covid vaccine & kids
Freedom. Personal liberty. That's generally my focus.
When it comes to vaccines & healthcare, I believe freedom and TRUE informed consent should be the priority.
Personally, my family and I are avoiding the Covid jab like the plague. There's no way in the world I'd get one now and I'd fight like the mama bear I am before I allowed my kids to get one.
Maybe you feel differently, and that's ok.
However, it is NOT ok for this jab or ANY mRNA jab or ANY medical therapy or procedure to be REQUIRED of our kids in order for them to attend school. Period. This is a hill I'll die on.
Missouri's process regarding required vaccines
You may not know this, but it is only a small committee of bureaucrats that decide when a new vaccine gets added to the school requirement list in Missouri. There is no legislative oversight on that process.
The addition of a vaccine would probably go completely unnoticed until you got a call from the school nurse.
Frankly, I hate this process and would love to see the legislature put the burden back on the legislative process so that the public would have an opportunity to weigh in. But that's not happening anytime soon as far as I can tell.
rep. bill hardwick working for our kids
Representative Bill Hardwick is Chair of the Emerging Issues Committee in the Missouri House of Representatives. Today, he is hearing a group of bills regarding vaccines.
Several of them are specific to Covid, one is concerning employer liability, but his primary concern is protecting our school kids. I applaud him for that!
Rep Hardwick and I agree that our school kids should NOT be required to take the Covid vaccine or ANY mRNA vaccine or other form of gene therapy in order to attend school. I'm thrilled he has sponsored a bill to address this and he's conducting a hearing today where his bill along with several others will be heard.
I hope you'll wholeheartedly support his bill and help us create a wave of grassroots voices across the House that would move them to action.
The lobbyists from the pharmaceutical industry and Chamber of Commerce will be working against us. The speaks volumes, doesn't it? The Chamber of COMMERCE. Why are they weighing in?? That's easy, right?
$$$$$$
This is all about the flow of MONEY. Not our kids. I won't go down that rabbit trail, but make no mistake about it. They don't care about the health of your children.
one hiccup
There is one issue I have with HB 700, which has nothing to do with our kids, but with employee exemptions regarding mRNA vaccines or gene therapy. I love the intent of the bill in allowing exemptions for employees, including hospitals and universities. However, there is a term, "undue hardship" that is not defined clearly in the bill.
This section of the bill requires hospitals and employers who are public entities grant exemptions for religious, non-theistic moral beliefs, and for medical reasons UNLESS the employer suffers from an "undue hardship."
I don't prefer this phrase to be in the bill because it does allow a possible loophole for an employer to refuse an exemption request. However, our kids need to be protected and grownups have choices. IF an employer refused the exemption, there would need to be a lawsuit filed and the results of that suit would be crucial to how things move forward.
Likely, some employees would lose their jobs or be forced to be jabbed, because how many people do you know who are willing to sue their employer? It's not going to go well for them even if they win.
I would prefer this section be completely removed and these two issues on separate bills and without the "undue hardship" language. But still, I'm thrilled to protect our kids and I believe they are the priority.
So... is this tiny bit of dog poop in the brownie worth eating? For my kids... maybe it is.
Representative Boggs does have a stand alone bill on employer liability that we can support or even Rep Hardwick could separate his bill into two.
In an ideal world, I'd love to see Representative Hardwick's bill passed without the employer liability and then a liability bill without the undue hardship in it.
please take action
1. Call & email every committee member. Names & contact info listed below. Keep it short, sweet and please be respectful. It's as easy as saying, "I support Representative Hardwick's vaccine bill without the "undo hardship" language" If you have a personal experience, please share it.
Bill Hardwick, Chair. 573.751.3834
Dane Diehl, Vice-Chair. 573.751.4065
Ashley Aune, (D) Ranking Minority Member. 573.751.3618
Bishop Davidson, 573.751.2381
Jeff Farnan, 573.751.9465
Sherri Gallick. 573.751.1344
Mike Haffner. 573.751.3783
Dave Hinman. 573.751.2176
Josh Hurlbert. 573.751.0246
Jamie. Johnson (D). 573.751.9760
Holly Jones. 573.751.7535
Doug Mann (D). 573.751.2134
Adam Schnetling. 573.751.5365
David Tyson Smith (D). 573.751.9753
Email addresses: Please copy/paste. Put your own email address in the "To" and then copy/paste these addresses into the "BCC" line in your email. You'll get a copy and then they will each get individual emails vs a group. I'd love to know if you get any responses. bill.hardwick@house.mo.gov, dane.diehl@house.mo.gov, ashley.aune@house.mo.gov, bishop.davidson@house.mo.gov, jeff.farnan@house.mo.gov, sherri.gallick@house.mo.gov, mike.haffner@house.mo.gov, dave.hinman@house.mo.gov, josh.hurlbert@house.mo.gov, jamie.johnson@house.mo.gov, holly.jones@house.mo.gov, doug.mann@house.mo.gov, adam.schnelting@house.mo.gov, david.smith@house.mo.gov
