Representative Maria Chappelle-NadalDistrict 72
Voters will be faced with a plethora of amendments and propositions this November 4th. I am hopeful that the following information will ease some confusion and encourage further citizen engagement and investigation. While many citizens are concerned about national outcomes, each voter needs to appropriate time in their schedule to consider ballot initiatives that will impact them in their own backyards and potentially in their daily lives.
STATE PROPOSITIONS* Proposition A: "The Schools First Elementary and Secondary Education Funding Initiative"* The provisions of Prop A include:* Repealing the existing loss limit and preventing the Missouri Gaming Commission from imposing any future loss limit. (This wouldn't prevent the General Assembly from passing a future law re-imposing the limit, but the expectation is that if the limit is repealed it is unlikely to ever be reinstated.)* Prohibiting requiring casino patrons to use tracking cards in order to gamble.* Capping the number of casino licenses in Missouri at 13, thus prohibiting any future casinos from being built unless an existing facility closes. (The General Assembly, of course, could still pass a law to raise or eliminate the cap but doing so would likely encounter strong political resistance from social conservatives.)* Increasing the gross receipts tax on casinos to 21 percent from the current 20. (Hiking the gross receipts tax had been a standard part of past loss-limit-repeal bills before the legislature, but at a higher rate of 22 or 23 percent.)* Establishing a special fund earmarking the additional gaming tax revenue raised by the proposal for education. (Even without this provision, the money would still be earmarked for education pursuant to Article III, Section 39d of the Missouri Constitution.)* Changing the state's education funding formula in an attempt to ensure that the additional tax revenue earmarked for education isn't offset by a reduction in general revenue funds currently spent on education.* The fiscal note on Prop A estimates it would generate between $110 million and $137 million a year in additional revenue for the state and up to $19 million a year in new revenue for local governments that have a casino in their jurisdictions.
Supporters say the loss limit costs casinos money ?and state revenue ?by driving Missourians to casinos in neighboring states, none of which have limits, and making Missouri casinos unattractive to high-stakes gamblers. The additional revenue could help improve Missouri's public schools. It is also argued that the loss limit is ineffective at stopping problem gamblers from losing more money than they can afford to lose, and the tracking cards used to enforce the loss limit is an invasion of privacy that turns off many potential casino patrons. Additional, capping the number of casinos will keep Missouri's gambling industry strong by ensuring that the market doesn't become oversaturated.
Opponents say the loss limit provides at least some checks against gamblers getting in over their heads and shouldn't be repealed. It is argued that the fiscal note is based on unrealistic assumptions and is drastically overinflated; therefore Prop A won't provide anywhere near the amount of new revenue that supporters claim. There is no guarantee public schools will see a dime of additional money from Prop A since lawmakers will find a way to offset whatever new revenue comes in with reductions elsewhere. Capping the number of casinos unfairly eliminates competition, gives the existing casinos a monopoly over the Missouri market and prevents cities that currently don't have casinos from getting them. Prop A is written by the gambling industry for the gambling industry, and will be the sole beneficiaries. Opponents further state that despite the misleading campaigning, Prop A is not a pro-schools initiative and the gambling industry is playing on Missourians' strong support for public schools to enhance their own profits.
Proposition B: "The Quality Home Care Act"
* The ballot question reads: "Shall Missouri law be amended to enable the elderly and Missourians with disabilities to continue living independently in their homes by creating the Missouri Quality Home Care Council to ensure the availability of quality home care services under the Medicaid program by recruiting, training and stabilizing the home care workforce?"
PROVISIONS
* As of Jan. 31, 2009, Proposition B would establish the Missouri Quality Home Care Council, which would be placed under the Department of Health and Senior Services for organizational purposes but maintain operational independence from it.
* The council would consist of 11 members appointed by the governor subject to Senate confirmation. The members would serve staggered three-year terms and would include: six current or former recipients of home care services; two representatives of the Missouri Centers for Independent Living; and one representative each from the Department of Health and Senior Services, the Governor's Council on Disabilities and the Governor's Advisory Council on Aging.
* The Council's powers and duties would include:* Evaluating the size, quality and stability of Missouri's home care workforce and encouraging people to enter the field.* Recommending minimum qualifications for home care workers and providing voluntary training for those workers.* Establishing and maintaining a registry of qualified home care workers.* Cooperating with other state agencies, including law enforcement, to prevent abuse and neglect of home care consumers.* Recommending wage rates for home care workers to the General Assembly.* Establishing general terms and conditions of employment for home care workers.* Issuing administrative rules to implement its directives.* Proposition B also would organize all home care workers into a single, statewide collective bargaining unit. The State Board of Mediation would oversee an election by mail ballot to determine what union would be designated as the exclusive bargaining representative for the unit.* Collective bargaining agreements reached with the union would be subject to approval by the Missouri Quality Home Care Council.* Proposition B would prohibit home care workers from striking.
