Kathie Conway – Missouri House of Representatives Newsroom

Legislature’s budget could help counties save money on holding state prisoners

The budget passed by the Missouri legislature this week aims to get the state caught up in payments to counties for holding state prisoners, and to give counties cheaper options for taking care of those prisoners.

Representative Kathie Conway (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications – click for larger version)

The budget includes more than $34-million to reimburse county jails that hold inmates on state charges until they are transferred into state custody. Missouri statute calls for the state to reimburse each county $22.58 per day for every state inmate that county holds in its jail. Missouri is about 6-months behind in those reimbursements according to House Budget Committee Chairman Scott Fitzpatrick (R-Shell Knob).

Out of that $34-million, counties can spend up to $5-million in state funds on alternative methods for tracking inmates – methods including ankle monitors or a smartphone app for monitoring of prisoners.

“There’s talk of, for super-low-risk offenders, potentially letting them out with an app on their phone – basically they’ll have to check in with facial recognition requirements and they have to check in however many times a day the court wants them to check in from their home,” said House Budget Committee Chairman Scott Fitzpatrick. “It’s a riskier method but it’s also much less expensive and if we feel like somebody’s not a risk of fleeing or something like that, it’d be a low-cost option.”

“This is a chance for the state and the counties to save money up front, and hopefully start catching up with the reimbursements we owe the counties and keep costs down going forward,” said Representative Kathie Conway (R-St. Charles), the Chair of the budget subcommittee that deals with the Departments of Public Safety and Corrections.

“[The state only releases] $10-million per quarter [in county reimbursements], so if [a county gets] the money that’s fine, then you have to wait for the n ext quarter to start getting reimbursed again. There are a lot of counties out there that just can’t afford to do that,” said Conway. “This $5-million also gives other counties the opportunity to use this GPS tracker system if they wish … if they can use this electronic tracking system for the cost of what one day [of holding a state prisoner] would be, they’re actually going to catch up with their arrears a lot sooner.”

Conway has also been working for several years to develop a similar program that will be launching as a pilot in Audrain, Montgomery, and Warren Counties. It will use a bracelet similar to those people wear to track the number of steps they take each day, popularly known as a “FitBit.”

House Budget Committee Chairman Scott Fitzpatrick (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications – click for larger version)

“It worked with [a smart phone app], and rather than the $12.50 a day that it costs for the ankle bracelet, this was around $15 to $20 a month. People could be out on probation and every three minutes this would send a ping for GPS and the probation and parole officer would always know their location, could send them notification of court dates and different payments that were due,” said Conway. “[We] set up a pilot program where it could be pre-conviction as well, and I think the significance of that is most of the cost for county jails to hold prisoners for the state came before the conviction.”

Counties could utilize that $5-million for any “alternative jail sanctions,” as these prisoner tracking options are being called, that don’t cost more than $12.50 per day. If not all of the $5-million is utilized, it will roll back into the money used to reimburse counties.

The legislature voted to approve its budget proposal on Wednesday, two days ahead of its constitutional deadline.

House budget committee votes to continue barring state funding for DUI checkpoints

The House Budget Committee has proposed a state spending plan that would continue to keep state-appropriated funds from going to impaired driving checkpoints.

Last year the House proposed that $20-million made available for grants to law enforcement agencies not be allowed for use in checkpoints. That proposal became part of the final budget plan for the fiscal year that began July 1, 2017. Law enforcement agencies can conduct checkpoints but have to find other ways to pay for them.

The idea was controversial but has the backing of House Budget Committee Chairman Scott Fitzpatrick (R-Shell Knob), who cited data from the Department of Transportation showing saturation efforts – periods of increased law enforcement patrols on the roads – result in more arrests per dollar.

Representative Kathie Conway (R-St. Charles) remains adamant in her opposition to the prohibition. She proposed letting $500,000 be used on checkpoints in the Fiscal Year 2019 budget, and argued that checkpoints are effective.

