Missourinet

Your source for Missouri News and Sports

You are here: Home / Archives for Genise Montecillo

Weighing in on whether to veto the transfer bill and call a special session

By

Critics of the bill that proposes change to Missouri’s student transfer law say it doesn’t fix anything, and want Governor Jay Nixon (D) to tell lawmakers to try again.

The bill lawmakers sent to Governor Nixon includes a provision that after three years of a district in St. Louis City or County and Jackson County being unaccredited, would allow its local tax dollars to go to a nearby private school if its students transfer there.

Opponents like Representative Genise Montecillo (D-St. Louis) say that’s all the bill was about, and they want Nixon to veto it.

“I’ve heard from all of my superintendents, I’ve heard from my constituents. I don’t think there’s a superintendent in this state that supports this plan,” says Montecillo. “Those people that understand education and what it takes to improve education outcomes opposed this plan, and yet they continued to refuse to take vouchers off the table. If that’s not about agenda, then explain to me what it is about.”

Nixon has said he opposes any legislation that would let tax dollars go to private schools, but hasn’t said what he will do with this bill.

Some lawmakers say Nixon has indicated to them a veto and special session are coming

He tells reporters he knows he must act soon, with one school district bankrupt and another close to it because of the cost of student transfers.

“We’re going to expedite a review of this bill,” says Nixon. “Obviously I’ll have to make a decision on it relatively quickly because of the fiscal timeframes involved.”

Opponents of the bill want Nixon to call a special session so that a new bill can be created. He has not said whether he will.

House Speaker Tim Jones (R-Eureka) says if that happens, he wants to see more involvement from the Governor in a solution.

“If the governor vetoes this issue, then he owns it and he has to come up with a solution,” says Jones. “I will challenge him to propose and work with us, like he did in the Boeing special session. You saw that when this governor wants to, he can actually engage with the legislature, be a leader and get things done in a short period of time.”

Montecillo says it’s not up to the Governor to propose a plan.

“We have a plan,” says Montecillo. “The problem that [Republicans] have and what they dislike about that, it is a clean transfer fix. It addresses a single problem facing the state. It is void of the agenda that they want to push and promote.”
Opponents of the bill say the Governor has some leverage over what lawmakers might or might not attempt to put into a bill in a special session through the call he would issue for that session.

House Republicans and Democrats recap 2014 legislative session (VIDEOS)

By

Both parties in the state House assessed the regular session of the General Assembly after it wrapped up on Friday in back-to-back media conefrences.  Here is the video of those conferences (courtesy Jonathan Lorenz, Missouri House Communications).

Republicans:

Democrats:

Bill to triple abortion waiting period sent to Gov. Nixon

By

Missouri could become the third state in the nation to require a 72-hour wait for a woman wanting to have an abortion, under legislation that has been sent to Governor Jay Nixon (D). The bill, HB 1307, would triple the current 24-hour waiting period in Missouri.

The House voted 111-39 for the proposal, a strong enough vote to override a veto, but the Senate vote fell one short of the two-thirds majority.

Nixon has not said whether he would support the 72-hour waiting period, saying only that he has been consistent on such issues. In the past he has let other bills placing restrictions on abortion become law without his signature.

Proponents say the legislation isn’t about whether or not a woman should be allowed to have an abortion, but whether she gets all the information available and has time to consider that information.

“Lets get off the issue of whether there’s going to be an abortion or not,” argues Representative Jeanie Riddle (R-Mokane). “What we’re trying to do is get information to these women, we’re trying to give them healthy choices and we’re trying to lessen the suicide rate of women that are in turmoil.”

Representative Jay Barnes (R-Jefferson City) argues 72-hours is not too long to wait before having a serious procedure.

“There is no more serious medical procedure than this,” says Barnes. “The last time we debated this bill we heard somebody get up and talk about how it took 6-months for her husband to decide whether he would get a knee surgery. A knee surgery, Mr. Speaker, and we’re talking about the ending of a human life.”

Opponents say the legislation is an attack on women’s ability to have an abortion led primarily by Republicans.

“The idea that a woman would not have taken this time already to take the time and have discussions with her doctor is insulting,” argues Representative Genise Montecillo (D-St. Louis). “You give them 72-this year … you’re going to be back for another day or two next year.”

