Capitol Report- Bills for 2009

By Alison Schneider
The Missouri House worked hard to clear the decks as they neared the end of the first session on May 15th. They did manage to approve the fiscal year 2010 state budget just 24 hours before the May 8th Constitutional deadline and after the usual give and take. The $23.1 billion budget appropriates money to state agencies and offices of elected officials. In addition, the passed bills set out a spending plan for the federal stimulus money the state will be receiving. High on the priority list is how to ease the burdens of the Missouri taxpayer, how to “kick start” the economy, and of course – how to spend that money.
The main points garnering attention as the session came to a close included a statewide intercommunication system for law enforcement agencies, improvements to Ellis Fischel Cancer Center, and improvements, restoration and repair to the St. Louis Metro system. The Missouri Department of Economic Development will receive some $12 million for upgrades and construction of facilities that help develop markets for Missouri products and the state’s universities will receive a boost for improvement of their facilities.
Here are some of the “meatier” bills that received attention in the last weeks:
HB 64 & 545, offered by Representative Smith (R-Salem) is a plan to raise the dependency exemption for each qualified child from $1,200 to $2,100. The version of the bill contained in the legislation passed by the House would raise the exemption to $1,600 per dependent. Rep. Smith points out that neighboring states have higher exemptions and that Missouri’s dependency exemption hasn’t been changed since 1998. This bill will also alter the state tax codes to provide relief to the majority of Missouri taxpayers.
Under the current codes, all Missourians earning in excess of $9,000 annually are taxed at a flat rate of $315 plus 6 percent of excess income over $9,000. Under the HB 64 $ 545 the tax code would be changed so that workers earning between $8,001 and $50,000 would be taxed at a lower flat rate of $260 plus 5 ½ percent. For Missourians making more than $50,000 annually the tax code would be changed to a flat rate of $2570 plus 6 percent.
In addition, the bill would raise the maximum amount of federal taxes that Missourians can deduct. The bill would increase the federal tax deduction for the individual income tax from $5,000 to $7,500 for single taxpayers and from $10,000 to $15,000 for married taxpayers.
“This is a major tax relief plan that would mean significant savings for most families living and working here in Missouri. Some might say we can’t do this during tough economic times but I believe that is exactly when Missourians need it most.” says Smith. “The boost we will see to our economy by allowing Missourians to keep more of their dollars will offset anything we may lose by reducing the revenues generated by our income tax.”
The original proposal was a only a two-year plan, but the House Speaker Pro Tem Pratt (R-Blue Springs) tacked on an amendment calling for the reduction to be permanent and the House passed the bill as presented. Don’t start planning what to do with the extra cash just yet, however, as there is expected opposition in the Missouri Senate, and further when it hits Governor Nixon’s desk.
HB 22 was the big boy of the session. It’s a heftily written, multi-inclusive bill utilizing some $600,596,774 of mostly federal stimulus funds that’s been bouncing around the House and Senate all session. It’s been submitted, withdrawn, rewritten, and resubmitted several times since its inception. Initial voting indicated the mammoth spending bill would pass, but it received a resounding “no” vote from the House earlier this month after a group of dissenters picked up steam enough to sway the vote. Their feelings were that it was a “vehicle for localized pet projects” and some Representatives felt that the money would be better saved for next year. Don’t be concerned, though – because a week later, the lawmakers retooled it, put it up for reconsideration and passed it on the Senate floor by a vote of 117-42.
HB 22 is a complicated, wide spanning bill listing a large variety of projects to be funded by federal stimulus provided for state use. The projects listed include $12 million to the St. Louis Metro System, $111 million to state law enforcement agencies to upgrade a statewide communications system, and $312 million for the Ellis Fischel Cancer Center in Columbia. Some other benefactors of the bill are $86 million allocated to the Missouri State University system for a variety of projects on several campuses over the next two years and $46 million for Ethanol production incentive projects. There’s a sizable amount allocated to the Division of Natural Resources to support state parks and historical buildings, and allocations to medical care in the areas of pediatrics, home-bound, and elderly services. The bill is expected to be signed by Governor Jay Nixon later this month.
HB 1393 was also on the docket for this past session is legislation modifying Missouri’s motorcycle helmet law. The bill would allow those 21 and older to ride without helmets on all Missouri roads except interstate highways. The House gave the bill final approval Wednesday on a vote of 93-65 after t making it past the Senate earlier by a 94-52 vote.
Proposals to repeal the mandatory helmet law have been a pretty hot topic in the past. But surprisingly, this year’s measure, to simply modify the law, received little debate in either chamber. No real debate here as economic studies estimate tourism dollars will increase an additional $3 million by repealing the helmet provisions and that there is no negative effect on state funding.
Supporters of Missouri’s existing helmet law say the protective headgear keeps motorcyclists safer during a potentially dangerous activity. But motorcycle enthusiasts contend it’s more fun to ride without a helmet. Their argument is that the state should not be allowed to dictate when it comes to personal choice issues. The bill still needs to be approved by the Governor before it becomes law, though – so make sure you cover your melon if you’re out on your bike.
