Mike Lear – Page 45 – Missouri House of Representatives Newsroom

Missouri House proposes civil penalties for poaching

The state House has voted to increase fines for poaching because it’s cheaper for non-Missouri residents to poach than to hunt with a license.

Representative Jered Taylor (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

That’s what Representative Jered Taylor (R-Nixa) told his colleagues when he presented House Bill 1873, which creates a civil penalty for poaching.

“Currently when an individual is caught poaching … the Conservation Department will write a ticket to that individual. It will go to the Fine Collection Center where fines are typically no more than $200, so it’s actually cheaper for an individual from out of state to come into Missouri and not get a hunting permit, attempt to get a deer by poaching illegally, and risk the chance of being caught because the highest it will be is $199, where an out-of-state permit is $250,” said Taylor. “It’s cheaper for them to take that risk.”

Under HB 1873 anyone found guilty of killing, chasing, processing, or disposing of animals listed in the bill must pay restitution, which will go to the school district in which the individual was caught. Penalties would range from between $375 and $750 dollars for a turkey to between $2,500 and $5,000 for a black bear or elk.

The legislation would create a civil penalty of between $500 and $1,000 for each paddlefish taken illegally. Taylor explained that was an addition to this year’s version of the legislation because of growing problems regarding those fish.

“Individuals are collecting the paddlefish, collecting the eggs and selling it – I believe it’s about $200 an ounce for these eggs to use as caviar, and it’s a big problem,” said Taylor.

The bill had widespread support, particularly from lawmakers like Don Rone (R-Portageville), who have been angered by cases of poaching they know of first hand.

Rone said a man from Tennessee came to his district when high water had a number of deer contained in an area.

“There was a world-class buck that we had been following on our farm for four years. We would not shoot this deer because we knew this deer had the capabilities of becoming a world-class buck,” said Rone. “This gentleman killed that deer in the woods when the deer was corralled in the five-acre woods. That’s why we need to have this fine up higher than we have it today … what did he get? $175 fine.”

Taylor said the proposal mainly targets repeat offenders that would be identified by Conservation Department officials and local prosecutors working together.

Backers of the bill said it will help dissuade poachers from taking wildlife away from Missourians, and say Missouri has some of the lowest poaching fines in the country.

The House voted 130-19 to send the bill to the Senate for its consideration.

Representative proposes easing of mandatory minimums for some crimes

The state House is being asked to consider giving judges more flexibility about when to impose minimum sentences mandated by Missouri law for many offenses.

Representative Cody Smith (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

House Bill 1739 would allow judges to depart from those mandatory minimums except regarding crimes that involved the use, attempted use, or threat of serious physical force, or certain non-consensual sex crimes against a minor. The case would have to involve “substantial and compelling” reasons that the minimum sentence would be unjust to the defendant, or would not be needed to protect the public.

It’s sponsored by Carthage Representative Cody Smith (R).

“HB 1739 would permit judges to adjust the length of a prison sentence to fit the crime and a person’s role in it. If someone played a very minor role in a nonviolent offense but still deserves some prison time, the judge could give the person a shorter sentence that is more appropriate for the severity of the crime,” said Smith.

Smith said one of the issues his bill would help address is overcrowding in Missouri’s prisons. It is predicted that Missouri is on pace to need to build two new prisons. The cost to the state to build and operate those is projected at $485-million over the next five years.

Many offenders in Missouri prisons are serving sentences stemming from nonviolent drug offenses. Smith said in such cases, easing mandatory minimum sentencing requirements could allow judges to instead require drug treatment and other programs in lieu of prison time. Smith said treatment outside of prison is typically more effective.

“It’s my understanding that drug treatment in prisons is largely unsuccessful and it’s much more successful outside of prisons through programs like drug courts. To have people working with drug courts or through their probation or parole while they can maintain a job, be with their family presumably, be productive citizens I think is much better than having them incarcerated and trying to do that through prison sentencing,” said Smith. “[Drug issues are] more of a health care problem at this point rather than a criminal justice issue, in my mind.”

