Missourinet

Your source for Missouri News and Sports

You are here: Home / Archives for Missouri Constitution

St. Louis sets up test to Missouri’s constitutional ban of same-sex marriage

By

The City of St. Louis has set up a challenge to Missouri’s constitutional ban on gay marriage by issuing marriage licenses to four same-sex couples in a ceremony Wednesday night at City Hall. The four couples were then married by a municipal judge in the office of Mayor Francis Slay.

St. Louis Recorder Sharon Quinn Carpenter and the four couples married in the office of Mayor Francis Slay on Wednesday. (courtesy; St. Louis Recorder's Twitter feed)

St. Louis Recorder Sharon Quinn Carpenter and the four couples married in the office of Mayor Francis Slay on Wednesday. (courtesy; St. Louis Recorder’s Twitter feed)

The city says it will voluntarily stop issuing any more same-sex marriage licenses as it expects to defend the first four, in a challenge to the constitutional ban. City officials tell the St. Louis Post-Dispatch they will take the issue all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary.

Slay said the ceremony made him proud. “St. Louis is a city that doesn’t tolerate discrimination. We are sending a message on what’s right, and I can’t think of anything more right than this.”

The Attorney General’s Office Thursday morning sought a temporary restraining order blocking the city’s Recorder of Deeds from issuing further marriage licenses. Circuit Judge Rex Burlison denied that motion, noting that Recorder Sharon Quigley Carpenter agreed that while the case is going on she would issue such licenses only after giving the Attorney General’s Office and the Court two business days’ notification. A spokeswoman for the Attorney General says a hearing will be held at a later date on preliminary and permanent injunctions.

Missouri voters in 2004 approved an amendment to the state Constitution defining marriage as only being between a man and a woman.

Federal appeals courts on Wednesday issued rulings against same-sex marriage bans in Utah and Indiana.

Advocates rally opposition to exclusion of bicycling from transportation tax proposal

By

The Executive Director of the Missouri Bicycle and Pedestrian Federation says a move to keep proceeds from a proposed transportation sales tax from going to bicycle paths was a “total blindside.”

During House debate of the proposed constitutional amendment, an amendment was offered that in part would pull the word “bicycle” from the forms of transportation the tax money could support.

Executive Director Brent Hugh says in meetings throughout the state Missourians have supported a comprehensive approach to transportation infrastructure improvements, including for bicycles.

He says the need for more transportation money in Missouri is clear and his group has been a part of a multi-year process to develop the transportation tax proposal.

“It’s like a punch to the gut,” says Hugh of the amendment, offered by Representative Paul Curtman (R-Pacific). He says it sends a message to his group of, “‘Well thanks for helping us all through here but now, you know, see ya.'”

Curtman says he doesn’t want language in the state Constitution that would allow Missouri tax dollars to support bicycle infrastructure.

The amendment earned rebuke from lawmakers who said pulling the word “bicycle” from the tax proposal would seal its defeat. Many legislators say roughly 40 percent of voters are expected to be opposed to any tax increase proposal, and losing the support of alternative transportation backers would cost enough votes to spell certain failure.

Representative Chris Kelly (D-Columbia) says the mounting of opposition by bicycle supporters started almost immediately.

“Monday is bike day at the Capitol,” notes Kelly, referring to the Missouri Bicycle and Pedestrian Federation’s lobbying day. Support for bicycling in the transportation funding plan is one of the issues participants are urged to ask lawmakers to support during the day. A statement from the Federation is also urging citizens to contact representatives and voice opinions on social media about the issue.

See the other issue bicycle lobbiers are being asked to speak against to lawmakers

Kelly says he is only “barely supportive” of the transportation tax proposal, but he doesn’t like what he calls a “sneak attack” on bicycles.

“I don’t like that as the method,” says Kelly of Curtman’s amendment, “and I also don’t like the public policy of taking alternative transportation out of the package.”

Kelly offered a motion to divide Curtman’s amendment into two pieces so that lawmakers could vote on them separately. Debate of the transportation tax was then suspended, leaving the issue to be settled when it is taken back up. Majority Floor Leader John Diehl (R-Town and Country) says that will happen Tuesday.

Legislator files proposed amendment to allow same-sex marriage in Missouri (VIDEO)

By

A state representative has filed a proposal that would revisit the 2004 decision by Missouri voters to define marriage in the state Constitution as being between a man and a woman.

Representative Mike Colona (D-St. Louis) has filed HJR 85, a proposed constitutional amendment that would ask voters to add language saying that a marriage may exist between a man and a woman and a same-sex couple.

71 percent of Missouri voters approved Constitutional Amendment 2 in 2004 that said to be valid and recognized in Missouri, “a marriage shall exist only between a man and a woman.” 

Colona says he thinks the time is right to put the issue back before Missourians.

“That’s a different question than do I think it will happen,” Colona tells Missourinet.

Colona, who is openly gay, says he doesn’t think the proposal could clear the legislature and reach a ballot this year.

