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
In hopes of consolidating our Calls To Action and hot topics for the upcoming week, I'm going to link the Senate info here and I'll do my best to update you as the week progresses. These aren't the only items we are watching and as you know legislation is an every changing beast so I'll keep you posted as best I can.
monday, feb 6th
senate hearings
Local Government & Elections Committee
2:00 pm in Senate Committee Room 2
SB 16 by Cierpiot - OPPOSE. Weighted voting in our Central Committees. It's BAD!
SJR 30 by Ben Brown - SUPPORT. Bans rank choice voting via ballot measure.
1. Come testify in person
2. Call and email the committee members:
Senator Elaine Gannon, Chair - elaine.gannon@senate.mo.gov 573.751.4008
Senator Sandy Crawford, Vice Chair - sandy.crawford@senate.mo.gov. 573.751.8793
Senator Jill Carter - jill.carter@senate.mo.gov. 573.751.2173
Senator Mary Elizabeth Coleman - maryelizabeth.coleman@senate.mo.gov 573.751.1492
Senator Andrew Koenig - andrew.koenig@senate.mo.gov. 573.751.5568
Senator John Rizzo - john.rizzo@senate.mo.gov. 573.751.3074
Senator Barbara Washington - barbara.washington@senate.mo.gov. 573.751.3158
Senate Formal Calendar**
Bills on the formal calendar will be brought to the floor for debate & perfection, but there's no way to know when. They won't all make it to the floor Monday, but it will depend on how quickly things move as to when they do arrive this week or maybe even next week. There will also be additions as time passes. These are the bills I've been watching closely, but there are a few others as well.
SB 5 by Koenig - School Choice. OPPOSE. Can't support as currently written.
SB 81 by Coleman - Voucher/School Choice & Tax Credit for Home Schools. OPPOSE. Can't support as currently written. The playing field is unequal between public & private schools. Either push DESE back out of public schools or the only fair thing to do is push DESE requirement in to private and although we don't want that, it will likely happen. The Treasurer's office will create the rules around the flow of money. It won't end well. Private schools need to be protected and public schools need to be free.
SB 100 by Eigel - Gold & Silver. SUPPORT
SB 39 by Rehder - Boys in Girl's Sports. SUPPORT w/Amendments to strike DESE & Title 9 language. Change the language regarding birth certificates due to Cierpiot's birth certificate bill. She needs to use Moon's language in regard to identification of biological boys.
SB 117 by Leutkemeyer - Torte Reform & Sovereign Immunity. OPPOSE. This is a HORRIBLE bill. I can't express how bad & far reaching it will be. This bill needs to die quickly!!
SB 45 by Gannon - Expanding Medicaid. OPPOSE. Why are Republicans expanding medicaid?? The only way we can support this is if they add the pro-life language to it that would exclude post abortion care. We might see a filibuster over this one.
senate resolutions
SCR 4 by Eigel - Commends Israel from its cordial and mutually beneficial relationship with Missouri and the United States, supports Israel's right to exist and recognizes Jerusalem as the eternal capitol of Israel. I LOVE BILL EIGEL FOR THIS!!
tuesday
senate hearings
Education & Workforce Development
8:15am in the Senate Lounge
SB 134 by Moon. SUPPORT. Bans school personnel from speaking with students about gender identity without prior permission from a parent.
1. Testify in person. Arrive by 7:15 or even earlier. Doors should open at 7:45 am. Limited seating. Overflow stands in hallway.
2. Call & Email Committee Members
Andrew Koenig, Chair 573.751.5568
Rick Brattin, Vice-Chair. 573.751.2108
Lauren Arthur. 573.751.5282
Doug Beck. 573.751.0220
Elaine Gannon. 573.751.4008
Denny Hoskins. 573.751.4302
Greg Razer. 573.751.6607
Nick Schroer. 573.751.1282
Curtis Trent. 573.751.1503
Education Committee Emails: andrew.koenig@senate.mo.gov, rick.brattin@senate.mo.gov, lauren.arthur@senate.mo.gov, doug.beck@senate.mo.gov, elaine.gannon@senate.mo.gov, denny.hoskins@senate.mo.gov, greg.razer@senate.mo.gov, nick.schroer@senate.mo.gov, curtis.trent@senate.mo.gov
Senator Ben Brown's SJR 30, a resolution that would add a ban of rank choice voting to our ballot, has a hearing at 2:00 pm in the Senate Local Government and Elections Committee.
