House Speaker Dean Plocher and the Missouri House of Representatives are honored to announce the induction of Marie Watkins Oliver into the Hall of Famous Missourians.
Missouri House Speaker Dean Plocher stands alongside the newly unveiled bust of Marie Watkins Oliver with her great-great grandson, Jack Oliver. (Photo: Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)
Marie Watkins Oliver, hailed as the “Betsy Ross of Missouri,” played a pivotal role in crafting the Missouri State Flag. In 1908, Oliver, the wife of Senator Robert Burett Oliver and a resident of Cape Girardeau, headed the committee formed by the Daughters of the American Revolution and took on the challenge of creating an official state flag.
Her resulting masterpiece integrated red, white, and blue, symbolizing Missouri’s federal ties while embodying local autonomy and self-governance. The central coat-of-arms denotes Missouri’s geographical significance, while twenty-four stars on the blue band mark the state’s place as the twenty-fourth state in the Union. Each color carried profound meaning: blue for vigilance, permanency, and justice; red for valor; and white for purity.
Despite setbacks, such as the loss of her original flag in a fire, Oliver’s resilience triumphed. Following numerous attempts to secure legislative approval, the Oliver Flag was officially adopted as the state flag on March 22, 1913. The silk flag she crafted stands proudly in Jefferson City, serving as a timeless testament to Oliver’s lasting legacy.
In recognition of her efforts and impact on the Show-Me State, Speaker Plocher presented the bust for Oliver as the latest member to join the Hall of Famous Missourians.
“In honoring Marie Watkins Oliver’s induction into the Hall of Famous Missourians, we celebrate not just a woman of historical significance, but a visionary who stitched together the very fabric of our state’s identity,” House Speaker Dean Plocher, R-Des Peres, said. “Like the stars on our flag, her contributions shine brightly, reminding us of the resilience and creativity that define Missouri. It’s a privilege to recognize her pivotal role in shaping our history and heritage.”
Many House lawmakers think Missourians need a break in the taxes they pay to the state. Thirteen House members, nearly evenly split across party lines, have proposed doing so by cutting taxes on necessary products, particularly diapers, feminine hygiene products, and food.
As the legislature enters the final few weeks of its session those bill sponsors are hoping their proposals will get some traction, perhaps as amendments to other proposals, or at least legislative hearings that could spur movement in future years.
Representatives Crystal Quade, Adam Schnelting, Maggie Nurrenbern, Ben Keathley, Patty Lewis, Chris Sanders, Barbara Phifer, Justin Hicks, Robert Sauls, Chris Dinkins, Jo Doll, Wendy Hausman, and Mark Sharp all filed proposals for the 2024 legislative session that would reduce or eliminate sales taxes on one or more products that Missourians need, generally including food, diapers, or feminine hygiene products, or some combination of the three. (Photos: Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)
None of these proposals have been referred to committees.
Missouri is one of only 13 states in the nation that taxes food. Three neighboring states do not tax food, and Kansas will join that number next year. St. Charles Republican Adam Schnelting is one of the legislators proposing that Missouri do the same.
Schnelting said as inflation has skyrocketed in recent years, he has hoped that his idea would catch on amount his House colleagues.
Lone Jack Republican Chris Sander said in districts such as his, which is near the border with Kansas, Missourians are taking advantage of the lower rates some neighboring states offer.
Robert Sauls (D-Independence) proposes exempting food not only from the state sales tax of 1.225 percent, but also from local sales and use taxes, which in some parts of the state drive the rate up to more than eight percent.
Representative Chris Dinkins (R-Lesterville) said she and other legislators are seeing more and more of their constituents struggling, and they want to help.
Missouri taxes diapers and feminine hygiene products at 4.225 percent. Several neighboring states tax those products at a greater rate, but three don’t tax feminine hygiene products at all and one does not tax diapers.
The 4.225 percent rate is often called a “luxury” tax, as it is applied to items that are deemed non-essential. That doesn’t sit well with many lawmakers, including Representative Mark Sharp (D-Kansas City, who proposes taxing such items at the lesser 1.225 percent.
