urbanSTL

I don't think I've ever voted in August but that changes this year. I haven't read all the details but I would probably support the one that funds state parks.

Hard no on 4 and 5.

Re Amendment 4 (initiative petition threshold), only politicians and the most politically minded citizens, view this as a political issue. Most voters will either not understand the why behind it or view it as a power grab by the legislature.

Remember, it took a lot of Republican votes to pass $12 and $15 min wage, repeal right to work, expand Medicaid, etc.

Not to mention most people couldn’t tell you the difference between an amendment by initiative petition and an amendment proposed by the legislature

https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/new ... udget.html

Kehoe vetoes $53 million in approved funds, restricts an additional $441 million because of "lagging revenues."

Some of the cuts and restrictions include:

-$7.5M for I-44 repairs.
-$3.5M for low income housing in Springfield.
-$2M to purchase flood prone land in Jefferson County to be made into a park.
-$104 million for state capitol renovations.
-$245M in other various construction projects across the state.

Some things he allowed to go forward include:

-$15M for a new parking garage in Jefferson City.
-$21M for road construction at the state fairgrounds in Sedalia.

Some of the new funding demands straining the state budget includes $469 million in Medicaid funds, which increased significantly after new federal cute were put in place last year shifting the funding balance more towards the states.

To help balance the budget, lawmakers took $89 million from the $600M set aside for capitol renovations and $72 million from the Blind Person Fund to help maintain the budget for public schools next year, though the school budget is still short $190 million from what they requested.

The state still may have to find another $150 million in funding for SNAP, as there are worries that more federal funding changes may be made to shift burden to the states.

After his cuts and restrictions, Missouri is still sitting in a more than $2 billion deficit, which will be filled using pandemic era funds.

Kehoe blamed "out of control spending" for the state's budget concerns, even though the approved budget was more than $3 billion less than what Kehoe had originally requested.

Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk

The decision to spend billions on expanding the entirety of I-70 is looking more illogical by the minute.  Same as even the notion of Amendment 5.

If he were truly fiscally conservative and clairvoyant as he claims, couldn't he have pulled shovels out of the dirt knowing the impending sh*t storm? An inherited mess no doubt but there are some fairly obvious places to cut corners in the state budget.

Realistically, Missouri is already a low tax and low service state. If anything taxes should be raised and spent on education and infrastructure.

bwcrow1s wrote:The decision to spend billions on expanding the entirety of I-70 is looking more illogical by the minute.  Same as even the notion of Amendment 5.

If he were truly fiscally conservative and clairvoyant as he claims, couldn't he have pulled shovels out of the dirt knowing the impending sh*t storm? An inherited mess no doubt but there are some fairly obvious places to cut corners in the state budget.

Lest we not forget the capital gains tax cut that is turning out way more expensive than they originally claimed.

Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk

goat314 wrote: ↑

6:32 PM - Jul 02

Realistically, Missouri is already a low tax and low service state. If anything taxes should be raised and spent on education and infrastructure.

Agreed, but not all spending is created equal. Repairing bridges is a lot more productive than expanding interstates. You fix a bridge you can save money on upkeep. You expand a highway and not only do you have to pay for it now, but it means you have to maintain it later. And it's still useless if the bridge collapses. 

symphonicpoet wrote: ↑

4:41 AM - Jul 03

goat314 wrote: ↑

6:32 PM - Jul 02

Realistically, Missouri is already a low tax and low service state. If anything taxes should be raised and spent on education and infrastructure.

Agreed, but not all spending is created equal. Repairing bridges is a lot more productive than expanding interstates. You fix a bridge you can save money on upkeep. You expand a highway and not only do you have to pay for it now, but it means you have to maintain it later. And it's still useless if the bridge collapses. 

We all know that the current "conservative" mindset is way more austerity driven than any sort of true fiscal responsibility. If they were truly interested in balancing budgets and common sense policies, they wouldn't be cutting taxes on the wealthy and cutting services for middle class and poor every chance the get. Reaganomics was a failed ideology and experiment that has done immense harm to America's civic institutions and public commons over the past 40 years.

I have only seen vote no for amendment 5 online. Obviously my feed is politically biased, but I’m getting the impression that this crashes and burns?

addxb2 wrote:I have only seen vote no for amendment 5 online. Obviously my feed is politically biased, but I’m getting the impression that this crashes and burns?

https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/gov ... e634d.html

Missouri's Catholic bishops oppose it.

Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk

If the legislature passes it, it’s for the rich. Studies show the rich get the laws passed they want. And everyone else gets ignored by lawmakers. Especially since Citizens United.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

addxb2 wrote: ↑

9:00 PM - Jul 23

I have only seen vote no for amendment 5 online. Obviously my feed is politically biased, but I’m getting the impression that this crashes and burns?

I have plenty of conservative people in my own feeds against it too. I’d be shocked if it passes or even secures more than 45%. Even supporters of eliminating the income tax have reservations about amendment 5, the way it was written, and the ways to replace lost revenue specifically how the Hancock amendment is phased out after 3 years and how that phase out is apparently dangerous to the overall “.guard rails” of this proposal. Of the initiatives this time, amendment 4 seems like the wild card.

Does anyone with a decent finger on the pulse of MO politics have any sense of how Amendment 4 & 5 are polling/projecting?

If they fail (which for all of our sakes I certainly hope they do), I think you can expect to see conservatives judicial activism in Jeff City pick up steam in earnest - something we’ve generally managed to avoid relative to the federal judiciary the last 20 years.

And if Amendment 4 fails, I think you can expect to see a deluge of progressive/populist amendments on the ballot in 2028 including, but not limited to, (1) banning public funds to private education, (2) eliminating gerrymandering, (3) legalizing abortion (assuming abortion gets repealed in November which I think is likely), (4) amending the initiative petition process to make signature gathering easier, (5) ranked choice or other more democratic election system.

Both will fail and neither will get above 45%