Missouri House of Representatives Newsroom

Missouri Legislature proposes tougher standard for employment discrimination

The legislature has sent Governor Eric Greitens (R) a bill that would make it harder to prove discrimination in the workplace.

Representative Joe Don McGaugh (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

Senate Bill 43 would require a former employee to prove that his or her age, race, gender, disability or ethnicity was the main reason he or she was fired rather than one among other reasons. Republicans said the bill is needed because the courts have allowed too many cases of alleged workplace discrimination to proceed.

The House’s handler of SB 43, Representative Joe Don McGaugh (R-Carrollton), said the legislation responds to Supreme Court decisions that lowered the standard in employment discrimination cases.

“Senate Bill 43, in my opinion, isn’t even tort reform. It’s undoing judicial activism,” said McGaugh. “So what’s the effect of the court playing legislature? Even the most meritless cases have to be decided by a jury. Employers are required to spend thousands of dollars defending completely baseless claims brought by lawyers arguing anything that can contribute.”

The bill also places limits on the damages that can be awarded to successful plaintiffs, exempts from liability supervisors and managers who are not employers, and limits protections for whistleblowers.

The legislation cleared the House on a Republican-led 98-30 vote, but it had Republican opposition.

Representative Jay Barnes (R-Jefferson City) spoke against the measure’s whistleblower section.

“The proponents have not identified a problem with whistleblower law in the State of Missouri. There is not a spate of whistleblower cases in this state,” said Barnes. “The whistleblower portion eliminates protections for the employees most likely to know about illegal activity in their employer.”

Democrats said the legislation would make it easier for workplace discrimination to occur and go unpunished, and argue it represents a conflict of interest because its senate sponsor, Senator Gary Romine (R-Farmington), is the owner of a business that is the subject of a pending discrimination lawsuit.

Representative Bruce Franks, Junior (left), talks about SB 43 with Republican colleague Nate Tate (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

St. Louis Representative Bruce Franks, Junior, read a series of racial slurs cited in that case and called the bill unacceptable.

“We’ve heard time and time again how this sets us back. All of the forward movement we’ve done, this sets us back,” said Franks.

McGaugh said the legislation has been filed for years, long before there was a case against Romine’s company.

“If you’ve been in this body more than one year you’ve voted on this multiple times,” said McGaugh. “Everything that we’re going to talk about today this body has seen before and we’ve talked about before.”

The House debated the bill for more than five hours Monday, rejecting five amendments, before voting to pass the bill the Senate had proposed. It’s now up to Governor Grietens whether it will become law.

Lawmaker in need of transplant urges continuation of organ donor checkoff donations

A state representative who needs a liver transplant hopes that before the General Assembly’s session ends on Friday it will vote to continue to allow donations from tax refunds to the organ donor program.

Representative Steve Cookson (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

Poplar Bluff Republican Steve Cookson is a survivor of both liver cancer and hepatitis C, the latter of which he contracted from a blood transfusion when he was young. He learned last year that he is in liver failure.

“I’ve been told that I can look forward to getting much worse before I’ll probably end up getting better,” said Cookson.

Cookson has made it a priority, as part of his personal story, to push for the passage of a bill that would allow the organ donor program checkoff on individual and corporate income tax returns to continue. It is set to expire at the end of the year unless the legislature acts. The House and the Senate each have bills on the issue that could be sent to the governor before the session’s end.

“I just would ask the members of the body to think about how they may personally be affected by this (bill) and how important it would be for them, their spouses and their children,” he said. “I would ask that the body overwhelmingly support this bill for all those people that just want to have a chance at continuing life.”

The checkoff allows people to donate $2 or more from their refund to the Missouri Organ Donor Trust Fund, which maintains the organ and tissue donor registry. The money is also used to promote organ donation and its benefits.

The registry allows individuals to give consent to have their organs and tissues donated so that family members aren’t called upon to do so. Cookson encourages Missourians to enroll.

Cookson has remained active during this year’s session despite his condition. When possible he spends time in his office resting and listening to debate, and comes to the chamber when necessary to debate or vote.