Smith said more than 30 states have reduced, eliminated, or reformed mandatory minimum sentences and in those states crime rates have dropped. He thinks the changes to sentencing laws contributed to those drops.

“Once you have a prison sentence you lose your job, often times you lose your family, you are unable to maintain whatever positive momentum you have going in your life. I can see how you would very easily turn back to crime or drugs when you get out of prison, or do something in prison that would keep you there for a longer time,” said Smith. “If you can maintain some semblance of a normal lifestyle – again with your family, with a job, and work with something like a drug court – then you have incentive to turn your life around, and that’s been the case in those states.”

The projected fiscal impact of HB 1739 says it could save Missouri more than $3.1-million once fully implemented. Smith notes that does not include how much the state could save if it is able to avoid building and operating any new prisons.

The bill has been approved by the House Committee on Crime Prevention and Public Safety. It faces another committee, which could vote whether to send it to the full house for consideration.

Missouri House adopts resolution launching investigation of charge against Gov. Greitens

“We will do our best.”

Representative Jay Barnes presents a resolution that would launch the House’s investigation into a felony charge against Gov. Eric Greitens. (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

That was the final statement to the House Thursday from Representative Jay Barnes (R-Jefferson City) before the chamber adopted a resolution that launches its investigation of a felony charge against Governor Eric Greitens (R). Barnes will chair the Special Investigative Committee on Oversight that will conduct that investigation.

A St. Louis grand jury last month indicted Greitens for felony invasion of privacy. He is accused of taking, without consent, an intimate photo of a woman with whom he had an affair in 2015.

House Resolution 5565 authorizes the Committee. It was approved 154-0.

Barnes discussed with other members how the investigation will be conducted. He said the committee will close its hearings to the public when witnesses are giving testimony.

“The reason for that, if you think about legal process and the context of a trial where testimony is given, other witnesses in a case are excluded from the courtroom while a separate witness is testifying … lawyers call that, ‘invoking the rule.’ So we could ‘invoke the rule,’ but if we have a public hearing, invoking the rule means nothing because everything that a previous witness says would be reported to other potential witnesses and they could come in and that would color their testimony based on what they had heard previous witnesses have said, and I think the best way to get accurate information is to close those hearings so that other potential witnesses don’t know what previous witnesses said,” Barnes explained.

Barnes said the first witnesses the committee will question are individuals that were identified in publicly-available documents and documents that have been reported on, though he did not name them. He said subpoenas would be sent to those witnesses. Based on their testimony, more individuals could be called to testify.

House Speaker Todd Richardson (right) and Majority Floor Leader Rob Vescovo (left) talk with Representatives Jay Barnes (second from right), who chairs the Special Investigative Committee on Oversight, and Representative Don Phillips (seated), the vice chair of that committee. (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

Democrats expressed concerns that they would like more clarity about what possible actions will remain after the committee completes its work, but in the end they joined in supporting the resolution.

Columbia representative Kip Kendrick (D) said the situation with the governor has become a distraction for lawmakers. He wished the committee well in conducting its investigation.

“It’s an embarrassment for everyone in this body, for everyone in this chamber, for the whole state,” said Kendrick. “The charge of this committee to hold this investigation is very serious. Outside of passing the budget this year it’s probably the most serious thing that’s happening … I hope that everyone in this chamber, on both sides of the aisle, don’t enter into the partisan bickering or partisan fights on this moving forward. There are going to be attempts to make this a partisan issue and it’s not. This should be a fair and thorough process that should be allowed to play out.”

House Minority Leader Gail McCann Beatty (D-Kansas City) asked Barnes about the process, and at the end of her inquiry told him, “We’re putting all of our trust in you to handle this properly.”

Barnes acknowledged to the chamber the levity of the job before him and the committee.

“This is a solemn and serious obligation. Thank you for the trust that you have placed in me and the members of this committee and the trust that this body places in us. We will do our best,” said Barnes.

