Rep. Chris Kelly, D-Columbia, is sending this letter to press outlets all over the state. He argues convincingly for a bond issue to fund new construction on state university and junior college campuses:
The Fifth State Bond Issue:
Let's Not Play Politics With Our State's Future
by State Representative Chris Kelly
Since last December I have been nagging anyone who would listen--and some who would not--to consider a Fifth State Building Bond. I believe we should allow the voters to decide if Missouri should dedicate some of the tax revenue that taxpayers are already paying to a large-scale capital program. We could construct needed buildings at every university and community college in the state. We could also replace some of our mental health and other facilities that are literally falling down around our ears. We could undertake these projects at record low costs because every contractor in the state is hungry and, if we act quickly, we could borrow the money at record low interest rates. At the same time, we could create jobs to help alleviate an unemployment rate approaching 10%.
I now see that several key legislative Republicans have recently reversed their positions on the issuance of State General Obligation Bonds--the bonds that would be used to construct important state and higher education buildings and to put thousands of our fellow citizens to work at high-paying construction jobs. Their reversal comes directly on the heels of a change in the position of our Democratic Governor who now has decided to support the sale of the bonds.
It looks awfully like my Republican colleagues thought the bonds were a good idea when Jay did not support them. Now that Jay supports the bonds, they are, all of a sudden, a bad idea. These Republicans say the Governor ought to use federal stimulus money to complete the building work. However, these same legislators voted to use much of the stimulus money to operate the government's day-to-day operations. Further, the immutable fact is that we finished FY 2009 with revenue about 6.9% less than the previous year. That is a lot of money. Everyone in this discussion knows that if we don't protect some of the stimulus money for FY 2011 and 2012 we will be in much worse shape in those years than we are today.
Bipartisanship Is Our Best Policy
I was encouraged during the 2009 legislative session that we had a good chance to be successful with the bond Issue. Many thoughtful Republicans looked at the idea--including my co-sponsor Rep. Steve Tilley (R-Perryville)--decided that it had merit, that it was good for Missouri, and got on board regardless of party labels. A bipartisan group of hardworking legislators came within a whisker of sending the bond issue to the voters. As the session wore on, we were joined by university and community college advocates and by business and labor groups around the state. More and more people considered the actual merits of the proposal and decided--without any political gamesmanship--that the bonds were a good idea. I was particularly grateful to my supportive GOP colleagues because they had no political reason to help me. They simply made a decision in the best interests of Missouri, even if it meant working across the aisle.
Store "" to Goals
Store "" to Results
Store "" to Change
Store "Bipartisanship" to Myth
Do while .not. EOF
Case .not. EOF
If gop = "Lucy" .and. Dems = "Charlie Brown"
Store "Obstruction" to Goals
Store "" to Results
Accept "Are you ready to move forward?" Y/N to Change
If Change = "N"
Loop
Endif
If Change = "Y"
Store "Stones" to Dems
Store "Irrelevant" to gop
Store "Accomplish something" to Results
Skip
Loop
Endif
Loop
Endif
If Dems = "Stones"
Store "Accomplish even more" to Results
Skip
Loop
Endif
Endcase
Enddo
I've been a Russ Carnahan skeptic since I moved to Saint Louis. The first few times I saw him speak, he was every bit as awkward and milquetoast as he was portrayed in Can Mr Smith Get To Washington Any More? and his early voting record was just as weak as one would have predicted from his performance in that race.
But recently I've shifted in my opinion. Carnahan's voting record has been fairly good since 2006. He's improved considerably in his public speaking, and he's brought funding to Missouri for infrastructure improvements and energy efficiency, among other things. Which brings me to his vote for the Waxman-Markey American Clean Energy and Security Act last week.
Russ has caught some flak on that vote, specifically from a local bakery and St. Louis Sheriff Jim Murphy (who is a Democratic committeeman, no less.) And I don't believe the criticism is coming from the same quarters as Greenpeace - Murphy was circulating a WSJ editorial against cap and trade, and McArthur Bakery sent the following to Carnahan:
Dear Congressman,
Many of us have had it. You are a follower not a leader. Nancy says Jump boy, you say, How high?