“Some of the way it affects me is it causes toxins to build up in my mind, like ammonia,” said Cookson, his normally strong voice quieted with fatigue. “Not only do I talk slow already but I have to really concentrate to pull all my thoughts together.”

He said in recent months he has spent a lot of time reflecting on his life, and what life itself is.

“Life is just time,” said Cookson. “Each individual wants a chance at life because they want to make those connections to the important people in their life, I think. That’s the reason for life is the keeping of connections with important people like my son and my wife and my relatives, my close friends.”

Cookson encourages other baby boomers to get tested for Hepatitis C, as others may have been exposed to it the way he was.

“It was something that happened during a time where medical science just didn’t know what they were doing to me,” said Cookson.

Cookson is in his final two-year term in the House. He will undergo on Tuesday more testing regarding his condition.

In the meantime, he plans to pressure fellow lawmakers to get one of those bills across the finish line.

“That’s why I’m back up here this week,” said Cookson. “I have to have faith that God has had a plan for my life.”

The two bills dealing with the checkoff extension are House Bill 105, sponsored by Representative Warren Love (R-Osceola); and Senate Bill 248, sponsored by Senator Will Kraus.

Legislature’s budget proposal would save Summer Jobs program for young adults

The budget passed last week by the state legislature would save a program that helps low-income youth enter the workforce.

Representative Bruce Franks (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

Governor Eric Greitens’ (R) budget proposal would have cut all funding to the Summer Jobs League within the Department of Economic Development. It had $8.5-million last year. The House had proposed restoring $6-million to the program. It compromised with the Senate to fund it at $4-million in fiscal year 2018.

Representative Bruce Franks (D-St. Louis), Junior, was responsible for making sure that program received some support.

“I’m happy with the $4-million. Do I wish it was more? Of course, but at the end of the day we’ll be able to put some young folks to work,” Franks said.

The Summer Jobs League gives 16- to 24-year-olds from low-income homes in the St. Louis and Kansas City areas work opportunities in fields they’re interested in. The League pays up to $8.50 an hour for 240 hours. Business owners don’t have to pay those employees while they are enrolled in the League, but often hire those employees after their time in the league is up.

Franks said it provides important opportunities for young adults whose lives might otherwise lack structure.

“To be able to come in here and get this structure and work at amazing places like Ballpark Village and the Scottrade Center, and our police department, circuit attorney’s office … lawyers’ offices, doctors’ offices, just to get them on the right road,” said Franks. “It’s more than just, ‘Hey, I’m going to give you a job, you work a couple hours.’ It’s a fundamental, comprehensive way of fighting crime from the root cause by providing the resources that we lack in our economically distressed communities.”

Franks emphasized the program is not just about getting jobs for “kids.”

“It’s about young adults, between the ages of 16 through 24, who get on the road to viable employment through Summer Jobs,” said Franks. “This program has saved lives; has gotten people on the road to different careers, different trainings, even in my particular business with some of the youth we’ve been able to hire who have moved on to work in corporate offices.”

Franks hopes in future years he can work to put more funding into Summer Jobs to see it offered in more parts of the state.

“The object is to make a viable program for all of the state of Missouri in every single part of Missouri – rural areas, St. Louis City, Kansas City – that’s what it’s about. It’s not just about one particular area because disenfranchisement doesn’t have a color. It’s not biased at all,” said Franks.

The budget has been sent to Governor Greitens for his consideration.

Earlier story: House budget plan would save program to get low-income youths into workforce

Legislature’s budget aims for transparency in settlements with the state, agency workplace environments

The legislature has passed a budget that aims to make state agencies more accountable when lawsuits against them cost taxpayer dollars.

House Minority Leader Gail McCann Beatty made creating transparency with the legal expense fund one of her priorities this session. (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

Lawmakers learned last fall that the Department of Corrections had reached millions of dollars in settlements in recent years with employees who had been harassed, discriminated against, and in some cases retaliated against. Legislators said they didn’t know about apparent ongoing issues in Corrections because of how money for settlements was identified in the budget.

