giant omnibus bills carrying giant problems
This is a presentation we shared across Missouri several times over interim, between May of '23 and January of '24 when the new legislative session began. It's an overview of several problems we've got here in Missouri inside our legislature. These problems have led to an open door to policies that promote globalism and a Missouri-last philosophy.
My hope is that you'll watch, even if you need to watch in smaller sessions, so that you are more knowledgable and more empowered to use your voice both with your elected officials and in your social network. Citizens deserve to know the truth and they need to know why things aren't happening here in Missouri like we would expect they would be with a supermajority of republicans in office.
major problems In a nutshell
1. The rules are set up to empower 4 individuals and create a pay-to-play system. The rules can be changed. We need legislators who will have courage enough to do it.
2. Unconstitutional, omnibus bills are the majority of what is passing. Your legislator needs to vote NO on multi-subject bills that are not aligned with the original intent of the bill AND/OR if they haven't read the bill.
3. Policy that pushes centralization & standardization across our systems through inventorying, monitoring and controlling resources and/or human activity is a problem and those bills need to be stopped in their tracks.
I'll be recording more educational content on the bills that are moving through the legislature now, making their way to the chamber floors for debate.
It's time to stand up & speak up!
arise & build podcast launch
The inaugural episode of the Arise & Build podcast dropped today! Hosted by yours truly, this will be another way for me to deliver content related to Christians stewarding freedom here in Missouri and across the nation.
I'm new to the podcast world, so it's not professional quality but I promise I'm a quick learner and it'll get better as the days go by.
As always, please subscribe & share!
*CORRECTION: I misspoke on the podcast. The meeting Tuesday is not a committee meeting and won't be available to the public. It's a caucus for the republican reps at the Capitol.
resources & action items
FiscalNote, Inc. is the parent company to Fireside, the constituent management service being pushed to our House reps by lobbyists and salesmen.
FiscalNote's CEO is a World Economic Forum type of guy. Check out his bio on the WEF website.
"Prior to founding FiscalNote, Hwang started his career in politics in the Obama '08 campaign, assisting in the election of the first Obama Administration."
"He is also currently a World Economic Forum Technology Pioneer,"
FiscalNote is being represented by lobbyist John Bardgett, per the MEC website as seen below. It will be interesting to see what donations come in to what campaigns & PACs after the purchasing decision is made.
contact your representative
Reach out to your rep and let them know you do NOT want constituent services in Missouri to handled by a 3rd party liberal globalist vendor!
We have a system already in place that is privately held by the State.
Our data should NOT be farmed out to the cloud, and definitely not to an ESG supporting vendor.
This is NOT a safe option for Missouri!
Use this lookup tool if you need to find your representative.
bill hardwick's mrna amendment
Friday afternoon in the Missouri House of Representatives, God gave us a miracle!
There's not much that I'm thrilled with regarding legislation this session, but this is a major miracle & I can't sit by without giving thanks & praise to Him and the humans who were willing to stand in the gap for our kids!
Representative Bill Hardwick filed HB700 which would've protected employees as well as our school kids from being required to take mRNA vaccines. His original bill made it through both House committees, but Majority Floor Leader Jon Patterson refused to bring it to the floor for debate and a vote.
As a result, Rep. Hardwick chose to take the portion pertaining to school kids and add it as an amendment onto an education related bill. It was a big mountain to climb. Honestly, I had pretty much given up hope that it could happen.
he did it...and it passed!
SB 199, an education related bill sponsored by Senator Holly Rehder, had already made it through the senate and was up for debate in the House. Representative Bishop Davidson was handling it and he made a motion to add a large amendment that addressed several different things.
Rep Hardwick rose to inquire of Rep. Davidson and ask questions about his proposed amendment. While he was speaking, Hardwick's vaccine amendment was filed (thank you Rep Mazzie Boyd for the assist!) and offered as an "amendment to the amendment."
