Archive for August, 2013

On September 11th, the Missouri General Assembly will meet to see if they have the testicular fortitude to override Governor Nixon’s vetoes of several bills that passed with amazing majorities this past session.

Bills we have particularly focused upon include the Second Amendment Preservation Act (HB436) and the Anti-Agenda 21 legislation (SB265). there are other bills you may want to focus upon, but these are two that passed with veto proof majorities that the governor saw fit to override.

Here is an alert from Missouri Precinct Project on another bill, HB253:

Time is getting close and in the remaining days before the Veto Session, the Missouri Precinct Project would like to urge everyone across the state to do everything we can to override the Governor’s veto on the “Broad-Based Tax Relief Act of 2013 – HB253”.
 The Governor has been traveling around the state telling people, and primarily teachers, that this bill would cut funding for education. Nothing could be further from the truth. Actually, the  Governor is withholding $400 Million from education funding that the legislature as already appropriated.The only official that withholds money from education is the Governor.
The Governor claims that returning money to the taxpayers is a risky scheme, yet he is traveling around the state in his new airplane, when the state already has several airplanes that are not being used. Others complain that the tax cut is to small that it will not make much of a difference. Well, which is it. The tax cut will doom us all or the tax cut is not benefiting anyone. Remember, this is first time in 100 years that anyone has cut any Income Taxes and it is a first steps with more steps to follow.
Some Legislators are saying that they are not able to support an override because it hurts teachers. We know that this is totally false and we need to call on those people that caving to School Superintendents is not leadership but standing up for what is right and proper shows that they can do what is right for all the people in the state and not just for those that are unwilling to work for real education reform instead of always asking for more money.
We urge all of the individuals on this email to call their legislators, on either side of the isle, and urge them to override HB253.
The attached document lists specific information in more detail.
And all of us need to call the legislators that did not sign the original bill, are sitting on the fence or have expressed that they might favor an override even if they did not vote for the original bill.
Don Phillips, R-138
Dennis Fowler, R-151
Elaine Gannon, R-151
Kent Hampton, R-150
Jeff Roorda, D-113
Ed Schieffer, D-041
Steve Hodges, D-149
Go to http://www.house.mo.gov/member.aspx for contact information.
And don’t forget to call you Senator as well. Make sure you remind them that we need the tax cut. We cannot afford to let more jobs cross the state line to move out of Missouri.

Enjoy your Labor Day weekend and next week start making those phone calls.

Deborah (Beaver) Slack was born July 8, 1954, at Walker Air Force Base, Roswell, New Mexico, and returned to her Creator August 24, 2013. She was united in marriage to Michael Don Slack and resided on a farm near Thayer, Missouri, which she loved.

Debbie Slack…She will be sorely missed.

She is survived by her husband Michael, daughter Carmen Deborah Smith, son-in-law Keith Rodell Smith, granddaughter Cheyenne Dakota Smith and grandson Laramie Laredo Smith of Gentry, Arkansas; daughter Maria Palmer and son-in-law in spirit Kyle Love of Steamboat Springs, Colorado; her parents Beal and Lynn Beaver of Prairie Grove, Arkansas; brothers Steve, Mark and David Beaver, sisters-in-law Jennifer and Karen Beaver, sister Sharon and brother-in-law Robert Hensley all of Northwest, Arkansas, sister Pam and brother-in-law Naushad Aurangzeb of Alta Loma, California; mother-in-law Mary Slack, sister-in-law Jill Slack and nephew Matthew Slack of Springfield.
Deb was a retired elementary school teacher and lifelong gardener. She was the founder of Ozarks Self Reliant Living University and taught classes in gardening and heritage studies each month in three cities.
She was an organizer of the Go Green Festival in Thayer, a member of the Missouri Organic Association and a speaker at their conference every year, and a supporter of the Ozarks Property Rights Coalition. She loved her family, her country, her farm and the chance to teach others organic gardening, canning and self-reliance.
She especially loved her daughters and her beautiful grandchildren. She had many friends in the Ozarks that she loved and thousands of people online in the Organic Homestead Gardening Group and others whose lives were made richer by knowledge she shared.
She loved native American culture and was adopted into, and appointed Medicine Woman by the Overhill Cherokee Nation. She was a member of the Republican Central Committee of Oregon County and many politicians will testify that she often warned them to stay honest and respect the people they served. She was a frequent guest on local radio, especially America’s Voice Now, and was offered the chance to host a weekly self-reliance radio program two days before her passing.
She worked long hours in her garden, loving every minute, and credited her mother with her love of gardening. She and Mike loved working together and had talked the day before she passed about how happy they were and how they planned to grow old together on their farm.
A celebration of Deb’s life will be held Saturday, Aug. 31, 2013, at 1:00 p.m. at Carter Funeral Home Chapel, 827 Chestnut St., in Thayer. Afterwards, as Deb wished, her friends and family will meet at the Fun & Friends Senior Center, 100 Chestnut St,, in downtown Thayer to share memories over covered dishes in the old time country way. All are welcome.

