After passing a mandatory 24-hour waiting period before obtaining an abortion in 2003, the Missouri Legislature repeatedly struggled to agree on pro-life priorities in 2004.  In the end, this year’s legislative session turned into a wash out.
    Several life issues were advanced only to stall, primarily because too many divided agendas competed for time and opportunities to break threatened filibusters by pro-abortion lawmakers.
    Senator John Loudon’s “Parental Consent” measure sought to create new tools to keep minors from receiving abortions in Illinois, circumventing Missouri’s Parental Consent Law.  A variety of pro-life advocates (Senators Matt Bartle and Anita Yeckel, Representatives Charles Portwood and Jim Lembke, just to mention a few) fought to define  the term “next Friend,” in order to keep abortion activists from taking minor girls to get court orders to ignore parental consent requirements.  Representative Jane Cunningham attempted to create guidelines for abortion clinics and doctors, in order to hold them accountable and to restrict unethical practices that increase abortion numbers.
    A combination of these items was eventually passed by the House but stifled by pro-aborts in the Senate who dedicated themselves to earning their pro-abortion political donations!
    On the bioethics front, pro-life efforts were very disappointing.  Representative Jim Lembke and Senator Matt Bartle burned major political capital by going way out on a limb in their careers, in trying to advance human cloning restrictions.
    Both House and Senate debates over human cloning bogged down, as lobbyists for the medical research industry effectively confused the issue, and maligned the minority of pro-life legislators who truly understood the complexities of the issue. 
    Many other pro-life proposals failed to materialize, as attention focused on the aforementioned high-profile issues.  On the plus side though, no pro-abortion bills were seriously considered by any committee of the House or Senate!  This is a complete reversal of the Missouri politics of the 80’s and 90’s!

