offenders would receive a Class B misdemeanor for their second offense and a Class D felony for any subsequent offense.
The company that owns any commercial vehicle found to be in violation would also be fined $3000 per offense. These carriers would be able to reclaim possession of their vehicle after paying the fine and providing a driver who meets the requirements.
No debate on the bill occurred, and it will now be voted on in committee before moving to the Senate floor.
The committee also heard HB 1730, sponsored by Rep. Mike Costlow, R-Dardenne Prairie.
Current Missouri law states that possessing, manufacturing, transporting, repairing or selling a firearm suppressor is a criminal offense. If passed, the bill would decriminalize these actions in the state.
Firearm suppressors, commonly known as gun silencers, muffle but don’t completely silence the sound of a gun when it’s fired. Costlow said that the use of silencers would help preserve shooters’ hearing.
“We want to make sure we keep Missourians safe,” Costlow said.
The bill also includes a provision that states suppressors manufactured and used completely in Missouri wouldn’t be subject to federal commerce clause regulations. Because of this, Missouri-manufactured and used suppressors wouldn’t have to be registered with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, according to the proposed bill.
The committee had no questions for Costlow, and no witness testimony was heard for or against the bill.
-----------------------------------------------------
Senate hearing 129-page public safety bill
By Margaret Stewart and Eric Hughes, Missouri News Network
A Senate committee heard a House bill Monday that would modify numerous public safety provisions. There have been 35 proposed amendments to the bill, 15 of which have been adopted.
Amendments address topics such as child pornography and artificial intelligence, safety of first responders, gift card fraud and fire codes.
House Bill 3068, sponsored by Rep. Jeff Myers, R-Warrenton, was heard on the House floor in late April with over three hours of discussion.
The bill initially offered alterations to the sex offender registry. It is now what many would call a “Christmas tree bill,” meaning it has branched out to cover a variety of provisions.
The AI portion of the bill would prohibit AI tools from being classified as mental health professionals and crack down on the distribution of sexually explicit AI content.
AI services would be deemed incapable of acting as mental health professionals and advertising AI chatbots as mental health professionals.
The bill would also prohibit the imitation of human “likeness” in sexually explicit material produced by AI, including using a person’s voice.
Restrictions aim to prohibit sexual depictions of minors in photos, videos and computer-generated content. A child is classified as anyone under 14 years of age in the bill.
Violators of the law would be subject to civil penalties. There will be a fine of $10,000 upon the first offense and $20,000 upon the second offense.
Another amendment to the bill would focus on eliminating gift card fraud.
Tampering of any kind with EBT, food stamps and physical and digital gift cards would be labeled as felonies under the bill’s provisions.
Violators will be classified as Class C felons for any amount of tampering valued at least $25,000, Class B felons for any amount over $750 and Class A misdemeanors for any amount under $750.
A section of the bill relating to fire safety would require the Missouri Division of Fire Safety to adopt Missouri fire and life safety standards with new minimum requirements for safety.
The new requirements will affect means of egress, fire resistance, fire alarms, emergency operations and other safety measures for state-inspected facilities.
Jorgen Schlemeier, representing the Missouri Assisted Living Association, testified in opposition to the bill. He said the legislation would require them to comply with at least two different state fire safety codes.
“We want government efficiency,” Schlemeier said. “We want a code and we do not want multiple inspections over the same issue.”
The Missouri Division of Fire Safety would also make necessary adjustments to the fire and life safety standards every five years under the bill’s requirements.
Compliance with these new standards would be verified through inspections done by either the Division of Fire Safety or other local jurisdictions.
State inspected facilities will not be authorized for operation unless they are found in accordance with the new policy.
Another provision in the bill would make it an offense to impede, threaten or harass a first responder after bring told to back at least 25 feet away from or not approach an on-duty first responder.
The proposed legislation would make it a Class D misdemeanor to impede, threaten or harass a first responder in this way.
Other topics under the bill include:
The bill will need to pass through the Senate committee before reaching the Senate floor for debate.