2. Submit an online testimony BEFORE MIDNIGHT TONIGHT!
SUPPORT HB 700 with a request to remove the employer liability section. (bans any potential mRNA requirements for school kids)
SUPPORT HB 336 (employer liability in regard to vaccines)
You'll have to submit 2 separate forms for each bill. Please check your email after you submit to verify & complete the process.
3. PRAY!
please join us
I've had the opportunity to partner with a great friend of mine, Gail Griswold, in bringing a couple nationally recognized speakers to town.
Gail is a mom of boys, a Missouri business owner, the President of the Board of Education at Camdenton Public Schools, among other things. She's as conservative as they come and she's passionate about improving the public school system for Missouri's kids.
When she invited me to work with her to bring this event to Jefferson City, I was thrilled to have the opportunity and I hope you'll consider joining us.
what is it?
full day of fun & learning
Gail chose the speakers for the evening and I decided to add a few things earlier in the day for anyone who would like to learn more specifics about Missouri legislation. Please come for any or all of the activities, but please do register! Find all the details & register on the Home Page.
SUBSCRIBE TO THE BLOG
the problem with "parent's rights" Acts
I know the masses love the idea of "parent's rights." But I don't like it.
When you define something in statute, you then have to abide by it. If the definition isn't written correctly - you've got big problems and unintended consequences down the road.
In regard to parent's rights, the truth is that parents ALREADY possess the rights. ALL of them. Trying to enumerate or define them is inviting trouble because undoubtedly - even if they are trying to do a good thing - the legislature will likely mess it up. They will miss something, include something they shouldn't or use language they shouldn't- and we'll be worse off instead of better.
For that reason alone, I don't like most of the Parent's Rights legislation we're seeing right now. I do understand parents need transparency from their schools, but it needs to be written correctly.
Personally, I like Senator Eigel's "Empowering Missouri Parents Act." In his bill, he begins by saying, "Missouri school districts shall NOT..." I know it's a slight change in the language but it makes a huge difference. Senator Eigel puts the school in their place vs trying to give parents everything they are due. Senator Eigel's bill, SB 318, has not been referred to committee at this time.
Here's one clue Senator Eigel's bill is better. Eigel's is 2 pages. Koenig's is 33.
Senator Koenig's Parent's Rights Act has already been through committee and it was perfected on the senate floor this past week. That means the senate can no longer make any changes to it. They'll vote on the perfected bill the first part of the week.
koenig's bill is protecting schools not kids
we aren't guaranteed access to proprietary materials
Did you know that publishers of curriculum, even third party contractors that come into schools to teach various topics - including sex ed & mental health - often have agreements with schools that the materials will not be sharable with parents and sometimes even board members and admin?
For example, Missouri's MAP test is proprietary. No administrators, teachers, or parents ever see the exact test that students take. In fact, they are told many times not to even look over students' shoulders. Seeing the test is off limits.
This isn't transparency. I don't know about you, but I don't like it. When the kids had books, we could all see the pages when the kid brought them home or when we went to school at conference time. Now that most curriculum is online - we have no access and we don't have a clue what the kids are actually learning.
Senator Koenig's SB 4 does not guarantee parents will be able to see curriculum if it is proprietary. Copyrights and proprietary materials are mentioned a few other times in the bill in addition to this one on page 8.
This is taken from an email between a school board member and third party contracted to provide education to students, but unwilling to share curriculum materials because of the copyright. This is a problem.
penalties for schools is $25K
In the case of copyrighted, proprietary materials schools can be fined $25,000 per incident if they are found in violation. This disincentivizes schools to be transparent and allows for the excuse of copyright infringement for nearly any materials request. In most cases, a parent wouldn't know whether or not materials were proprietary, copyrighted or not. This is found on page 14.
allows CRT
This part is a little bit tricky, because if you don't read all the way through you'd think everything is A-OK. But no. Essentially, he says that, "You can't do all this CRT stuff" but then he turns around in the next section and says, "This shall not be seen as prohibiting...all the things that might be CRT."