Rep Hardwick's presentation of his amendment was wonderful. The PQ halted all conversations about it and brought the issue to a vote. Thankfully, Hardwick called for a roll call vote, which records each legislator's vote. I've shown those votes below.
watch it happen
This is a video of Rep Hardwick presenting the amendment and the vote. I hope you'll watch!! He did an excellent job!
In the video, Hardwick mentions the Governor having the opinion that we shouldn't require Covid vaccines. He posted that opinion publicly on Twitter in the fall of 2022. He stated clearly that the government should not require Covid vaccines in schools.
We'll see if Governor Parson will stick to his word or try to squirm his out of protecting our kids to keep Pfizer happy.
here's the vote
republicans who voted 'no' with democrats
what's next?
I wish I could tell you that this was a done deal but we still have a ways to go. The bill now will go back to the Senate. Since it originated in the Senate and now has been changed by the House, the senate has 3 options. In order to pass a bill, BOTH chambers (House & Senate) have to agree on the final form - including every tiny detail.
When SB 199 is back in the senate, these are the options:
- Senate leadership could refuse to even take it up for a vote. This would kill the bill and our amendment.
- Senate leadership can refuse to adopt all the changes, but send it to a Conference Committee, consisting of 5 from the House & 5 from the Senate. The committee would meet, make a deal and then take the final version back to both chambers for a final vote.
- Senate leadership can choose to bring it up AND bring it to a vote.
please pray!
We only have 96 hours of session left. Time is running out & we need this amendment to pass for the sake of our kids! Please pray that God moves more mountains for this amendment to pass!
please take action.
You can help make your wishes known by making 2 phone calls and sending 2 emails. Tell them why you DON'T want schools requiring any type of mRNA vaccine and we want to keep Rep Hardwick's amendment to that effect. Be sure to politely ask for SB 199 to be brought to the floor for a vote or sent to conference committee.
1. Cindy O'Laughlin, Senate Majority Floor Leader
573-751-7985
2. Senator Holly Rehder
573-751-2459
PRIVACY ACTS
This sounds good, right? Let's protect privacy. It's important for all of us. But these acts aren't about protecting you. They are about expanding protections for elected officials and penalizing citizens when the line is crossed. And the penalty is steep. A Class D felony carries a penalty of up to 5 years in prison and a $10,000 fine.
Language is being added to expand the statutes already in place for judges and also to include all state elected officials, county elected officials and even election poll workers.
There are separate bills floating around to protect different groups of elected officials. They all have basically the same language although they are sponsored by a couple different legislators - Representative Peggy McGaugh and Representative Rudy Veit.
Please understand, I'm not in supporting ANY physical harm or harassment of ANYONE. However, when we include language that say "with the intent", who defines intent? How is that determined? "Intent to harass, intimidate" or even "influence the job performance" is a big problem in these bills.
This blog could be viewed as having intent to influence job performance of our elected officials. What if I mentioned to you in a blog that Senator Moon's wife and kids joined him at the Capitol for the legislative ball? Or that I ran into Representative Seitz and his wife, Valerie, while I was in Branson on vacation? If these bills pass and someone feels like I am trying to harass or intimidate, I could go to prison and have a felony conviction to live with the rest of my life...even though Senator Moon is married, loves his wife and kids and posts photos of her himself on his own social media pages. And we all know Representative Seitz and his wife Valerie live in the Branson area so I could very well run into them while I'm headed to Silver Dollar City.
These bills are just too invasive.
the bills
- HB 301 is a public safety bill sponsored by Rep Roberts with a "Privacy Act" amendment added by Rep Rudy Veit. It has passed the House and is in the Senate. This amendment pertains to judicial officers and all elected state officials and any political subdivision thereof. I've included a PDF attachment of the amendment for you to download and read as well as the link here. The following is language taken directly from the amendment beginning on page 2 line 6.