-----------------------------------------------------
MONDAY
Respect MO Voters turn in historic number of petition signatures
By Faith Jacoby, Missouri News Network
JEFFERSON CITY — The Respect MO Voters Coalition turned in a record-breaking number of petition signatures to the Secretary of State’s office for a 2026 constitutional amendment.
The signatures, collected from every congressional district in the state, represent a “massive statewide mobilization supporting the Respect MO Voters constitutional amendment to preserve the citizen initiative,” according to a news release from the Respect MO Voters Coalition.
The amendment will require ballot summaries to be clear and accurate, preserve the freedom to petition and make it harder for politicians to change or undo what has already been voted on.
“Today, the voters of Missouri stand together to say, ‘No more, enough is enough’ to politicians’ power grabs” said Benjamin Singer, co-founder of Respect MO Voters. “We’re here to turn in 360,000 signatures for a citizen ballot initiative that allows the millions of Missouri voters to have our say in keeping this century-old freedom alive and strong.”
Nearly 2,000 volunteers contributed to collecting signatures in all 115 counties in the state.
The signature collection started in February of 2025 with “volunteer-organized town halls, surveys, and policy summits to craft an amendment directly shaped by the people of Missouri,” according to the news release. The volunteers then raised money to hire constitutional attorneys to draft the amendment.
“This amendment has been powered by volunteers from the start,” said DeMarco Davidson, executive director for Metropolitan Congregations United. “Everyday people, reaching out to each other and having conversations in their communities to ensure power stays with the people.”
The issue, many of the speakers agreed, is bipartisan.
“Preserving the citizen initiative process in Missouri is not a partisan issue,” said Bob Johnson, a former state legislator, R-Lee’s Summit. “It’s come under attack in this state by whichever party holds the power in Jefferson City, going back decades.”
“At the end of the day, this isn’t about party lines, it’s about defending the will of the people,” said Matt Andrews, president of Laborers’ Local 42 in St. Louis. “And that’s something we should all be willing to stand up for.”
After remarks from speakers, volunteers then carried the boxes of petitions into the Secretary of State’s office.
The over 367,000 signatures set a record for most petition signatures gathered by volunteers in the state’s history.
-----------------------------------------------------
WEEKEND
Supreme Court decision could threaten Missouri’s Black lawmakers
By Tyler Kirwan, Missouri News Network
WASHINGTON — Every year since 1969, at least one of Missouri’s elected representatives in Washington has been Black, oftentimes, two. Wednesday’s Supreme Court ruling that undermined the Voting Rights Act raises questions about whether that tradition will continue.
Missouri Democrats, particularly the state’s Black lawmakers, from the nation’s capital to the state’s capital, are sounding the alarm.
“Make no mistake: This ruling is not a defense of ‘colorblind democracy,’” state Rep. Michael Johnson, head of the Legislative Black Caucus, said in a news release. “It is a license for those in power to dilute Black political power while hiding behind the Constitution they have chosen to selectively honor.”
U.S. Rep. Wesley Bell, who represents a St. Louis district that has consistently sent a Black representative to Congress for six decades, sees this ruling as undermining “what civil rights leaders and activists fought for.”
“When we see that right, constitutional right, being chipped away on the edges, it’s very concerning,” he said.
Missouri elected its first Black representative to the U.S. House of Representatives three years after President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act into law. In the 60 years since, Missouri has sent six Black representatives to Washington. All of them are from St. Louis or Kansas City.
Nationally, of the 12,591 members who have been elected and served in Congress since 1789, 201 have been Black, according to the U.S. House Historian’s office.
The Voting Rights Act strengthened Black voting power by prohibiting discriminatory practices that some states, most especially those of the old Confederacy, used to keep Black people from voting. These included discriminatory “literacy tests” and poll taxes, meant to create a financial barrier to the polls.
