Missourinet

Your source for Missouri News and Sports

You are here: Home / Archives for Stacey Newman

State legislature asks voters to consider stronger gun rights

By

The state legislature is asking Missouri voters whether the Constitution should be changed to provide a stronger right to bear arms.

The legislature has sent to the November ballot a proposal to define the right to bear arms in Missouri as “unalienable” and to require the state to defend any infringement of that right. It would also guarantee a constitutional right to defend one’s family with a firearm.

The proposal cleared the state Senate 23-8 on Wednesday after the House passed it 122-31 the day before.

Representative Jay Barnes (R-Jefferson City) says he’s opposed past proposals that he thought would have put gun rights above other rights, but this is different.

“It ensures that Second Amendment rights, by subjecting government regulations impacting them to strict scrutiny,” says Barnes, referring to a form of judicial review used by courts to determine the constitutionality of certain laws, “is given the same protection afforded every other fundamental right in the United States’ and the Missouri Constitution.”

The ballot issue would also remove wording in the Missouri Constitution that say the right to bear arms does not justify wearing concealed weapons. Representative Linda Black (D-Desloge) says that brings to the Constitution up to date.

“Several years ago we passed that conceal and carry law, that we have the right to carry after completing sufficient course,” says Black. “So, it is something that needs to be changed. It’s inaccurate in our Constitution. It’s an error at this point in time that needs to be fixed.”

Representative Stacey Newman (D-St. Louis) thinks the changes would hinder the prosecution of criminals that use guns.

“Current law allows those city prosecutors to file criminal charges for those who ignore the law,” says Newman, “and yet this resolution takes that tool away.”

The language for the November ballots reads, “Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to include a declaration that the right to keep and bear arms is an unalienable right and that the state government is obligated to uphold that right?”

House early voting proposal advances to Senate on bipartisan vote

By

A proposed constitutional amendment to set an early voting period has passed the House with bipartisan support, despite some Democrats decrying the measure as a “sham” and misleading to voters.

Representative Tony Dugger (photo courtesy; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

Representative Tony Dugger (photo courtesy; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

It would allow nine days of early voting excluding Sundays ending the week before federal and state elections beginning with the 2016 General Election.

Representative Stacey Newman (D-St. Louis) asks if the bill is only meant to be a counter proposal by Republicans to an initiative petition that if passed would allow early voting for six weeks and require accommodation of voters on Saturday and Sunday for three weeks before federal or state elections.

“The question that pops in my mind is why is the most popular day of voting across the country … a Sunday, why is that purposely excluded in this amendment?” Newman asks. “The very day that men and women of every stripe, of every profession, the day that most working voters have off.”

“I’m telling you beware,” Newman says, “this is political attempt once again to convince us that the majority party here actually cares about increasing access to voters.”

Of the claim that his legislation is a “sham,” Representative Tony Dugger (R-Hartville) says, “I don’t think so. I mean, it’s clear what I’m doing.”

Dugger says Sundays during the early voting window were exempted to preserve it as a day off for those who would have to work if early voting continued on that day.

“Sunday is basically a day for families to get together. A lot of people attend church on Sunday, get together for lunch,” Dugger tells Missourinet. “We would literally be forcing thousands of people to go to work on Sunday because you’re going to have to have the Secretary of State’s Office open, you’re going to have to have every election authority’s office open in the state plus every [early voting] center.”

The proposed amendment was passed 126-24. It moves on ot to the Senate.

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 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.

School threat bill hearing includes criticism of TV station involved HS lockdown

By

A proposal that would make it a crime to cause a school to go on lockdown stems from an incident January 16, when a reporter for St. Louis TV Station KSDK triggered a lockdown at Kirkwood High School.

Kirkwood Superintendent Tom Williams (left) testifies in favor of legislation sponsored by representative Stacey Newman (right).

Kirkwood Superintendent Tom Williams (left) testifies in favor of legislation sponsored by representative Stacey Newman (right).

Kirkwood School District and City officials have testified in favor of that bill at a House Committee hearing.