(1) "Elected official", any elected member of state government or any political subdivision thereof; (2) "Personal information", the same meaning as defined in section 407.1500. 2. A person commits the offense of unlawful disclosure of personally identifiable information if he or she knowingly releases, publicizes, or otherwise publicly discloses the name, home address, Social Security number, telephone number, or other personal information of an elected official or a family member of the elected official with the purpose to harass, intimidate, or cause death or bodily injury to the elected official or a family member of the elected official. 3. The offense of unlawful disclosure of personally identifiable information is a class A misdemeanor. However, if a violation of this section is done with the purpose to influence an elected official in the performance of such official's official duties, the offense is a class D felony.";
- HB 781 sponsored by Rep Peggy McGaugh is an election bill that grants this same protection to election officials, including volunteer poll workers. The following language is found on page 11 starting at line 88 in the bill. Emphasis added to bold words by me.
Disseminating through any means, including by posting on the internet, the personal information of the family of an election official with the intent to harass, intimidate, or influence such official in the performance of his or her duties. For the purpose of this subdivision, "personal information" includes home address, Social Security number, federal tax identification number, checking or savings account numbers, marital status, and identity of a child under eighteen years of age. For the purpose of this subdivision, the term "election official" includes election judges, challengers, watchers, and other volunteers or employees of an election authority. If a violation of this section results in death or bodily injury to an election official or a member of the official’s family, the offense shall be a class B felony.
- HB 405 sponsored by Rep Peggy McGaugh pertains to all elected county officials. The language is the same as her bill above, but please click the link to verify for yourself.
the end game
These bills are designed to protect government officials and intimidate citizens. The truth is we already have statutes on the books for stalking, harassment, assault, etc. These added measures aren't necessary and they infringe on our first amendments rights.
Protect the officials. Jail the citizens if they get offensive. Nice.
These bills need to go.
TAKE ACTION
Status: Senate hearing is scheduled for Monday 2/27 at 1:30pm. Call and/or email committee members and ask for the privacy act amendment to be removed.
Sen Leutkemeyer - 573-751-2183
Sen Schroer - 573-751-1282
Sen Coleman - 573-751-1492
Sen May - 573-751-3599
Sen Roberts - 573-751-4415
Sen Rehder - 573-751-2459
Sen Trent - 573-751-1503
Email Addresses. Copy & paste into your own email server.
tony.leutkemeyer@senate.mo.gov, nick.schroer@senate.mo.gov, mary.coleman@senate.mo.gov, karla.may@senate.mo.gov, steven.roberts@senate.mo.gov, holly.rehder@senate.mo.gov, curtis.trent@senate.mo.gov
Status: This bill has already had a House hearing but the committee still hasn't voted on it. Please email and/or call the committee members and ask for a no vote.
Peggy McGaugh, Chair - peggy.mcgaugh@house.mo.gov 573-751-2917
Dan Stacy, Vice Chair - dan.stacy@house.mo.gov. 573-751-8636
Joe Adams - joe.adams@ house.mo.gov. 573-751-4265
Brad Banderman - brad.banderman@house.mo.gov. 573.751.0549
Donna Baringer - donna.baringer@house.mo.gov. 573-751-4220
Tricia Byrnes - tricia.byrnes@house.mo.gov. 573.751.1460
Jeff Coleman - jeff.coleman@house.mo.gov. 573.751.1487
Bill Falkner - bill.falkner@house.mo.gov. 573.751.9755
Roger Reedy - roger.reedy@house.mo.gov. 573.751.3971
Alex Riley - alex.riley@house.mo.gov. 573.751.2210
Adam Schwadron - adam.schwadron@house.mo.gov. 573.751.2949
David Tyson Smith - david.smith@house.mo.gov. 573.751.9753
Justin Sparks - justin.sparks@house.mo.gov. 573.751.0562
Cheri Toalson Reisch - cheri.toalson-reisch@house.mo.gov. 573-751-1169
Ken Waller - ken.waller@house.mo.gov. 573.751.4451
Kevin Windham - kevin.windham@house.mo.gov. 573.751.4726
Eric Woods - eric.woods@house.mo.gov. 573.751.2199
HB 405 has been referred to a committee but not heard yet. Please call and/or email the committee members and ask for a no vote.
