Capitol News:
Veto Session Sees Several Bills
Enacted into Law
The annual Veto Session began
Wednesday, September 16 at noon and by the time it was finished 12 hours later
the House and Senate had combined to override the governor’s vetoes on 10
pieces of legislation. Heading into the day, the legislature had successfully
completed 94 veto overrides in the history of the state. Seventy-two of the
overrides had occurred under the watch of the current governor. With
Wednesday’s total added to the tally, the legislature has now successfully
approved 104 overrides and Gov. Nixon has seen 82 of his vetoes overridden.
The annual Veto Session is
required by Article III, Section 32 of the Missouri Constitution, which calls
for the General Assembly to convene each September to consider vetoed bills.
Overrides have typically been rare in the state’s history because a successful
motion requires two-thirds majorities in both legislative chambers – 23 votes
in the Senate and 109 in the House of Representatives. Override efforts begin
in a given bill’s chamber of origin. If the originating chamber fails to
override, the other chamber can take no action on it.
The House entered the day with 10
vetoed bills and one vetoed budget line-item to consider. The Senate began
deliberations with six vetoed Senate bills to consider, as well as one override
motion on HB 150 that had already been approved by the House during the regular
session. When their work was done shortly after midnight Thursday morning, the
two chambers had combined to override vetoes on six House bills and four Senate
bills.
House Fails to Override Veto of
Right to Work Bill (HB 116)
During the 2015 regular session
the House and Senate had worked together to send Right to Work legislation to
the governor’s desk for the first time in the history of the state. The
governor then vetoed the bill, which set up a much-discussed and
much-anticipated vote to enact the bill into law despite the governor’s
objections.
Wednesday afternoon the House
spent nearly two hours debating the bill before finally attempting the override
motion. In front of packed galleries filled with both supporters and opponents
of the bill, the House failed to approve the override motion by a vote of
96-63. The 96 votes fell 13 short of the number needed to override, but
represented a gain of four votes from the 92 that originally approved the bill
in the House during the regular session.
In effect, the bill would have
given workers in Missouri the right to decide whether to join a union.
Specifically, it would have prohibited an employer from requiring a person to
become a member of a labor organization as a condition or continuation of
employment.
Supporters of the idea say it is
meant to make Missouri a more attractive location for new and existing job
creators. They say it preserves the rights and freedoms of the individual to
choose whether to join a union. Opponents say it is an attack on organized
labor and a move that would lead to lower wages for workers.
I supported this override and
spoke in favor of it. I have been told
by our community business leaders and economic developers Missouri is losing
jobs to states that are Right to Work. I
have verified this with other economic developers and business leaders
throughout the state to ensure this wasn’t a phenomena to our area because we
are close to Arkansas and Tennessee. I
was told over and over when companies look at possible states and consider the
attributes of those states, the consistent item on the list of reasons why they
are NOT considering Missouri is we are not a Right to Work state.
Right to Work is not a guaranteed
deal maker though, we must be equal in other areas as well such as utilities,
infrastructure, housing, and we are equal in those areas in most cases. I talked with many, many people in our
district, overwhelmingly I was asked to please support Right to Work, and this
was by people on every side of the political aisle, Republican, Democrat,
Libertarian, and Independent. We did
gain votes for Right to Work and we will continue to work to fight for Missouri
jobs and grow Missouri’s economy.
General Assembly Overrides
Governor’s Veto of Unemployment Reform Bill (HB 150)
During the 2015 regular session
the Missouri House successfully completed an override motion on the governor’s
veto of legislation that supporters say will keep Missouri’s system of unemployment
financially stable. Because of a filibuster, the Senate was shut down in the
final week of session and was unable to complete the override motion. Wednesday
evening, members of the Senate finally completed the override to enact into a
law a bill that will link unemployment benefits to the rate of unemployment,
and ensure the state keeps more money in the unemployment trust fund.
Supporters of the bill say it is
meant to protect the state’s unemployment system from insolvency in the event
there is another economic downturn. Missouri is the only state that has been
forced to borrow money from the federal government to pay for unemployment
benefits during each of the last five economic downturns. Borrowing federal
dollars has the added negative impact of taking away a portion of a federal tax
credit businesses normally receive.
Opponents say the change will
make it even more difficult for unemployed Missourians to obtain the financial
support they need to pay their bills and keep food on the table. They say it
will make the length of Missouri’s unemployment benefits one of the shortest in
the nation.