“Checkpoints are not really used to catch drunk drivers and impaired drivers. They’re mostly to make the public aware of the risk of being caught,” said Conway. “There’s been ten studies reported in five separate papers that the impact of sobriety checkpoints showed relative decrease in alcohol-related crash fatalities of 9-percent, and that’s just the fatalities. Two of these studies showed a decrease of 64-percent in one and 28-percent in the other of blood alcohol content above the legal limit.”

Those who supported barring state-appropriated funds from going to checkpoints last year stood by their decision. Representative Justin Hill (R-Lake St. Louis) said what’s happened in the last year shows it was correct.

“We were pretty confident last year when we spoke about focusing this fund to methods that work and actually remove drunk drivers off the road because after all, that is the goal – to arrest drunk drivers and get them off the road to make our roads safer,” said Hill. “In the first six months, without using these funds to use checkpoints, we saw an increase of 15-percent statewide in DWI arrests, and you know some may say that’s kind of a long shot to say that’s due to the lack of checkpoints, but I truly believe that sometimes this body has to make tough decisions to force the hand to do what not only is right, but to do what’s effective and efficient.”

Representative Peter Merideth (D-St. Louis) supported the partial opening up of state funds to checkpoints. He said he believes checkpoints are effective, at least when used in conjunction with other things like saturation efforts. He also believes checkpoints are fairer.

“What I would point out is that when we rely solely on individual officers pulling over individual vehicles we have significant research and evidence that those stops much more disproportionately impact poor and minority communities, and at the very least a checkpoint is a uniform way to check everybody fairly, regardless of your color, regardless of the type of car you drive,” said Merideth.

Representative Justin Hill (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications – click for larger version)

Many backers of the prohibition on state funds being used for checkpoints say checkpoints are unconstitutional because vehicles are stopped without probable cause. Yukon Republican Robert Ross said while he supports law enforcement and knows Conway does too, he said the issue is one of due process.

“Checkpoints are a system of being guilty until you can prove yourself innocent. That’s exactly counterintuitive to the way this country was set up and how we should operate,” said Ross.

The committee rejected Conway’s amendment. If that decision stands through the completion of a budget proposal for Fiscal Year 2019, the prohibition on state-appropriated funds being used for checkpoints would continue. Conway said she would continue to try to lift it.

“I’ve stood in crowds of 200 and 300 police officers that were going out to do saturation and/or DUI checkpoints. They’re very enthusiastic about their programs. I’ve stood and talked with parents and spouses and children of people that were killed by drunk driving and they’re very supportive of DUI checkpoints; in some places it’s up to a 70-percent approval of the citizens where checkpoints are used,” said Conway. “For some it simply boils down to a constitutional issue and their minds will not be changed, but I think it’s also – since it has been found constitutional under both Missouri and United States Supreme Courts – that until that changes we have to go with the constitutionality of it, and I must say that public safety is always at the forefront of most things that I do.”

The full House, when lawmakers return from spring break next week, will debate the proposal that was passed out of the chamber’s Budget Committee. The issue could be debated again then.

House Budget Committee members frustrated by Capitol metal detectors

Members of the state House Budget Committee have told the Greitens Administration they aren’t pleased with how it paid to keep operating metal detectors in the State Capitol.

House Budget Committee Chairman Scott Fitzpatrick (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

The state legislature passed a budget that approved paying for additional police officers to patrol the Capitol while the metal detectors, which were installed shortly before Eric Greitens (R) became governor, would be removed. Greitens’ administration has paid contract workers to continue operating those detectors using money out of a fund for building maintenance.

Lawmakers on the budget committee expressed frustration not only at how the administration is paying for those contract workers, but also at Greitens’ continued support for using metal detectors.

“If the administration had come out at the beginning of the year and said, ‘We think these metal detectors need to be here,’ and there was clear communication that that was the intent of the administration, I think it’s far more likely that there would have been an appropriation for the manning of the metal detectors,” said Budget Committee Chairman Scott Fitzpatrick (R-Shell Knob). “The public communication that was out there was that the administration was not in favor of metal detectors.”