Supporters say Proposition B will improve the quality and availability of home care services by establishing statewide professional standards for workers, providing training for workers and maintaining a registry for qualified workers so that they may be connected with consumers in need of their services. It will reduce worker turnover in the home care field, which ranges from 40 percent to 60 percent due to difficult working conditions, insufficient training, low wages, lack of benefits and a lack of opportunities for advancement. It is vital to improve the quality and availability of home care services as Missouri's population ages and the demand for home care services increases. The Missouri Quality Home Care Council, with a majority of its members current or past consumers of home care services, will provide consumers a voice in addressing problems with the system ?a voice they currently lack.
As confirmed by the Missouri Ethics Commission, SEIU (Service Employees International Union) is the sole funding source for the campaign committee that was formed to place Prop B on the ballot and campaign for its passage. According to SEIU, Missouri's 8,000 homecare attendants currently earn low wages, no sick time, and no benefits and are classified as "self-employed" contractors. As a result, many consumers have lost home services because of funding cuts and high turnover. Disabilities advocate and former Missouri 25th House District Democratic candidate Bob Pund, who is paralyzed from the shoulders down, believes that Prop. B will greatly assist in retaining a home health care provider. In an October 8th article from St. Joe News.net, Pund states, "There's a lot of turnover. I've had times I haven't had an attendant for a little while, which is a real hardship." The article mentions that Missouri currently serves more than 55,000 seniors and adults with disabilities in home and community settings. More than 24,000 older Missourians are residents of nursing homes, which puts the state 39th in the nation for nursing home use. Pund adds, "It will allow more people to leave nursing homes so they can live in the community," and "They could save money by taking them out of nursing homes. Better service and save money."
Proposition C: "The Clean Energy Initiative"
The ballot question reads, "Shall Missouri law be amended to require investor-owned electric utilities to generate or purchase electricity from renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, biomass and hydropower with the renewable energy sources equaling at least 2% of retail sales by 2011 increasing incrementally to at least 15% by 2021, including at least 2% from solar energy; and restricting to no more than 1% any rate increase to consumers for this renewable energy?"
The estimated direct cost to state governmental entities is $549,683. It is estimated there are no direct costs or savings to local governmental entities. However, indirect costs may be incurred by state and local governmental entities if the proposal results in increased electricity retail rates.
* Proposition C would require that minimum percentages of electricity sold in Missouri by investor-owned utilities be derived from renewable sources such as solar, wind, biomass and hydropower.* Proposition C would require that at least 2 percent of the power sold in Missouri by investor-owned utilities, whether that power be generated in the state or purchased from elsewhere, be derived from renewable sources by 2011. That percentage would increase to 5 percent by 2014 and 10 percent by 2018 before topping out at 15 percent by 2021.* The measure would cap rate increases for compliance costs at 1 percent and impose fines on companies that fail to comply. Companies would be prohibited by law from passing on the cost of fines to customers.* The proposal would also require utilities to offer rebates of $2 per installed watt to electric customers who install new or expanded solar electric systems on their property.* Proposition C repeals the Green Power Initiative, which the General Assembly enacted during the 2007 legislative session as part of SB 54. The bill set voluntary targets for renewable energy usage of 4 percent by 2012, 8 percent by 2015 and 11 percent by 2020.
* Supporters say Proposition C will gradually reduce Missouri's reliance on increasingly expensive fossil fuels and ultimately could lower consumer energy costs. It is further argued that the development and use of renewable energy sources will reduce pollution and foster economic development in the state. In an October 10th article in the South County Times, Erin Noble of the Missouri Coalition for the Environment stated, "Coal is not economically smart, because we import it from other states," said Noble. "It's not environmentally smart, because it burns dirty and releases harmful amounts of mercury that are especially dangerous for youngsters and for pregnant women." Tony Wyche of the Missouri Clean Energy Initiative adds, "By investing in wind, solar and the next generation of biofuels, we can produce the energy we use right here in Missouri. By voting yes, Missouri voters can have a say in where we get our energy from and can ensure that we are creating jobs." Also in support of Prop. C, for amongst other reasons, expanded employment opportunities, the Jewish Community Relations Council (JCRC) released the following statements on October 10: "Proposition C will create manufacturing and construction jobs in Missouri because it will require investment in new technology and clean energy like solar and wind. According to experts, wind and solar energy will be among the sources of new manufacturing jobs in the 21st Century." According to Missourians for Cleaner Cheaper Energy, investor-owned utilities provide 76 of the electricity generated in Missouri; as such utilities include AmerenUE, Aquila, Empire District Electric Co. and Kansas City Power & Light. The existing voluntary targets for renewable energy usage is arguably meaningless, as utility companies can ignore them without consequence and it is argued that mandatory targets with financial penalties for noncompliance will encourage utilities to make a real commitment to renewable energy.
STATE AMENDMENTS
Amendment 1
The ballot question reads, "Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to add a statement that English shall be the language of all governmental meetings at which any public business is discussed, decided, or public policy is formulated whether conducted in person or by communication equipment including conference calls, video conferences, or Internet chat or message board?"
Provisions:
* Amendment 1 would add a new section to Article I of the Missouri Constitution ?the state's Bill of Rights ?establishing English as the official language of Missouri government proceedings.