Settlements had come out of a single line in the budget called the legal expense fund, which had no spending limit. That meant legislators did not know how much money was being spent on settlements each year, and agencies didn’t have to explain to the legislature what was behind lawsuits against them.

The budget for the year starting July 1 would cap that line at $16-million. If settlements exceed that, the Office of Administration can pull up to $10-million from other funds it controls. If that isn’t enough, OA can then take money directly from the budget of the department involved in a given settlement.

The Attorney General has said he will also report to the legislature every month on the activity of the legal expense fund. House Budget Committee Chairman Scott Fitzpatrick (R-Shell Knob) said that’s why even if OA has to go to any of those additional places for settlement money, it must all pass through that fund.

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

“So it still has to go to the legal expense fund and then it has to be paid from the legal expense fund, so that shouldn’t impact [tracking that fund’s activity],” said Fitzpatrick.

Meanwhile the House has passed a bill that would require by law those monthly reports from the governor, but with the process moving slowly in recent weeks, House Democrat Leader Gail McCann Beatty (Kansas City) said she’s looking for other bills to which she can add that language.

“The Attorney General has been very cooperative and is now posting that information on his website so it is there for the first time. I will be asking those other departments that don’t fall under the Attorney General to do the same voluntarily until we have the opportunity to actually pass this legislation,” said McCann Beatty.

Legislators believe that with the new budget provisions and reporting by the attorney general any future situations like that uncovered at Corrections will be exposed.

Meanwhile, a House subcommittee launched to investigate corrections and recommend changes in that department is close to releasing its report.

The legislature’s budget proposal is now awaiting action by Governor Eric Greitens (R).

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.”

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

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.

Legislature’s budget follows House lead; fully funds K-12 schools for first time

The state legislature has passed a budget proposal that for the first time fully funds the current form of the K-12 education funding formula. The $27.7-billion spending plan for the fiscal year that begins July 1 would pump $48-million more dollars into the state’s public schools, providing them with nearly $3.4-billion.

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

The inclusion of full funding of the formula was a personal win for House Budget Committee Chairman Scott Fitzpatrick (R-Shell Knob).

“It was the number one thing I was going to figure out how to do when I released the [earliest version of the House’s budget proposal], was to fully fund the formula,” said Fitzpatrick. “I made that decision early on.”

House Democrats including Representative Deb Lavender (Kirkwood) say they are pleased with the funding increase, but point out that the legislature passed last year a bill reinstating a cap on how much the formula can grow year-to-year.

“Yes we’re fully funding the foundation formula – at a rate of $450-million less than what the foundation formula would have been a year-and-a-half ago,” said Lavender. “So, are we fully funding that?”

Representative Deb Lavender (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

House Democrat Leader Gail McCann Beatty (Kansas City) said the budget included a “phantom fully funding of the formula.”

Republicans said reinstating that cap meant the formula would not continue to grow beyond what the legislature could appropriate.

“When the General Assembly took that cap off in 2010, starting at that point the formula has never been funded. They tweaked the formula in a way that made it unfundable,” said Fitzpatrick. “My contention would be that the formula that was agreed to in 2005, that everybody got in a room and worked out, is fully funded.”

The legislature’s proposal would also restore funding for school transportation, which Governor Eric Greitens (R) had proposed cutting.

The House and Senate voted to send that budget to Greitens Thursday, one day ahead of the constitutional deadline, and one day after selected House and Senate conferees finalized a compromise between each chamber’s proposals.

Legislature coming down to the wire this week on FY ’18 budget proposal

The legislature’s top responsibility enters its final push this week, as Friday is the constitutional deadline for it to propose a budget for the fiscal year that begins July 1.

Beginning tomorrow, selected House and Senate members will work to negotiate a compromise between each chamber’s budget proposals. Any compromise the two sides reach must then be voted on by 6 p.m. Friday to be sent to Governor Eric Greitens (R).

