American Civil Liberties Union Archives

Missouri Legislature gives final approval to absentee ballot legislation; photo ID requirement stripped out

May 15, 2020 By Brian Hauswirth

Absentee ballot legislation that expands voting by mail through the rest of 2020 is on its way to Missouri Governor Mike Parson’s desk, after receiving final approval from the House in Jefferson City on Friday evening.

State Rep. Dan Shaul, R-Imperial, speaks about absentee ballot legislation on the Missouri House floor in Jefferson City on May 15, 2020 (photo courtesy of Tim Bommel at House Communications)

The final House vote was 121-24, and came with about 30 minutes to spare before the mandatory 6 p.m. adjournment.

State Rep. Dan Shaul, R-Imperial, who chairs the Missouri House Elections and Elected Officials Committee, is the bill sponsor.

There are two but separate options under the Shaul bill.

The first expands absentee voting to those 65 and older, or who are vulnerable to COVID-19. Elderly people are considered at greater risk. Notarization is not required for those 65 and older or who are vulnerable.

The second option expands voting by mail for everyone, but requires notarization.

Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft, a Republican who campaigned on a platform of photo ID in 2016, tweeted his disappointment on Friday. He’s disappointed that the photo ID requirement was stripped out of the final bill.

But Secretary Ashcroft emphasized that his office will implement and follow the law.

The bill given final approval this evening also contains an emergency clause, which passed with bipartisan support. If Governor Parson signs it, it will be in effect for the August primary election.

House Speaker Elijah Haahr, R-Springfield, praises the bill, saying it is the result of compromise. Haahr tells Capitol reporters that the bill passed with bipartisan support, adding that it also faced criticism from lawmakers in both parties.

House Minority Leader Crystal Quade, D-Springfield, agrees it’s a compromise. She says the bill on the governor’s desk will allow many Missourians who are concerned about the health risks from crowded polling places to cast an absentee ballot or to vote by mail.

And the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) wants lawmakers to go further in the future. In a statement to Missourinet, the ACLU notes the measures approved by lawmakers will expire at the end of 2020.

“We are glad to see the Missouri Legislature act to expand the right to vote, we hope they will continue to do so in sessions to come,” the ACLU says, in the statement.

Missouri bill would notify parents of sexual orientation, gender identity school materials

February 26, 2020 By Alisa Nelson

State law could be changed to require that Missouri public school districts tell parents if class material, guest speakers, or displays in school mention sexual orientation or gender identity. The Missouri House Elementary and Secondary Education Committee is debating State Representative Chuck Basye’s bill that would let parents have their kids removed from class if they do not approve. Basye, R-Rocheport, says the bill is in response to a Columbia middle school Gay/Straight Alliance Club putting posters up without parents knowing.

State Rep. Chuck Basye speaks on the Missouri House floor in February 2018 (photo courtesy of Tim Bommel at House Communications)

“I think the parents have a right to know what is in front of their children in public schools,” says Basye. “That’s the intent of the bill, nothing more nothing less.”

Under the legislation, Missouri schools could be sued for violating the terms. Basye, the chairman of the committee, says concerns of parents “tend to fall on deaf ears”.

“A lot of people, a lot of parents feel that they’re not listened to, by whether it’s the school board, the administration, or what have you. That’s the design of the last part of this bill is to give this a little bit of teeth so parents can take action if they feel that they’re not being listened to or their child is subjected to something they don’t agree with,” says Basye.

Representative Raychel Proudie, D-Ferguson, says the measure treads on dangerous ground. She has served as a school teacher and counselor in public and charter schools in Missouri and elsewhere.

“I would argue there’s no better place for information or a learning place than a school setting,” says Proudie. “I don’t see any like nude pictures or questionable words as far of obscenities on here. So, I’m not really clear what the issue was with this. If I put ‘Jesus Saves’ up though, I could certainly see how my Jewish student would have an issue with that. I don’t take offense to your wanting to be involved in your child or your children’s education and the education of your community. But, I do insist that we’re not just talking about sex and sexuality but the actual worthiness and personhood of a group of individuals.”

Kansas City Democrat Judy Morgan, a retired school teacher, says teachers should be able to teach all students about some important historical figures, including LGBT individuals. She cites Harvey Milk, the first openly gay man to be elected to a public office in San Francisco, California. He served on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors for ten months before a former board member assassinated him.

“If any LGBT student or an ally is in that class, and they know that these students are being removed because you’re teaching about an openly gay politician, that’s going to stigmatize those kids,” Morgan says. “That’s going to hurt those kids.”

Columbia school parent Jay Atkins says there is space to have such conversations in a responsible way as educators and parents, but lines must be drawn to limit them to human sexuality curriculum.

“I think that it would be perfectly appropriate to teach about the history of Harvey Milk and the LGBT struggle for equal rights throughout the course of our country,” he says. “Where I think we’re starting to get into some grey waters is if the content of the Harvey Milk curriculum, or the Abraham Lincoln curriculum, or the George Washington curriculum, or the Harry S. Truman curriculum, if we start talking about what their preferred gender identity and sexuality was and how that impacted their health and well-being, I think that we’re in the realm of content governed under this statute.”

Another issue of contention is whether the measure infringes upon individual free speech.

“This is not only way too far reaching, but absolutely censorship of essentially livelihoods and existence at all,” says Jay-Marie Hill with the American Civil Liberties Union of Missouri.

Hill argues that the bill goes as far to make teachers responsible for what a guest speaker might say, possibly leading to termination if the potential law is broken.

The committee has not voted on House Bill 1565.