Hausman, who is in her second year as a freshman legislator, said the idea was brought to her by fellow members of a businesswomen’s group, Little Black Book.
Many legislators and advocates point out that difficulty affording or providing necessary products has a ripple effect, contributing to issues with both mental and physical health.
St. Louis Democrat Barbara Phifer points out, “Period products, especially, are very intimate and personal. If you think about young girls who are going through puberty, and if they don’t have access to those products, their school participation drops dramatically.”
Opposition to these ideas in past years has come from local governments, who say cutting taxes on these products jeopardizes services they provide, such as emergency responders.
House Democrat leader Crystal Quade’s (Springfield) plan to cut taxes on food would let Missourians vote on a number of tax changes, including a tax on private planes and yachts, and create a fund in the state’s coffers to help local governments transition.
Representative Maggie Nurrenbern (D-Kansas City), who is in her fourth year on the House Budget Committee, said the state can afford to reduce these taxes.
Chesterfield Republican Ben Keathley said the growth in support for these proposed sales tax cuts is a direct response to inflation hikes over the past several years.
The House wants Missouri to stop taking money from the children in its care without their knowledge, money that they could use for things like continuing education, buying a home, or otherwise bettering their lives.
Representative Hannah Kelly (Photo: Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)
House Bill 2227 would end a practice legislators were “shocked” to learn the state has been engaged in, and one some called “egregious.”
Missouri has, for decades, taken benefits that are supposed to go to children in foster care and used them to pay its own agencies for providing that care. Those benefits include things like Social Security funds intended for those with disabilities, or survivors’ benefits for children whose parents have died.
About five percent of children under the state’s control are eligible for such benefits, which often amount to more than $900 a month per child. The intended recipients rarely know that someone else has applied for their money or that they were even eligible for these benefits.
In 2018, the state intercepted $8.1 million; in 2020, $7.9 million; and in 2022, the figure was last checked at $7.1 million.
The legislation would allow that money to be used for unmet needs that exceed what the state is obligated to pay. Legislators heard that in the case of social security benefits for a child about to age out of the foster system, one year’s worth could translate to two years of books and supplies for college; ten months of rent for a one bedroom apartment; up to one year of childcare; or to offset four years of SNAP benefits.
As HB 2227 has progressed through the House, legislators at each step, upon hearing for the first time what Missouri has been doing, have responded with disbelief.
Representative Raychel Proudie (Photo: Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)
The Missouri House this week voted to increase the criminal penalties for resisting or interfering with an arrest, or fleeing from law enforcement. The bill is named in honor of a St. Louis County Police Detective who was killed by a fleeing suspect, in 2021.
That was the opening statement from Representative Justin Sparks (R-Wildwood), the sponsor of House Bill 1692. Sparks was with the St. Louis County Police Department for nearly 15 years. He knew Detective Tony Valentine personally, and was on the scene when he died.
Sparks was certainly not the only House member to speak in favor of the legislation with passion borne of personal experience. Representative Lane Roberts (R-Joplin), whose career in law enforcement spans decades, including as Joplin Police Chief and the state’s Director of Public Safety, said he knows what it’s like to lose friends and to lose those under his command.
Representative Justin Sparks spoke at a media conference on 02/14/2024 backed by St. Louis area law enforcement, in support of Valentine’s Law. (Photo: Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)
In a display of the bill’s bipartisan support, Representative Robert Sauls (D-Kansas City), agreed. His career includes time as both a Jackson County prosecutor, and as a public defender.
Representative Robert Sauls (Photo: Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)
A person would violate Valentine’s Law if they reasonably know law enforcement is trying to stop them and they flee at a speed 10 miles per hour or more greater than the posted speed limit, and if, in doing so, they pose a risk of physical harm or death to any person.
The offense would be a class D felony with a one-year minimum prison sentence. It would increase to a class B felony if, by fleeing, they cause serious physical injury to another person. It would become a class A felony if by fleeing they cause another person’s death.