EDUCATION

While bills dealing with education accountability dominated the education debates in 2004, it was home educators who ended up at the greatest risk overall.  By the last day of the session, accountability won when House Bills 1040 and 1041 cleared the legislative process, and home schoolers came out victoriously, having defended their rights and sovereignty before the State.
    To start with, on the home education front, no bills requiring registration or linking attendance together with driver’s licenses, made it very far in the legislative process.  Proposals to raise compulsory education age ranges did however receive significant attention.
    In order to give credibility and political muscle to the idea of raising compulsory attendance ages, the St. Louis Public School Lobby pushed their agenda all year, that adding more years to school attendance would reduce drop-out rates. Drop-out rates are one of the factors determined by the federal courts to order forced bussing or allow voluntary student transfer programs.  While no credible research shows that a rise in the age of compulsory education would reduce drop-out rates, it certainly would create a substantial burden upon home educators --  particularly when families have to justify themselves to government agencies through some form of post-defacto registration.
    In last day wrangling, a bill was passed that could have been disastrous for home schoolers.  However, home school negotiators managed to lop off any reference to the higher age of eighteen; threw out any connections to driver’s licenses; eliminated all requirements for home education registrations (both direct or indirect); severely limited the geographic application of any changes to St. Louis City only; required all affected students/families to be voluntary participants; set a sunset of four years on the experiment; and abolished all explicit exemptions which would have set up private and home educators as sitting ducks for future attacks.
    While home schoolers did not win a total victory, they certainly held their ground throughout an intense political battle.  All that the other side achieved was a four-year demonstration project that only applies to voluntary consumers of government schools in St. Louis City.  This new provision is now added to Missouri State statutes as a true anomaly -- an abnormality which has little to no effect on public policy, and certainly no impact on private or home schoolers.
    Passage of Senate Bills 968 and 969 in their final versions merely allow the St. Louis Public School Board to adopt a policy that states, within that one school district, that the compulsory age may be increased by one year -- from age sixteen to age seventeen.  The only students affected will be those who have already been enrolled in public school prior to turning sixteen, thus removing any need to exempt any non-public school students.  Private and home educators need no exemption.  Therefore no disclaimers, registrations, or other challenges may entangle home schoolers or private schooling families. In fact, as the pro-government forces capitulated on point after point, they had to add in extra protective language, clarifying that home schools do not have to keep additional logs, portfolios, or any other requirements.  The newly revised law specifically states that home schooled students’ compulsory age remains at the current ages --between seven and sixteen years of age.
    There is only one difficult issue for the parent. A fifteen-year-old who is enrolled in a St. Louis public school, who drops out of school before turning seventeen (without graduating), and who claims to have started home schooling to avoid violating the law, must provide a written statement from the parent that their child is attending a home school in compliance with the law.  Yet, even this section helps to protect home education by segregating original home educators from those who try to cover up for a delinquent child who refuses to go to school.  Bad apple cases have been used as antidotal evidence against home education. These cases can now be easily identified as not being truly representative of the home school community.
    On another front, over the last couple of years Families for Home Education (FHE) has sought to create a legal form of relief for home school families who are harassed by juvenile officers.  Under the law, no Division of Family Services (DFS) worker is allowed to interfere with home educators just because they home school.  This law was established in 1986 (Senate Bill 795) as part of the larger battle to clarify the statutory guidelines for home education.  At that time, some DFS employees had been threatening and interfering with families who refused to put their children in government schools. 
    Chapter 210.167. RSMo. states:  “If an investigation conducted by the division of family services pursuant to section 210.145 (abuse & neglect) reveals that the only basis for action involves a question of an alleged violation of section 167.031. RSMo, (compulsory education), then the local office of the division shall send the report to the school district in which the child resides.  The school district shall immediately refer all private, parochial, parish or home school matters to the prosecuting attorney of the county wherein the child legally resides.”  
    Within some counties of the State, juvenile officers serving as truancy officers for school districts, have discovered that they do not have to live under the same restraints as DFS employees.  The results have been devastating to some families, as they have faced harassment from yet another layer of unaccountable government bureaucrats.
    Last year FHE successfully brokered a deal to add juvenile officers to the same restrictions and standards required of the DFS (See House Bill 1679 - 2003).  But, unfortunately, that bill was vetoed by Governor Holden.
    This year, as FHE worked to kill several bills threatening home schoolers, they managed to add juvenile officer restrictions to several bills flowing through the legislative pipeline.  In the end, one bill survived the entire legislative process and has been signed into law.
    The text of the new protective provision reads: “211.0314.  When an investigation by a juvenile officer pursuant to this section reveals that the only basis for action involves an alleged violation of section 167.031, RSMo, involving a child who alleges to be home schooled, the juvenile officer shall contact a parent or parents of such child to verify that the child is being home schooled and not in violation of section 167.031, RSMo, before making a report of such a violation.  Any report of a violation of section 167.031, RSMo, made by a juvenile officer regarding a child who is being home schooled shall be made to the prosecuting attorney of the county where the child legally resides.”
    This new provision requires juvenile officers to turn home school cases over to proper law enforcement (county prosecutor), rather than dragging families into the legal limbo of unaccountable juvenile authorities.  Another victory for home educators!
    There are far too many legislators to list here who have stood with the home education community.  But special recognition should be given to Representatives Brian Baker (R) Belton, Maynard Wallace (R) Thornfield (Ozark Co.), and Jane Cunningham (R) St. Louis Co., who strove with great personal stress to protect home education.
    Speaker of the House Catherine Hanaway (R) St. Louis Co. and Senator Norma Champion have repeatedly gone out on a political limb to assist us in holding juvenile officers accountable for their treatment of home school students and parents. 
    Home schooling Representatives Ed Emery (R) Lamar, Mark Wright (R) Springfield, Cynthia Davis (R) St. Charles, and Rex Rector (R) Harrisonville, have all gone to the mat numerous times to defend home education.
    State Senator John Loudon (R) West St. Louis Co. and home school father of three, has championed the cause for home educators time and time again.  Senator Loudon’s never-ending vigilance makes it possible for home school parents to sleep safe and sound at night.