The lockdown happened when a KSDK reporter doing a story on school security entered the High School, signed in, asked to use the bathroom but then went a different direction in the hallway.

Kirkwood Superintendent Tom Williams says the man never identified himself as a reporter and only signed in with a name and phone number, as is the school’s normal procedure. When staff thought the man acted suspiciously they called the number he left. The man said he was a reporter, but the station wouldn’t confirm his story. Williams says that is when the school went on lockdown.

“After two hours … the news station finally called to verify that the individual was actually working on an assignment for KSDK.”

The station that night ran a story about breaches in the school’s security.

“We acknowledge that we made mistakes. We acknowledge that we had some breakdowns and some flaws in our security procedures,” says Williams. “However the action of KSDK was dangerous and very inappropriate, especially in today’s environment.”

Representative Brandon Ellington (D-Kansas City) challenged Williams’ assessment that the reporter was at fault.

“A gentleman walked into a building, walked around the building and left the building and the school had no procedures in place to stop that individual from coming into the school,” says Ellington. “It seems like we want to pass a bill to stop people from exposing holes in a system when there shouldn’t be holes in that system.”

Representative John McCaherty (R-High Ridge) says whether the reporter was right or wrong and whether the school has “holes” in its security are not the issues.

“The reality of it is,” says McCaherty, “that [the reporter] put children, teachers, himself and possibly police officers in danger by what he did.”

Kirkwood Police Chief Jack Plummer asked legislators to understand how seriously he viewed the situation.

“Quite frankly if we’d have confronted [the reporter] on the campus and he’d have made any kind of movements that my people would have determined to be threatening, we’d have killed him.”

A parent of a Kirkwood High School junior, Jennifer Wilton, told lawmakers the incident was “terrifying” for her and other parents.

“It’s not the job of the news media to test security systems,” says Wilton. “I also don’t think it’s their place to manufacture the news.”

The legislation (HB 1522), sponsored by Representative Stacey Newman (D-St. Louis) would make the actions of that reporter on January 16 a felony. It would make it a crime for a person to make a threat to the security of a building or public school by making a false report that jeopardizes security procedures or knowingly causing a false belief or fear that triggers initiation of security procedures. It also makes it a crime to expose the internal security procedures of a building or public school.

The School Administrators Association, the Missouri National Education Association, the Missouri School Board Association, the American Federation of Teachers, the Missouri State Teachers Association and the Cooperating School Districts of Greater St. Louis all testified in favor of the legislation.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Missouri testified against the bill and cited concerns that its language could restrict an individual’s freedom of speech based on the actions of another entity. ACLU lobbyist Jay Hardenbrook said his organization would work with the sponsor to change that wording.

House gives initial approval to ‘conscience rights for medical workers’ bill

By

The House has given first round approval to legislation meant to allow medical workers in Missouri refuse to participate in certain procedures including abortion, human cloning and stem cell research if they have a religious or moral objection to them.

Majority Floor Leader Tim Jones (left) and Representative Stacey Newman. (photos courtesy, Missouri House Communications)

House Speaker Tim Jones (left) and Representative Stacey Newman. (photos courtesy, Missouri House Communications)

House Speaker Tim Jones (R-Eureka) says his bill has been tightened up from previous years to define what it means not to participate, to specify what medical professionals it would apply to and what procedures those professionals could decline to provide. 

The chamber voted 116-38 to move the bill one step closer to going to the Senate where it failed last year. 10 House Democrats voted with Republicans to advance the proposal, with one Republican voting against it.

See Jones’ legislation, HB 1430

Democrats speaking against the bill said it would allow the government to interfere in the decisions of women regarding their healthcare. Representative Stacey Newman (D-St. Louis) told a colleague, “To be clear, this is just one more vagina-specific bill in an election year that is designed to hurt women.”

Jones says Newman hasn’t read the bill.

“This is not a women-only bill. This is a human kind bill, because the procedures talk about human cloning. Well, that can be men or women. Human embryonic stem cell research … men or women; humans. Human somatic cell nuclear transfer, fetal tissue research: those issues involve men and women. They involve people. They involve children yet to be here.”