The committee, whose other members are vice chairman Don Phillips (R-Kimberling City) and representatives Jeanie Lauer (R-Blue Springs), Kevin Austin (R-Springfield), Shawn Rhoads (R-West Plains), Gina Mitten (D-St. Louis), and Tommie Pierson, Jr (D-St. Louis), is expected to begin holding hearings next week.

House proposes criminalizing ‘revenge porn’

The Missouri House has voted to criminalize what is often called, “revenge porn;” sharing or threatening to share private sexual images of a person without that person’s consent. Such sharing often happens by the uploading of those images to the internet.

Representative Jim Neely (photo; Missouri House Communications)

House Bill 1558 would make such sharing of images a felony punishable by up to seven years in prison and would make threatening to share them a felony carrying up to four years in prison. The bill covers photographs, videos, digital recordings, and other depictions.

The bill is sponsored by Representative Jim Neely (R-Cameron), who said it’s simply an issue of common sense.

“I’m not afraid of the subject. A lot of people can’t handle certain subjects and it doesn’t bother me to talk about it so there it is,” said Neely.

St. Louis Democrat Stacey Newman thanked Neely for tackling an issue that she said predominately effects women.

“I know that none of us would want our family members, our daughters, our granddaughters; anyone involved in a situation where photographs like this would be used to punish,” said Newman.

The Missouri Coalition Against Domestic Violence supports the legislation. Public Policy Director Jennifer Carter Dochler said people who have been victims of “revenge porn” face a number of issues.

“Often times they feel very vulnerable and exposed because they did something to establish intimacy with a partner and now it’s been used against them and they don’t know who all’s seen it. This wasn’t their choice that it was being distributed, they don’t know who’s seen it, they don’t know what’s being done with it. Something was used against them that was not its purpose,” said Carter Dochler.

Liberty Democrat Mark Ellebracht was glad to see Republicans and Democrats come together to pass this bill on an issue he thinks most Missourians think is already addressed in law.

“A number of people that I’ve talked to, both from regular attorneys’ perspectives to the constituents that call me and express their concerns, everybody is a little bit surprised that something like this hasn’t been done already,” said Ellebracht. “I think that it was a sorely needed measure that we needed to pass to put the law in this state where people expect it to be.”

In addition to creating the crime of “nonconsensual dissemination of private sexual images,” the bill allows victims to file civil suits against those accused of the crime.

HB 1558 passed out of the House 149-1. It now goes to the Senate for consideration.

Bipartisan House bills would close ‘loophole’ that allows domestic abusers to have guns

A bipartisan effort to change Missouri gun laws aims to keep domestic abusers from having firearms.

Representatives Donna Lichtenegger (left) and Tracy McCreery co-present their bills aimed at keeping guns out of the hands of individuals with a history of domestic violence. (photo; Chris Moreland, Missouri House Communications)

House Bills 2276 and 1849 are sponsored by Representatives Donna Lichtenegger (R-Jackson) and Tracy McCreery (D-St. Louis), respectively. Both bills would expand the crime of unlawful possession of a firearm to include those who have been convicted of domestic violence misdemeanors or who have a full order of protection against them.

Representative Lichtenegger said the issue is personal for her because of her own experience with domestic violence.

“When I was four I can vividly remember my mother getting beaten nightly by my drunken father. Because of that I ended up in a children’s home because he threatened to throw acid in my face,” said Lichtenegger. “When I was 15 or 16 – don’t remember the age, really, because I don’t remember the night very well – but someone came into my room and beat the crap out of my head. There’s just no other way to put that.”

Both representatives say the bill would fill in a “loophole” in Missouri law created by the passage of Senate Bill 656 in 2016. Under the state’s original concealed carry law, Missourians who were found guilty of a domestic violence misdemeanor or who were subject to an order of protection were denied concealed carry permits. That prohibition was nullified by SB 656. Federal law denies guns to those with misdemeanor domestic violence convictions or full orders of protection against them, but since Missouri law doesn’t, only federal agents and courts can pursue such cases in Missouri.

