Connect with us

Politics

Trial this week to decide boundaries of 3 Missouri Senate districts in St. Louis County

Published

on

[ad_1]


A political activist who spent much of the past six years in the fight over how Missouri legislative districts should be drawn will be the prime witness in a case challenging the state Senate map.Cole County Circuit Judge Jon Beetem on Monday denied an effort to exclude testimony from Sean Nicholson, principal at GPS Impact and leader of the 2018 Clean Missouri initiative, as an expert witness on redistricting. He will be the only witness for a group of three plaintiffs who are challenging aspects of the map crafted by a panel of judges in early 2022.The lawsuit asks Beetem to redraw the boundaries of five districts – three in northwest Missouri and two in St. Louis County – to remedy what the plaintiffs see are unconstitutional flaws. They contend that splitting Hazelwood in north St. Louis County between the 13th and 14th districts violates the constitution, as does splitting Buchanan County between the 12th and 34th districts.If Beetem agrees, and changes the map, it would be used in the 2024 elections. The proposed map is unlikely to change the partisan makeup of the Republican-dominated Senate, but it would shift at least one candidate planning to run next year out of their current district.Monday’s hearing on Nicholson’s qualifications was the last preliminary step before a trial, set to begin at 9 a.m. Wednesday. Beetem did not indicate Monday whether he would rule at the end of the presentations Wednesday or at a later date.Assistant Attorney General Jason Lewis, representing the secretary of state’s office, argued that advocacy does not equal expertise in redistricting issues.“He certainly is an experienced professional in the area of civics and campaigning and advocacy,” Lewis said. “That is not redistricting. That is not a redistricting field. Redistricting is a specialty.”In response, Chuck Hatfield, the Jefferson City attorney representing the plaintiffs, said Nicholson’s personal involvement in the fight over how Missouri should draw legislative districts makes his testimony important to determining whether the map should be changed.In addition to working on ballot-issue campaigns, Nicholson worked on the House map currently in use and helped draft proposed Senate maps that ultimately were rejected by the Senate Independent Bipartisan Citizens Commission, Hatfield said.“I don’t think there is any way this evidence should be excluded,” he said.Map issuesUnder the concept of one person, one vote, legislative districts are supposed to be nearly identical in population. And under civil rights laws, districts should be drawn to give minority voters an opportunity to elect representatives of their choice.To meet those standards, and reduce political gerrymandering, since the 1960s the Missouri Constitution has required bipartisan commissions to do the work of redrawing lines after every census. When a commission, after being given six months, is unable to agree on a map, the job is turned over to a panel of appeals court judges.In 2018, Nicholson and his backers successfully changed the constitution with an initiative petition they called Clean Missouri to make partisan fairness of the map a key priority for the commissions.Republicans, upset with the potential for new maps that would challenge their supermajorities, put their own ideas for changing the process on the 2020 ballot and it passed.It retained the idea that the districts should show some partisan fairness but made it a lower priority than keeping counties and cities intact in the new districts.Both Clean Missouri and its successor retained redistricting commissions and, when they could not agree, judicial panels.The Senate map being challenged in court was drawn by the judicial panel. A commission that worked on the Missouri House map agreed to a plan and it has not been challenged in court.The first priority, under the constitution, intended to “take precedence over any other part of this constitution,” is to make them racially fair. Another priority is that splits of counties “shall each be as few as possible” and that “as few municipal lines shall be crossed as possible.”In court on Monday, Beetem said that what he must decide after Wednesday’s trial is whether the map proposed in the lawsuit is a “better map,” constitutionally, than the one in use.Based on the 2020 census, an ideal Senate district has 181,027 people. There can be a deviation of up to 1% overall, and districts that do not cross municipal or county boundaries can vary as much as 3% from the ideal.Counties that have enough population for one or more districts are supposed to have as many whole districts as the population allows, with the remainder attached to a single adjacent district.It is “possible” to draw a constitutional map with fewer splits, Hatfield said in an interview. That makes the current map unconstitutional.“We think it is a very straightforward case,” Hatfield said.The lawsuit contends that the line drawn through Hazelwood as a boundary between the 13th Districtand 14th District is unnecessary, violating the “few as possible” provision and packing Black residents into the 13th District.Only the boundary between those two districts would be changed under the proposed map.On the western side of the state, Buchanan County is split between the 12th District and the 34th District. Putting Buchanan entirely within the 12th District, as proposed by the plaintiffs, would mean altering the 21st District as well.Under the proposed map, the 34th District would include Platte and all of Clay County outside the 17th District, which is entirely within the boundaries of Clay County. The portion of Clay County that would shift is currently drawn into the 21st District.The counties that would become part of the 21st District are Caldwell, Carroll, Chariton, Daviess, Grundy, Linn, Livingston and Sullivan.In the court filings responding to the proposed map, Lewis wrote that “many maps” could be drawn that do not split Hazelwood or Buchanan County but not every map with that result “is necessarily constitutional.”Political consequencesRepublicans hold a 24-10 majority in the Senate, and the changes being sought in Wednesday’s trial won’t significantly alter the partisan leanings of any district.Half of the Senate is on the ballot every two years. Next year, odd-numbered districts will elect senators.The two St. Louis County districts are both represented by Democrats. Sen. Angela Mosley will be seeking her second term representing the 13th District, while Sen. Brian Williams, who represents the 14th District, won his second and final term last year.In the northwest Missouri districts, Sen. Rusty Black, R-Chillicothe, won his 12th District seat last year and won’t be on the ballot until 2026. In the 34th District, Sen. Tony Luetkemeyer, R-Parkville, is barred from running again in 2026 due to term limits.But proposed changes in the 21st District would put state Rep. Doug Richey, R-Excelsior Springs, the 34th District. Richey and state Rep. Kurtis Gregory, R-Marshall, have launched campaigns for the GOP nomination in the district currently represented by Sen. Denny Hoskins.Richey’s home would be just a few miles outside the new district line but only residents of a district may run for legislative seats.Richey made headlines during the session for his budget amendment that would have barred state agencies, institutions and contractors from having diversity, equity and inclusion programs. The amendment was ultimately defeated.He thinks the district lines will survive the challenge, Richey said.“It is not likely that a judge is going to rule against a panel of judges with a declaration they didn’t have enough information to draw the map,” he said.He’s going to continue campaigning while the court case – which is likely to be appealed no matter how Beetem rules – goes on, Richey said.“Everyone is going to be watching very closely how he decides that matter,” Richey said. “It will definitely have an effect on this Senate district in terms of its boundaries.”This story was originally published by the Missouri Independent, part of States Newsroom.