FAMILY

One of the most significant bills passed this year was signed into law by the Governor without any ceremony.  After vetoing foster care reform legislation last year, Governor Holden could not afford the political fallout of a second veto.  Instead the Governor chose to sign the bill in secret (as he has other bills which defied his politically correct agenda).
    House Bill 1453 cleared the legislative process and received its last votes on the last day of the session.  Together with Senate Bill 762, the Division of Family Services lost its biggest battle since the agency was formed.  Under the direction of Republican Speaker of the House Catherine Hanaway and the leadership of the Senate, very significant reforms to the way DFS conducts business have become law this year.
    While many more changes need to be made in the future, this is the first time DFS has ever been required to become accountable.  Since there isn’t enough room to list all the reforms which are incredibly broad, significant and numerous in this issue of the MetroVoice, readers will have to visit the State’s web site, and go to both the House and Senate links to read the “Truly Agreed” versions of these bills.
    In other actions supportive of families, House Bill 1136 and Senate Bill 799 were adopted and put into law, which hold the primacy of parental rights and prerogatives regarding the disposition of fetal remains from a stillbirth.
    Currently, the practice of most hospitals is to deny parents access to such deceased children and treat the child’s body as medical waste.  These bills direct the Department of Health to issue an official certificate of stillbirth, recognizing that just because the child is deceased, he or she is still a child.  These provisions are provided to parents who desire them and are not forced upon anyone.  Additionally, any parent may claim such a child’s body for the disposition of their choice.  No longer can any medical institution withhold a child’s body just because of a stillbirth or miscarriage!
    In yet another piece of legislation passed by this year’s General Assembly, school children have been granted protections against strip searches by school personnel.  The most aggressive lobbies against this prohibition were the public schools and DFS.  For various reasons they wanted to maintain the authority to strip search any child at any time under any circumstances, and they did not want parents to get in their way. Senate Bill 968 limits strip-search authority to law enforcement officers except in very limited situations. The bill requires parental notices “as soon as possible” and provides for the dismissal of school employees who violate these new standards of protection.

GAMBLING

Seven different bills were introduced this year to eliminate the $500 loss limit on Missouri casinos.  Not one of them advanced through the legislative process.  The twenty-nine sponsors and co-sponsors of these bills all hailed from the Democrat Party – answering the call of Governor Holden to expand gambling in order to raise State revenues.  But this does not mean there are no Republicans who would support such an effort.  In fact, Missouri sits on the edge of losing our loss limits because of the financial influence of the casino industry!  A coalition of the majority of one party, plus a minority of the other, could add up to disaster for the State’s protections against the unethical enticements of this billion-dollar a year industry.
    Bills to create additional protections against casinos getting a foothold in the Branson area were targeted by those who wanted to add amendments to remove the $500 loss limit.  This assault effectively killed all effort to defend Southwest Missouri.  (It must be noted that Peter Herschend, of Silver Dollar City, was among those who cut a deal with the casinos.  Under his plan, the Branson area would receive some limited protections against casino gambling at the expense of the rest of the State.  He would have allowed the rest of the State to go down the tubes to save his personal empire!  Thankfully he lost.)
    Senator John Loudon’s legislation to authorize the Joint Committee on Wagering and Gaming to solicit competitive bids from State universities for a comprehensive study of pathological or problem gambling was once again pushed aside by lawmakers, who have been recruited to protect the casino industry.  Loudon’s gambling impact study could have demonstrated to policy makers how social and widespread government services costs negate or even exceed revenues paid by casinos.
    On a positive note, several new gambling venue proposals were rejected by various committees.  They therefore never made it to any floor debates or recorded votes.  These included Truck Stop Mini-Casinos, ‘Non-profit’ Video Poker Halls, and Bingo expansion.

GOVERNMENT ETHICS

House Bill 1599 created a Joint Committee on Government Accountability.  As passed by the Legislature, this new law requires the General Assembly to regularly examine inefficiencies, fraud, and misconduct in State government.  Membership of the Committee will be made up of fourteen members of the House and Senate.  This guarantees that the Committee remains directly accountable to voters and not to a politically insulated bureaucracy.  This is the most direct accountability proposal adopted in over fifty years!
    House Bill 978 created the Small Business Regulatory Fairness Board.  The bill was passed, but vetoed last year, and has been passed again.  The purpose of the bill is to make sure government regulatory agencies which harm small businesses are answerable to a higher authority.  Passage of this bill puts government bureaucracies on notice that they cannot push around and/or harass small enterprises out of business.  All rules and regulations which stifle citizens from being able to start or run a small business must answer to this Board and justify harmful actions.  In other words, it reminds government agencies who their boss is - the people!
    In an effort to stop the migration of physicians away from Missouri, and to bring sanity back to the civil litigation which is driving so many professionals out of business in our State, House Bill 1304 was passed and placed on the Governor’s desk.  But, like last year, the trial lawyers wanted this bill killed and since they’re good financial supporters of the Governor, he vetoed it again for the second year in a row.
    This brings us to House Bill 980.  Once again the Legislature has responded to out-of-control power-hungry bureaucracies.  This time they addressed the out-of-balance scales of environmental rules.  In recent years the political correctness of protecting Mother Earth has caused great harm to legitimate enterprises, including plain old farmers.  House Bill 980 establishes accountability for the Department of Natural Resources and related boards and commissions.  These government agencies must cite their legal authority before strong-arming the very people who pay their wages. 
    These bills and the new laws they created in 2004 were greatly needed and appreciated.  They belatedly address some of the worst offenders in the community of bureaucracies which control peoples lives and livelihoods.  The American dream has seen far too many years of sleepless nights because of unaccountable agencies that, far too often, thrive off of intimidation and unethical tactics.  These new standards provide a good platform to rebuild Missouri’s lagging economy and offer real hope for our children’s future.