“But if we don’t start some time,” says Colona, it’s never going to happen, and I think now is the time with two cases pending in our court system dealing with marriage equality for the General Assembly to return and address this issue again.”

He says before courts rule on the language currently in the Constitution he wants to use his position as a state representative to call attention to the issue.

See the language of HJR 85

He notes other recent events that have kept it in the public mind, such as Governor Jay Nixon (D)’s in his State of the State Address calling for passage of the Missouri Nondiscrimination Act and statements that the General Assembly should give voters the chance to reconsider same-sex marriage.

“My thoughts are,” says Colona, “ten years after the passage of that marriage ban, we very well could have a much different outcome.”

Proposed change to governors’ budget powers gets bipartisan committee approval

By

The House Committee on General Laws has given its approval to a proposed change to Missouri’s Constitution regarding the power of a governor to restrict money in the state budget.

Representative Todd Richardson (photo courtesy; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

Representative Todd Richardson (photo courtesy; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

The committee passed the proposal that would ask voters to give the legislature the power to review the withholding of money in the budget by a governor. It is offered by Representative Todd Richardson (R-Poplar Bluff), who told colleagues it was inspired by budget scenarios like what he says is happening now.

“The governor is still withholding $147-million dollars that we as a legislature appropriated,” says Richardson. “There’s no financial justification for that and the legislature ought to have some say in whether the governor can continue to withhold that money.”

The resolution would have a governor issue a proclamation when he or she restricts expenditure of or reduces the amount of money appropriated in the budget because actual revenues are less than the revenue estimate an appropriation was based on. The legislature could then reconsider that appropriation.

“This is a power that I expect would be rarely used,” Richardson tells the committee. “It’s no different than the power that we have over the governor making a line-item veto in the budget.”

Representatives Mike Colona (left) and Jeremy LaFaver confer before voting on the resolution. (photo courtesy; Tim Bommel, House Communications)

Representatives Mike Colona (left) and Jeremy LaFaver confer before voting on the resolution. (photo courtesy; Tim Bommel, House Communications)

Representative Mike Colona (D-St. Louis City) told Richardson he was concerned the proposal would have unintended consequences. He asked Richardson what would happen if a legislature appropriates money based on projections that turn out to be too high.

“How does this address that,” Colona asks, “Because what I envision is … I gotta call a special session of the legislature to come in and in essence to a supplemental budget to fix it.”

Richardson told Colona the proposal would not take away any of a governor’s authority to withhold money in a budget.

“In the situation that you describe,” he tells Colona, “I would trust that there would not be a two-thirds majority of the general assembly that would override the governor’s decision in that case.”

Colona remains unconvinced. He tells Missourinet, “We’ve had a budgetary process that has worked for decades. If we throw a monkey wrench in there, who knows about the unintended consequences? I’m not about to take that risk.”

The resolution did get one “yes” vote from a Democrat. Representative Jeremy LaFaver (D-Kansas City) told the committee he liked the idea.

“The legislative branch is where I think the power should be,” he told Richardson.

The proposal would also stipulate that the governor could not reduce appropriations for the payment of public debt.

If approved by the legislature it would go on the November ballot.

 

Right to farm amendment goes to the people (AUDIO)

By

Missourians will have a chance to decide if farmers should have a constitutional right to do what they’re doing.    The legislature has sent them the so-called “Right to Farm” amendment.   

Representative Bill Reiboldt (photo courtesy; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

Representative Bill Reiboldt has carried a right to farm proposal for three years in the House. (photo courtesy; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

The movement to create the amendment was triggered by the “Puppy Mill” petition campaign putting limits on pet breeders.  Voters approved the puppy breeding law but the legislature immediately changed it, saying it needed to be more practical.   Regulation of pet breeders is handled by the state agriculture department.                                             

The original proposals would have prohibited petition efforts such as Proposition B creating agricultural laws, but that idea has been removed.  St. Louis Senator Scott Sifton thinks that’s the most important change made in the three years of work on the bill.

“What’s most important to me is…that the power of the people to check the legislature on that subject matter and any other agriculture subject matter is not something I do not  want to see taken away from them,” he says.

The proposal also retains the right of local governments to pass ordinances on zoning, health, and environmental issues., The original proposal would have eliminated that local government authority.

Early versions of the proposal also dealt with the abilities of local governments to pass ordinances and laws restricting farming. The legislature finally agreed on a compromise that says the amendment would not interfere with rights afforded local governments elsewhere in the Constitution.

Desloge Representative Linda Black says what is going to voters deals more directly with the right to farm.

“We had kind of gotten bogged down in the House on petition issues, trying to put protective language in that resolution … I think that the compromise that was struck leaves out any language for petitions but it does kind of soften the ability for local municipalities and counties to implement ordinances that enforce any kind of laws that have to do with livestock or agriculture.”

Black says the proposal will also extend protection to urban farming.

The Missouri Farm Bureau is one of the groups that has pushed for a right to farm amendment. President Blake Hurst says his group was comfortable with the language dealing with local control issues being removed, but they still want the state’s initiative petition process to be addressed.

AUDIO: Senate Debate 31:04