“The Civil Rights Movement, starting back in the ’60s, made some tremendous progress in protecting voting rights across the board for all people. And particularly minorities that were being disproportionately impacted,” said Missouri Democratic Party Chairman Russ Carnahan. “And now the court has turned backwards to go back to those not so good times to open the door for that kind of discrimination again.”
Even before the Supreme Court’s decision, Missouri Republicans were already taking aim at one of the state’s two black members of Congress.
Emanuel Cleaver, who represents Kansas City’s 5th district, is currently at the center of a redistricting battle. Missouri’s Republican-dominated state legislature is pushing a redistricting plan this year that could eliminate his current district.
At the direction of President Donald Trump, Missouri’s state legislators joined their GOP counterparts across the country in redrawing the state’s congressional lines to try to shore up the Republican majority in the U.S. House in November’s elections.
If the state legislature’s new map withstands a court challenge, Cleaver is likely to lose his seat to a Republican.
“I feel horrible today,” Cleaver told the Missourian on the day the Supreme Court handed down its ruling. “It reminded me of my grandpa, Reverend Noah Albert Cleaver. He died at 103 and never voted, because he had to pay a poll tax, and he just wouldn’t do it. So he died without ever voting in the United States of America.”
While the Voting Rights Act did not directly affect Missouri, University of Missouri political scientist Scott LaCombe thinks the Supreme Court ruling could have a ripple effect that would reduce the number of Black representation and Democrats that the Show-Me state sends to Congress.
“I think a lot of states are going to be emboldened to draw more aggressive gerrymanders,” LaCombe said.
In the past, the Voting Rights Act has made politicians reluctant to advance gerrymanders that dilute the Black vote, for fear of drawing lawsuits. The Supreme Court decision may make them less concerned about that, LaCombe said.
While neither Carnahan nor Bell would speculate over whether Missouri’s Republicans could take aim at Bell’s St. Louis district next, former Rep. Cori Bush was more outspoken.
Bush, who lost a Democratic primary to Bell in 2024, and is trying to win back her seat this year, called the court’s decision a show of “just how far MAGA Republicans will go to disenfranchise Black voters,” in a social media post on X.
Bush called for enactment of proposed voter protection legislation that Democratic leaders in Congress so far have been unable to get through a Republican-controlled Congress. “Democrats must fight back against this blatant attack on our voting rights, pass the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, and exercise all options available to stand up for the right to vote,” Bush said in her post.
Named after a late civil rights icon who served 33 years as a member of Congress, the John Lewis act would update the Voting Rights Act and establish new criteria to determine which states must receive federal preclearance before making changes to voting practices.
Cleaver called the act “a contemporary solution to the problems that still exist in this country based on race.”
If Mizzou’s LaCombe is correct that the republicans may take gerrymandering to a new level, it would not only hurt the state’s Black representation in Congress, but the Democratic party’s representation in Congress.
Currently two of Missouri’s eight members of the U.S. House are Democrats. Republicans are hoping that their new redistricting plan will leave just one of the state’s eight congressional districts in Democratic hands. A redrawing of the 1st Congressional District could potentially drop that number to zero. More than 40% of Missouri’s votes for president in the last presidential election went to Democratic candidate Kamala Harris, according to the Secretary of State website.
Mizzou’s LaCombe thinks one party politics are bad for everyone.
“I think there’s a lot of value of having bipartisan representation in Washington, DC, because, you know, one day, there will be a Democratic president and a Democratic trifecta again, and we want to have a Missouri representative there within that coalition. I think states are really doing themselves a disservice when they have a single party coalition,” he said.
He also thinks it hurts civic life. “Competitive electoral environments boost turnout. You tend to have better policy that’s more responsive to voters. And so the more incumbents feel like they are not worried about losing their seats, the more complacent they’re going to get. And really, just the worse representation Missouri is going to get,” LaCombe said.
Despite the odds against him in the upcoming election, Cleaver isn’t giving up. “I think we’re resilient. I think we’re going to find a way to combat this attempt to reduce, if not eliminate, minority participation in the Congress of the United States,” he said.
