Missouri House Republicans raise their hands to speak as House Majority Leader Jon Patterson moves for a vote on April 13, 2023 (Annelise Hanshaw/Missouri Independent).
Republican factional fights are nothing new in the Missouri General Assembly.
But what is new this year is the venue — the House of Representatives, where a sophomore lawmaker accusing his colleagues of corrupt politics seeks to upset the usually routine election of a speaker.
State Rep. Justin Sparks of Wildwood admits history is against him in his attempt to prevent state Rep. Jon Patterson of Lee’s Summit from becoming speaker. Patterson, who was majority leader in the previous General Assembly, was designated as the GOP candidate for speaker months ago.
In videos posted online and in an interview with The Independent, Sparks accused Patterson and the GOP House leadership of demanding large campaign contributions in exchange for plum committee slots.
“The uncomfortable truth is, power is for sale. In Jefferson City,” Sparks said in the first video of his speaker’s bid. “If you want to be a chairman of a powerful committee, you got to pay.”
If elected speaker, he said, he wants to change House rules so committee chairs are elected by committee members.
Patterson did not respond to a request for an interview.
No speaker nominee has been denied election since 1996, when 11 Democrats voted present and four backed the Republican floor leader.
“It’s certainly a long shot by all standards, but it had to happen, and that’s why I was convinced that I had to do it,” Sparks said in an interview with The Independent.
With 111 Republicans, Sparks will need 29 other party members to join him to prevent Patterson from receiving the 82 votes needed to make a majority.
Sparks would not say how many members have committed votes to him.
To actually win, Sparks, a leader of the far-right Freedom Caucus, would need the 52 Democrats to abandon their party leader, state Rep. Ashley Aune of Kansas City, to create a coalition majority.
Sparks has not asked for Democratic votes, Aune said.
“As far as I can tell,” she said, “it’s a political suicide mission.”
The action begins at noon Wednesday when Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft brings the gavel down to open the House session. This year’s session concludes on May 16.
As of Tuesday, lawmakers had prefiled more than 1,250 bills, 725 in the House and 539 in the state Senate. House members have also offered up 44 proposals to change the Missouri Constitution, while the Senate has 50 ready for opening day.
The only bills lawmakers must pass are appropriations to fund state government.
Issues expected to receive extensive debate include:
- Proposals to alter or repeal the provisions of Amendment 3, which protects abortion rights.
- Constitutional amendments to make it more difficult to pass measures by initiative petition.
- Bills to cut or eliminate the income tax.
- Measures that address crime and police, including a proposal backed by Gov.-elect Mike Kehoe to put the state back in control of the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department.
Patterson, if he survives the challenge from Sparks, will set the House agenda in a speech prepared for delivery on opening day.
In the Senate, incoming President Pro Tem Cindy O’Laughlin has said she wants direct elections of appeals court judges and to make the director of the Department of Transportation an appointee of the governor instead of the state Highways and Transportation Commission.
How many bills will reach Kehoe’s desk will depend on how well the GOP supermajority works together. Last year, out of more than 2,300 non-budget bills and 170 proposed constitutional amendments, only 28 were passed — making 2024 the least productive legislative session in recent history
The low numbers, despite bipartisan support for some major bills and intense grassroots pressure for partisan GOP proposals, was due to factional warfare in the Senate, which had upset regular business for several years.
With 10 newly elected senators, replacing some of the most vocal critics of the leadership, O’Laughlin said she is “optimistic” the chamber can function without rancor.
“We have an opportunity to work together, set aside past conflicts, and focus on addressing the needs of Missourians,” O’Laughlin said. “I’m committed to fostering collaboration and ensuring that we deliver meaningful results for the people of this state.”
The Democratic floor leader, state Sen. Doug Beck of Affton, said a Senate free of factional fights would be good if the focus is on broadly supported proposals such as tax credits for child care and better teacher pay.
“But if that leadership, the Senate leadership, decides instead to focus on partisan politics and overturning the will of the voters, then the Senate’s reputation for dysfunction may save it from itself,” Beck said.
Abortion and initiatives
Republicans know key party constituencies are demanding action to limit or repeal Amendment 3, which restored abortion rights in Missouri. But there is no consensus on what that will look like.
Although Amendment 3 took effect Dec. 5, no clinic is offering abortion services because of a December court decision that left licensing laws in place. The dozens of abortion-related bills filed by Republicans range from proposals to re-impose Missouri’s abortion ban with another statewide vote as well as smaller measures attempting to set parameters around Amendment 3, including by defining fetal viability.
“In the district I represent, Amendment 3 is very problematic,” said State Rep. Dane Diehl, a Butler Republican.
Diehl and other Republicans interviewed said they will go as far as possible to limit abortions. But with the strong presumption included in the Constitution that such laws are off-limits, the options are few.
“How can we work around the edges on the abortion issue is definitely going to be there,” state Rep. Bill Owen of Springfield said.
The most conservative members will be pushing for a full repeal, but Democrats warn that could backfire at the polls.
“They’re not content with just being re-elected into the supermajority,” Aune said. “They want to also control every aspect of our lives, and this is just one additional way they’re going to do it.”
Amendment 3 received 51.6% of the vote and every Republican running statewide received at least 55% of the vote. That means there are many thousands of Republican voters who also supported Amendment 3, Beck said.
“It only passed because of support from Republican voters who believe their elected officials respect the outcome of the election,” he said.