Representative Kathie Conway (R-St. Charles), who chairs the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Public Safety, was critical of the administration’s decision to use money from the maintenance fund to pay to staff the detectors – a step that was done without the legislature knowing about it or approving it.

“We need to be in the loop,” said Conway.

Not all budget committee members were as upset with the administration’s actions.

Kansas City Democrat Greg Razer asked Greitens’ Office of Administration Commissioner, Sarah Steelman, what would happen if the detectors are removed and an incident occurs at the Capitol.

Sarah Steelman is the Commissioner of the Office of Administration, under the administration of Governor Eric Grietens. She testified to the House Budget Committee that the administration wants to keep metal detectors in the Capitol. (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications).

“The governor works here, the legislature works here, and anyone who’s here during the springtime knows that there are hundreds of rambunctious, loud fourth graders that roam this hall … if we remove the metal detectors and, God forbid, something horrible happens in the halls of this building and one of those kids are hurt, can we look that parent in the eye and say we did everything we could to protect your kid?” asked Razer.

“No, I don’t think we can,” said Steelman.

Fitzpatrick said he is, “somewhat indifferent,” about the metal detectors being in place, but he remains frustrated about the administration funding the staffing of those without the legislature’s approval.

He did say he does not want to see Capitol Police officers staffing those detectors after the legislature approved money for more officers to be hired so the Capitol halls would be patrolled.

“I’m going to have a major problem with that,” said Fitzpatrick.

Likely fewer DUI checkpoints in Missouri under new state budget

The state budget that went into effect July 1 could lead to fewer impaired driving checkpoints but more periods of increased law enforcement presence on Missouri roads.

Representative Scott Fitzpatrick (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

Under language the House proposed no money controlled by that budget can be used on checkpoints. Specifically, $20-million available for grants that law enforcement agencies have used to fund various efforts now cannot be used for checkpoints.

Supporters said data from the Department of Transportation show that periods of having more officers on the roads, often called “saturation efforts,” get more results for the money invested.

MODOT reported that in the year that ended July 1, 2016, saturation efforts resulted in 3,055 arrests at a cost of $704 per arrest, compared 1,201 arrests at checkpoints at a cost of $1,047 per arrest. Over the three years through July 1, 2016, saturation periods yielded 9,288 arrests at $704 apiece compared to 4,152 arrests at checkpoints costing $919 each.

A comparison by House staff of states in which checkpoints are legal with states in which they are not found that the latter had a slightly lower number of drunk driving fatalities per capita.

House Budget Committee Chairman Scott Fitzpatrick (R-Shell Knob) said the new language was about making the most effective use of Missouri budget dollars and taking the most effective action toward making roads safer.

“I was convinced by the data … that it’s a better use of money, and it saves more lives by getting more drunk drivers off the road and it does so at a lower cost,” said Fitzpatrick. “From a budgeting perspective it’s hard to argue in any way that checkpoints are the more effective method than saturation patrols.”

Representative Justin Hill (R-Lake St. Louis), a former O’Fallon Police officer, supported the restriction.

“What we’re going to see is better bang for the taxpayer’s buck because when you put an officer out there and say, ‘Go get an impaired driver,’ for four hours, chances are the officer’s going to find one, but when you add all those officers on one single checkpoint … they average anywhere from three to five. For 20 officers that’s just not effective use of taxpayer dollars,” said Hill.

Representative Kathie Conway (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

The prohibition was strongly opposed by St. Charles Republican Kathie Conway, who chairs the budget subcommittee on Public Safety. She argues it’s misleading to say saturation patrols yield more arrests.

Conway said saturation efforts and checkpoints work together, first by publicizing checkpoints on social media and traffic announcements.

“That drives people away from that checkpoint. Then the saturation on the perimeters of that, because there’s only so many ways to avoid that checkpoint, they catch them,” said Conway. “So to say they don’t catch people at check points … if you want to get technical about it they’re not, but having that checkpoint they know where the people are going to be going to avoid it.”

From now through June 30, 2018, Missouri law enforcement agencies can still conduct checkpoints, but would have to pay for them through means other than these grants.