You do not represent the interest of your constituents on the cap and trade issue. So you now have your name in lights for 40,000 cars a week to enjoy.
You sir are not good for small business. And we are letting all of our customers and neighbors know it.
David McArthur
Obviously, Murphy and McArthur are free to say and think whatever they like. Still, Murphy claims he didn't intend his squabble with Carnahan to become public, yet somehow the letter got circulated to where regular folks like you and I are reading about it. And I wonder if Murphy finds Wall Street Journal editorials against unions worthy of passing around, or if it's just on topics that he appears to be uninformed about.
The facts are that even without considering gains in energy efficiency, the average household would pay only the price of a stamp a day in return for huge gains in clean energy and a reduction in carbon emissions and other pollutants. And according to a NRDC study, when you factor in energy efficiency, the average Missouri household will have in 2020 a lower average electric bill ($6.32 less per month per household) and lower transportation costs ($13.93 per month per household) than if we had done nothing but continue with the status quo of relying on coal.
So yeah, Russ deserves some praise on this one. If you live in the 3rd District, don't forget to pat him on the back, especially because you know that followers of Rush, Newt and Glenn Beck are letting him have it right know.
"Sky Spirit", a bronze sculpture by Sabra Tull Meyer, is located at Les Bourgeois Vineyards in Rocheport, Missouri - just up the hill from the bluffs overlooking the Missouri River .
Sabra Tull Meyer is a sculptor who has worked in bronze for over 30 years. Her sculptures include; human figures, small to monumental in scale, portrait busts, memorial plaques and wild life subjects. Her work may be seen in numerous public locations and found in private collections across the nation. She is a native Missourian with a Master of Arts and Master of Fine Arts degrees from the University of Missouri. Her experience includes teaching at Stephens College, Columbia, Missouri and William Woods University, Fulton, Missouri. She is listed in the archives of The National Museum of Women in the Arts. She is an Associate Member of the National Sculpture Society, member of the Oklahoma Sculpture Society, Museum Associates, Columbia Art League, and the State Historical Society of Missouri.
[Senator Bond] That will cause a change in the regime's attitude, or a regime change, because they're short of refined petroleum.
Iran is indeed short on refined petroleum, and there's been some congressional support for trying to cut off refined petroleum exports to Iran in order to exert pressure on the Iranians to stop their nuclear program. But I can't imagine a more direct way of "proving" to those Iranian people sitting on the fence that the reformists are American puppets than to threaten a US-led blockade on the Iranians in order to effect "regime change".
Today Governor Jay Nixon (D) vetoed SB 202, the repeal of Missouri's motorcycle helmet law. He cited a number of reasons in his letter [pdf] to the Missouri Secretary of State:
...I disapprove of Senate Committee Substitute for Senate Bill No. 202. My reasons for disapproval are as follows:
Senate Committee Substitute for Senate Bill No. 202 repeals Missouri's 42 year old helmet law for any motorcyclists of passengers 21 years of age or older, except on interstate highways.
Head injuries are the leading cause of death in motorcycle crashes. Without a helmet, a motorcyclist is 40 percent more likely to suffer a fatal head injury than a helmeted motorcyclist in a crash. [Traffic Safety Facts, National Highway Transportation Safety Administration, January 2008].
It is estimated that from 1984 through 2006, helmets saved the lives of 19,230 motorcyclists and 13,320 additional lives would have been saved had helmets been worn by operators or passengers. [Traffic Safety Facts, National Highway Transportation Safety Administration, January 2008].