[ad_2]

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Politics

Poll: Support for Missouri abortion rights amendment growing

Published

on

[ad_1]


A proposed constitutional amendment legalizing abortion in Missouri received support from more than half of respondents in a new poll from St. Louis University and YouGov.That’s a boost from a poll earlier this year, which could mean what’s known as Amendment 3 is in a solid position to pass in November.SLU/YouGov’s poll of 900 likely Missouri voters from Aug. 8-16 found that 52% of respondents would vote for Amendment 3, which would place constitutional protections for abortion up to fetal viability. Thirty-four percent would vote against the measure, while 14% aren’t sure.By comparison, the SLU/YouGov poll from February found that 44% of voters would back the abortion legalization amendment.St. Louis University political science professor Steven Rogers said 32% of Republicans and 53% of independents would vote for the amendment. That’s in addition to nearly 80% of Democratic respondents who would approve the measure. In the previous poll, 24% of Republicans supported the amendment.Rogers noted that neither Amendment 3 nor a separate ballot item raising the state’s minimum wage is helping Democratic candidates. GOP contenders for U.S. Senate, governor, lieutenant governor, treasurer and secretary of state all hold comfortable leads.“We are seeing this kind of crossover voting, a little bit, where there are voters who are basically saying, ‘I am going to the polls and I’m going to support a Republican candidate, but I’m also going to go to the polls and then I’m also going to try to expand abortion access and then raise the minimum wage,’” Rogers said.Republican gubernatorial nominee Mike Kehoe has a 51%-41% lead over Democrat Crystal Quade. And U.S. Sen. Josh Hawley is leading Democrat Lucas Kunce by 53% to 42%. Some GOP candidates for attorney general, secretary of state and treasurer have even larger leads over their Democratic rivals.