Legislature’s budget bars use of state-appropriated funds for DUI checkpoints

Missouri drivers could see fewer impaired driving checkpoints under the budget proposed by the legislature.

House Budget Committee Chairman Scott Fitzpatrick (left) and Senate Budget Committee Chairman Dan Brown (right) conduct a budget conference committee hearing in the House Lounge on May 3, 2017. (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

Language added by the House would prevent money in that budget from being used on checkpoints. It could still be used for other enforcement efforts, and many lawmakers said they would prefer to see it used for saturation efforts – periods of increased numbers of law enforcement personnel on the roads.

House Budget Committee Chairman Scott Fitzpatrick (R-Shell Knob) said saturation efforts are more effective.

“Once the subcommittee passed that amendment, made that recommendation, I researched the issue, and the reality is that saturation patrols result in a greater number of arrests and at less cost per arrest,” said Fitzpatrick. “To me what we should do as a budget committee is make sure that we’re spending the money in a way that gets the most number of drunk drivers off the road.”

The shift was strongly opposed by the Representative Kathie Conway (R-St. Charles), who chairs the subcommittee on the Department of Public Safety’s budget.

“I think that any time we take funds away that help law enforcement stop DWIs, it’s shameful,” said Conway. “These two different methods – the saturation and the DUI checkpoints – work in harmony in the more populous areas … what I wanted to see allowed, either or, or a combination, it did not restrict it, and I very much do not like the House version of it.”

Several House Democrats agreed that they would rather have seen law enforcement allowed to continue using state appropriated funds for checkpoints, however the change was supported by several members of the legislature with law enforcement backgrounds.

Fitzpatrick said he wants to at least see some results.

“I would like to get a year’s worth of data on this. I think it will result in more arrests,” said Fitzpatrick.

The change means that for the fiscal year beginning July 1, law enforcement agencies can still conduct DUI checkpoints, but they cannot use funds allocated by the state budget to pay for them.

The House and Senate voted Thursday to send that budget plan to Governor Eric Greitens (R), one day ahead of its constitutional deadline.

House votes to require monthly reporting on settlements in cases against Missouri

The House has voted to increase transparency when lawsuits against state agencies are settled. The legislation was prompted by the revelation that millions of tax dollars were paid out over several years in settling harassment and discrimination cases against the Department of Corrections.

Representative Paul Fitzwater (R-Potosi) carried HCB 7 on the House Floor. (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

House Committee Bill 7 would require the attorney general to report every month to the legislature and others about how the state’s legal expense fund – the fund from which money for settlements is taken – has been used.

Those cases against Corrections came to light late last year when an article on Pitch.com detailed several of them, and outlined how employees who complained about being harassed or discriminated against were victims of retaliation by fellow Corrections staff members.

House members said after the article came out that they were unaware of the settlements because those have been paid out of a line in the budget that has no spending limit on it. That meant departments never had to come to the legislature and justify how much their settlement agreements were costing the state.

St. Charles Republican Kathie Conway, who chairs the appropriations committee that oversees Corrections, said this bill is needed.

“This is something that needs to be in statute so that the legislature is not caught unaware of all the goings on in different departments,” said Conway.

House Democrat Leader Gail McCann Beatty hopes to prevent state employees who have complained of harassment or discrimination from having to sign gag orders as part of court settlements. (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

House Democrat leader Gail McCann Beatty (Kansas City) proposed that the reporting should cover all state agencies and not just the Department of Corrections. She said the reporting requirements could lead the legislature to make changes in policies or laws to address issues resulting in lawsuits in other agencies.

She hopes the legislature will go further and address the signing of gag orders by state employees who complain of harassment or discrimination, as some in the Corrections cases did under the terms of their settlements.

“While we can sunshine and get this information it does not give that employee the opportunity to give their side,” said McCann Beatty.

Missouri Attorney General Josh Hawley (R) announced in March he would begin monthly reporting on the activity of the legal expense fund. Legislators praised his decision but said HCB 7 is still needed to ensure future attorneys general will follow suit.