Republicans acknowledged that a full repeal is unlikely. And a ballot measure putting tighter limits on when a woman can seek an abortion could generate opposition from the right for not going far enough.
O’Laughlin said she’s uncertain what path the Senate should pursue.
“We owe it to voters to address this issue in a way that reflects the values of our state,” she said. “Whether that means pursuing a full repeal or making adjustments—such as including exceptions for certain cases—I’m committed to ensuring the laws governing this issue are both transparent and reflective of what Missourians truly want.”
Aune said she’s cautiously optimistic about the chances for preserving all of Amendment 3.
“My concern would be higher if it seemed that these folks had any clear plan to attack this issue,” she said.
Last year, a proposal to make constitutional amendments proposed by initiative harder to pass failed in the Senate because of factional fighting among Republicans. A priority for years, it is certain to be pushed again.
“I strongly believe we need to protect Missouri’s constitution from being influenced by outside interests,” O’Laughlin said.
A better idea, Beck said, would be to limit the ability of lawmakers to enact changes to statutory proposals put on the ballot by initiative. There are already efforts underway to rollback portions of the minimum wage increase law passed in November as Proposition A.
“I would really love to see something put forward that says, hey, you know, the voters passed this and you can’t touch anything for five to 10 years, or something like that,” Beck said.
Budget and taxes
The consensus revenue estimate issued last month projects that during the current fiscal year, tax receipts will decline $70 million for the first time in living memory that has happened in a growing economy.
But that decline is just about one-half of 1% from record revenue in fiscal 2024 and, even with the decline, revenues will be more than $13.3 billion, about $200 million more than anticipated a year ago.
And when Kehoe delivers his first budget proposal Jan. 28, he will be able to tap the largest surplus ever enjoyed by an incoming governor. The state held $5.7 billion in the general revenue and other funds on Dec. 31, with another $2.6 billion stashed but unspent on major projects like expanding Interstate 70 or renovating the Capitol Building.
Spending from all funds should decline because, through December, the state has spent about half of the federal money received through the American Rescue Plan Act. But flat general revenue has lawmakers talking about the potential for cuts or limitations on earmarked funds.
“We’ve got less money coming in from the federal government,” Aune said. “We have revenues that are lower than we wish they were, and so that is going to mean that we’re gonna have to tighten our belts.”
Owen said the sluggish revenue will help focus attention on earmarks. Some items make it into the budget one year and they stay there because no one takes a close look, he said.
“There are some good things, but I mean, they need to be one time things,” Owen said.
Kehoe has promised to try to eliminate the state income tax, which provided 65% of state revenue in the fiscal year that ended June 30. The top rate now is 4.7%, which could drop next year if revenue growth returns.
Several lawmakers have proposed a 4% flat tax, followed by step-down reductions.
Discussions of a tax cut when revenues are falling and the budget is being cut doesn’t make sense, Beck said.
“I hear how these budgets are gonna get tough, and then they’re having conversations on the other side about getting rid of the income tax,” he said. “I don’t understand how this all works. Maybe we’re rooted more into running for the next election than we are to actually run the state of Missouri.”
O’Laughlin priorities
Since 1940, the Nonpartisan Court Plan has governed the selection of appellate and some trial-level judges. A panel made up of attorneys elected by other lawyers and residents appointed by the governor screen candidates and recommend three names for appointment by the governor.
Once appointed, the judge is put on the next general election ballot for a vote on whether they should be retained. During their tenure on the bench, judges are subject to regular retention votes, with members of the Missouri Supreme Court on the ballot every 12 years.
O’Laughlin is pushing to replace that process with direct election of all judges. For the courts of appeal and the Supreme Court, the panel would remain in place to recommend three candidates for the ballot, but others could run outside that process.
In social media posts, she said voters know very little about the judges when they vote on retention. And she is upset that several recent decisions did not go the way she wanted, including a last-gasp attempt to keep abortion rights off the November ballot.
“Judicial impartiality is critical to maintaining public trust in our courts,” O’Laughlin said in an email to The Independent. “I believe that electing judges can increase accountability by giving the public a direct voice.”
Beck, however, said he will defend the system in debate.
“I hate to bring in more and more politics into these things, because a lot of times, I don’t think you get the best person in that case,” he said.
O’Laughlin also wants to eliminate the Highways and Transportation Commission, which controls spending on highways and selects the director of the Department of Transportation. The commission has shown its independence by pursuing a lawsuit over how much it can spend on employee salaries and drew ire from O’Laughlin when it picked Ed Hassinger, a 40-year veteran of the department, as the new director.
“For far too long, the department has operated in isolation, shielded from public accountability by unelected commissioners and guaranteed revenue streams,” O’Laughlin wrote in a social media post.
Kehoe, a former member of the commission, opposes the move, saying putting selection of the head of the Department of Transportation into the hands of the governor injects politics into road construction decisions and “could be a disaster,” the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported.
O’Laughlin said she is pushing ahead with her proposal.
“While I understand Gov.-elect Kehoe’s concerns, I believe this proposal remains a priority because of its potential to improve transparency and oversight,” she said.
Beck said he’s willing to consider measures to make the department more accountable, but sees the same danger of politics if lawmakers set the department’s budget.
“If you move it under the control of the governor or the legislature,” Beck said, “it’s going to become very, very partisan.”
YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.