The House proposed that the state should for the first time fully support the formula for funding K-12 schools. Early discussions in the Senate suggested it would do otherwise, but it decided to follow suit. That was the top priority for House Budget Committee Chairman Scott Fitzpatrick (R-Shell Knob), and with both chambers agreeing on it, he says his priority now is clear.

“A balanced budget,” Fitzpatrick said.

Getting there by Friday, however, will be challenging. The difference between the two chambers’ budget proposals is somewhere beyond $100-million.

Fitzpatrick said much of that difference is in projects the Senate added when they were planning not to fully fund the K-12 education formula. When the Senate voted to instead fund the formula, it didn’t remove those projects.

“Now that the formula is funded, I think the projects are going to be tough to [pay for],” said Fitzpatrick.

Another substantial difference between the two proposals concerns “Es.” For several years, legislative budget makers have used an “E” at the end of a budget line to represent an open-ended spending limit. This was often used in places where predicting how much would be needed over the course of a fiscal year was particularly difficult, and it would allow an entity to exceed the budgeted amount if necessary. The effort to remove Es began several years ago, and the House proposed a budget that completed that removal.

The Senate restored some Es to various places in the budget. Fitzpatrick wants to remove those in the final compromise. He said their presence in the Senate’s proposal also distorts how far apart the House and Senate plans are.

“So like for the budget reserve fund, we put a $25.5-million number in there. The Senate put the E back on and made it $1, so that makes their budget actually appear $25.5-million smaller,” said Fitzpatrick. “So really to compare apples to apples you have to add $25-million to their budget to see the difference.”

Fitzpatrick said he doesn’t know how many more such examples exist throughout the budget plans.

One line of particular importance to Fitzpatrick and others in the House is the state’s legal expense fund, which has had an E on it. That line has been the focus of great legislative attention this year after the revelation that the Department of Corrections has settled millions of dollars in lawsuits in recent years in cases of employee harassment, discrimination, and retaliation.

With an E on that line – the line from which comes the money for all settlements with the state – Corrections never had to come before a legislative committee to explain what was behind the multiple, large settlements. Lawmakers say that kept them in the dark as to the environment and repeated issues in the Corrections Department.

The House’s proposal replaced that line with lines in the budgets of each state agency. That meant any future settlement would come out of the involved agency’s budget, and if it had so many that it exceeded what the legislature appropriated, it would have to explain why to lawmakers. The Senate returned the legal expense fund to being a single line in the budget. Fitzpatrick and House members strongly want to see the House’s version restored.

House and Senate conferees begin meeting Tuesday morning. Their goal is to have a compromise ready for each chamber to vote on by Friday. Failure to meet the state Constitution’s deadline could mean legislators will have to meet in a special session, after the regular session ends on May 20, to complete a budget.

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 votes to send project labor agreement ban to Governor Greitens

Missouri legislative Republicans’ labor reform agenda took another step Thursday with the final passage of a bill barring project labor agreements (PLAs) for public projects.

Representative Rob Vescovo began proposing a ban on project labor agreements for public projects when he was first elected to the House for the 2015 session. (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

The House voted to send Senate Bill 182 to Governor Eric Greitens (R), who had called for the elimination of PLAs.

Under a PLA, a governing body requires non-union contractors to pay union dues to workers on a project. SB 182 would prohibit that, and would bar local governments from giving preferential treatment to union contractors. Governing bodies that violate the bill’s provisions would lose state funding and tax credits for two years.

Republicans said PLAs are unfair to non-union workers and contractors. Arnold representative Rob Vescovo (R) said PLAs discriminate against the largest segment of Missouri’s workforce.

“86-percent of that workforce will not be able to do work on those job sites or bid on those job sites unless they sign a project labor agreement,” said Vescovo.

Lake St. Louis Republican Justin Hill said PLAs amount to extortion.

“Those non-union contractors are forced to pay union dues into benefits that they will never receive,” said Hill.