Hawley’s first such report comes out April 30.

HCB 7 would also require the Department of Corrections’ director to meet with the House’s committee overseeing that department twice each year to discuss issues with that department.

The House voted 150-1 to send the bill to the Senate, but only two weeks remain in the legislative session for that body to consider it.

House budget proposal could mean fewer DUI checkpoints on Missouri roads

If the House’s budget proposal stands, Missourians might see fewer DUI checkpoints on state roads over the next fiscal year.

Representative Galen Higdon opposed language in the House's FY '18 budget proposal that would keep state and federal funds allocated by that budget from going to DUI Checkpoints. (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications) — Representative Galen Higdon opposed language in the House’s FY ’18 budget proposal that would keep state and federal funds allocated by that budget from going to DUI Checkpoints. (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

The House proposed language that would prevent money controlled by that budget from going to such checkpoints. House Budget Committee Chairman Scott Fitzpatrick (R-Shell Knob) said this is largely because of data indicating checkpoints aren’t effective enough compared to other enforcement methods.

“I looked at the data … on what’s the best way to get drunk drivers off the road, and according to data from [the Department of Transportation], the best way to do it is saturation patrols,” said Fitzpatrick. “Last year alone, saturation patrols resulted in a little over 3,000 DWI arrests. Checkpoints resulted in about 1,200, at a cost of over $1,000 per arrest when you look at how much we spend on the checkpoints.”

Lake St. Louis Republican Representative Justin Hill, who formerly worked for the O’Fallon Police Department, also said saturation efforts are more effective. He encouraged fellow lawmakers to give those a try for the twelve months of Fiscal Year ’18.

“Let’s look at the numbers, and I’m sure you will see, and your constituents and your police departments will see that this is more effective and is least impacting innocent individuals that might otherwise go through a checkpoint,” said Hill.

Representative Galen Higdon (R-St. Joseph) is a former Buchanan County Sheriff’s Deputy. He coordinated checkpoints for the last four years before his retirement. He believes checkpoints have reduced crashes in his district, so he opposed the new language.

“[Checkpoints] are an efficient way to reduce intoxicated or impaired drivers on our highways,” said Higdon.

Representative Justin Hill supports language in the House's FY '18 budget proposal that would discourage DUI checkpoints for what he believes are more effective efforts. (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications) — Representative Justin Hill supports language in the House’s FY ’18 budget proposal that would discourage DUI checkpoints for what he believes are more effective efforts. (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

Representative Kathie Conway (R-St. Charles) chairs the budget subcommittee on Public Safety. She said when the idea to bar state funds from going to checkpoints came up she heard from numerous law enforcement agencies, victims groups, anti-drunk driving groups, and others who opposed the change and were “upset” about it.

She said checkpoints and saturation efforts can work in conjunction, and said the latter actually work better when the two are used together.

“While [saturation efforts] are good methods as well, a lot of them hinge on DUI checkpoints because it drives people nearby to avoid the checkpoints,” said Conway.

Proponents of the change also said there are questions of whether checkpoints violate Missourians’ rights, and said saturation efforts are also more effective at dealing with other violations of the law besides impaired driving.

If the language becomes law, nothing in Missouri law would prevent law enforcement agencies from conducting checkpoints. They simply would not be able to use money allocated by the state budget to do so.

The House’s proposed budget plan next goes to the state Senate for its consideration.

Number 2 Corrections official faces committee investigating sexual harassment, retaliation in department

A top Department of Corrections official has told a House subcommittee poor training, bureaucracy, and the Department’s growth have contributed to problems with harassment and retaliation among Missouri prison employees.

Dave Dormire is the Director of Adult Institutions in the Missouri Department of Corrections. After more than 40 years with the Department, he will retire April 1, amid allegations his department's culture was rife with sexual harassment and retaliation against those who complained. (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications) — Dave Dormire is the Director of Adult Institutions in the Missouri Department of Corrections. After more than 40 years with the Department, he will retire April 1, amid allegations his department’s culture was rife with sexual harassment and retaliation against those who complained. (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

Dave Dormire is the Department’s Director of Adult Institutions and has been in the Department more than 40 years. He has announced he will retire April 1.