Lots of people were very excited that Glenn Beck was going to be in Southern Missouri and quite looking forward to the event. The PRC was considering having an informational booth at the event to help people to network with other freedom fighters in their general area to thwart Agenda 21 with knowledge and the eternal documents, documents, documents that are necessary for effective action…..However, the event has moved.

The deepest concern we have is that THERE ARE NO REFUNDS being given to people who purchased tickets or booths for the event in Branson. This is unconscionable. Maybe people from outside of the area don’t understand that distance and time is an issue. For instance, where we live, Branson is a 2 1/2 hour drive. We can, with a lot of planning, make a day trip to Branson and still be able to make it home safely. Kansas City is a five hour drive. That’s 10 hours on the road and however long at the event, and not something that is easily done in a single day with commitments on both sides of attending the event. This is the case for a lot of people.

When you move an event a long distance with short notice it’s bad enough, but when you don’t refund people due to your poor planning, it’s pretty well criminal.

The PRC will not be having a booth at the Covenant America Event.

We are saddened that such a promising event is now deeply clouded with such impropriety.

This makes me wonder if he would prefer to ban citizen journalists as well….and, aren’t most journalists in Missouri citizens as well?

Senator Blunt Bans Media From Listening Posts

 

As elected officials return to their districts to host townhalls, listening posts, and an array of “talk to the constituents” events during the August recess they’re learning that constituents are pretty eager to talk to them. As a precaution for his “listening post,” Missouri Senator Roy Blunt has barred media presence [my emphasis]:

Listening Posts are meetings with Missourians held by Senator Blunt’s staff across the state. During these meetings, Missourians are invited to share questions and concerns with members of the Senator’s staff.

Listening Posts are not open to the media – if you’re a reporter and have a question or a request for comments, please call 202-224-1403.

Senator Blunt’s Jefferson City office also extends one-on-one service to all Missourians who have an issue with a federal agency or need assistance. Please call the Senator’s Office of Constituent Services at (573) 634-2488 or send us a letter at 308 E. High Street, Suite 202, Jefferson City, Missouri 65101.

I understand that barring media gives district residents greater opportunity to engage with their elected senator. Their concerns and questions are often vastly different from what a mostly biased, “gotcha” media has in mind. However, wouldn’t some, perhaps invited, media coverage allow those district constituents who are unable to attend to take part in a way? And what of private citizens who are also citizen journalists? Everyone with a camera is a citizen journalist, it’s the new minute man.

Perhaps it’s because I view every opportunity to drive the agenda as just that, an opportunity. I do wish Senator Blunt would at least partially reconsider and invite a few media members in television and newspaper who are responsible enough (our state has a few) to accurately amplify the discussion to those unable to attend — perhaps web cast?

– See more at: http://danaloeschradio.com/senator-blunt-bans-media-from-listening-posts/#sthash.al24ZcKU.dpuf

This is an interesting issue. If we had economic freedom, where one actually profited from their labor without onerous governmental management, this likely wouldn’t be an issue at all.

There are two articles worth reading here, so this is a rather long post. Here is the first one:

When Welfare Pays Better than Work

The federal government funds 126 separate programs targeted towards low-income people, 72 of which provide either cash or in-kind benefits to individuals. (The rest fund community-wide programs for low-income neighborhoods, with no direct benefits to individuals.) State and local governments operate more welfare programs.Of course, no individual or family gets benefits from all 72 programs, but many do get aid from a number of them at any point in time.