Brian Munoz

/

St. Louis Public RadioHundreds of demonstrators pack into a parking lot at Planned Parenthood of St. Louis and Southwest Missouri on June 24, 2022, during a demonstration following the Supreme Court’s reversal of a case that guaranteed the constitutional right to an abortion.

One of the biggest challenges for foes of Amendment 3 could be financial.Typically, Missouri ballot initiatives with well-funded and well-organized campaigns have a better chance of passing — especially if the opposition is underfunded and disorganized. Since the end of July, the campaign committee formed to pass Amendment 3 received more than $3 million in donations of $5,000 or more.That money could be used for television advertisements to improve the proposal’s standing further, Rogers said, as well as point out that Missouri’s current abortion ban doesn’t allow the procedure in the case of rape or incest.“Meanwhile, the anti side won’t have those resources to kind of try to make that counter argument as strongly, and they don’t have public opinion as strongly on their side,” Rogers said.There is precedent of a well-funded initiative almost failing due to opposition from socially conservative voters.In 2006, a measure providing constitutional protections for embryonic stem cell research nearly failed — even though a campaign committee aimed at passing it had a commanding financial advantage.Former state Sen. Bob Onder was part of the opposition campaign to that measure. He said earlier this month it is possible to create a similar dynamic in 2024 against Amendment 3, if social conservatives who oppose abortion rights can band together.“This is not about reproductive rights or care for miscarriages or IVF or anything else,” said Onder, the GOP nominee for Missouri’s 3rd Congressional District seat. “Missourians will learn that out-of-state special interests and dark money from out of state is lying to them and they will reject this amendment.”Quade said earlier this month that Missourians of all political ideologies are ready to roll back the state’s abortion ban.“Regardless of political party, we hear from folks who are tired of politicians being in their doctor’s offices,” Quade said. “They want politicians to mind their own business. So this is going to excite folks all across the political spectrum.”

[ad_2]

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Democrat Mark Osmack makes his case for Missouri treasurer

Published

on

[ad_1]


Mark Osmack has been out of the electoral fray for awhile, but he never completely abandoned his passion for Missouri politics.Osmack, a Valley Park native and U.S. Army veteran, previously ran for Missouri’s 2nd Congressional District seat and for state Senate. Now he’s the Democratic nominee for state treasurer after receiving a phone call from Missouri Democratic Party Chairman Russ Carnahan asking him to run.“There’s a lot of decision making and processing and evaluation that goes into it, which is something I am very passionate and interested in,” Osmack said this week on an episode of Politically Speaking.Osmack is squaring off against state Treasurer Vivek Malek, who was able to easily win a crowded GOP primary against several veteran lawmakers including House Budget Chairman Cody Smith and state Sen. Andrew Koenig.While Malek was able to attract big donations to his political action committee and pour his own money into the campaign, Osmack isn’t worried that he won’t be able to compete in November. Since Malek was appointed to his post, Osmack contends he hasn’t proven that he’s a formidable opponent in a general election.“His actions and his decision making so far in his roughly two year tenure in that office have been questionable,” Osmack said.Among other things, Osmack was critical of Malek for placing unclaimed property notices on video gaming machines which are usually found in gas stations or convenience stores. The legality of the machines has been questioned for some time.As Malek explained on his own episode of Politically Speaking, he wanted to make sure the unclaimed property program was as widely advertised as possible. But he acknowledged it was a mistake to put the decals close to the machines and ultimately decided to remove them.Osmack said: “This doesn’t even pass the common sense sniff test of, ‘Hey, should I put state stickers claiming you might have a billion dollars on a gambling machine that is not registered with the state of Missouri?’ If we’re gonna give kudos for him acknowledging the wrong thing, it never should have been done in the first place.”Osmack’s platform includes supporting programs providing school meals using Missouri agriculture products and making child care more accessible for the working class.He said the fact that Missouri has such a large surplus shows that it’s possible to create programs to make child care within reach for parents.“It is quite audacious for [Republicans] to brag about $8 billion, with a B, dollars in state surplus, while we offer next to no social services to include pre-K, daycare, or child care,” Osmack said.Here’s are some other topics Osmack discussed on the show:How he would handle managing the state’s pension systems and approving low-income housing tax credits. The state treasurer’s office is on boards overseeing both of those programs.Malek’s decision to cut off investments from Chinese companies. Osmack said that Missouri needs to be cautious about abandoning China as a business partner, especially since they’re a major consumer of the state’s agriculture products. “There’s a way to make this work where we are not supporting communist nations to the detriment of the United States or our allies, while also maintaining strong economic ties that benefit Missouri farmers,” he said.What it was like to witness the skirmish at the Missouri State Fair between U.S. Sen. Josh Hawley and Democratic challenger Lucas Kunce.Whether Kunce can get the support of influential groups like the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, which often channels money and staff to states with competitive Senate elections.