In addition to safety issues, weakening or eliminating helmet laws causes a dramatic spike in the cost of treating patients who suffer injuries in motorcycle accidents. The State of Florida saw a 40 percent increase in the number of motorcyclists admitted to hospitals in the 30 months following repeal of its helmet law in 2002, with the cost for treatment more than doubling to $44 million. [Traffic Safety Facts, National Highway Transportation Safety Administration, January 2008]. According to one study, it was estimated that the total cost to treat motorcycle accident victims who were not wearing a helmet is $250,231,734 a year more than the cost of treating victims who were wearing a helmet. [Economic Impact of Motorcycle Helmets: From Impact to Discharge, Journal of trauma-Injury, Infection & Critical Care, 2006]
Ultimately the taxpayers must pay a significant portion of these increased costs. After Florida repealed its helmet law, 16 percent of injured motorcyclists admitted for hospital treatment were either under-insured or uninsured and the costs for another 21 percent were billed to either charitable or public sources, such as Medicaid. [Traffic Safety Facts, National Highway Transportation Safety Administration, January 2008].
In accordance with the above stated reasons for disapproval, I am returning Senate Committee Substitute for Senate Bill No. 202 without my Approval...
When traveling in Europe while studying abroad in college, I would occasionally run into people in hostels who had a strange view of traveling. I would ask them where they had just arrived from, and they would reply something like, "Oh, we just did Budapest." Anyone who said they had just "done" a city was hard-pressed to be able to tell me precisely what they had done, other than a pub crawl. Which was annoying, because I liked to find out about travel experiences from other travelers - what was worth the trip, what was nice enough but too crowded or expensive, etc. The "I just did..." response gave me zero information on how great or terrible destination was.
That's the way this article left me after an initial giddiness about the CBO score of $600 billion over 10 years to cover 97% of Americans, including a government-run public health insurance plan. Sure, I'm glad to find out that leading Democrats on the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee included a public option, glad that they had the CBO score the health care plan with the public option this time, and I'm elated that the CBO scored the bill as much cheaper than the incomplete plan submitted back in May. But I still feel like the reporter just "did" the public option.
From the article, all I know is that there's potentially going to be a $60 billion a year government-run health insurance plan. I have no idea from the article whether a trigger will be put in place, a threshhold that will need to be crossed in order to activate the public option. I don't know if the plan will be offered nationally or state-by-state. I don't know if it will be accountable to Congress. I don't know if it will be available to all Americans, or just those who can't currently get coverage. All of these points would make a big difference in whether I would support such a bill or oppose it.
So I'm begging reporters to ask about what a public option would entail when you write about its inclusion in a health care reform bill. And fortunately, dear reader, we don't need a reporter to help us find out where our Senators, at least, stand on these very important questions. Please ask Senators McCaskill and Bond for specific responses.
Do you support a public healthcare option as part of healthcare reform?
If so, do you support a public healthcare option that is available on day one?
Do you support a public healthcare option that is national, available everywhere, and accountable to Congress?
Do you support a public healthcare option that can bargain for rates from providers and big drug companies?
Still haven't heard back from either Bond or McCaskill after two weeks of asking the question.
Somehow I don't see Mayor Slay or Mayor Funkhouser taking this step:
It's now time to meet the carbon challenge. Our second goal for the next four years is to put L.A. on a path to permanently break our addiction to coal. Coal currently accounts for roughly 40% of the DWP's power portfolio. Breaking the coal habit is a long term proposition demanding a long-term commitment. It's going to require investment from ratepayers. Our future depends on pricing power in relation to the environmental cost.
During my first term, we set high standards for green development and we've taken action to meet them. Los Angeles will get 20% of its energy from renewable sources by next year. We rolled out the most far reaching green building standards of any big city in America.
And this month, the largest city-owned wind farm will start delivering clean power to L.A.'s families. Moving forward we're aiming to get 40% of our power from renewable sources by 2020 and go 60% carbon-free by the end of the next decade.
Today, I am directing the CEO of the Department of Water and Power to take every action necessary to reach these goals and eliminate the use of coal by 2020. Meanwhile, we're going to move beyond the clean air action plan - the most aggressive effort to cut emissions at any port worldwide. We are going to electrify goods movement at our harbor.