Today, the Cato institute is releasing a new study looking at the state-by-state value of welfare for a mother with two children. In the Empire State, a family receiving Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Medicaid, food stamps, WIC, public housing, utility assistance and free commodities (like milk and cheese) would have a package of benefits worth $38,004, the seventh-highest in the nation.

While that might not sound overly generous, remember that welfare benefits aren’t taxed, while wages are. So someone in New York would have to earn more than $21 per hour to be better off than they would be on welfare. That’s more than the average statewide entry-level salary for a teacher.

Plus, going to work means added costs such as paying for child care, transportation and clothing. Not to mention that, even if it’s not a money-loser, a person moving from welfare to work will see some form of loss — namely, less time for leisure as opposed to work.

Is it any wonder, then, that, despite the work requirements included in the 1996 welfare reform, only 27.6 percent of adult welfare recipients in New York are working in unsubsidized jobs? (Another 13 percent are involved in the more broadly defined “work participation,” which includes job search, training and other things.)

Welfare is slightly more generous in Connecticut, where benefits are worth $38,761; a person leaving welfare for work would have to earn $21.33 per hour to be better off. And in New Jersey, a worker would have to make $20.89 to beat welfare.

Nationwide, our study found that the wage-equivalent value of benefits for a mother and two children ranged from a high of $60,590 in Hawaii to a low of $11,150 in Idaho. In 33 states and the District of Columbia, welfare pays more than an $8-an-hour job. In 12 states and DC, the welfare package is more generous than a $15-an-hour job.

Of course, not everyone on welfare gets all seven of the benefits in our study. But, for many recipients — particularly the “long-term” dependents — welfare clearly pays substantially more than an entry-level job.

To be clear: There is no evidence that people on welfare are lazy. Indeed, surveys of them consistently show their desire for a job. But they’re also not stupid. If you pay them more not to work than they can earn by working, many will choose not to work.

While this makes sense for them in the short term, it may actually hurt them over the long term. One of the most important steps toward avoiding or getting out of poverty is a job.Only 2.6 percent of full-time workers are poor, vs. 23.9 percent of adults who don’t work. And, while many anti-poverty activists decry low-wage jobs, even starting at a minimum-wage job can be a springboard out of poverty.

Thus, by providing such generous welfare payments, we may actually not be helping recipients.

There should be a public-policy preference for work over welfare. And while it would be nice to raise the wages of entry-level service workers, government has no ability to do so. (Studies have shown that attempts to mandate wage increases, such as minimum-wage hikes, primarily result in higher unemployment for the lowest-skilled workers.)

If Congress and state legislatures are serious about reducing welfare dependence and rewarding work, they should consider strengthening work requirements in welfare programs, removing exemptions and narrowing the definition of work.

In New York, lawmakers should consider ways to shrink the gap between the value of welfare and work by reducing current benefit levels and tightening eligibility requirements.

The federal government funds 126 separate programs targeted towards low-income people, 72 of which provide either cash or in-kind benefits to individuals. (The rest fund community-wide programs for low-income neighborhoods, with no direct benefits to individuals.) State and local governments operate more welfare programs. Of course, no individual or family gets benefits from all 72 programs, but many do get aid from a number of them at any point in time. In the Empire State, a family receiving Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Medicaid, food stamps, WIC, public housing, utility assistance and free commodities (like milk and cheese) would have a package of benefits worth $38,004, the seventh-highest in the nation. Welfare is slightly more generous in Connecticut, where benefits are worth $38,761; a person leaving welfare for work would have to earn $21.33 per hour to be better off. And in New Jersey, a worker would have to make $20.89 to beat welfare. Nationwide, our study found that the wage-equivalent value of benefits for a mother and two children ranged from a high of $60,590 in Hawaii to a low of $11,150 in Idaho. In 33 states and the District of Columbia, welfare pays more than an $8-an-hour job. In 12 states and DC, the welfare package is more generous than a $15-an-hour job. People Aren’t That Stupid While it’s beneficial to have a job, assuming there is hope of advancement, for those with no special skills there is little to no hope of advancement. Moreover, wages are taxed, welfare benefits are not. And what about day-care costs for single mothers? What about transportation costs? What about the value of extra leisure time? Add it all up and it makes perfect sense for many to remain on welfare for as long as they can. Minimum Wage Fallacy Given welfare benefits exceed minimum wage, it should not be surprising to find socialists arguing for higher minimum wages. And they are. In Seattle, a Campaign Seeks to Push Minimum Wage to $15. How successful would that be? Not very. The higher the minimum wage, the more incentive businesses have to get rid of employees and use hardware and software robots. And with the Fed suppressing interest rates, companies can borrow with minuscule interest rates and do just that. Should minimum wages rise, the recipient workers would benefit, but at the expense of millions of others who would lose a job or not get one. Then when prices rose in response, the socialists would ask for increased welfare benefits to keep up with the rising cost of living!