This bill also includes additional provisions to help improve election security such as enshrining in statute that only US citizens can vote in MO elections. It strengthens requirements on what kind of machines can be used and ensures permanent paper records for each vote are kept and preserved for use in any future election audit.
Multiple democrat groups are expected to show up and strongly oppose the bill. We need as much support as we can get to be physically present in the room!
If you believe in preserving the integrity of our elections please share this information and consider coming to the Capitol Monday to testify. Unfortunately, the Senate has decided they will not be accepting online witness forms.
call to action
1. Come to the Capitol Monday to testify if you are able.
Time: 2:00 pm
Place: Senate Committee Room 2
Plan to arrive around 1:00 pm. Doors will open at 1:30 pm
If you need help with information regarding your visit to Jefferson City, please reach out. I'm here to help!
2. Call and Email each of the committee members and express your SUPPORT of SJR 30. Ask for a yes vote and any other support they are able to give.
Senator Elaine Gannon, Chair - elaine.gannon@senate.mo.gov 573.751.4008
Senator Sandy Crawford, Vice Chair - sandy.crawfod@senate.mo.gov. 573.751.8793
Senator Jill Carter - jill.carter@senate.mo.gov. 573.751.2173
Senator Mary Elizabeth Coleman - maryelizabeth.coleman@senate.mo.gov 573.751.1492
Senator Andrew Koenig - andrew.koenig@senate.mo.gov. 573.751.5568
Senator John Rizzo - john.rizzo@senate.mo.gov. 573.751.3074
Senator Barbara Washington - barbara.washington@senate.mo.gov. 573.751.3158
We knew Cierpiot's weighted voting bill wouldn't stay down for long and indeed, it is up for a hearing again next week.
Sorry, Senator Cierpiot, your tricky shenanigans aren't going work this time. Even those constituents who traveled in to Jefferson City last week to testify, only for it to be pulled at the last minute will be back and with even more determination this week. Good try.
Nothing about the bill has changed so although he may have hoped that pulling it from committee a couple weeks ago would mean we'd forget or not be willing to take up the fight again, that is certainly not the case at all.
This bill is important, so please take action and do whatever you are able.
call to action
If you aren't aware of the bill and the details, please read my previous post, Dictatorship Is Coming To Your County.
SB 16 is scheduled now to be heard in the Local Government & Elections Committee on Monday, February 6 at 2:00 pm.
1. PRAY! Please pray the committee would vote down this horrible piece of legislation. It needs to die in committee and not waste the time, effort and energy of our legislators or citizens.
2. Come testify in person. Plan to arrive at the hearing room approximately 1/2 hour early, around 1:30 pm. It will be located in Senate Committee Room 2. This is located in the back hallway (behind the rotunda) on the first floor. Walk behind the rotunda and turn right. The committee rooms are on the left.
2. Contact Your Central Committee Chair. Express to your county chair that you feel this bill is bad for Missouri and would request your central committee to write and submit a resolution to this effect. Click on the link to find your chairperson and their email address.
3. Email and Call Every Committee Member. Every senator on this committee is serving the entire state in their position on this issue. Contact each of them by phone & email to let them know your thoughts.
Committee Members
Senator Elaine Gannon, Chair - elaine.gannon@senate.mo.gov 573.751.4008
Senator Sandy Crawford, Vice Chair - sandy.crawfod@senate.mo.gov. 573.751.8793
Senator Jill Carter - jill.carter@senate.mo.gov. 573.751.2173
Senator Mary Elizabeth Coleman - maryelizabeth.coleman@senate.mo.gov 573.751.1492
Senator Andrew Koenig - andrew.koenig@senate.mo.gov. 573.751.5568
Senator John Rizzo - john.rizzo@senate.mo.gov. 573.751.3074
Senator Barbara Washington - barbara.washington@senate.mo.gov. 573.751.3158