One more favorable vote would send the legislation to the Senate.

Proposed background check extension, other gun bills back in front of lawmakers

By

A state representative is part of an effort in 11 states by state lawmakers who want to close what they see as a loophole in gun laws, that allows a person to buy a gun at a gun show or online without submitting to a background check.

Representative Stacey Newman (D-St. Louis County) is active in several groups that propose tougher gun control laws. Her bill to extend the background check requirements was not given a legislative hearing in the 2013 session. Newman says she will file that bill early in the new session and is hoping for better results.

She says more than 90 percent of Americans support universal background checks and a poll in 2013 shows more than 80 percent of Missourians back them.

“I will be putting some pressure on (House Speaker Tim Jones),” says Newman. “People deserve to at least have a public hearing.”

Newman says the bill has had good results in Colorado, where it became law last year.

“They’ve already had some sales that have been blocked because the buyer was either convicted or charged with a serious crime. We know that background checks work and we believe that we need to do those in Missouri.”

Newman says she’s also preparing to oppose legislation that would block enforcement in Missouri of federal gun laws that has been filed by Senator Brian Nieves (R-Washington) and waiting to see what the gun bill Senator Ron Richard (R-Joplin) has said he will file will propose.

Senator Maria Chappelle-Nadal (D-University City) has filed two bills that would make it a crime to allow a child to have a gun in violation of state laws regarding weapons offenses, to fail to securely store a gun resulting in a child gaining access to it, and requires parents to tell their children’s school if they own a firearm.

House gives initial approval to two gun bills (AUDIO)

By

On the same day the U.S. Senate rejected an expansion of background checks for gun purchases, the Missouri House of Representatives has advanced two gun rights bills.

A bill (HB 170) sponsored by Rep. Casey Guernsey (R-Bethany) would make laws passed after Jan. 1, 2013 that ban, restrict ownership or require registration of a gun or magazine unenforceable in Missouri and would make it a Class D felony to attempt to enforce them.

A separate measure (HB 436) sponsored by Rep. Doug Funderburk (R-St. Peters) would make any law that infringes on the right to bear arms under the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution invalid according to state law.

Guernsey says of his bill it is one he never thought he’d have to sponsor.

“We as a legislative body in Missouri are going to have to put ourselves between the citizens of Missouri and the federal government when it comes to one of our most basic, fundamental, constitutional rights, that of our Second Amendment rights to keep and bear arms,” Guernsey said.

Rep. Stacey Newman (D-St. Louis) said Guernsey’s bill is unconstitutional.

“You talk to any lawyer that’s standing here … they’ll tell you that this bill basically benefits the trial lawyers,” Newman said. “It just gives them something else to contest in court because we all know that this bill is not going to hold any muster.”

Supporters and opponents of the bills expressed outrage at various parts of one another’s arguments. Rep. Margo McNeil (D-Florissant) cited incidents of gun violence.

“I feel that what is really outrageous is 20 children killed in Sandy Hook [Conn.] not too long ago, and six adults,” she said. “What is outrageous is 61 mass shootings since Columbine [Colo.] in 1999. What is outrageous is 17 bullets in one six-year-old’s body. That’s what’s outrageous.”

AUDIO:  McNeil’s floor remarks (1:42)

Rep. Paul Curtman (R-Pacific) countered by saying it is outrageous that state or federal lawmakers would try to infringe on Missourians’ Second Amendment rights.

“If you were to go back in time 230-some years and look at a dictionary, the word ‘infringe’ would say something along the lines of ‘to corrupt’ or ‘to corrode,’ so anything that the federal government does to restrict the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, in fact, an infringement, and therefore unconstitutional,” he said.

AUDIO:  Curtman’s floor remarks (3:27)

An amendment was adopted on Funderburk’s bill that would allow school districts to designate school protection officers. These would be teachers or administrators that would be allowed to carry concealed guns on school grounds. It was sponsored by Rep. Rick Brattin (R-Harrisonville).