He talked to the House Subcommittee on Corrections Workforce Environment and Conduct after it had heard testimony from several other department officials, employees, and former employees.

The subcommittee was formed after news articles shed light on cases in which Department employees alleged they’d been harassed and, in some cases, retaliated against. Several of those cases have gone to court, and several of those resulted in settlements costing the state millions of dollars.

Since September, 2011, Dormire has been responsible for some staff appointments, overseeing the safety of staff and inmates, and for disciplinary decisions.

Dormire was asked why some of the people who had been involved in those incidents still work for the Department. He told lawmakers some allegations go unsustained, and some efforts are made to correct employees rather than fire them after a first incident.

“I’ll blame the culture a little bit. As you know, correction officer is a tough job,” Dormire said. “We train them specifically to continue to watch and address behaviors. Then they become supervisors, and that’s the behavior they’ve learned – to address behaviors. They’re not well trained – I acknowledge that – not well trained on being a good supervisor.”

Representatives Bruce Franks, Junior (left), and John McCaherty (right) (photo, Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

Dormire told subcommittee member John McCaherty (R-High Ridge) the Department has not tolerated its employees committing harassment or unprofessional behavior repeatedly.

“I know that’s your feeling, but we do tolerate it,” McCaherty responded. “It’s going on in the Department, it’s going on now, and that’s why we have a committee because we’ve been tolerating it, so I know your hope is that we don’t tolerate it but as a department we do tolerate it.”

“I understand your opinion, sir. Obviously when I have my records to show what we’ve done and how we’ve addressed things,” Dormire said.

“And we have court cases to show the other side of it,” said McCaherty.

Dormire said the Corrections Department has grown to eight times the size it was when he started there, to more than 32-thousand inmates and roughly 8,000 staff throughout the prison system.

“That’s created all kinds of bureaucracy and things like that, and management issues. I’m not here to make excuses but other departments have not faced that type of growth,” said Dormire.

Subcommittee members told Dormire it has been reviewing reports of harassment and retaliation that date back as much as 20 years.

“It looked like our employees would’ve been better off behind bars,” said Chairman Jim Hansen (R-Frankford). “They would’ve been safer there than they would from some of their supervisors, and it’s disturbing.”

Committee members also asked Dormire about reports they’ve heard of nepotism in the Department’s hiring and promotion practices. At an earlier hearing, they heard from a former employee that wardens often ignore the recommendations of panels assigned to recommend employees for promotion. The system was described as one of “good ol’boys” hiring and promoting friends and relatives.

Dormire told lawmakers the Department used the state’s Merit system, created in state law to prevent favoritism, political influence, or arbitrary decisions in hiring and other employment decisions.

Representative Kathie Conway (R-St. Charles), who said she has heard of, “so much nepotism,” in the department, challenged Dormire on that claim.

“We have to use the Merit system,” said Dormire.

“You have to not sexually harass people, too, but that didn’t seem to be the case,” said Conway.

Committee members asked Dormire about allegations raised by recent articles by Pitch.com suggesting that he had been involved in retaliation against employees, and had been deceptive in his answers in some investigations. Dormire denied those allegations.

Asked specifically whether he testified that disciplining two guards accused of harassing two nurses would have been “moot” because the nurses had quit, Dormire said, “I don’t remember making that statement in particular. I don’t normally use that word. It’s possible. I don’t remember that.”

Committee members again indicated they are looking to those at or near the top of the Corrections Department’s hierarchy – wardens and administrative officials – as being largely at fault.

Hansen said of the cases of harassment he’s read about wardens seemed to be involved in some, and “totally incompetent,” in others.

“I think you’ve got good wardens,” Dormire told Hansen. “Some of them need some help.”

“They need help? We don’t have time. This is costing the state taxpayers millions of dollars,” Hansen responded. “We got people who are supposed to be head of the parade that are playing out of tune and out of step with the marching band.”