“This has been part of federal law since 1997 but the only place that it appeared in Missouri law prior to the enactment of SB 656 was in our CCW chapter, so when we passed 656 we kind of accidentally took those protections out,” said McCreery. “This actually, truly is an issue that shouldn’t be about political party, so I hope the fact that we’ve worked together on this kind of symbolizes how this is just a good, sensible public policy.”

The bill was presented Tuesday night to the House Committee on General Laws. Several advocates for domestic violence victims told lawmakers they strongly support the legislation.

Judy Kile, Executive Director of COPE, a shelter in Lebanon, told the committee her twin sister’s husband shot and killed her in a murder-suicide. He had a history of domestic violence.

“Yesterday was our birthday but one of us isn’t here,” said Kile. “We need to get the guns out of their hands if they are known to be domestic violence offenders.”

Carla Simpson, who works for New House Shelter in Kansas City, said her sister’s husband also shot her to death in a murder-suicide.

“My brother-in-law was pretty much a law-abiding citizen except for the domestic violence; except for the abuse he caused my sister and he had been to court and he had been convicted of domestic violence,” said Simpson.

She said if a judge had been able to order that her brother-in-law not be allowed to have guns, “I think that Mike would have thought twice about having guns in his house and my sister may still be alive today. I’m here in her memory.”

Both bills also make gun possession illegal in Missouri for those who are unlawfully in the country or have renounced his or her citizenship.

No one spoke against the proposals in Tuesday night’s hearing. The committee has not voted on either bill. Last year similar legislation received a hearing by a House committee but that panel did not vote on it.

House votes to require notification of both parents when minors seek an abortion

The Missouri House has voted to require the notification of both parents when a minor in Missouri seeks to have an abortion.

Representative Rocky Miller (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

The House voted 113-37 on Monday to pass House Bill 1383. It would require that a parent or guardian giving consent for a minor to have an abortion notify any other custodial parent or guardian in writing before the minor gives her consent. It would not apply in an emergency or for custodial parents or guardians that have been found guilty of certain crimes, are listed on the sex offender registry, are the subject of an order of protection, have had parental rights terminated, or for whom the whereabouts are not known.

Missouri law now requires that a minor seeking an abortion and one parent or guardian of that minor give written consent before the procedure can be performed.

HB 1383 is sponsored by Representative Rocky Miller (R-Lake Ozark).

“It just comes down to common sense,” said Miller. “We just need to be able to notify the other parent if the other parent is a good parent. In addition this bill has the added benefit of notifying a good parent if the other parent … happens to not be a good parent.”

The bill was opposed by many Democrats including Stacey Newman (D-St. Louis), who argue that teens could be put in danger because the parents it would require them to notify could be abusive.

“This bill puts pregnant girls in grave danger of abuse from their abusers, from their traffickers, from their incestuous fathers, step-fathers, their custodial male parent, and yet we hear on this floor with previous bills that each one of you is against sex trafficking and child abuse … and yet each one of you knows exactly what dangers our teens face. Each one of you women knows exactly how any angry parent could react, and each one of you women knows exactly why teens may only notify, may only talk to one parent – that parent that they trust for very good reason,” said Newman.

Representative Crystal Quade (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

Representative Crystal Quade (D-Springfield) said the bill could force teens to contact parents they don’t want to contact.

“What worries me about this bill are the young women who, as we’ve discussed, are abused by their parents, potentially, and don’t have the guts, don’t want to, don’t have the financial means, it’s purely not their path of coping, to go to the courts to get a piece of paper that says they don’t have to reach out to their potential abuser,” said Quade. “As someone who doesn’t speak to their biological father I understand what it means to reestablish connections when you don’t want to, and if we as a legislative body are forcing young women to reestablish connections because they don’t want to go to court for whatever reason, it’s shameful.”

Newman said, “every major credible medical organization strongly opposes this bill.”

“They strongly oppose the idea of minors who request confidential services … they strongly oppose any type of intervention, any type of parental consent,” said Newman.

Miller disputed that argument, saying the American Medical Association’s position supports his proposal.

