Missourinet

Your source for Missouri News and Sports

You are here: Home / Archives for Tony Dugger

Legislature offers voters an early voting ballot measure

By

The state legislature has sent voters a proposal to allow six business days of early voting before general elections. The proposal cleared the House on Wednesday, a day after it was approved in the Senate.

Representative Tony Dugger (R-Hartville) sponsored the early voting proposal in the House. (photo courtesy; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

Representative Tony Dugger (R-Hartville) sponsored the early voting proposal in the House. (photo courtesy; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

The proposal would change the Missouri Constitution to allow voters to mail in ballots or vote in-person during business hours. Early voting would end on the Wednesday before the election.

Democrats in the House say the proposal is a “sham,” and say it is only meant to distract voters in November from a less restricted form of early voting outlined in an initiative petition that is pending with the Secretary of State. Secretary of State Jason Kander (D) has offered similar criticism.

The plan would not require local election authorities to offer early voting if no money is included in the annual state operating budget to reimburse them for it. Democrats are also critical of that provision, saying it allows future legislatures to block early voting by denying such an appropriation.

Republicans defend the plan as a legitimate early voting proposal that would not put a financial burden on local election authorities.

House votes to move primary elections to June

By

The Missouri House has approved a bill that would move the state’s primary elections for Congress, the state legislature and statewide elected offices to June. The proposal now goes to the Senate.

Supporters say the change would allow more time for candidates to raise money ahead of general elections. Opponents argued it was purely political and would cause more campaigning to take place while lawmakers are still at work during legislative session.

The proposal passed only after Republicans convinced many members to switch their votes. It had been failing 60-89 at one point before turning around to the final 84-67 vote. At least 82 votes are needed to pass legislation out of the House.

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 sends voter photo ID bill, proposed constitutional amendment to Senate

By

The state House has passed legislation aimed at requiring voters in Missouri to have photo identification to vote.

With party-line votes the House approved a proposed change to Missouri’s Constitution (HJR 47) necessary to allow the photo ID bill to become law, along with the bill (HB 1073). The proposed amendment would go to voters in November. If voters reject that issue the bill would become null.  The measures were sponsored by Representatives Stanley Cox (R-Sedalia) and Tony Dugger (R-Hartville), respectively.

Both items now go to the Senate for consideration.

The bill would require a person wishing to vote display to election officials a valid Missouri driver’s or non-driver’s license, military identification or any unexpired ID that is issued by the United States or Missouri that has that voter’s photo and signature.

Republicans say the bill is needed to prevent voting fraud. Democrats argue the legislation is intended to keep certain populations from voting.

See earlier stories on this issue.

House gives initial approval to voter photo ID

By

The state House has given initial approval to legislation aimed at requiring voters in Missouri to have photo identification at the polls on election day.

Representative Tony Dugger (R-Hartville) and Representative Stanley Cox (R-Sedalia) offer the voter photo ID bill and the proposed constitutional amendment that would allow it to become law, respectively. (photos courtesy, Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

Representative Tony Dugger (R-Hartville) and Representative Stanley Cox (R-Sedalia) offer the voter photo ID bill and the proposed constitutional amendment that would allow it to become law, respectively. (photos courtesy, Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

One piece is a proposed change to the state Constitution that would allow the other piece, the voter photo ID bill, to become law. The legislature passed such a requirement several years ago but it was ruled unconstitutional, which is why supporters want to now change the Constitution to allow it to become law. The fact that such a change would be necessary is one of the arguments made by opponents against its passage.

Representative Chris Kelly (D-Columbia) told a Republican supporter of the legislation it is based on false arguments.

“The real purpose of this is to keep older black women from voting, but your purpose is to cure voter impersonation fraud.”

As Democrats have done in years past, Kelly challenged Republicans to provide evidence of at least one case of voter identification fraud having happened in Missouri. They did not offer such evidence.

Democrats argue that many older black women for various reasons might not be able to obtain the source documents needed for them to acquire photo IDs.

Representative Kevin Engler (R-Farmington) says that argument is insulting to such women.

Engler tells a fellow Republican, “For these districts’ [representatives] in urban and the St. Louis area to say their women are too dumb … they can’t get IDs, ‘They’re smart enough to decide whether to have an abortion or not. We want them to have that decision, but they’re not smart enough to get an ID.’ How callous is that?”

Another favorable vote will send the voter photo ID proposals to the Senate. The proposed constitutional change would require voter approval if it clears the legislature.

The legislation is HB 1073 and the proposed constitutional amendment is HJR 47.

House advances voter photo ID bill, constitutional change

By

The state House is one vote away from sending the Senate a voter photo ID bill and the change in the state constitution that would allow it to become law.

Representatives Tony Dugger and Stanley Cox (photos courtesy; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications.)