So CRT is not prohibited IF...
- You are exercising your 1st Amendment right to free speech
- You go to the CRT filled teacher training because you choose to
- You provide access to CRT filled sources for the purpose of individual research
- You discuss or assign CRT filled assignments as long as you make it clear this is not the school's belief or position
- You discuss it in the context of history
- Concepts are related to the history of racial groups
- Concepts are related to current events
Here's a quote from page 30:
"This section shall also not be construed to prohibit teachers or students from discussing public policy issues, current events, or ideas that individuals might find unwelcome, disagreeable, or offensive." - pg 30 line 74-77
I'm sorry, Senator, but we'd be better off if you just delete this entire section. Let's not try to define CRT in detail and then try to give back the same list. You've basically just codified CRT!
We would TRULY be better off without ANY of this.
incentivizes homeless/immigrant students
Senator Koenig also decided to pull the school funding formula into this Parent's Rights bill.
- He increased the rate schools are paid on each child who receives a free or reduced priced lunch
- He added money for every homeless student.
Why? I believe there are a couple of possibilities.
PREPARING FOR IMMIGRANTS
Several of our schools have already had large influxes of immigrants over the last couple of years and unless our current Presidential administration changes something about our immigration policy, we are likely to have many more.
These students put a big toll on our public schools. They often times have no experience with English, they are living in hard situations and it costs our schools, teachers and our students a lot.
They are a burden to our already struggling system.
HIS SCHOOL CHOICE SUCCESS
It could also be that Senator Koenig wanted to incentivize schools for opting in to his open enrollment program and accepting students who qualify for free & reduced lunches or are homeless.
His open enrollment bill, SB 5, is about ready to be perfected on the senate floor and we can probably expect it will pass in the House quickly as well.
I could be wrong, But it's possible.
Call To Action
1. Call & email your Senator and let them know what your concerns are with this bill. Ask for a no vote. Senator Eigel has a better option! Nothing at all is better than this. Legislator Lookup Tool
2. Copy the link to this post & send it to a conservative friend!
I hear often that our freedoms and our rights are eroding away. How can that be?
The Constitution hasn't changed. The actual Bill of Rights hasn't changed.
Technically, in most ways, nothing has changed in so far as what our government sees as "inalienable rights."
And yet...things are changing. Government is getting bigger and it feels like the voices of the majority of "We The People" are getting weaker.
Several things are happening, but one of the issues that is happening behind the scenes and unbeknownst to nearly everyone is a shift in our statutes regarding civil liability.
Civil Liability:
If you intentionally or even mistakenly injure someone physically or damage someone's property, you could end up being responsible for paying the other person's losses. This is known as civil liability.
The Tool
If our founding documents and our legislative process spell out your inalienable rights and add them to our statutes, then it is the court system that is the tool used to implement those rights when they have been infringed upon. After all, if you aren't able to exercise your rights or protect them, then you don't really have them, do you?
The courts are where grievances of all types are redressed.
The definition of redress is: 1) to set right. Remedy. 2) to make up for. Compensate.
You have a right of redress when someone has harmed you in some way. The legal way this is done is through the civil court system. The one who harms you is held liable for the damages. This is civil liability.
When the legislature begins to remove your ability to redress your grievances through the court system, they are infringing on your ability to set things right or be compensated for your loss.
The courts are the tool we use to enforce MANY of our individual liberties if we have been harmed by another person.
you're losing your right to sue someone who has harmed you
The Missouri legislators are quietly removing your rights to redress grievances. It's been happening for a while.
In 2021, the Missouri legislature passed SB 51, a Covid Liability bill. I worked throughout that session against the bill and we gave it a good fight but the medical lobby won in the end.
I know it's not the fault of one player when a team loses, but I will forever remember the one representative who brought the bill up again in a rules committee with a procedural maneuver and then another flipped his no vote to a yes, which was the lynch pin holding it back. Within a day, maybe less, it was a done deal and headed to the Governor's office.
That bill in '21 gave hospitals, nursing homes, pharmacists, and big business total immunity from liability with anything at all related to Covid. But guess what? Not you. You aren't immune. Small businesses aren't immune. Churches aren't immune. But if your elderly mom was neglected in a nursing home when you couldn't get in to see her - you're out of luck and your mom is probably dead.
They call it "tort reform" and say that they are trying to unburden our courts.
But what does that actually do? It creates two tiers. The ones who have no accountability & the ones who do.
If you have no accountability and can't be held liable, you are free to cut corners, do whatever you want and potentially do harm without any consequences.