David Evans - 573-751-1455 david.evans@house.mo.gov
Rudy Veit - 573-751-0665 rudy.veit@house.mo.gov
Robert Sauls - 573-751-5701 robert.sauls@house.mo.gov
Marlon Anderson - 573-751-7605 marlon.anderson@house.mo.gov
John Black - 573-751-1167 john.black@house.mo.gov
Brad Christ - 573-751-2150 brad.christ@house.mo.gov
Ron Copeland - 573-751-1688 ron.copeland@house.mo.gov
Michael Davis - 573-751-2175 michael.davis@house.mo.gov
Justin Hicks - 573-751-3572 justin.hicks@house.mo.gov
Ian Mackey - 573-751-3859 ian.mackey@house.mo.gov
Cameron Parker - 573-751-3629 cameron.parker@house.mo.gov
Greg Sharpe - 573-751-3644 greg.sharpe@house.mo.gov
David Tyson Smith - 573-751-9753 david.smith@house.mo.gov
Justin Sparks - 573-751-0562. justin.sparks@house.mo.gov
Grab your popcorn & a coke - this is a long one.
Here's the "Table of Contents" if you will:
- The Backstory
- The MO Republican Platform
- Fast Forward - Rep McGaugh and Her Bill, HB 781
- Truth is Revealed in the Hearing
- Threats?? I Wish I Was Joking
- Her LEA Friends are Worn Out
- Rep Stacy Asks Questions and Leadership is Mad
- Call to Action
the backstory - 2022 mo Election bill passed
During the 2022 Missouri legislative session, the republicans cheered, shouted & waved their banner of victory because of the amazing election integrity bill they passed. They carried it like a trophy back home to their districts touting what a success the session had been. After all, they were the ones responsible for the new requirement for voter ID!
To that Missourians responded, "Yay!"... and there were pats on backs of republican legislators all across Missouri.
Well, part of that bill (HB 1878) included the OPTION for Missouri voters to affiliate with a political party on their voting record. The summary of this portion of the bill as per the bill page linked here is as follows:
DECLARING A POLITICAL PARTY AFFILIATION
Under current law, voters are not required to declare a political party affiliation when registering to vote. This amendment requires any person registering to vote to declare a political party affiliation, beginning January 1, 2023. The options for political party affiliation shall include all established political parties. Voters are entitled to choose to be unaffiliated with any political party as well. If a voter does not designate any political party affiliation, then the election authority shall designate the voter as unaffiliated. A voter can change his or her political party affiliation at any time by notifying his or her election authority in the manner described in the amendment.
NOTE: It was Representative Dan Stacy who submitted that language and although he was unsuccessful getting it added to a bill in the House he was successful in getting it added as an amendment when it went through in the Senate. If you ask me, this is what good legislators do. They work hard to get their language added to acceptable pieces of legislation in order to accomplish their goal. Great job, Rep Stacy!
the missouri republican platform
Not many voters know the actual platform of either party. I'm not judging. I didn't either, until a few short years ago when I got more involved. However, I did know the gist of what is considered to be the republican priorities - small government, lower taxes, fiscally conservative, pro-life, etc. and I did know that there seemed to be a lot of republicans who weren't voting that way.
The reality is that the Missouri Republican Platform is pretty lengthy and specific. In truth, when you run as a republican on any ballot, you are expressing to voters that you align with these principles and voters can expect you to vote and represent your constituents accordingly.
And frankly.. if you decide to run as any type of candidate, you ought to be expected to READ and understand the platform you’re running on!
That's the way it should be, at least.
Anything less than that is a misrepresentation of yourself and your intentions, imho.