* The language of the proposed new section: "Section 34. That English shall be the language of all official proceedings in this state. Official proceedings shall be limited to any meeting of a public governmental body at which any public business is discussed, decided, or public policy formulated, whether such meeting is conducted in person or by means of communication equipment, including, but not limited to, conference call, video conference, Internet chat, or Internet message board. The term "official proceeding" shall not include an informal gathering of members of a public governmental body for ministerial or social purposes, but the term shall include a public vote of all or a majority of the members of a public governmental body, by electronic communication or any other means, conducted in lieu of holding an official proceeding with the members of the public governmental body gathering at one location in order to conduct public business."
The General Assembly placed this measure on the Nov. 4, 2008, ballot with the passage of HJR 7 during the 2007 legislative session. HJR 7 passed 25-7 in the Senate and 127-29 in the House of Representatives; however, opposition remains remarkably high to Amendment 1, with immigrants' rights advocates, clergy men and women and notable new sources speaking out. An editorial yesterday from the St. Louis Post Dispatch calls Amendment 1, "a complete waste of taxpayers' money" and explains that "State law already ‘recognizes that English is the common language used in Missouri and recognizes that fluency in English is necessary for full integration into our common American culture for reading readiness.'" Bishop Robert Finn of the Diocese of Kansas City - St. Joseph released statements on October 10th condoning Amendment 1, explaining, "The unspoken fear behind Amendment 1 is that newly arrived immigrants will not learn English and that America will become a country in which people no longer understand each other. That is the same suspicion that greeted our Catholic ancestors - the Germans, Poles, Italians and others who came to America's shores in the 19th and early 20th century. A vicious anti-Catholic nativism arose which sought to bar Catholic immigrants from participation in American life." Bishop Finn adds, "Catholics who know their heritage know that the present fears are unfounded. Just as our ancestors learned English, so are today's immigrants learning the language of their adopted country," and concludes, "Our laws should reflect the best of our American ideals. We are known as a warm and generous people who confidently extend a welcoming hand to newcomers. Amendment 1, however, seems to be a prejudicial reaction against even legal immigrants and workers."
ST. LOUIS COUNTY PROPOSITONS
Proposition 1: "The St. Louis County Children's Mental Health Tax Initiative"
Proposition 1 is a county wide ballot initiative to develop a Community Children's Service Fund to help our children, youth and their families face tough issues like substance use, child abuse, and mental illness and the funds generated from the one-fourth cent sales tax increase will be used solely in St. Louis County. In the early 1990's, Missouri passed a law allowing counties to establish local Community Children Service Funds to provide mental health services to county children ages 0-19. Currently under Missouri law, CSF funds are allowed use for respite care, temporary emergency shelters, transitional living programs, outpatient psychiatric treatment, individual, group, or family counseling and therapy, crisis intervention, outpatient substance abuse treatment, home & school based family intervention, school-based prevention programs and services to teenage mothers.
The Board of Directors' main function is to disburse and oversee the funds, which can be audited at any time. The Board will have a minimum of 9 members, all strictly volunteer and appointed by the governing board of the county. The Board may only contract with public or not-for-profit agencies licensed and certified to provide the services outlined in law. Mandatory audits would occur every two years to assess program effectiveness and examine need in other areas of care. Eric Murray, Outreach Director of Putting Kids First, stated today, "Given the success in surrounding counties and the fact that St. Louis County has the largest number of teenagers in the state, this program is invaluable." Based on the average weekly expenditures, Mr. Murray continued, "Our research indicates that the average family would only pay an extra $1 per week."
Proposition 1 will raise approximately $40 million dollars annually for nearly 12,000 children in need of mental health services in St. Louis county.
Proposition M
Provisions:
Proposition M would add a 1/2-cent sales tax in St. Louis County for MetroLink expansion and operations. If it passes it will raise about $80 million dollars per year. In addition, it will trigger a 1/4 sales tax in St. Louis City from a tax that was passed in the City in 1997. This revenue currently can not be collected until the County passes a matching referendum, which Prop. M would accomplish. The first half raised will be used to match federal grants to expand MetroLink. The second half will go to operate the current system and make improvements in the connecting bus system expanding the reach and effectiveness of the overall Metro system. The measure has a 20-year sunset.
Supporters argue Prop. M is a positive move for St. Louis County -- environmentally speaking. Congestion will be reduced with an estimated 45,000 fewer cars on the road. As many of you know, public transportation saves 1.4 billion gallons of gasoline per year in the U.S. Metro Link currently uses 30% renewable bio-fuels or compressed gas in their daily operations. Economically speaking, job access will increase for the already large percentage of St. Louis County and City residents who already utilize MetroLink. $15 billion dollars in economic development has spurred within walking distance of MetroLink stations since 1993. University City resident and Philosophy Professor Bill Hartmann points out the impact to students. "Up to 10,000 college students throughout the City and County use Metro each day, with 2000-3000 alone attending Forest Park, said Hartmann. "If Proposition M fails to pass, I foresee immense hardship in students' ability to achieve a higher education."
On November 4th, record numbers of people will go to vote. Keep in mind some of the many important ballots initiatives that have a significant impact on our state. Talk with your family and neighbors about some of these important issues as they are certain to affect our community one way or another.
|