However, if you aren't in that group that is immune then guess what? You'd better mind your P's and Q's. You might find yourself paying out big.
Sound fair?? Not to me, it doesn't.
sb 117 by Senator tony luetkemeyer
SB 117 is dangerous. There are 3 parts to this bill and you need to understand them.
1. Reduces the statute of limitations from 5 years to 2 years for personal liability regarding...
"An action for any injury to the person or rights of another, not arising on contract and not otherwise provided for by law, including actions for personal injury or bodily injury"
This means instead of having 5 years to sue someone for harm, you only have 2. Maybe in some cases that works. But for many, it doesn't.
- What if you had a wreck, suffered horrible physical injuries that left you jobless, enduring surgeries, therapies, etc.
- What if your children were hurt and. you were dealing with their recovery, therapies, etc?
- What if you just didn't realize you were sick or it took more than two years to get a diagnosis that was the result of a chemical or toxic exposure?
There are a lot of situations where you would be under an incredible amount of stress, occupied with health matters, etc. No one in these circumstances wants to take up a law suit and deal with the legal system when they are just trying to survive the trauma of what was done to them.
2. Reduces the statute of limitation in regard to uninsured and underinsured motorists from 10 years to 2 years.
"An action against an insurer relating to uninsured motorist coverage or underinsured motorist coverage, including any action to enforce such coverage."
This means you only have 2 years to redress your grievances with your insurance company if there's a problem. Interesting. They love to protect the insurance companies.
I don't hate insurance companies. My husband works for one and has for 30+ years. But let me assure you, the insurance companies are reinsured to the hilt and decreasing your ability to hold them accountable by 8 years isn't what's best for the people. Have you ever had insurance issues drag out for months or years at a time?? It can happen.
Maybe 10 years is too long. But 2? Hmm... that's a little extreme when the ones you are protecting are multi-million and billion dollar companies.
Also, this might very well cause the court system to clog up faster than it does now because it might actually force people to file suit when with more time for mediation it might have settled out of court.
3. Gives SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY to ALL 3rd party PRIVATE contractors of PUBLIC ENTITIES!
I can't scream this loud enough!! Take to heart the red print and all caps because I mean it!
Sovereign Immunity: Sovereign immunity refers to the fact that the government cannot be sued without its consent.
Lines 47 - 52 of Luetkemeyer's SB 117 say this:
"When acting within the scope of a government contract, private contractors of a public entity, excluding those private contractors provided for in section 210.114 shall have sovereign or governmental tort immunity to the same extent as a public entity, including any limitation on awards for liability provided for in section 537.610."
According the US Code, the definition of public entity is:
who would be immune?
This means that ANY private contractor working for any government entity, the public school system, the State University system, fire/police/EMS departments, public transportation systems, etc. The actual list would be miles long. It would be so far reaching that there's no way to even truly comprehend how far this actually goes.
But here are a few examples:
- The State of Missouri
- Highway contractors...think road construction
- Database systems contractors.... think data leaks and security breaches including ERIC...VOTER REGISTRATION INFORMATION
- Classroom Wallet...the contracted provider for disbursing funds through the Treasurer's office for the ESA program.
- Equipment contractors... think faulty ANYTHING from sprinkler systems to voting machines to the food in the Truman Building cafeteria
- Universities in the Missouri State System
- University of Missouri Hospital systems - NO DOCTOR contracted through MU could be held liable for ANY issue of malpractice.
- Real Example: A knee replacement surgery was done on over 15 patients at University Hospital. The knee was defective. If this law passes, neither the surgeons or the manufacturer would be liable for those cases or be required to repair the damage done.
- Every other contract doing business with the universities. EVERY. CONTRACTOR.
- Missouri Public Schools
- Playground equipment providers
- DATA
- SOFTWARE providers
- Bus drivers & transportation services
- Food services
- County & City Governments
- Equipment and gear for public safety workers...thing oxygen tanks for firefighters, police equipment, ambulance services, etc etc.
- DATA
- Construction crews
the problem
Other than the obvious, the fact that you can't sue for something done wrong to you in all these different situations, the bigger problem is that they are continuing to separate us. There are different rules for different groups of people.
The government & anyone doing business with the government in ANY way - NO ACCOUNTABILITY.
The people, small businesses, churches, etc. - SORRY CHARLIE. YOU'RE OUT OF LUCK.
Not only are you out of luck as far as being held accountable for your own actions and following a different set of rules, but the government and their partners can now cut corners, be deceitful, and plan their business dealings with you knowing that they have ZERO accountability for ANYTHING.