Candidates are literally lying to the people just by running on a platform they have no intention of supporting. It happens every election cycle and it's why the Republican party is such a train wreck and not unified. We've got every party under the sun - including life long democrats - who run as a Republican because that's the only way they can get elected.
In regard to this issue of voters declaring a party affiliation, the Missouri Republican Platform says this:
"...the Missouri Republican Party SUPPORTS: ...
Establishing closed primaries requiring all voters casting a ballot to declare a partisan affiliation and make maintaining such declarations as public record."
Therefore, our republican representatives should be EXPECTED to uphold this tenet. Republican voters would assume that our republican legislators would cast their vote in support of this principle. We shouldn't have to voice our support, because it would be expected that a republican elected official in Missouri would agree with and support closed primaries and working toward that end.
Thank you, Rep Stacy for including it in the election bill last year and working toward our republican goals!
Fast forward to thursday, feb 2, 2023
Representative peggy mcgaugh & her bill
Representative Peggy McGaugh was appointed Chair of the Elections and Elected Officials Committee by Speaker of the House Dean Plocher. As Chairperson, Rep McGaugh gets to choose which bills the committee will hear. Of course, all the Chairs choose theirs as early as possible - that's part of the benefit of being the Chair, after all.
NOTE: Rep Dan Stacy is the Vice-Chair of the Elections and Elected Officials Committee
So Rep McGaugh has filed HB 781 with a couple of primary goals in mind and she brought it before her committee Thursday, February 2, 2023. Her bill does the following:
1. Removes the ability for voters to affiliate with their party which repeals the language that was passed in 2022. It's interesting to note that she voted for that bill. This repeal would directly contradict the MO Republican platform goal of closed primaries and she knows it. See video clips below!
2. Adds a class one election offense and felony which is punishable by up to 5 years in prison and a $10,000 fine for,
"Disseminating through any means, including by posting on the internet, the personal information of the family of an election official with the intent to harass, intimidate, or influence such official in the performance of his or her duties. For the purpose of this subdivision, "personal information" includes home address, Social Security number, federal tax identification number, checking or savings account numbers, marital status, and identity of a child under eighteen years of age. For the purpose of this subdivision, the term "election official" includes election judges, challengers, watchers, and other volunteers or employees of an election authority."
The problem with this last addition to the statute is that the crux of it is proving intent, it applies to literally thousands of election volunteers and it carries a punishment of up to 5 years in PRISON & up to $10,000 in fines for what could be a text or a social media comment.
The language is too broad and is a potential risk to Missourians ESPECIALLY if they are sue happy or paranoid or just angry and have an axe to grind.
Also, marital status is included. So... if I make a phone call, send an email or text or make a post or comment on social media that somehow connects a person to their spouse, that could fit this definition.
This is too broad and it's concerning as to how this would affect someone's 1st amendment right of free speech since it only requires a judgement about intent to be made.
I'm not trying to defend harassment and our election officials shouldn't be bullied -ever - but you'll see in the videos below that Rep McGaugh is pretty quick to throw out the question, "Are you threatening me?" when that was obviously the furthest thing from the truth. In fact, she referenced being threatened at least twice in the hearing when as far as I could tell, she was just angry that she was being asked questions she didn't want to answer.
What happens when a volunteer or election worker perceives or even just claims there was a threat that could land you in prison for 5 years?
She's filing this same language in another bill that would apply to ALL county elected officials. Yikes!
What happens to me if I write this blog and mention that she's married a year from now and this statue is in place and she sees it and gets mad? Am I going to be taken to court by someone in a position that uses government funds to prosecute me because I've told the truth and someone is offended and claims my intent was to harass or intimidate?
It's time to hold them accountable, not turn a blind eye. And I think that's ok. I'm so sick of the censorship. BUT...that's not even what caused all the ruckus at the hearing.
Everyone but Rep Windham seems to agree with her. He’s my favorite democrat. He’s really a smart guy and always thinks critically, has great comments and questions and he offers them respectfully.
truth is revealed in the hearing
If you don't have snacks & a coke...GET THEM NOW!