Representative Bob Burns said project labor agreements are good tools for local governments, which the legislature should not move to take away. (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

Democrats called the legislation an attack on unions. Representative Bob Burns (D-St. Louis) said PLAs protect local governments by ensuring that they will have work done that is quality and completed on time by skilled workers. He said his time on a board of education in Affton provided evidence of that.

“A lot of things that should have lasted 25, 30 years were failing after 5 years or 2 years, and these contractors were nowhere to be found,” said Burns. “The district wouldn’t have to spend more funds to get something done and get it fixed if it would’ve been done properly in the first place.”

SB 182 was carried in the House by Vescovo, who began introducing such legislation as a freshman in 2015. It is expected Greitens will sign the bill into law.

The House’s passage of SB 182 follows other labor reforms it has proposed, including the passage of a right-to-work bill signed into law by Greitens earlier this year. That legislation prevents the collection of union dues or fees from workers as a condition of employment.

Earlier story: House Republicans continue labor reform efforts; address project labor agreements

Missouri House votes a second time to ease state’s motorcycle helmet law

The state House has voted twice this session to relax Missouri’s law requiring that helmets be worn by motorcycle riders.

Representative Shane Roden offered an amendment to a Senate bill to ease Missouri's motorcycle helmet law. (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications) — Representative Shane Roden offered an amendment to a Senate bill to ease Missouri’s motorcycle helmet law. (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

Members voted earlier this month to pass House Bill 576, and on Tuesday voted for an amendment to Senate Bill 8, both containing the same language. They would allow riders 21 and older who have completed a motorcycle safety course or who have had their motorcycle license for at least two years to ride without a helmet if they have insurance.

Missouri legislators have for years debated easing the state’s helmet law. While both measures received favorable votes, the issue stirs passion in both proponents and opponents, and both sides of the issue are bipartisan.

Rolla representative and doctor Keith Frederick (R) said he generally, “doesn’t want the government telling people what to do,” but riders without helmets could cost taxpayers a lot of money.

“Somebody has a bad accident and they have a head injury that incapacitates them for years, it’s … I think the gentleman from the White District in the past has pointed out the lifetime cost is average about $4.5-million,” said Frederick.

Kansas City Democrat Ingrid Burnett said she could not support the amendment after the death of a close family friend.

“He hated wearing a motorcycle helmet but he wore his helmet when he was in Missouri because Missouri had a helmet law, but when he was traveling back to Oakland and going through a state where there was no law, he had a serious accident and lost his life,” said Burnett.

The amendment to SB 8 was offered by Cedar Hill representative Shane Roden, who said he rides motorcycles himself. He said he would wear a helmet most of the time even if the law is changed, but he wants the freedom to ride without it.

He argued that nearly half of fatal motorcycle accidents involved riders that had more than the legal limit of alcohol in their systems, “so if we want to talk about reducing fatalities maybe we need to start enforcing DWIs a little bit stronger, so I would say if you really want to make an effective reduction in deaths, maybe we need to go on the campaign about riding while intoxicated or buzzed driving.”

Representative Keith Frederick opposes proposals this year to relax Missouri's motorcycle helmet law. (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications) — Representative Keith Frederick opposes proposals offered again this year by fellow Republicans to relax Missouri’s motorcycle helmet law. (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

St. Joseph Republican Delus Johnson said as a motorcycle rider, he feels he is “grouped in” by the state’s helmet law with those who ride while intoxicated or ride recklessly.

“Why am I being punished?” asked Johnson. “Why am I grouped in with these drunks that are riding motorcycles that probably don’t have a motorcycle license, they don’t have motorcycle insurance. If they’re not wearing a helmet and they get in a wreck they’re breaking the law anyway. Why are we grouped in with those lawbreakers?”

Supporters also argue that allowing people to ride in Missouri without helmets would increase tourism. They say many riders and groups deliberately avoid the state because of its helmet law.

HB 576, sponsored by High Ridge Republican John McCaherty, is awaiting a vote by a Senate committee. SB 8 has been sent back to the Senate with several amendments that that chamber must consider.