The legislation is designed to
make sure the state has enough money in its unemployment trust fund so that
businesses don’t have to pay a penalty. Specifically, it will increase the
minimum amount of money in the fund before employers’ contribution rates
decrease. For example, Missouri businesses would see their contribution rates
decrease by 12 percent if the fund has a balance greater than $870 million.
The bill also ties unemployment
benefits to the average unemployment rate so that more benefits are available
when unemployment is high. If the state were in a position of high unemployment
(9 percent or higher) benefits would be available for 20 weeks. In periods of
low unemployment (lower than 6 percent) benefits would be available for 13
weeks. Supporters noted that a similar system is already in place in states
like Georgia and Florida. They call the change an important step toward
ensuring Missouri can afford to help its citizens during times when they are
without work.
House and Senate Override Bill to
Prevent Undocumented Immigrants from Receiving A+ Scholarships (SB 224)
Another bill now set to become
law is meant to ensure scholarship benefits through the state’s A+ Schools
Program are received only by young people who are legal residents of the United
States. Specifically, the bill requires a student to be a United States citizen
or a permanent resident in order to receive benefits.
The impetus for the legislation
was a decision by the Missouri Department of Higher Education to allow students
who are lawfully present, but not legal residents, to receive A+ scholarships.
The decision applies directly to students who are part of the Deferred Action
for Childhood Arrivals program that allows children who were brought to the
United States illegally by their parents to stay and legally live, work and
study.
Supporters of SB 224 say the bill
ensures the limited amount of scholarship money in the A+ program will be
reserved for legal Missouri residents. They say it is unfair to Missouri
families to see diminished scholarship amounts for their children because the
dollars are instead going to young people who are not legal residents.
Opponents of the idea say it is an attack on young people who are in the
country illegally through no fault of their own. They say the legislature
should work to increase funding for the A+ program so all children can benefit.
The A+ Scholarship program allows
Missouri high school students who have met certain requirements to receive
state-funded assistance to attend participating public community college or
vocational/technical school, or certain private two-year vocational/technical
schools. The program allows thousands of
Missouri students to pursue a college degree each year.
General Assembly Acts to Ensure
Uniform Minimum Wage (HB 722)
The House and Senate also
collaborated Wednesday to overturn the governor’s veto of legislation meant to
keep minimum wages in municipalities throughout Missouri at a rate that does
not exceed the state standard.
Supporters of the bill have said
a uniform minimum wage is important to provide a level playing field for
employers and employees around the state. They say the bill is simply a
clarification of existing law, which prohibits cities from raising the minimum
wage. Opponents say the bill is an attack on local control and an infringement
on the rights of municipalities. They also say higher wages for Missourians can
only have a positive impact on the economy.
In addition, the bill that will
now become law ensures Missourians will continue to have the choice of paper or
plastic bags at the grocery store. The
bill specifies that all merchants doing business in this state must have the
option to provide customers with a paper or plastic bag for any item or good
purchased. The bill also makes it clear
that a political subdivision cannot impose any ban, fee, or tax upon the use of
paper or plastic bags.
Other Bills Now Set to Become Law
HB 618 - Changes the laws
regarding the disposition of human remains. Expands the types of medical
professionals who can attest to a cause of death, to include physicians’
assistants, assistant physicians and advance practice registered nurses.
HB 878 - Specifies that the
Department of Public Safety must have the authority to commission corporate
security advisors and establishes procedures to do so.
HB 1022 - Authorizes a return of
premiums paid by insureds.
HB 1098 - Changes the laws regarding
trust companies.
SB 20 - Creates a state and local
sales and use tax exemption for material, machinery, and energy used by
commercial laundries in treating or cleaning textiles.
SB 142 - Requires the Department
of Natural Resources, when developing a state implementation plan, state plan,
or non-point source management plan for submission to the Environmental
Protection Agency, to prepare an implementation impact report in lieu of a
regulatory impact report in collaboration with certain other state entities.
The report will be delivered to the Governor, Joint Committee on Government
Accountability, President Pro Tempore of the Senate, and the Speaker of the
House of Representatives along with the proposed plan 45 calendar days prior to
submission to the Environmental Protection Agency.
SB 345 - Increases the fee that
banks can charge consumers for loans of 30 days or more, to a maximum of $100.
Limit now is $75.