SB 140 & 141 are a pair of bills sponsored by Sen. Jeff Smith, (D-St. Louis) that address child support and paternity. The bills give men a longer grace period to catch up on child support payments or to prove they are not the parent of the child in question. The bills provide courts with the discretion to refer non-custodial parents not paying child support to job training or drug treatment programs rather than to prison. They also provide for named ‘fathers’ to have two years to challenge paternity judgments with DNA tests.
Representative Smith stated that the “fathering courts” in Jackson County already have allowed roughly 500 people to pay nearly $3 million in child-support payments since 1998. The bill would allow these courts to be expanded statewide. If the court-ordered treatment or job training is completed successfully, the parent in question could have their sentences for failing to pay child support reduced or even dismissed.
The idea behind this training or treatment program is that once you have incarcerated a parent for non-payment of support, it is insured that there will not be any payment – they can’t pay if they can’t work. This legislation would presumably get them back in the work force and providing for their children monetarily, easing the state’s burden for prosecution and incarceration costs along with state aided child support. The MO Department of Corrections estimates that if all criminal nonsupport offenders participated in this program instead of being incarcerated, the state could save up to $1.5 million in prison costs.
Also addressed in this legislation is a change to the “in default” The bill also changes the level at which non payments becomes a felony. Current laws require that the parent must owe in excess of $5000 or have failed to make 6 payments over a 12 month period. The new legislation requires that the parent must owe more than 12 month’s worth of ordered payments to qualify as felonious delinquency.
Further, these bills would allow for men to challenge a paternity judgment with a DNA test. Under current legislation, a named father has a year to contest a paternity judgment, after which his name automatically goes on the child’s birth certificate and he is required legally to pay child support. Under this legislation men may challenge paternity judgements already in place with DNA testing until December 31, 2011. After that date, judgements would have to be challenged within two years of the ruling date.
If the DNA test showed the named father is not indeed the father of the child, he would be excused of any previous child-support debt and would have criminal nonsupport convictions, if any, removed from his record and his name would be removed from the child’s birth certificate. The petitioner of the test would be required to pay $150 of the costs of the testing with the remainder of the costs being covered by federal funds.
Smith said the petitioner would have to pay about a third of the roughly $150 cost for a DNA test. A federal subsidy would cover the rest. While the person is relieved of any future child support, prior payments made in satisfaction of judgement will not be recouped.
A few of the other bills passed on for Governor Jay Nixon’s approval are:
HB 316 which changes the laws regarding the Open Meetings and Records Law, commonly known as the Sunshine Law. This bill passed the House by a vote of 158 to 0.
HJR 11 proposes a constitutional amendment guaranteeing a citizen’s First Amendment right to pray on public property and reaffirming every citizen’s right to choose their own religion (or the right not to choose a religion at all). If passed by the Senate, this proposal would be placed on the 2010 ballot.
HJR 17, which proposes a constitutional amendment delaying repayment to the Budget Reserve Fund for three fiscal years.
HB 426, which establishes the Large Carnivore Act. This Act regulates the ownership, possession, transportation and breeding of large carnivores…specifically any cat of the Felidae family which is not a native to Missouri and is held in captivity excluding common domestic house cats. Basically, mountain lions, tigers and bobcats or any other predatory wild cat is not allowed to be kept as a pet.
HB 152, which requires that any person 17 years old or older arrested for burglary, second degree burglary or any felony must provide a biological sample upon being booked for the crime for purposes of DNA analysis.
HB 668 is a pretty controversial bill (sponsored by Rep. Kenny Jones, R- Clarksburg) that allows for concealed weapons on college campuses as well as lowers the minimum age for a concealed weapons permit to 21. Further, the bill specifies that deadly force may be used against a person unlawfully entering private property by the person who owns or leases the property. The owner or lessee does not have any duty or responsibility to retreat or avoid confrontation.
HB 82, which authorizes an individual income tax deduction for 15% of any military retirement income which increases by 15% annually until 2016 when once it’s fully phased in.
HB 111 honors our veterans by allowing unclaimed cremated remains of veterans to be collected by a veterans’ service organization for the purpose of internment.
HB 236, which establishes “Kaitlin’s Law” requiring school districts to allow certain students with disabilities to participate in graduation ceremonies after four years of high school attendance regardless of requirements being met. This is a “common sense” piece of legislation that recognizes those students that might not be mentally or physically able to complete state and local graduation requirements, but have performed at the best of their individual abilities. This does present a problem for school districts, however, as it’s a bit of a conflict with the federal No Child Left Behind legislation.
HJR 37, which proposes a constitutional amendment guaranteeing the right to vote by secret ballot for all public offices, initiatives and referendums and employee matters.
HCS SCS SBs 36 & 112, which modifies provisions relating to sexual offenses against children.
Now, it’s a “sit and wait” summer as the legislators watch for the Governor to sign their offerings and put them into action before his deadline on July 14th and then look forward to the veto session begins on September 16th.