“They would have to have a valid concealed carry weapons permit and also go through post-commission training … basically police officer training … this is a way of protecting our schools and our children where it matters most, at our most vulnerable areas of our society,” Brattin said.

Brattin’s proposal drew more response from Newman, who tweeted, “It’s NRA night in MO House. What’s next? Arming kids?”

Other provisions between the two bills would lower the age to be eligible to apply for a concealed carry weapons permit from 21 to 19 and allow permit holders to open carry, bar the publishing of gun owner lists, prevent medical practitioners from asking gun ownership status of patients and exempt individuals from federal background checks in private gun transactions.

Both packages would advance to the Senate with another favorable vote.

House approves conscience rights for medical workers legislation

By

The House has passed its version of legislation to redefine what medical workers can choose not to do based on conscience.

House Speaker Tim Jones (photo courtesy; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

House Speaker Tim Jones (photo courtesy; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

The House version of conscience rights for medical workers legislation is sponsored by House Speaker Tim Jones (R-Eureka). He says the bill strengthens the definitions of the medical procedures it allows workers to opt out of.

“Abortion, abortion-inducing drugs, contraception, sterilization which is not medically necessary, assisted reproduction, human cloning, embryonic stem cell research, human somatic cell nuclear transfer, fetal tissue research and nontheraputic fetal experimentation. That’s it. If it’s not in the bill, it’s not included and you can’t use it as the basis for your objection to that medical procedure.”

Read the legislation, HB 457.

Jones says the bill could not be used to deny a woman access to emergency contraception in cases of rape. He says he has been assured, that is in keeping with Catholic doctrine.

“If it’s a rape then the idea is, under the doctrinal theory, that a pregnancy has not yet occurred so the drugs can be administered so the act of the pregnancy cannot occur with that short of a period of time, if you’re talking about the rape situation … I was told that directly from the Catholic authority. They showed me the directive.”

Several House Democrats speaking against the bill maintained it would deny emergency contraception.

Representative Stacey Newman (D-St. Louis) has opposed versions of this legislation in the past, and says this version causes her even greater concern.

“Remember the original bill was a conscience bill … that would allow any medical professional, any medical entity to refuse treatment for religious reasons. Because it had trouble in committee, this bill was narrowed to just deal with reproductive health … just deal with women.”

Jones tells the House his bill also specifically defines when a medical worker can and can not claim a conscience protection right.

The proposal goes to the Senate on a 116-41 vote, a great enough margin to overturn a Governor’s veto if no legislators change their votes.  11 Democrats voted for the bill.

House Committee approves voter photo ID proposal (AUDIO)

By

The House Elections Committee has advanced a proposed law to require photo identification to vote.

Representative Stacey Newman (left) inquires Representative Stanley Cox (right) about his voter photo ID proposal.

Representative Stacey Newman (left) inquires Representative Stanley Cox (right) about his voter photo ID proposal.

Opponents of the measure often ask why it would be necessary, saying no instances of voter fraud at the polls has been recorded in Missouri. Its sponsor, Representative Stanley Cox (R-Sedalia), says that doesn’t mean people aren’t getting away with it.

“My position is it’s clearly an issue, because if you’re not going to cheat on election day, why do you do all of this other fraud of registration fraud, which is extremely commonly proved and exists … so when we know that people are doing that, there must be a reason. People do things for a logical reason. They do it to cast an illegal vote.”

Representative Stacey Newman (D-St. Louis County) says requiring a photo ID to vote is unconstitutional and would disenfranchise certain voting groups.

She asks Cox during the committee hearing, “If there is one person in the state of Missouri who is legally qualified to vote and could no longer vote because of this bill, is this bill justified?”

Cox maintains, “It won’t happen.”

The bill is tied to a proposed constitutional amendment which must be passed first by the legislature, then voters, in order for the bill to take effect.  It must go through the House rules committee before reaching the full chamber for debate.

AUDIO:  Representative Stacey Newman inquires Representative Stanley Cox on HB 216, 14:24