“’Physicians should strongly encourage minors to discuss their pregnancy with their parents. Physicians should explain how parental involvement can be helpful and that parents are generally understanding and supportive.’ That is straight from the American Medical Association, so anybody that says differently is lying and it’s upsetting,” said Miller. “I haven’t had any, any, any hard proof to me that there’s a problem with notifying a good parent.”

Miller argued that the majority of Americans believe in parental notification when a minor seeks an abortion.

“You’re worrying about these bad things that could happen but there’s an overwhelming amount of good that does happen when you discuss these things,” said Miller. “You must have parental involvement when it’s involving a child like this.”

HB 1383 goes to the Senate, where similar legislation has been approved by committees in recent years but has not been passed in that chamber.

Missouri House creates committee to investigate felony charge against Gov. Greitens

The Missouri House has created a committee that will investigate the charge on which Governor Eric Greitens (R) has been indicted.

Representative Jay Barnes and House Speaker Todd Richardson (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

Greitens was indicted by a St. Louis grand jury for felony invasion of privacy. Greitens is accused of taking, without consent, a photo of a woman with whom he had an affair in 2015.

House Speaker Todd Richardson (R-Poplar Bluff) and other Republican members of House Leadership said Thursday they would begin identifying the legislators that would investigate that charge. On Monday Richardson announced the committee will be chaired by Jefferson City Republican Jay Barnes.

“This committee’s task is going to be to investigate facts. We’re going to do so in a way that is fair, thorough, and timely, and we’re going to do it without any preordained results,” said Barnes. “We are going to be asking questions of witnesses on both sides and hope to have a process with full involvement from everyone involved in this matter.”

Barnes, an attorney, has been tasked with heading other investigative committees including one into the state’s involvement in a fraudulent deal to bring to Moberly a sucralose producer under the name Mamtek.

He is joined on the committee by its vice chairman, Don Phillips (R-Kimberling City) and representatives Jeanie Lauer (R-Blue Springs), Kevin Austin (R-Springfield), Shawn Rhoads (R-West Plains), Gina Mitten (D-St. Louis), and Tommie Pierson, Jr (D-St. Louis).

Representative Pierson, one of two Democrats on the committee, said it’s unfortunate that the panel is needed but the process should be as prudent as possible.

“I did accept to be on the committee because I feel that I will be fair and honest and open to hearing and allowing the process to run its course,” said Pierson. “That’s what I hope to see happen.”

Meanwhile, said Richardson, the House will continue its other work.

“We are going to continue to move forward with the substantive legislation that we have spent the bulk of this session working on,” said Richardson. “Yes, Representative Barnes and his committee are going to have a big task but that is not going to deter us or limit our ability to move forward on priorities that the people of Missouri sent us here to do.”

The committee will hold its first hearing later this week.

House considers barring public contracts with companies boycotting Israel

The state House’s Speaker is asking his colleagues to bar state and local governments from contracting with any company that is boycotting Israel.

Missouri House Speaker Todd Richardson (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

Speaker Todd Richardson (R-Poplar Bluff) is sponsoring only one piece of legislation this year: House Bill 2179. It would prevent any public entity in Missouri from entering into contracts with such companies. It’s being called the, “Anti-Discrimination Against Israel Act.”

Richardson told the House Committee on General Laws the bill is a push-back against the Boycott, Divest, and Sanctions movement (BDS movement) against Israel. Richardson says the U.S., and Missouri in particular, have strong economic ties to Israel.

“I think there is a belief, and I think rightly, that while some people that may sympathize with the BDS movement may do it legitimately and with good intention, but at its core the BDS movement seeks the economic destruction of the State of Israel,” said Richardson. “I think it’s been the longstanding public policy in the United States, and certainly here in the State of Missouri, that the State of Israel legitimately exists. It’s existed legitimately and been internationally recognized for more than 70 years and those efforts to seek to destroy it are something that we shouldn’t be supporting.”

St. Louis representative Peter Merideth (D) asked whether the bill sets a precedent for the state to take a position or action against those who participate in protests.