UPDATE: Park service rescinds permit requirement for baptisms…    http://www.thesalemnewsonline.com/news/local_news/article_…
UPDATE: Park service rescinds permit requirement for baptisms
The Salem News | Posted: Tuesday, August 20, 2013 11:00 am
The National Park Service will no longer require permits for baptisms on rivers in the Ozark National Riverways, according to an announcement Thursday from the office of congressman Jason Smith (R-Salem).
“Today’s decision by the park service is a victory for common sense,” said Smith. “The notion that permits would be required for baptisms on our riverways is ridiculous. I appreciate (ONSR) Superintendent Bill Black’s quick response to my request to rescind the permit requirement, and I want to continue working with him and the folks who live along the rivers to preserve our traditions and rural way of life.”
Smith was notified of the reversal in letter from Black dated Aug. 22.
“As of today the park’s policy has been clarified to state that no permit will be required for baptisms within the Riverways,” said Black’s letter to Smith.
A story about the required permit and objections from some churches was published in The Salem News Aug. 20 and on the newspaper’s web site, thesalemnewsonline.com, the same day.
Over 5,000 people read the story on the web site within 48 hours, and thousands more read it in the newspaper and spread it on facebook and other social media sites.
Smith reacted immediately and made his request of Black.
“We have closely reviewed the National Park Service Policy and have determined that as superintendent I have the option to require a special use permit for baptisms and other activities within the park,” Black wrote.
“We have reviewed our past practice of issuing special use permits and determined that I have the flexibility within agency policy to allow the baptisms without a permit.
“We also share your concern for the continuation of this traditional use of the rivers. As of today the park’s policy has been clarified to state that no permit will be required for baptisms within the riverways.”
The following story ran in The Salem News Aug. 20 and on thesalemnewsonline.com:
By Allyssa D. Dudley
Staff Writer
1 of 3    8/22/13 3:50 PM
UPDATE: Park service rescinds permit requirement for baptisms…    http://www.thesalemnewsonline.com/news/local_news/article_…
The Ozark National Scenic Riverways is now actively enforcing a policy that would require churches to apply for a special use permit in order to baptize on the riverways.
ONSR has required those participating in first amendment activities to apply for a special use permit for nearly 25 years, according to Faye Walmsley, public information officer. First amendment activities can include religious services, public demonstrations and press coverage, according to information provided by ONSR.
“We have just never actively used the authority until 2006,” she said.
Walmsley said the policy is in place in order to prevent scheduling conflicts. She cited that several times she knew of multiple weddings attempting to take place on the same day at the same location, when there also may be another event taking place.
“It is a policy that needs to be enforced. We want to make sure there is no conflict between entities,” she said.
For the members of Gladden Baptist Church, being required to schedule their baptisms at Sinking Creek ahead of time is a conflict in itself.
“If the Holy Spirit is working on Sunday morning, you’re going to baptize Sunday afternoon. You may not know ahead of time,” said church member Dennis Purcell.
Purcell said that the congregation of Gladden Baptist Church has baptized its members on Sinking Creek for nearly 50 years. Originally members of the congregation would go down to the water’s edge to view the service. This changed in 2011 when the parks service installed large boulders blocking the sandbar to vehicle traffic, including wheelchairs.
It was due to this issue that Purcell contacted ONSR Superintendent William N. Black, who responded by advising Purcell that all activities would require a special-use permit. In a letter dated July 3 Black wrote,
“To maintain park natural/cultural resources and quality visitor experiences, specific terms and conditions have been established,” the letter said.
Black went on to write that a master application would be produced and sent out in multiple copies to streamline the process, and those permits would be good for seven days.
Walmsley said this week that in the future churches would be given an exception, and their permits would be good for one year. With the master application churches would be required to give two business days notification of events, including baptisms.
“We’ll fill everything out for them, and do all the work, we just need to check the schedule and
2 of 3    8/22/13 3:50 PM
UPDATE: Park service rescinds permit requirement for baptisms…    http://www.thesalemnewsonline.com/news/local_news/article_…
approve the events,” she said.
Three area churches are currently using the master application permit for a singular location, including Midvale Pentecostal Church, Pleasant Grove United Methodist, and Hartshorn Assembly of God.
“It doesn’t really change anything. They told us they were going to respect our traditions and heritage, and they haven’t done any of that,” Purcell said.
Purcell stated that he has advised U.S. Representative Jason Smith of the issue.
If a group or individual was found using the access area without a permit, there would potentially be a fine levied, Walmsley said.
3 of 3    8/22/13 3:50 PM

