from Rep. Mike Colona’s enewsletter
The House of Representatives Rules Committee passed HB744, which creates the Missouri Family Recovery Plan Fund and the Economic Stimulus Fund in the state treasury to receive moneys provided under the federal American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. (2.18.09) This legislation passed the House of Representatives today, February 26, 2009 with an emergency clause in order for the state to begin receiving federal funds immediately.
from Rep. Mike Colona’s enewsletter
The House of Representative’s Crime Prevention Committee held a hearing on HB496, which changes the controlled substance classification of all methamphetamine precursor drugs from Schedule IV and Schedule III, requiring a physician’s prescription. I am a member of the Crime Prevention Committee and report that there were two no votes on this matter in committee, belonging to myself and Rep. Nasheed from St. Louis. The points we brought up to our colleagues were those discussed regarding the requirement of a physician’s prescription for Sudafed. My colleague and I emphasized that many of our constituents do not have primary health care doctors or health insurance, making it very difficult for law abiding citizens to obtain Sudafed. We also thought it was important to remind the other members of the committee that while meth is a big problem, the bigger problem we see in our urban neighborhoods are those of crack and heroin. The bill does nothing to address those concerns.
The House Budget Committee on Feb. 25 approved a supplemental spending bill for the current state budget that omits funding recommended by Gov. Jay Nixon that would extend health care coverage to about 20,000 Missouri children. Nixon had asked for the funding when he submitted his supplemental budget last month. However, House Budget Committee Chairman Alan Icet left it out of the bill, HB 14. Committee Democrats attempted to add the health care funding to the bill but were thwarted by Republicans on procedural grounds.
from Rep. Mike Colona’s enewsletter
When the Republican-controlled General Assembly in 2005 passed new restrictions that made it harder for many injured workers to get worker’s compensation benefits, Democratic opponents warned it would backfire on the business interests seeking the changes by moving injury claims from the worker’s compensation system to the courts. The Missouri Supreme Court on Feb. 24 made that situation likely by ruling that injured workers excluded from the system by the 2005 law can seek redress in civil court, where damage awards can be substantially higher.
A coalition of 71 labor unions and other groups that filed the lawsuit also challenged the law as unconstitutional on various grounds. The Supreme Court, however, ruled that those claims weren’t ripe for judgment because the plaintiffs included no workers whose rights allegedly were infringed by the revised law. Since the court didn’t address the merits of those claims, they could be the subject of a future lawsuit. The case is Missouri Alliance for Retired Americans, et al., v. Department of Labor.