“There was talk of some conservative folks across the country wanting to boycott the NFL because of some protests in the NFL and there were businesses saying we’re not going to advertise on NFL games now. So if that had spread and grown and all of a sudden business across our state are going, ‘We’re going to protest the NFL by boycotting advertisements on the NFL,’ and we said, ‘Well you know what, we benefit economically from the NFL.’ Are we then entitled to, as a state, say as our policy because we economically benefit from the NFL we can tell those businesses they’re not allowed to do business with our state?” Merideth asked.

Richardson said he would not support something to the extent of the position Merideth posed, and said his bill addresses a unique situation.

“You are talking about a deep and long-standing public policy of this country and of this state to support the State of Israel and its continued existence, and Missouri enjoys tremendous economic benefits from that relationship,” said Richardson.

The bill was the subject of two hours of testimony.

Andrew Rehfeld of the Jewish Federation of St. Louis said BDS seeks to end the existence of Israel, and said that’s why the Federation supports HB 2179.

“What we are seeking to do is address the fact that Israel is consistently singled out for this kind of activity, that this activity is aimed at the distinctive character of Israel as a Jewish state, and this legislation makes clear – more than symbolically, I’ll grant you that – but at the same time it sends a statement that the state won’t do business with businesses that want to engage in that kind of discriminatory economic practice,” said Rehfeld.

House Bill 2179 was the subject of about two hours of testimony in a packed hearing room. (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

Naveen Ayesh told lawmakers the BDS movement is a peaceful attempt at changing oppressive Israeli policies she said she has experienced first-hand. She argued HB 2179 would be unconstitutional.

“The Supreme Court has recognized non-violent political boycotts as protected free speech under the First Amendment. Legislatures should work towards protecting the rights of Missourians, not punishing them for exercising them, and hopefully push towards a more balanced Middle East foreign policy that grants equal rights for Palestinians and everyone in the Holy Land,” said Ayesh.

The committee voted 12-1 to advance HB 2179, with Representative Merideth casting the lone dissenting vote. It faces one more committee, which will vote whether to send it to the full House for debate.

Missouri legislature approves human trafficking hotline posters

The first bill to be passed out of the Missouri legislature in 2018 aims to fight human trafficking.

Representative Patricia Pike (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

House Bill 1246 would require the Department of Public Safety to develop posters that provide information on what human trafficking is and how victims can get help. It would require those posters to be displayed by certain businesses including hotels and motels, strip clubs, private clubs, airports, emergency rooms, bus stations, and truck and rest stops.

The posters will include the National Human Trafficking Resource Hotline, which is 888-373-7888, and by text is 233733 (BEFREE).

HB 1246 is sponsored by Adrian Republican Patricia Pike.

“This bill works to provide rescue information to the victims and educate the citizens about human trafficking in a statewide and uniform way,” said Pike. “I believe this bill will save lives, bring victims home to their families, and educate the public further on how to identify human trafficking. It will also provide law enforcement with increased opportunities to receive tips to help combat trafficking.”

Representative Michael Butler (D-St. Louis) said trafficking is a major issue in Missouri and particularly in St. Louis. He said the legislation is a sign that the legislature, and the state, are starting to recognize how great that issue is, and said more must be done.

“The greatest fear I have is something like this happening to my daughter. Many of us, I’m sure, who have children, we think about it every time we’re in the grocery store, every time we’re somewhere public – that you could lose that person and it was your responsibility,” said Butler. “I just thank [Representative Pike] for making me feel a little more comfortable about what I’m doing here today and whenever I think about that in the grocery store … I think about this bill.”

Under the bill the posters must be created by January 1, 2019, and must be displayed by the establishments specified in the bill by March 1, 2019. Businesses that repeatedly fail to display them could incur fines. The posters will be printed at the cost of each business that must display them.

House Speaker Todd Richardson prepares to sign HB 1246 so that it may be sent to the governor’s office for consideration. (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

The creation and display of such posters was one of the recommendations of the House Task Force on Human Trafficking, which was chaired by Speaker Pro Tem Elijah Haahr (R-Springfield).

Pike said more than 20 states have such posters and it has been shown that trafficking victims who use the national hotline have a better chance of being rescued.