The bill also adjusts the circumstances for when resisting or interfering with arrest is a class A misdemeanor and when it is a class E felony. If such an act is committed with the use of a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument, or involves taking someone hostage, it would be a class A felony.
The House voted 107-25 on Wednesday to send HBs 1692 & 1748 to the Senate, where versions of Valentine’s Law have been advanced out of a committee and a bill that includes it has been passed and sent to the House.
The House has voted to bar discrimination based on how people style their hair, specifically natural hair textures and cultural styles.
Representatives Raychel Proudie, LaKeySha Bosley, and Ashley Bland Manlove (Photo: Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)
For several years now, legislators have been asked to pass the “Missouri Creating a Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair,” or “Missouri CROWN Act.” House Bills 1900, 1591, & 2515 would specify that no person may be discriminated against based on hair texture or protective hairstyle if that style or texture is commonly associated with a particular race or origin. The measure applies to any educational institution that receives state funding.
Each year that the legislation has been considered, legislators have heard testimony, especially from people of color, who said they have faced discrimination based on their hairstyles. Again this year, Missourians told the House Committee on Urban Issues that their hairstyles have been politicized; they have been discriminated against in job interviews and classrooms; and they have been made to feel like they cannot style their hair how they choose.
Representative Raychel Proudie (Photo: Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)
The proposal has evolved over the years. The version passed on Wednesday by the House includes exceptions for the use of things like hairnets or coverings for safety purposes. This was a change pursued by Representative Scott Cupps (R-Shell Knob), whose background includes time as an agricultural education teacher.
He says in that curriculum, in particular, students need protection.
The Missouri House has voted to allow the use of “land banks” in all parts of the state, so that more of Missouri can utilize them to restore neglected properties to use and public benefit.
Representative Bill Owen (Photo: Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)
Land banks are nonprofit entities that acquire, manage, refurbish, and resell stagnant properties so that they are again productive and useful. Such restoration benefits regions by eliminating blight, bolstering property values, reducing crime, and making more land available for residential or commercial purposes.
Missouri has land banks in St. Louis, Kansas City, St. Joseph, and Blue Springs. House Bill 2065, the “Land Bank Act,” would allow them to exist in all communities of 1,500 or more. They could also be established all Missouri counties except Jackson (which includes Kansas City) and Buchanan (which includes St. Joseph), effectively making them a possibility statewide. HB 2065 specifically deals with residential properties.
Owen said as important as any other aspect of HB 2065 are the new tools it would create, for the management of land banks. In part, they are provisions that are answers to the problems critics have had with existing land banks.
One such complaint has been that too many people involved with these entities have been “insiders,” such as people who sit on the bank’s board or are in an advisory capacity. HB 2065 would establish that no one within two degrees of consequenity can be involved in land bank transactions.
Another oft-heard complaint has been that speculators will buy property from land banks and then do nothing with them. HB 2065 gives buyers three years to redevelop and repurpose a property or turn it back over to the land bank. The bill would also allow that sales of properties be conditional to certain improvements being made. If that condition is not met, the land bank may sue the purchaser for damages and seek a foreclosure, under which the property would revert to the land bank.
Representative Joe Adams (Photo: Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)
HB 2065 received bipartisan support throughout its House journey. Representative Joe Adams (D-University City) said he was supportive when the bill came through the House Committee on Local Government, on which he is the top Democrat.
Many Missourians want to avoid opioids when given an option for dealing with pain, and one state representative wants to make sure they know what their choices are.
Representative Melanie Stinnett (Photo: Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)
House Bill 2182 would require the Department of Health and Senior Services to create an educational pamphlet on the use of non-opioid options for pain management. It would cover pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments and related advantages and disadvantages.
The proposal has not been referred to a committee. With the session entering early March, Stinnett knows that isn’t encouraging, but she’s hopeful the one-page provision can be added to some other legislation. Even if it does not gain traction this year, she said the Department has been receptive and could create a pamphlet anyway.
In any case, she wants to see her idea become law to make sure such pamphlets are created, maintained, and updated as an ongoing educational tool.
Even in the absence of a pamphlet, Stinnett encourages Missourians to talk to their doctors and ask about their options.