Prior to the beginning of session, the House Speaker invited all Republican members to provide input as to which committees we wanted to serve, however the amendment was not adopted (it, too, was soundly rejected by voice vote). I have not polled the members to determine which, if any, committee choices were granted or not granted.
Before I provide more information about the committee choices, I want to let you know that this process began my first day in the House (although I didn’t realize what was occurring). So, let’s begin with my first day as a Missouri Representative, April 22, 2013.
Fifteen minutes after I was seated, the voting began…. Wow! I was certainly glad that I had read bills I thought would be discussed (a lot of bills). I may offer more information about my first session (a total of five weeks) at a later date (perhaps, in a book).
After the first day’s session, I was summoned to the Speaker’s office. Following a polite discussion, I was appointed to the Elementary and Secondary Education Committee. Unbeknownst to me, that very day, two members of the committee were summarily removed. The reason: the two members disobeyed the Speaker.
Of course, at the time, I had not a clue about what had happened. In time, with additional information, I would be able to place the “puzzle piece” on the board.
Over time, “plays” would be made and actions taken which caused me to realize that a game was being played (a serious game) and I was simply a “pawn.”
An early occurrence that took place outside the Speaker’s office not only confused me, but it solidified things I would learn later on. A group of representatives gathered outside the office of the Speaker of the House (for what purpose, I don’t recall). As we stood offering small talk, a member leaned my way and stated in a quiet voice (just above a whisper), “You’ll do okay. Just vote with the Speaker.”
Wanting to ensure what I had just heard, I asked the member to repeat was said. After confirming what I thought I had heard, I retorted, “Are you serious?!?”
The member snapped back, “Yes.”
Of course, I was appalled! I didn’t reply to the comment verbally. I can only imagine my facial expression. I thought to myself: “You have got to be kidding! The folks from Lawrence County didn’t elect me to simply follow the Speaker!”
I would come to learn that my “disobedience” would be the beginning of my end.
Since that time, I’ve been “socking away” tidbits of information which form additional pieces to the larger puzzle. Two years ago, I began putting together a plan to restore the power (control) of the House to the people (through the elected representatives).
Now, back to the rules debate.
I offered the first amendment, which actually included the request to:
Form committees based upon member preferences (rather than appointments made by the Speaker or a staff member) and allow committees to elect chairs.
During the debate, a fellow republican stood to inquire (ask questions) of me. Actually, the questioning was more of an attempted schooling. The member attempted to make the point that if we allowed all members to request committee appointments, chaos would result. (I asked for examples later – only the member requesting the inquiry is permitted to ask questions, unless, of course, it’s a friendly inquiry – this was not a “friendly” – at least I did not want to risk being called down).
By the way, not one attempt was made to justify the claim that “chaos” would be the result of members requesting committee assignments.
The member continued: If committees were made up of only attorneys, or physicians, or farmers, the people’s interests would not be done.
After the inquiry, I recalled my first full year… I was appointed to serve on the Agriculture, Department of Natural Resources (DNR), and Conservation Appropriations committee. The purpose of the committee is to set the budget for these departments.
Prior to this appointment, I learned about the problems experienced by the City of Miller (regarding their waste water treatment facility). I learned that over three hundred cities/municipalities were under the “thumb” (actually, the strong arm) of the DNR and I wanted to help alleviate the pressure applied by the department.
In short, these cities were being forced to upgrade their waste water treatment facilities to the tune of millions of dollars. Miller’s estimated cost was $1.5 million (to be spread among a population of < 700 (approximately 300 households). The resulting improvements would cripple the city financially and triple the utility costs for residents.
Two upper class members of the committee were farmers, like me. We had several discussions about the oppressive acts against Missourians by the DNR. They voiced support for taking some sort of action, so I took for granted they would stand with me.
Two new (freshmen) representatives, also farmers, told me they would support my amendment to remove money from a revolving fund established for the DNR’s express use in loaning money to city’s for improvements (this money is loaned with interest due).
When I offered the amendment, the chair became obviously agitated. Keep in mind, we (the chair and DNR officials) had met on several occasions attempting to resolve the problem. I wanted, as did Miller officials, the DNR to back off. DNR only promised to move back the compliance dates, so I continued with my attempt to strip money from them.
The chair “shut me down” during my proposal and proceeded with the vote. When the vote was tallied, my amendment received only one vote – mine.
Upon adjournment of the committee, I queried the to upper class members only to find “deer in the headlights” reactions. One actually stated, “I didn’t know what you were trying to do!” If that’s not unbelievable, I’ll share the laughable:
The two freshmen, grown adults mind you, approached me (it was the proverbial “hat-in-hand”). One spoke for the two: “We were told,” he stated, “that we could not vote against the chair.”
I responded, casually, “The first time is the hardest. After that, it’s actually pretty easy.”
I have often thought during my time in the House about how we (grown adults) often revert back to childhood. “Stay in line!” “Don’t speak out of turn!” “Be nice!” “Don’t oppose authority!” “Sit down and shut up!” (Oh, wait, the last one was actually a command barked by a now “retired” legislator!)
What I don’t understand, however, is the fact that we are (expected to be) grown ups. We (at least, I think) were elected to be leaders… to make decisions based upon the information available… to be the voices of those who elected us… not to be bullied into submission!
That was my only stint on the committee. I was removed (for what I believe to be my inability to “follow the leader”).
As for the premise that a committee made up of individuals from a like group, such as farmers, in this case (at least in my opinion) resulted in the will of the people being ignored!
Enough for now. Next time, I’ll fill you in on the next amendment.
2 comments:
I agree that upgraded facilities cost money. If politicians had made upgrades earlier the cost would have been less and that cost spread out over 20 years, length of bond issue, would not amount to that much money per person per month. Now we should also assume that if their wastewater is dumped into a receiving stream consideration should be given to the affect on that stream. Wait, three other towns downstream also have to use that water for their supply. So by not upgrading their facility those towns have to expend more money to clean it up due to Miller not complying. What if those three towns also dumped poorly treated water into that same stream and the next 5 towns down the line depend on it for their water supply? Do you start to see the cause and effect relationship on everyone, think your neighbor, downstream and it is not just Miller affected by thousands of people and that is what the DNR is thinking about when they have to start mandating more regulations. Think more of big picture and state and country rather than a speck in the scheme of things.
4:34, I see what you're saying. What bothers me is that these people are supposed to be elected representatives and not puppets. THAT is what is wrong with DC, Jefferson City and all the other political places. None of them are interested in representing or serving the people, only politics and themselves.
Post a Comment