Now, how you do think that's gonna work out???
current status of sb 117
SB 117 has passed committee in the Missouri Senate. It's on the calendar to be heard on the Senate floor. I'm hopeful we have senators willing to stand and fight for us. I've been reassured that is the case. However, at the first moment I see otherwise, I'll be sending out an SOS and begging you to help me fight against this UN-AMERICAN piece of junk!!
take action
Call & email your own senator and let them know how you feel about this. Their phones need to be ringing off the hook! Be sure to ask them how they plan to vote. If they tell you, let me know the response you get. I'd love to know! Email me at jodi@jodigrace.com
Although it may not seem like it, I truly do NOT enjoy confrontation and I'd much rather be celebrating wins like Representative Bill Hardwick brought us this week.
Rep Hardwick fought hard and did what most legislators just can't find the gumption to do - stand up to leadership and push back. I can't tell you how happy I am when I see this because it truly is a rare occasion and it needs to happen MUCH more often.
thank you, Representative bill hardwick!!
here's the story
Speaker of the House Dean Plocher apparently set this bill, HB 301, as one of his top priorities for this committee. There was even a work group meeting throughout the interim to pull it all together. Therefore, early on, Chair Lane Roberts (Republican from Jasper County) was prepared to bring it up and try to push it through. Mind you, both of these leaders are Republicans. They are supposed to be protecting our 2nd amendment rights according to the Constitution and the MO Republican platform.
But how many Republicans really pay attention to that?
Not many, unfortunately.
So Chair Roberts offers this bill (see page 15 lines 1-11) that would make it ILLEGAL for anyone under 18 to possess a firearm of ANY type.
HELLO!! Are you kidding me??
Do you have kids that hunt? Do they ever hunt on public land?
Do you have kids that like to go to the shooting range?
Excuse me, Rep Roberts... are you from Illinois!? Because I'm not sure what in the world you were thinking. I wonder if your Jasper County constituents know what the heck you've been up to this week. I can't even believe it.
But never fear, Missouri! It's Representative Bill Hardwick to the rescue!
Rep Hardwick gathered his troops, got the votes and offered an amendment that stripped that language right out of there... and our kids' gun rights were saved!
Truly, this is such a big deal and I can't thank Rep Hardwick enough. Standing against leadership isn't something these reps do on the regular. They are scared... and for good reason. See my earlier post about Rep McGaugh and the way she treated Rep Dan Stacy when he had the nerve to even ask questions about her bill. It's ridiculous the way both the "upper level" leadership as well as some committee chairs abuse their power.
I actually feel bad for them but they've GOT to start standing their ground. They get elected and probably most of them come up here with sincere high hopes of really making a difference. But the truth is I don't think they have any idea what they actually signed up for.
The House Rules and the power of leadership are stacked against them. The Speaker is in control of nearly every. single. step of legislation moving forward. His chosen chairman carry a portion of that power and do his bidding in most cases.
So what are they to do if they want to get something accomplished? They have to bow. They have to donate. They have to follow along.
They feel like they are forced to compromise. So they tow the line in hopes of getting something they really feel passionate about.
The crappy thing is that usually doesn't work anyway, but they still try.
but not this week, missouri! bill hardwick stood his ground!
Not once..but twice!
Earlier in the day, he led the way when the Chair's amendment to the original bill included a restriction on individuals to sell ammunition without being licensed by the Secretary of State to do so. For clarity, this would mean that if you had extra .22 shells and wanted to sell them to your neighbor because they ran out, you couldn't.
No joke. It's completely ridiculous, but I promise I'm telling the truth.
Chair Roberts says he's a Republican and a 2A defender but you sure wouldn't know it based on this hearing.
Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft happened to be there and I was told he literally got up and walked out of the room in frustration. Kudos to Ashcroft for letting them know what he thought!
So, a BIG THANK YOU to Representative Hardwick! This is the kind of fighting we like to see! THIS is what we can get behind! THIS is what they are elected to do....PROTECT our freedom and push back government overreach.
Bill, if I see you this week, I might just hug you!!
To give more credit where it is due, we had a few others who also spoke up in the hearing on these issues or others to defend our 2A rights here in Missouri. Thanks, also, to these Missouri House Reps!!
Representative Chad Perkins
Representative Brian Sietz
Representative Lisa Thomas
Representative Justin Sparks
Representative Brad Banderman
Courage is contagious and I'm hoping the actions of these legislators sparks others to stand up even and especially if their Committee Chairs or even the Speaker or Floor Leader are in opposition.