Representative Bruce Franks (D-St. Louis City) said he feels the committee still isn’t being told who it must talk to, to get to the nucleus of issues in the Department.

“We talked about the culture, we passed the buck today two or three times, we said we can blame the culture, we can blame the growth, we can blame all of these different things, except for blaming ourselves – the people who are actually in charge,” said Franks. “We have a lot of people up top who aren’t held accountable and who aren’t holding those right up under them accountable, who make 90-thousand, 50-thousand, 100-thousand, 85-thousand, so maybe we need to take about seven or eight of these particular jobs out and distribute their salaries to those who are making nothing to do most of the work.”

House members debate repeal of Missouri’s death penalty

Missouri House members were asked this week to consider whether Missouri should continue to have a death penalty.

Representative T.J. Berry said he wanted the House to have a discussion about whether the death penalty should be repealed before he is term-limited out of the chamber next year. (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

Missouri reinstated the death penalty in 1977 and currently uses lethal injection to carry out executions. It most recently executed Mark Christeson on January 31 for the murders in 1998 of Susan Brouk and her children, ages 9 and 12.

Clay County Republican T.J. Berry offered an amendment that would have repealed Missouri’s capital punishment statute. It would make life without the possibility of parole Missouri’s maximum sentence.

Berry said he favored the death penalty when he first took office in 2011, but said after looking at it objectively he no longer supports it.

“I don’t think that there’s any way that we can defend it any longer,” Berry told his fellow lawmakers.

Berry cited three reasons he wants to end the death penalty in Missouri: people who are sentenced by courts are sometimes exonerated; it costs the state less to incarcerate a person for life than to sentence that person to death and respond to appeals through the life of the case; and it takes years for a death sentence to be carried out, extending the time victims’ families must deal with offenders’ cases.

St. Charles Republican Kathie Conway disagreed with Berry’s reasoning and his proposal.

Regarding exonerations, she believes DNA evidence and repeated reviews by multiple courts on appeals leave little doubt as to the veracity of modern death penalty cases.

“We very rarely make that mistake again,” said Conway of exonerations.

House Minority Floor Leader Gail McCann Beatty opposes the death penalty despite having lost three family members to murder. She hopes the legislature will continue to consider the possibility of repeal. (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

House Democratic leader Gail McCann Beatty supports repeal. She agreed with another point Berry made; that some victims’ families don’t want the death penalty for those who harmed their loved ones. She told the chamber she believed this even though her brother and two nephews have been murdered.

“At no time have I ever thought that I wanted the death penalty for the people who did it,” said McCann Beatty through tears. “My brother was murdered by a friend of his that he grew up with. I don’t see the point in making that family suffer. They shared the pain that I did. There is no point. It doesn’t bring them back.”

Republican Paul Fitzwater (Potosi) told Berry he still supports the death penalty even though one of his best friends was sentenced to death and executed for murdering a couple in 1993.

“I attended his funeral the following Friday after that and it was tough on me, but it didn’t deter how I feel about the death penalty,” said Fitzwater. “I can just imagine if someone would kill one of my children or my parents or someone. I hear people get up there and say, ‘Well, you know, I can forgive him.’ I’m not sure I could ever do that.”

Conway also told Berry she doesn’t favor replacing the death penalty with a life without parole sentence, because efforts have been made in the legislature to allow some offenders with such a sentence to be paroled when old age or terminal illness is a factor.

“That’s a compact that we make with the jury. Here’s the law. This person will not be paroled, period, end of sentence, and we were going to change that. So I don’t trust going forward that that might not be the case again,” said Conway.

Berry withdrew the amendment, saying he hadn’t expected it to pass but he wanted legislators to have a conversation about the issue and give it some thought.

“I thought the discussion was great on the floor,” said Berry. “I was very proud of how people took it seriously.”

Berry, who is in the first year of his final term, hopes that future legislatures’ attitudes will shift more toward ending the death penalty in Missouri.