I actually attended this hearing myself but had to leave early. However, some friends stayed for the duration so when the texts started coming in I had to find the archive and watch it for myself.
Holy cow! It got interesting so I’ve got to share it with you.
I've clipped snippets of the hearing and uploaded them to my You Tube channel so you can watch them quickly. They are numbered for your convenience. However, I have also uploaded both of Rep McGaugh's introduction videos (1 & 2) if you'd like background info on her and her complete presentation on the bill as well as Rep Stacy's entire inquiry in case you want to watch those sections in their entirety. I do not want to be accused of grabbing sound bites and leading you astray so if you have time, please watch the larger sections all at once.
Also, you can watch the entire hearing on the House website. Just find the Elections Committee hearing on the list that met on 2/2/23 and click on it.
Remember: Rep Peggy McGaugh is Chairperson & Rep Dan Stacy is Vice-Chair
Peggy is trying to repeal Dan's party affiliation language from the 2022 election bill. Can you see how this is gonna go already??
In this first clip, Representative McGaugh says parties shouldn't vet their candidates. Excuse me!? Uh...yep. Peg... It's high time the Republican Party starts vetting their candidates! And btw, your clerks have to run on a platform so that's a lame excuse. Everyone knows they run on a party platform and I dang sure think the voters deserve to know if they are being honest about that or not.
In fact, I don’t care if we are talking about a nonpartisan race like school board. Your party affiliation helps voters know your ideology and how you will run your office.
Maybe there was a time it didn’t matter. But today, there’s a night & day difference between a Republican and a Democrat and I would prefer NOT to have a democrat sitting on my school board if I can help it… And definitely not my health board.
In fact, I’d choose Republican every time in every race at this point to avoid putting an official in place that would support and make decisions in alignment the democrat platform.
Would you?
In this second clip, she says she wonders if this is a step toward closed primaries. Yes, Peggy, it is. You know it and we know it. There are 32 other states that do it and there is case law that says the party has a RIGHT to gather this information AND the people have a right to associate with whomever they choose. The only problem here is the Clerk's Association doesn't like it. This is ALL about Peggy's favorite special interest group, NOT the citizens and NOT standing on the platform she ran on.
If you weren't sure, she's just spells it out in this one:
threats?? I wish i was joking
Here's where it gets interesting. Rep McGaugh seems particularly interested in being a victim and she focused on how her clerk friends could be victims as well. I'm beginning to wonder maybe if she actually belongs with the democrats. All of them were really supportive of her & her bill. That’s interesting. The Republicans were just silent, of course, except for Rep. Stacy.
In her comments early on in the hearing she made a declaration that there are just a lot of angry people out there, especially the ones who have heard or believe that there's been some sort of election fraud. Hmm. Again... yes.
When we see irregularities and election fraud happening around the nation it's pretty upsetting, Representative. I'd sure think you'd make THAT your highest priority... but that doesn't seem to be the case.
You want to preventatively protect election workers. There is another group who wants to preventatively protect our elections.
But I digress. Let’s get back on track.
Rep McGaugh is obviously antsy about being threatened and keeping everyone safe from all the bad guys of the world. So much so that in the middle of his inquiry, she gets more and more agitated while he stays calm asking the questions he's prepared for her. She's obviously getting flustered and one of the democrats pops up to accuse him of badgering her!
Then, a little later on, after he asks a question that she doesn't like, she just straight up asks him... check it out.
This attitude of hers makes me wonder just what she'd be encouraging her LEA friends to do in regard to that new language she's trying to implement that adds election offenses. If asking a question is a threat, I'm more than a little concerned about what else might be construed that way.
Check this one out and tell me who is badgering who...
her lea friends are wore out
OK, Rep McGaugh has made her point. The LEA's are worn out and don't want closed primaries. They don’t want to deal with people and their affiliations. That's that.