I mean, Peabody Energy's HQ is in Saint Louis. So is Arch Coal's. They are the number one and number two private coal companies in the entire world.
No disrespect should be shown to the flag of the United States of America; the flag should not be dipped to any person or thing. Regimental colors, State flags, and organization or institutional flags are to be dipped as a mark of honor...
...(d) The flag should never be used as wearing apparel, bedding, or drapery. It should never be festooned, drawn back, nor up, in folds, but always allowed to fall free. Bunting of blue, white, and red, always arranged with the blue above, the white in the middle, and the red below, should be used for covering a speaker's desk, draping the front of the platform, and for decoration in general....
Okay, Chapter 10, as iterated on the non-governmental site above, is not enforceable.
...Especially pertinent to this case are our decisions recognizing the communicative nature of conduct relating to flags. Attaching a peace sign to the flag, Spence, supra, at 418 U.S. 409"]409-410; refusing to salute the flag, Barnette, 319 U.S. at 632; and displaying a red flag, 409-410; refusing to salute the flag, Barnette, 319 U.S. at 632; and displaying a red flag, Stromberg v. California, 283 U.S. 359, [p405] 368-369 (1931), we have held, all may find shelter under the First Amendment. See also Smith v. Goguen, 415 U.S. 566, 588 (1974) (WHITE, J., concurring in judgment) (treating flag "contemptuously" by wearing pants with small flag sewn into their seat is expressive conduct)...
"Birthers" are individuals who fervently believe that President Obama was not actually born in the United States and is therefore not eligible to hold his current office. Two rallies were schedule in Missouri today - one in St. Charles County and one in Jefferson City.
Oh brother, you know it had to have been a pathetic event (at the Jefferson City rally) when a newspaper reporter, Tony Messenger of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, writes via a Twitter post:
I am familiar with your SMEAR Journalism (sic). You are not welcome at either events (sic). If you do show up, we will be forced to call security.
That's really sad. As much as we admire our friends at Fired Up they can't even get properly booted from a right wingnut event anymore. Sad, so sad. I digress.
Posted 3:30 p.m. Wed., July 1 ...At Wednesday's meeting, she held up a large reproduction of Obama's birth certificate and challenged various items on it. "This is a scandal of the highest proportions," Taitz said.
She also laid out other related allegations against the president.
Democrats dismiss such accusations...
[emphasis added]
Uh, I've got news for you Jo Mannies, it's not Democrats vs. republicans on this, nor is it liberal vs. conservative, it's sane vs. insane. And while we're at it, sometimes not all opposing ideas are equal. Sometimes crazy ideas just need to be treated as what they actually are, you know, crazy:
...Michael Medved referred to the Birthers as "crazy, nutburger, demagogue, money-hungry, exploitative, irresponsible, filthy conservative imposters" who are "the worst enemy of the conservative movement." He added, "It makes us look weird. It makes us look crazy. It makes us look demented. It makes us look sick, troubled, and not suitable for civilized company..."
Last time anyone checked Michael Medved was neither a Democrat nor a liberal.
Last Friday, grassroots folks affiliated with organizing for America presented Blaine Luetkemeyer's staff (or at least an office building support person...they closed their office for us...a whole other story) with a petition calling for health care reform including a choice of a Public Option.
This was the response of Gary Marble, Representative Leuktemeyer's Deputy Director:
"Congressman Luetkemeyer has made his position on health care very clear. Socialized medicine has failed in every attempt. The Congressman's position is in line with the overwhelming majority of the constituents who have contacted our office in opposition to Socialized medicine."
As you can see, Blaine is way out of touch with the 9th District (and reality). He was presented with nearly 700 petition signatures gathered both on paper and online. If you are from the 9th CD, please add your name to the petition that elicited this bizarre response here:
They [Constituents in the 121st] want someone who is real. Not one that says one thing in Johnson County and does another in Jefferson City. It's time our community has a voice over big money politics.
Photo of Sarah Palin by Brian Adams/Runner's World - via 