HOMOSEXUALITY

After a seven-year battle, Missouri finally adopted a statutory law in 2004 to define marriage in our State as only between one man and one woman.  At that time the St. Louis Post Dispatch criticized Governor Holden for failing to control the legislature and keep this law from being passed, as former Governor Carnahan had done for six years.  Thanks to the Republican takeover of the State Senate, the Democrat party and the homosexual activists lost control of the issue.
    On August 3rd Missouri voters will represent the first State in the nation to have the opportunity to add a protective definition to marriage to the State Constitution!  This is the result of the passage of Senate Joint Resolution 29.
    Missouri’s current statutory law could be declared invalid under any circuit court jurisdiction in the State by an activist judge.  This is how most homosexual politics are advanced.  What we are fighting for this year is an amendment to the Missouri State Constitution that would raise the level of protection for marriage.  Such a State Constitutional Provision could only be attacked by a federal judge, who could remove all State courts from having jurisdiction in order to twist the law by proclamation!
    Ultimately, we need a U.S. Constitutional Amendment to prohibit homosexual marriages, civil unions or any other legally recognized domestic partnerships.  It is important to note that since Missouri does not recognize any form of civil unions, we are not at risk of being forced to acknowledge other State’s homosexual civil unions under the “good faith and credit” clause of the Constitution.  Therefore, the proposed State Constitutional Amendment passed by the Legislature does not address the civil union issue.
    Senate Joint Resolution 29, introduced in the Senate, and several other bills introduced in the House, were championed by Senator Sarah Steelman and ten other senators, plus Representatives Kevin Engler and dozens of his fellow House members.  The final adoption of this proposal could amend the Missouri Constitution, if Missouri voters agree at the ballot box during the August Primary Election. The proposed Amendment reads: “That to be valid and recognized in this state, a marriage shall exist only between a man and a woman.”
    Legislation sponsored by Representative Jack Jackson and cosponsored by 11 other House members failed to advance in this year’s session. The legislation was aimed at curbing a practice of various county DFS offices, where homosexual households are given priority treatment as placement homes for foster and adoptive children!  HB 1677 would have prohibited a State agency or other child agency from placing a child with a person(s) who is in a known illicit sexual relationship outside a legal marriage.  Two-parent heterosexuals are often passed over in favor of homosexual households.
    The Bill stated:  “No child shall be placed, either temporarily or permanently, by any agency of the state or any child placing agency with any person who, openly or notoriously or under circumstances known to the state agency or child placing agency, is engaged in a sexual relationship with another individual to whom such person is not married or who asserts a marital relationship with another individual to whom such person is not lawfully married under the laws of the State of Missouri. Before placing custody of a child with any person, either on a temporary or permanent basis or for adoption, any state agency or child placing agency shall have a duty to inquire of the person regarding the potential existence of such relationships.”
    Expect this homosexual adoption/foster care problem to become a key issue in the 2005 General Assembly.
    On another issue indirectly related to homosexuality, readers should take note that when Governor Holden produced his barrage of politically correct vetoes last year, his courage waned with this year’s session ending right before his bid for reelection.  Last year lawmakers proposed allowing the Boy Scouts of America to have a specialized auto license plate but the Governor vetoed the bill.  (Remember it was the Boy Scouts of America who had to spend hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars defending themselves against homosexual activists who wanted to be scout leaders.  After years of court activities, the Scouts finally won, but at the added expense of paying retribution to the political and media communities.)
    Despite last year’s veto, lawmakers adopted House Bill 1317 to explicitly grant permission to the Boy Scouts of America to have their own specialized licenses plates.  Then to help protect the Scouts from another politically correct veto (which would have again made the homosexual lobby happy), they also added this measure to Senate Bill 1233, an omnibus transportation package.
    Hooray for the Boy Scouts and a hip, hip hooray for the lawmakers who have honored them!