To that I say that maybe they don’t like the job description and they need to move on.
It doesn't matter too much to McGaugh what the PEOPLE think, apparently, because she's confident in her re-election regardless. I’d venture to say that she needs only to take a gander down the hall to Senator Carter’s office to realize that might not be the case. But I’d better not, because she might feel threatened or claim I intended to harass her. 🙄
rep stacy asks questions and leadership is mad?
Yep! That's the word on the street.
Representative Stacy asked her questions she didn't want to answer, she got triggered and sassy, claims she was threatened by the inquiry and now rumor has it that apparently she's throwing a fit and House leadership is fit to be tied. 🤦🏻♀️
You see, the republicans have been told by leadership not to be fussing out in public. They are supposed to do their deals behind closed doors and then present a united front for all to see. That's why they all vote together all the time and we can’t figure out what’s happening.
Lectured in caucus meetings prior to any votes they take -they get told what to do and they fall in line because they are afraid of what will happen if they don’t.
Bullies... junior high bullies is what we are dealing with here.
Well, that and a grown woman who needs to put her big girl panties on and answer the questions she's asked.
For goodness sakes! Isn't this what the left does? They get all offended and then cry about it until everyone around them changes their tune and they get their way. I can't stand whining. Whining and lying. Those are my biggest pet peeves.
The committee hearings are SUPPOSED to be filled with robust conversations and debate. But instead, they fall in line and obey. Because that's exactly what is expected of them and when they break rank, they get punished.
THAT, my friends, is one reason why we need the House Rules to be overhauled!
So what can you do?
- HB 781 NEEDS TO DIE. It's just not good. It contradicts the Republican platform. It robs the parties and the people of thier right to associate/affiliate and therefore, is in contradiction to our First Amendment rights. It's overreaching as far as the protections for election workers and there's another part I didn't even discuss that just ridiculous. It will come up for a vote soon, so we need to be contacting all the Election Committee members via phone & email until they commit to voting no. Fill up the inboxes & email boxes - make the phones ring and respectfully tell them what you want. They have no power other than their vote, so keep it focused and polite.
OPPOSE HB 781. Ask them to vote NO.
Peggy McGaugh, Chair - peggy.mcgaugh@house.mo.gov 573-751-2917
Dan Stacy, Vice Chair - dan.stacy@house.mo.gov. 573-751-8636
Joe Adams - joe.adams@ house.mo.gov. 573-751-4265
Brad Banderman - brad.banderman@house.mo.gov. 573.751.0549
Donna Baringer - donna.baringer@house.mo.gov. 573-751-4220
Tricia Byrnes - tricia.byrnes@house.mo.gov. 573.751.1460
Jeff Coleman - jeff.coleman@house.mo.gov. 573.751.1487
Bill Falkner - bill.falkner@house.mo.gov. 573.751.9755
Roger Reedy - roger.reedy@house.mo.gov. 573.751.3971
Alex Riley - alex.riley@house.mo.gov. 573.751.2210
Adam Schwadron - adam.schwadron@house.mo.gov. 573.751.2949
David Tyson Smith - david.smith@house.mo.gov. 573.751.9753
Justin Sparks - justin.sparks@house.mo.gov. 573.751.0562
Cheri Toalson Reisch - cheri.toalson-reisch@house.mo.gov. 573-751-1169
Ken Waller - ken.waller@house.mo.gov. 573.751.4451
Kevin Windham - kevin.windham@house.mo.gov. 573.751.4726
Eric Woods - eric.woods@house.mo.gov. 573.751.2199
2. SHARE THIS POST FAR & WIDE. The more we educate citizens and grow participation, the faster we see results.
3. Contact your Central Committee Chair & Share the Info. You can find your committee chair by using this interactive map. Share the info and ask them to write and submit a resolution opposing this bill from your county central committee.
And PRAY! Actually please do that first.
We’ll see what happens next week.
Subscribe to the blog so you don’t miss “the rest of the story!”