The bill was passed out of the House in January 139-5 and the Senate passed it early this month. It now awaits action from the governor’s office or it could become law without any such action after 15 days.

Last year a similar bill sponsored by Representative Cloria Brown reached the state Senate but did not come to a vote in that chamber.

The House this week also passed a bill that sets a minimum age for applicants for Missouri marriage licenses. Sponsor Jean Evans (R-Manchester) said the bill would combat traffickers and abusers bringing minor victims to Missouri to marry them. That bill has been sent to the Senate for consideration.

House endorses minimum age for Missouri marriage licenses

The House this week voted to set a minimum age at which people in Missouri can get a marriage license, but the bill met more resistance than last year.

Representative Jean Evans (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

Marriage licenses can now be issued to persons younger than 15 under certain conditions. House Bill 1630 would increase that age to 17 and require a court hearing on whether the marriage is advisable. No licenses would be issued when either party is younger than 15, or when one party is 21 or older and the other party is younger than 17.

Bill sponsor Jean Evans (R-Manchester) began offering the legislation last year as a way to fight human trafficking; particularly cases in which abusers bring young trafficking victims to Missouri to marry them.

“Currently we do not have a minimum age of marriage in Missouri and this bill seeks to correct that,” said Evans. “In addition it will protect young people from predators and those who might do them harm with forced marriages.”

The bill had bipartisan support, including from St. Louis Democrat Michael Butler, who said it’s appropriate for the legislature to set a minimum age for things like marriage.

“A decision to get married … is a very important decision, and minors in a lot of cases, we know, generally don’t have complete control when that decision is made. To create a way for young people in our state to be protected from tough decisions that aren’t made by themselves, and we know this is occurring, is something that we should be doing,” said Butler.

Shamed Dogan (R-Ballwin) who argued that Missouri has a serious problem with human trafficking.

“If someone over the age of 21 – someone 30 years-old comes to a high school and engages in sexual activity with a 15 year-old or a 12 year-old or anyone under the age of consent that’s statutory rape, and right now that person can legitimately get married. That’s a problem,” said Dogan.

Similar legislation passed out of the House last year 139-1, but this year many Republicans opposed the bill. Some, including Lincoln Republican Wanda Brown, don’t like the requirement that a court hearing decide whether a marriage license should be issued for someone between the ages of 15 and 17.

Representative Wanda Brown (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

“I’m not opposed, necessarily, to raising the age limit for marriage. What I’m opposed to is telling every parent in this state they’re not fit to make a decision for their child without asking a judge, and of course paying an attorney,” said Brown. “The bill was brought forward in the name of stopping human trafficking. This is a made-up concept. This does nothing to stop the traffickers. This only takes the parental rights of good, law abiding citizens.”

Others like David Wood (R-Versailles) expressed concern the bill might affect religious populations living in their districts.

“I have a very large Mennonite population. Mennonite population typically marries relatively young,” said Wood. “My court could get really backed up waiting on a judge to approve a lot of these weddings when they’re approved by the family, they’re approved by the church, and they’re welcomed in the community.”

Regarding concerns like those of Wood, Evans said her bill is very similar to one in place in Pennsylvania where there are significant, similar religious populations.

“If you’re under 18 you have to have parent permission and go before a judge, and the judge just has to basically say there’s nothing – there’s no ill will here. There’s not somebody taking advantage of someone. This is a good fit, the families support it, and go forward and get married,” said Evans. “It’s very similar to that and it’s worked very well in Pennsylvania where, again, they have much larger communities of Amish and Mennonite even than we do here in Missouri.”

Evans also said the bill does nothing to prevent a religious wedding ceremony.

Despite increased opposition over last year, a bipartisan 95-50 vote sent the bill to the Senate. Last year Evans’ similar legislation was approved by a Senate committee but advanced no further.

Another measure backers say will help fight human trafficking became the first bill sent to the governor’s office in 2018. Speaker Todd Richardson (R-Poplar Bluff) signed House Bill 1246. The bill, sponsored by Adrian Republican Patricia Pike would require the development of posters displaying information on human trafficking.