From Duane Lester of the Missouri Torch, who is doing an absolutely great job of keeping us up on this issue!

Rep. Stanley Cox: “It’s Absolutely Clear…The Dept. of Revenue Was Implementing All The Requirements of REAL ID”

Yesterday in Jefferson City, the Bipartisan Investigative Committee on Privacy Protection concluded public hearings on the Department of Revenue’s collection of data from CCW holders, the release of the CCW list to the federal government and the department’s possible violation of state law by implementing the requirements of REAL ID.

Following a discussion of the committee’s conclusions, which you can watch here, I spoke with Rep. Stanley Cox, chairman of the committee about what he believes happened.

…”the Department of Revenue clearly was implementing all of the requirements of REAL ID” – Rep. Stanley Cox

“It’s absolutely clear to everyone that heard the testimony, maybe without exception, that despite the claims to the contrary, the Department of Revenue clearly was implementing all of the requirements of REAL ID,” Cox said.

Implementation of REAL ID was prohibited by state law in 2009 when Gov. Jay Nixon signed HB 361 into law. Members of the Nixon administration testified that despite the Department of Revenue taking action to comply with REAL ID, they weren’t violating the law because of the way the law was worded.

Edward R. Ardini, Jr., Counsel to the Governor, made the case yesterday to the Bipartisan Investigative Committee for Privacy Protection and Special Interim Committee on Privacy Protection that those three words change everything.

He testified that as long as actions that furthered compliance with REAL ID were taken, but not taken “in order to” comply with REAL ID, they were completely legal:

I think when it says ‘in order to comply with the goals or standards of REAL ID,’ I think that’s a purpose provision in there, and I understand what you’re saying, but I would disagree with that.

He later added:

That ‘in order to’ is important words in there. I understand, you may give it a different meaning than I may, but I think those are important words.

And:

If there’s a reason to implement something, for a security enhancement, ok, that is separate from implementing or complying with REAL ID, then the argument is you’re not doing it in order to comply with REAL ID.

Speculation was raised as to whether this logic was used by Gov. Nixon as a way to sign the bill into law, all the while intending to violate its intent. Cox said that was a “reasonable argument.”

“Because the testimony we received, that at the time of the adoption of that legislation in 2009, that even though they only testified for informational purposes, the department really opposed that, or at least there were a great number of people in the agency who thought it was a bad law. They never testified against it. So one theoretical analysis was, “Well, we’ll just let the General Assembly pass it, the Governor will sign the legislation, which he did, and we’ll just go ahead and ignore it.”

Although Cox believes there were laws broken, he says there will be no prosecution of those violations.

“Those were misdemeanors, not something likely to be prosecuted. They have a very short statute of limitations of one year. When these violations would have occurred, it wouldn’t have mattered if they were more than a year ago because they can’t be prosecuted. So, is somebody going to be prosecuted? Of course not. There’s not anybody really inclined to do it.”

The committee will issue a final report later with recommendations on how to prevent incidents like this in the future.