The passage of the measure in the Senate came on a deal that saw that chamber’s Democrats end a filibuster of the bill in exchange for Republicans agreeing not to bring up bills on so-called “paycheck protection” and photo-ID.

House approves ‘Pop Tart’ bill to protect kids pretending to have weapons in school

By

A bill has been sent to the state Senate that is meant to protect children simulating a weapon during play at school from criminal or civil penalties, fines or other punishments.

Representative Mike Kelley (R-Lamar) calls it the “Pop Tart” bill, stemming from an incident last year in a school.

“A child was eating a pop tart, and the shape of his Pop Tart happened to resemble a gun,” Kelley explains, “and that child was disciplined and suspended from school for having a pop tart that happened to be shaped like a firearm.”

The bill raised concerns among some Democrats, including Genise Montecillo (St. Louis), who challenged his contention that the legislation represented a “common sense” policy. She says it goes against other state laws.

“These are the procedures that school districts put in place as part of the Safe School Act to keep schools safe,” Montecillo told Kelly. “You’ve got a provision in here that children can have toy guns in school and there’s no punishment if they violate school policy for toy guns.”

Kelley stressed to Montecillo that the bill would allow guns only up to 2 inches in size.

“I don’t care what size it is,” she told him.

Kelley assured Representative Stacey Newman (D-St. Louis) that the legislation would not take local districts’ power to set policy and make decisions about what would and would not be allowed.

“I just want to make suer that local school districts can make their own policies that will negate this,” Newman told Kelley.

“They definitely can, ma’am,” Kelly told Newman.

The proposal went to the Senate on a 110-39 vote.

House turns Common Core elimination bill into plan to develop new standard

By

The state House has turned a bill that would have completely scrapped in Missouri the Common Core education standard into one that will give it a chance, while developing its potential successor.

Representative Kurt Bahr (photo courtesy; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

Representative Kurt Bahr (photo courtesy; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

The original bill filed by Representative Kurt Bahr (R-St. Charles) would have prevented the implementation of Common Core State Standards in Missouri without legislative approval. The bill was amended on the House floor to allow those standards to progress while a commission is created to create a new standard. 

Bahr says the amendments came from language the Senate is considering.

“We’re going to create the process in which we’re going to look at the standards and say, ‘How do we want to move forward for standards for the State of Missouri?'” Bahr tells Missourinet. “Are we simply going to blanketly accept Common Core standards or are we going to have Missouri standards written by Missouri teachers, Missouri parents and the stakeholders within Missouri and then change our assessments so that they are in-house?”

Some lawmakers who say they didn’t oppose Common Core did have problems with how its impact would be assessed, saying teachers might have suffered poor evaluations as a result of poor student performance while adjusting to the new standards. One of the amendments to the bill would prevent assessment test scores from the 2014-15 school year from counting toward school accountability or accreditation.

Representative Genise Montecillo (photo courtesy; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

Representative Genise Montecillo (photo courtesy; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

“I think this sort of alleviated some of the members’ concerns,” says Representative Genise Montecillo (D-St. Louis). She says with the changes approved Tuesday the bill, “was a good compromise and it doesn’t put districts in a bind that they have to dismantle what they’ve been working towards.”

The proposal would create a 14-member work group with members selected by the state’s professional teachers’ organizations, associations of state school boards and charter schools, the speaker of the House, the Senate president pro-tem, the governor, the lieutenant governor, the commissioner of higher education and the heads of state-approved baccalaureate-level teacher preparation programs.

That group will develop standards for English, language arts, math, history and government and present recommendations to the Board of Education next year. Those standards would then be implemented in the 2016-17 school year.

Bahr says during the two years before implementation, while Common Core is in place in Missouri, it will be evaluated and recommendations could include partial or full implementation of it.

The proposal would need another favorable vote to go to the Senate.

House endorses its version of federal gun law nullification legislation

By

The House has given initial approval to a bill meant to nullify federal gun laws within the state.

Representatve Doug Funderburk (photo courtesy; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

Representatve Doug Funderburk (photo courtesy; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

The bill, HB 1439, would deny state law enforcement agencies and courts the power to enforce federal gun laws and would make anyone deemed in violation of a Missourian’s Second Amendment Rights liable to legal action by that Missourian.

Other versions of the legislation would have made law enforcement officers subject to criminal prosecution for enforcement of the gun laws targeted by the measure. Sponsor, Representative Doug Funderburk (R-St. Peters) says he removed that language at the request of law enforcement.