House endorses tougher penalties for crimes against law enforcement

The state House is close to proposing greater penalties for those who commit certain crimes against law enforcement officers.

Representative Marsha Haefner (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

House Bill 57 aims to increase by one degree the penalty for voluntary or involuntary manslaughter, first- or second-degree property damage, unlawful use of a weapon, rioting, or first-degree trespassing, when those crimes are committed against a law enforcement officer.

It’s sponsored by St. Louis Republican Marsha Haefner, who said she hoped the bill would deter the committing of crimes against law enfrocment.

“It is intended to show meaningful and additional support for our officers across the state. It is also to express the level of intolerance Missourians have for those who commit crimes against the very people who have taken an oath to protect and serve us and protect our property,” said Haefner.

Some Republicans expressed reservations about the proposal. Cedar Hill Representative Shane Roden, a firefighter and reserve deputy sheriff, said he was not supportive of changes from an earlier version that would have increased penalties in crimes committed against other first responders, including firefighters. He spoke of an attack on his wife, who was attacked in the back of an ambulance two years ago.

“Our men and women from the fire service, from the ambulance side of things, are just as likely to end up getting attacked as the first responders,” said Roden.

Roden attempted to change the bill to extend to all first responders, but his amendment was defeated.

Kansas City Democrat Brandon Ellington believes the House shouldn’t be debating this issue when he and many Democrats believe it hasn’t done enough to respond to the 2014 shooting by a Ferguson police officer of Michael Brown or the unrest that followed.

“We haven’t had one officer that’s been shot down in the street and left there for six hours. Not one. But we’ve had other people of other colors that’s been left in the streets for over six hours and we can’t work on any kind of accountability legislation,” said Ellington. “The only thing we want to do is give increased protections to those that aren’t in jeopardy.”

St. Charles Republican Kathie Conway is married to a retired police officer. She said the bill would reinforce the legislature’s commitment to law enforcement.

“It’s not that the people that were out there ten or twelve years ago are any more dangerous, it’s that they are emboldened,” said Conway. “I don’t remember the last time, before the incident in New York, that people walked up and shot two officers sitting in a squad car. I don’t remember a time before when a peaceful march was taking place in Dallas and someone opened fire only to kill police officers.”

Representatives Brandon Ellington (left) and Bruce Franks, Jr. (right) stand on either side of Representative Tommie Pierson, Jr. (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

St. Louis City Democrat Bruce Franks, Junior, cited two of his family members who were law enforcement officers that were shot and killed. He said for that and other reasons, it is difficult to oppose House Bill 57.

“You never want anybody to think that you don’t care about law enforcement or you don’t feel that law enforcement should be protected each and every day and they shouldn’t return home. That’s not my objective and that’s not where my heart is,” said Franks. “We have measures in place … to put more into that, it doesn’t deter. It won’t keep officers safe. Nobody’s going to think about the fact that they have this enhanced penalty in the back of their head when they go do something horrendous to an officer, which is sad, but when somebody makes that decision, they’ve already made that decision.”

Kimberling City Republican Don Phillips, a retired Highway Patrol trooper, said he has no problem with the bill treating law enforcement like they are special.

“I can tell you when you get up in the morning and you get ready to go to work and the first thing you do is strap on a bullet proof vest, you strap on a – in my case – a .40-calibur Glock automatic and put 47 rounds of ammunition around your waist, you’ve got handcuffs with you, you’ve got an expandable baton, you’ve got another baton in your car, you’ve got a 12-gauge shotgun that’s loaded for riot situations if it comes down to that, you’ve got pepper mace, Mister Speaker when those are the tools of your trade, you’re not a normal citizen. You’re a special person in society. You’re a person that represents our law and order,” said Phillips.

The House also gave initial approval to House Bills 302 and 228, which would create a Blue Alert System. It would be meant to help identify, find, and apprehend anyone suspected of seriously injuring or killing a law enforcement officer. The system would send out messages over television and radio about those suspected of such crimes.

House Bills 302, 228, and 57 all need one more favorable vote to be sent to the state Senate.