Representatives Tony Dugger and Stanley Cox (photos courtesy; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications.)

House lawmakers’ emotions ran the gamut during hours of debate on Wednesday. Democrats say passing the measures into law would disenfranchise about 250,000 Missouri voters including minorities, the elderly, women and the military.

Representative Chris Kelly (D-Columbia) made an emotional argument against the proposals.

“Jim Crow is alive in this room today. This is the single most immoral act that I’ve ever seen happen in my time in the general assembly.”

The legislation laying out how voter photo ID would work, sponsored by Representative Tony Dugger (R-Hartville), was advanced 106-48. A proposed constitutional amendment sponsored by Representative Stanley Cox (R-Sedalia) to make the requirement for voter photo ID was perfected 108-46. Two Democrats, Vicki Englund (St. Louis) and Ira Anders (Independence) who voted against the bill voted for the proposed amendment. If both pass the legislature, the latter would go before Missouri voters.

Representative Genise Montecillo (D-St. Louis County) said those who voted yes would have to answer to constituents.

“Every one of you will have constituents who will have their constitutional right to vote taken from them with this bill. I envy you even less going home and explaining it to your families, your children, your grandchildren. Most of all I don’t envy you having to explain it to your maker when you meet your maker.”

Representative Noel Torpey (R-Independence) responded to Montecillo’s comment.

“If I’m going to hell, it’s not because of the vote I take today.”

Republicans say the law won’t disenfranchise anyone and will prevent voter fraud. It exempts anyone 65 and older and allows those who come to a polling place without a photo ID to cast a provisional ballot.

A vote to pass the legislation out of the House is expected to take place today.

House Committee hears voter photo ID proposal

By

The House Elections Committee has heard more than two hours of testimony against legislation to require Missouri voters to show photo identification at the polls.

Representative Tony Dugger presents his voter photo ID bill to the House Elections Committee. (Photo courtesy; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications.)

Representative Tony Dugger presents his voter photo ID bill to the House Elections Committee. (Photo courtesy; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications.)

The bill, House Bill 48, is accompanied by a proposed constitutional change, HJR5 that would allow the bill to become law after the Supreme Court declared a 2006 photo ID law unconstitutional. That means if the proposal clears the legislature it would go before Missouri voters.

The sponsor of both proposals, Rep. Tony Dugger (R-Hartville) says he files the legislation out of concern for the potential for fraud.

“In the 14 years that I was county clerk, every time that you would mail these voter ID cards out, I would get someone who would come into my office and bring me some cards and say, ‘These got delivered to my mailbox. I have no idea who they are,'” he says. “They don’t know who they are but their cards ended up in their mailbox, and it happens in every election. There’s just that chance out there that somebody could take that card, and that’s a form of ID that could currently be used … and vote with it.”

Dugger says there is no reason for someone to commit voter registration fraud if they don’t intend to commit voter fraud.  His bill would allow anyone who can not produce proper ID at a polling place to cast a provisional ballot. Secretary of State spokesman John Scott says that’s not good enough.

“In the 2012 election on ly 25 percent of provisional ballots were counted, so to say that you aren’t disenfranchising eligible Missourians because you will offer a provisional ballot doesn’t necessarily line up with the facts,” Scott says.

Rep. Stacey Newman (D-St. Louis) says she believes Scott’s bill was written by the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), a conservative organization known for writing model legislation.

She told Dugger, “If this had some merit, I don’t understand why some of your own party colleagues are now saying, after the November election, that this was designed to prevent people from voting.”

Rep. Brandon Ellington (D-Kansas City) testified against the bill, saying this measure and bills like it in other states have been filed in response to the election of President Barack Obama.

“We’ve seen these new, restrictive laws after 2008, which in my opinion shows a biasness [sic] in American society when we have a president of color and all of a sudden we’re questioning the legitimacy of people’s votes,” he says. “We never questioned the legitimacy of people’s votes in 2000 when Florida had they’re imbalances in they’re voting procedures, but all of a sudden we want to have these restrictive voter ID laws.”

Rep. Stanley Cox (R-Sedalia) said he was “perplexed” by Ellington’s testimony.

“I have never seen a state representative come to a committee … accuse the proponent of this bill of essentially racism,” Cox says.

Cox told Ellington he owed Dugger an apology.

Opponents of photo voter ID in Missouri say it would disenfranchise 250,00 people. Cox says that number is misleading.

He asked Scott, “Is it recognized that our voter rolls are hyper inflated with people that don’t exist, throughout our state? Dead people … there are at least four counties in this state that have more registered voters than people live in those counties, is that correct?”

Scott disagreed, to which Cox added, “OK, and so to match those figures is a meaningless fact.”

No one testified to the committee in favor of the two proposals. The committee has not voted on them.