“This is what law enforcement said was their most deep, heartfelt concern about the bill from last year and the bill that I originally filed this year,” said Funderburk.

The bill would also allow specified school personnel to carry concealed weapons with specific training. Representative Rick Brattin (R-Harrisonville) says that will serve as a deterrent to anyone who would consider carrying out a school shooting.

Representative Genise Montecillo (D-St. Louis) isn’t convinced that is the proper role for a teacher.

“I have no issue with having trained, real police officers in our schools. I think that’s a good idea. I encourage that. I’ve seen the effect and the impact that they’ve had in my school district. I do have issue putting folks that have sort of a pseudo police officer training and having folks filling two different roles.”

The proposal would not allow public hearings by school districts before the allowing of armed school personnel on school grounds.

Those House Democrats that oppose the legislation dismiss it as unconstitutional.

“On its face it contradicts our oath of office,” says Representative Stacey Newman (D-St. Louis). “It’s going straight to court if it becomes law.”

The legislation would prevent a medical practitioner from being required to ask a patient about his or her gun ownership status or to disclose such information except in specific circumstances.

The proposal would bar the disarming of a person carrying openly or concealed unless he or she is under arrest and lowers the minimum age at which one can obtain a concealed carry permit from 21 to 19.

It requires another favorable vote to go to the Senate.

House lawmakers offer messages of support to stricken sponsor of breastfeeding bill

By

The state House has given initial approval to legislation meant to lift restrictions on breastfeeding and give breastfeeding mothers the ability to opt out of jury duty. The original bill was offered by Representative Rory Ellinger (D-University City), who is battling liver cancer and was not able to be at the Capitol as the bill was debated.

Representative Rory Ellinger (courtesy Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

Representative Rory Ellinger (courtesy Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

Ellinger filed a bill addressing the jury duty issue in response to an incident in which a judge in Jackson County found a Lee’s Summit woman in contempt of court and put a $500 fine against her on hold until the end of the legislative session, to see if lawmakers would weigh in on such situations.

An amendment offered by Representative Kurt Bahr (R-St. Charles) changed the bill to require judges to excuse breastfeeding mothers from jury duty if the mother requests it and has a statement from her physician that she is a nursing mother.

His amendment would also clarify that a mother can nurse a child or express breast milk in any public or private place she is otherwise authorized to be and requires only that she use discretion. It would also specify that breast-feeding a child does not fall under the state’s statutory definition of sexual conduct or contact, or violate laws against public indecency or indecent exposure.

See the legislation, HB 1320

Bahr says he and other lawmakers wanted to address other concerns for mothers while making sure Ellinger would get the credit.

“I filed the same language that the Senate had,” says Bahr, “One of the reasons I wanted to go ahead and change his bill as much as I did is so that the Senate would in fact accept his bill and pass his bill, so when it’s signed by the Governor it will be Representative Ellinger’s bill number.”

Ellinger was said to be listening to debate from home, and lawmakers offered him emotional messages of support among their comments on the legislation.

Representative Genise Montecillo (D-St Louis) said, “Representative Ellinger and I didn’t always see eye to eye in policy but I think we both are very passionate when we come from our positions. The one thing I never doubted was his dedication to what was important. Rory, I hope you’re doing well. You’re in my prayers.”

The legislation needs another favorable vote to go to the Senate.

Earlier story: Proposed jury duty exemption stirs discussion of breastfeeding age limit

House endorses tax credit increase for pregnancy resource centers

By

The House has given initial approval to a bill that would increase the amount available in tax credits for pregnancy resource centers from $2-million a year to $2.5-million beginning in fiscal year 2015.

The centers offer doctor services, counseling on alternatives to abortion, and assistance with finances, budgeting and long-term support to women primarily between the ages of 16 and 24 who are dealing with unexpected pregnancies. Proponents say the centers keep those women from having to get such support from the state and so represent a good use of state tax dollars.

The centers have been criticized, however, by supporters of abortion rights, who say some centers present deceptive information regarding abortion. Those who oppose the bill say the state should not support such activities with tax credits.

Representative Genise Montecillo (D-St. Louis) raised that issue to the bill sponsor, Representative Kevin Engler (R-Farmington).