[ad_2]

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

As Illinois receives praise for its cannabis equity efforts, stakeholders work on system’s flaws

Published

on

[ad_1]


Medical marijuana patients can now purchase cannabis grown by small businesses as part of their allotment, Illinois’ top cannabis regulator said, but smaller, newly licensed cannabis growers are still seeking greater access to the state’s medical marijuana customers.Illinois legalized medicinal marijuana beginning in 2014, then legalized it for recreational use in 2020. While the 2020 law legalized cannabis use for any adult age 21 or older, it did not expand licensing for medical dispensaries.Patients can purchase marijuana as part of the medical cannabis program at dual-purpose dispensaries, which are licensed to serve both medical and recreational customers. But dual-purpose dispensaries are greatly outnumbered by dispensaries only licensed to sell recreationally, and there are no medical-only dispensaries in the state.As another part of the adult-use legalization law, lawmakers created a “craft grow” license category that was designed to give more opportunities to Illinoisans hoping to legally grow and sell marijuana. The smaller-scale grow operations were part of the 2020 law’s efforts to diversify the cannabis industry in Illinois.Prior to that, all cultivation centers in Illinois were large-scale operations dominated by large multi-state operators. The existing cultivators, mostly in operation since 2014, were allowed to grow recreational cannabis beginning in 2019.Until recently, dual-purpose dispensaries have been unsure as to whether craft-grown products, made by social equity licensees — those who have lived in a disproportionately impacted area or have been historically impacted by the war on drugs — can be sold medicinally as part of a patient’s medical allotment.Erin Johnson, the state’s cannabis regulation oversight officer, told Capitol News Illinois last month that her office has “been telling dispensaries, as they have been asking us” they can now sell craft-grown products to medical patients.“There was just a track and trace issue on our end, but never anything statutorily,” she said.

Dilpreet Raju

/

Capitol News IllinoisThe graphic shows how cannabis grown in Illinois gets from cultivation centers to customers.