PORNOGRAPHY, PROSTITUTION & SEX CRIMES

2004 has been a very productive year in the battle against pornography and in defense of decency.  The Missouri Legislature has passed two different bills, advancing a pro-family agenda further than any time in almost twenty years.
    First was House Bill 1055.  This legislation has produced several new legal standards. It makes possession of child pornography a Class D Felony for a first offense and a Class C Felony for any subsequent offense.  Current law is only a Class A Misdemeanor for a first offense.  House Bill 1055 also increases the crime of furnishing pornographic material to minors a Class D Felony when the offender has a prior conviction of various sex offenses.  Additionally, it adds several pornography offenses to the list of crimes which require a person to register as a sexual offender.
    When Missouri first adopted a possession law for child pornography, it was a model statute for the nation.  Since that time (1987) many States have adopted a much stronger provision.  This is due to the demonstrated connection between child porn and child molestation.  Child sexual predators show child porn to the child in order to confuse them about acceptable behavior.  Note that by raising the penalty standard from a misdemeanor to a felony, we also raise the statute of limitations from one year to three.
    A broad range of sex offender laws are enhanced with passage of House Bill 1055.
    The second bill passed into law this year was Senate Bill 870.  This is the measure which prohibits billboards for any adult cabarets or sexually oriented businesses within one mile of any State highway and prohibits persons under twenty-one from being employed to put them up in other areas.
    If an adult cabaret or sexually-oriented business is located within one mile of a State highway, then the business can display a maximum of two exterior signs on the premises of the business. The signs are limited to the purpose of conveying identification and providing notice that the premises are off limits to minors. The identification sign is limited to 40 square feet and can only convey the name, address, telephone number and operating hours of the business. Current existing signs must comply with the law within three years.
    House Bill 1215 compliments the sex crimes provisions of House Bill 1055 by making it an additional Class D Felony for a person convicted as a sexual predator to escape from a civil commitment.  This additional penalty would allow such individuals to be placed in secure prison environments, where they could not be a threat to society.
    House Bill 1487, which was also passed in the 2004 legislative session, creates several new crimes against persons.  Child kidnapping, human trafficking, forced labor and involuntary servitude are part of the bill’s provisions.  Trafficking for the purposes of sexual exploitation and child sexual trafficking is addressed in a variety of new laws. 
    Patronizing prostitution is now a much more serious crime in Missouri with the passage of this bill -- particularly if the patronizing of a prostitute turns out to involve a minor or child prostitute.  Anyone guilty of promoting minor or child prostitution, especially in a forced trafficking situation, can face very tough charges.

TAXATION

 As a final issue to report to readers, we need to be reminded that, more often than not, there is great and important news that’s never reported because of a lack of media coverage.  In other words, what has not been in the news can be the biggest news of all.  As opposed to the past several decades of Democrat controlled sessions of the Missouri General Assembly, our new leadership in Jefferson City has made -- and kept -- a very important promise.  No new taxes.
    For over a generation the Republican Party has promised citizens that if they were given control of the Legislature they would stop the constant increases to our families' and business's tax burdens.  After the first two years of Republican leadership (2003 and 2004), they have held to this promise as a serious commitment.
    Despite repeated, and often bitter debates, the new majority party leadership has consistently rejected proposal after proposal to raise any new taxes.  Tax plans of all sorts have been offered, some up front, some hidden, some downright mischievous, but in the end Missouri voters should note that the major media has failed to report this story.
    “Thank You”, to the leadership of the Missouri House and Senate for the biggest unreported story of the year.  No New Taxes!

 END NOTE

As we enter the election season for the Primary Elections on August 3rd and the General Elections on November 2nd, please feel free to contact Missouri Family Network with any questions about your elected official’s performance in regard to these and other issues.  I will personally avail myself to any inquiries.