“Most of them do wonderful work,” says Montecillo, “I just want to make sure women are getting good and accurate medical information so they can carry their children to term safely.”

Engler says he shares her concern.

“Most of the bills that your members are going to focus on from that area are going to get killed. That’s just the reality,” Engler tells Montecillo. “I’d like to work with you on coming up with something … maybe not legislative … that we can put out and say, ‘This is what you can do. You are getting tax credits from the State of Missouri, therefore you need to have some responsibility of doing things.”

Engler says the award of tax credits to those organizations and whether they are presenting accurate information becomes an issue of upholding the State Constitution in his mind.

Another favorable vote would send that measure to the Senate.

The bill is HB 1132.

House approves two abortion bills

By

The state House has sent to the Senate two bills that would change the laws governing abortion in Missouri.

One would triple the waiting period before a woman can have an abortion from 24 to 72 hours. In emotional and at times heated discussion, several House Democrats said the legislation would only make a woman wait longer to undergo a procedure she has already decided to have. Republicans argue that three days is not too long to ask a woman to wait to consider the procedure.

Sponsor Kevin Elmer (R-Nixa) says he and other supporters are acting on the belief that life begins at conception.

“It’s something that we feel very strongly about, just as those who believe that it happens at some other time feel very strongly about their side,” says Elmer.

The other bill would require the notification of both custodial parents or the guardian of a minor when that minor is seeking an abortion. Opponents like Representative Genise Montecillo (D-St. Louis) say that bill doesn’t fit for all families.

“What if that other parents … they’re not in that child’s life?” asks Montecillo. “Maybe they can’t get in contact with that person. What happens if they can’t reach … that parent has not been a part of their life for some time?”

Opponents argue the bill could create delays that would be harmful to the minor and could force a child to make contact with an abusive parent.

Backers say the bill will help minors get guidance and make good decisions.

Debate of the bills came hours after abortion opponents held a rally under the Capitol Dome.

Proposed jury duty exemption stirs discussion of breastfeeding age limit

By

After a Lee’s Summit woman was faced with a $500 fine for contempt of court for bringing her breastfeeding infant to jury duty, some called for a change in Missouri law to exempt breastfeeding women from jury duty.   The judge in that case has delayed fining her $500 until the end of the legislative session, to see whether lawmakers approve a specific exemption.

Representative Rory Ellinger (D-University City)

Representative Rory Ellinger (D-University City)

Representative Rory Ellinger (D-University City) is the sponsor of legislation to do just that, and he has told the House Committee on Children, Families and Persons with Disabilities he was hopeful the bill could make the House consent calendar, for bills that have no opposition.

It did meet some bipartisan resistance, however, from lawmakers who asked whether such an exemption should be limited to apply only to mothers of children up to a certain age.

Representative Rick Brattin (R-Harrisonville) suggested the language could be strengthened even more than that to avoid such an exemption being abused.

“I could almost see an amendment to make (an exemption be contingent) on sustainment of life of the child to where it’s necessary for the child’s life and that’s the only means of life for that child,” Brattin said.

Representative Genise Montecillo (D-St. Louis) also wants to see a limit to the age of children involved in order for a mother to get an exemption.

“I would think as they get older there’s going to be other food sources,” Montecillo said. “I doubt that a 5-year-old is only nursing.”

The Committee heard from Columbia midwife Sara Davis, who told the committee there is no recognized maximum age at which a child can breastfeed.

“The Advice of the American Academy of Pediatrics and also the World Health Organization is only minimums … no health organization has ever set a maximum age limit.”

Representative Jill Schupp (D-Creve Coeur) was not convinced that an age limit is a good idea.

“I just think that this is … talk about a sacred bond between a mother and a child and a great gift that a mother gives to her child in terms of good health and nutrition for the life of the child. I can’t believe that we’re thinking about putting what I would call some kind of arbitrary limits on this.”

Listen to Representative Schupp’s comments during the hearing:

The Committee’s chairman, Representative Jeff Grisamore (R-Lee’s Summit), intends to bring the bill up for a vote but he wants to see amendments offered that could clear up what he sees as possible unintended consequences.

“I think it’s needed but we don’t want the unintended consequence of discrimination against nursing moms who may nurse their children until 2 or 3 years old, which is not uncommon. The other thing is there could be a mechanism of clarification for electronic notification to the court … to where a mom won’t have to go through a doctor visit just to get a note.”