No notice has been posted, but Johnson’s verbal guidance comes almost two years after the first craft grow business went online in Illinois.It allows roughly 150,000 medical patients, who dispensary owners say are the most consistent purchasers of marijuana, to buy products made by social equity businesses without paying recreational taxes. However — even as more dispensaries open — the number available to medical patients has not increased since 2018, something the Cannabis Regulation Oversight Office “desperately” wants to see changed. Johnson said Illinois is a limited license state, meaning “there are caps on everything” to help control the relatively new market.Berwyn Thompkins, who operates two cannabis businesses, said the rules limited options for patients and small businesses.“It’s about access,” Thompkins said. “Why wouldn’t we want all the patients — which the (adult-use) program was initially built around — why wouldn’t we want them to have access? They should have access to any dispensary.”Customers with a medical marijuana card pay a 1% tax on all marijuana products, whereas recreational customers pay retail taxes between roughly 20 and 40% on a given cannabis product, when accounting for local taxes.While Illinois has received praise for its equity-focused cannabis law, including through an independent study that showed more people of color own cannabis licenses than in any other state, some industry operators say they’ve experienced many unnecessary hurdles getting their businesses up and running.The state, in fact, announced last month that it had opened its 100th social equity dispensary.But Steve Olson, purchasing manager at a pair of dispensaries (including one dual-purpose dispensary) near Rockford, said small specialty license holders have been left in the lurch since the first craft grower opened in October 2022.“You would think that this would be something they’re (the government) trying to help out these social equity companies with, but they’re putting handcuffs on them in so many different spots,” he said. “One of them being this medical thing.”Olson said he contacted state agencies, including the Department of Financial and Professional Regulation, months ago about whether craft products can be sold to medical patients at their retail tax rate, but only heard one response: “They all say it was an oversight.”This potentially hurt social equity companies because they sell wholesale to dispensaries and may have been missing out on a consistent customer base through those medical dispensaries.Olson said the state’s attempts to provide licensees with a path to a successful business over the years, such as with corrective lotteries that granted more social equity licenses, have come up short.“It’s like they almost set up the social equity thing to fail so the big guys could come in and swoop up all these licenses,” Olson said. “I hate to feel like that but, if you look at it, it’s pretty black and white.”Olson said craft companies benefit from any type of retail sale.“If we sell it to medical patients or not, it’s a matter of, ‘Are we collecting the proper taxes?’ That’s all it is,” he said.State revenue from cannabis taxes, licensing costs and other fees goes into the Cannabis Regulation Fund, which is used to fund a host of programs, including cannabis offense expungement, the general revenue fund, and the R3 campaign aiming to uplift disinvested communities.For fiscal year 2024, nearly $256 million was paid out from Cannabis Regulation Fund for related initiatives, which includes almost $89 million transferred to the state’s general revenue fund and more than $20 million distributed to local governments, according to the Illinois Department of Revenue.Medical access still limitedThe state’s 55 medical dispensaries that predate the 2020 legalization law, mostly owned by publicly traded multistate operators that had been operating in Illinois since 2014 under the state’s medical marijuana program, were automatically granted a right to licenses to sell recreationally in January 2020. That gave them a dual-purpose license that no new entrants into the market can receive under current law.Since expanding their clientele in 2020, Illinois dispensaries have sold more than $6 billion worth of cannabis products through recreational transactions alone.Nearly two-thirds of dispensaries licensed to sell to medical patients are in the northeast counties of Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake and Will. Dual-purpose dispensaries only represent about 20 percent of the state’s dispensaries.While the state began offering recreational dispensary licenses since the adult-use legalization law passed, it has not granted a new medical dispensary license since 2018. That has allowed the established players to continue to corner the market on the state’s nearly 150,000 medical marijuana patients.But social equity licensees and advocates say there are more ways to level the playing field, including expanding access to medical sales.Johnson, who became the state’s top cannabis regulator in late 2022, expressed hope for movement during the fall veto session on House Bill 2911, which would expand medical access to all Illinois dispensaries.“We would like every single dispensary in Illinois to be able to serve medical patients,” Johnson said. “It’s something that medical patients have been asking for, for years.”Johnson said the bill would benefit patients and small businesses.“It’s something we desperately want to happen as a state system, because we want to make sure that medical patients are able to easily access what they need,” she said. “We also think it’s good for our social equity dispensaries, as they’re opening, to be able to serve medical patients.”Rep. Bob Morgan, D-Deerfield, who was the first statewide project coordinator for Illinois’ medical cannabis program prior to joining the legislature, wrote in an email to Capitol News Illinois that the state needs to be doing more for its patients.“Illinois is failing the state’s 150,000 medical cannabis patients with debilitating conditions. Too many are still denied the patient protections they deserve, including access to their medicine,” Morgan wrote, adding he would continue to work with stakeholders on further legislation.Capitol News Illinois is a nonprofit, nonpartisan news service covering state government. It is distributed to hundreds of newspapers, radio and TV stations statewide. It is funded primarily by the Illinois Press Foundation and the Robert R. McCormick Foundation, along with major contributions from the Illinois Broadcasters Foundation and Southern Illinois Editorial Association.

[ad_2]

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending