State auditor encouraged by Parson's opposition to dark money

(From State Auditor Nicole Galloway)

State Auditor Nicole Galloway is again urging Gov. Mike Parson to take action to curb the influence of dark money in Jefferson City, following his recent comments on the subject.

On January 30, while hosting the Missouri Press Association at the Governor's Mansion, Gov. Parson conveyed he has long been opposed to dark money and that Missourians should know who is contributing to such organizations.

In a letter delivered today, Auditor Galloway asked the Governor to make Senate Bill 735 a legislative priority. The bill would increase transparency on state contracts awarded to financial supporters of dark money groups, which are not required to report the source of donations they receive.

"We can both agree that Missourians want and deserve a transparent, honest and efficient government," Auditor Galloway wrote in the letter. "But, they need leadership on these issues in order to make such expectations a reality."

The letter asks the Governor to support the legislation promoting transparency in state contracts and to issue an executive order consistent with his recent comments clarifying his administration's stance on dark money.

This is not the first time Auditor Galloway has asked Gov. Parson to join her in efforts to combat dark money's influence in state government. In a meeting shortly after he ascended to the office and in previous letters, Auditor Galloway has both raised her concerns to the Governor about what she said was Jefferson City's "culture of corruption" and proposed ways — through legislation and executive order — to restore public trust. To date, those proposals have not been heeded.

"I'm urging Gov. Parson to make Senate Bill 735 a priority because he stated his opposition to dark money. Together, we can help restore public trust in government," Auditor Galloway said. "For the third year in a row, there's a bill in the General Assembly that would shine a greater light on public contracts awarded to supporters of dark money groups."

Senate Bill 735 would require any person or company entering into a public contract for more than $5,000 to disclose annual payments greater than $500 made to a 501(c)(4) not-for-profit organization. Such organizations include what are known as dark money groups. The legislation also would require anyone with more than a 10% interest in the contracting company to disclose payments they make of more than $500 to a dark money group.

A copy of Auditor Galloway's letter to Gov. Parson is available here.

Creve Coeur Democrat: Why do Republicans feel the need to overturn what the voters wanted

(From Sen. Jill Schlupp, D-Creve Coeur)

What a week it was!

We heard it would be coming to the Senate, and indeed, the legislature's efforts to repeal the voters' passage of Clean Missouri are underway.

 As you will remember, Clean Missouri created a new process using a non-partisan demographer to draw legislative district lines after the 2020 census numbers are in. It prioritized competitive districts so that voters will have a real choice during partisan elections in November. It also made various ethics reforms including imposing a $5 lobbyist gift limit and lowering campaign contribution limits.

The legislation passed statewide with 62% voter approval and passed in every state Senate district. Why, then, does the majority party feel the need to overturn the voters' change to the Missouri Constitution through their own ballot initiative? 

 

Its passage has threatened the majority party's supermajority status if districts are drawn more competitively.

They claim people didn't know what they were voting on. They claim the redistricting proposal combined with various ethics reforms confused people. Let's be clear: The multi-part bill that the Republicans say confused people at the polls is the same multi-part format included in the new legislation being proposed. Too confusing before, but not next time? There seems to be a lot of hypocrisy as this legislation is debated.

The Senate Democratic minority, now made up of 8 senators due to the loss of two members to gubernatorial appointments, held the floor arguing against the Republican's challenge to Missouri voters' decision until 3:10 AM. It was a long night, which ended when the Republicans laid the bill over. Democrats are standing strong in support of the public's vote and interests. That said, the Republican's bill to undermine the voters will be back again for debate.

And, so you know, I offered an amendment that would do away with Dark Money in Missouri politics, requiring disclosure of donors so people would know who is spending big money to support or oppose ballot measures. My colleagues avoided voting on my Dark Money disclosure proposal. I believe transparency in our government is critical. It is your government. You should know what special interests are influencing policy.

It is early in session. Things are moving fast. I'll always work to keep you informed.

Diamond man ordered held without bond on child pornography charges

A Diamond man will be held without bond while awaiting trial on child pornography charges.

Judge David P. Rush ordered Terry Lee Miksell, 63, bound over for trial and held in the Greene County Jail during a hearing this morning in U. S. District Court in Springfield.








Miksell was charged January 28 following an investigation by the Southwest Missouri Cyber Crimes Task Force. Heallegedly exchanged sexually explicit Facebook messages with a 16-year-old girl between August 13 and September 16, 2019.

Miksell acknowledged the messages to investigators and admitted that he got "carried away."

Some final thoughts about the Kansas City Chiefs and the Super Bowl

More than two decades have passed so I am assuming many people are unaware that at one time Jasper County Sheriff Randee Kaiser was a reporter for the Carthage Press and a good one.

Perhaps his biggest scoop during the time he served as sports editor came in 1994 when he received a tip that the Kansas City Chiefs were going to sign defensive back Felix Wright, a Carthage High School graduate, who later excelled at Drake University and had gone on to a successful pro career, first in the Canadian Football League and then with the Cleveland Browns, where during the 1989 season he led the NFC in interceptions.

The news was unexpected because it came during the playoffs and Wright had not played during the regular season, failing to catch on with any NFL team after spending the 1992 season with the Vikings.

Wright had been in touch with Chiefs Coach Marty Schottenheimer earlier in the season and though Schottenheimer did not have a spot for him then, he told him to stay ready in case he ran into injuries.

Unfortunately for Wright, the Chiefs secondary remained healthy until the postseason and that is when the call came.

The Chiefs had a talented young team that had been boosted into Super Bowl contention by the addition of two veterans with postseason pedigrees, quarterback Joe Montana and running back Marcus Allen.

Felix Wright signed a contract to play two games for the Chiefs- the AFC championship game against the Buffalo Bills and the Super Bowl.

He ended up playing only one, as Montana suffered a concussion and the Chiefs fell.

That was the end of Felix Wright's career ... and it was also the fourth time he had played in the AFC Championship game and not made into pro football's showcase game.

Wright had been with Schottenheimer's Cleveland Browns teams during the 1986 and 1987 seasons as they lost in dramatic fashion to John Elway and the Denver Broncos and was still with the team when Coach Bud Carson guided the team to the AFC title game in 1990.

I hope the Chiefs and 49ers players fully appreciate the stage on which they played Sunday night.

Felix Wright had a great career, outstanding by any measure, but he would given anything to play in the Super Bowl.

Now for some final thoughts about the 2020 Super Bowl:

The MVP choice was the right one- I have seen a lot of people commenting that Damien Williams should have been Super Bowl MVP. I respectfully disagree. The Chiefs needed Williams' stellar play to win, but Patrick Mahomes had to be the MVP. How many quarterbacks, especially at age 24, have you seen experience frustration for such a long period of time in such a pressure-packed game, but maintain their composure and just dial it up to the next level. It was something to see.

Alex Smith- The respect Mahomes and Coach Andy Reid have shown for Alex Smith, the man Mahomes replaced as quarterback, has been refreshing to see. During the entire buildup to the game, both men have frequently praised Smith's role in guiding Mahomes through his rookie year.

The 1970 Chiefs- Another example of the leadership role Reid has carved in Kansas City was shown by the respect he has shown for those who came before him and his invitation to members of the 1970 Super Bowl winners to join in the victory parade was heartwarming. Len Dawson and nine other Chiefs who went directly from the Super Bowl to the Pro Bowl did not get to participate in the one a half-century ago.

The Halftime Show- Some people are up in arms because Jennifer Lopez and Shakira's performances were not family friendly. I would suggest a good remedy would have been to turn off the TV during the halftime performances. I hope I have half as much energy as Jennifer Lopez when I am that old.

Commercials- A lot of companies wasted a lot of money. And a note to Michael Bloomberg and President Trump- Can't we just keep politics out of the Super Bowl and put it back on Facebook where it belongs?

Announcers- I thought Joe Buck and Troy Aikman were mediocre at best during the second, third and fourth quarters. On the other hand, the announcing during the first quarter was top notch. Of course, I was driving from Newtonia to Joplin at the time and was listening to Kevin Harlan and Kurt Warner on NFL Radio.

Geography- To anyone who may be unaware, while there is a Kansas City, Kansas, the Chiefs play in Kansas City, Missouri.

Kay Hively: Working in a cottage industry

Cottage industries. How long has it been since you heard that phrase? Or have you ever heard it?

Years ago that phrase was commonly used to describe people (usually women) who worked at home. These women made clothes or did alterations for people, took in ironing, did baby setting, rented out rooms, cooked or baked for others, sewed curtains, gave music lessons and dozens of other things.

Many people once thought that with the rise of cottage industries, women would soon be working as much as men. This seemed to be the ideal outlet for women to work.

It was felt that housewives could stay at home, mind the children, do their housework and make money. Even with the smaller pay, it was believed that these women wouldn’t need extra clothes for work, they wouldn’t need a car or have to buy gasoline and have flexible hours.

But cottage industries did not become a big part of American life. Women wanted to go to college and have “real” careers. Those who took advantage of working at home didn’t make an issue of it, so the phrase practically disappeared.

While many women continued giving piano lessons and making curtains, most worked without the label of cottage industry.

I recently saw a couple of women on television who have started a company that has women who work at home making leather purses. These two women hire wives of service men to

work in a company that is named after Rosie the Riveter, the symbol of working women in World War II.

The founders wanted to help women who, being military wives, often have to move every year or so, making it hard for them to keep a “regular” job. The founders also want to give opportunities to women who live in places outside metropolitan areas, and they say the company is doing so well they need more women to meet the demand.

Today, I think the cottage industry is more of a “computer industry,” as many people work at home and do it on a computer. But this industry has both men and women in their ranks so the image of a housewife making a little extra money no longer fits.

I have spent most of my life working at home, so I guess that makes me a worker in a cottage industry.

But just between you and me, I have enjoyed all these years and wouldn’t have traded jobs with anyone.

(Kay Hively is a historian, author and former editor, reporter and columnist for the Neosho Daily News and Neosho Post.)

Nancy Hughes: Don't forget to dance

“Never be lacking in zeal, but keep your spiritual
fervor, serving the Lord.”
Romans 12:11 (NIV)

One of the most precious videos I ever saw showed a two year old boy who finally was able to hear for the first time. Having been deaf from birth, he had never heard his mother’s voice or music playing or birds chirping – in other words, all of the sounds that we enjoy and take for granted.

As the little boy sat on his mother’s lap, she spoke gently to him, calling his name while hearing aids were placed in his ears.

“Brian. Brian, its Mommy.” He jerked his head toward her face and instantly began to smile and bounce up and down on her lap. His father laughed and then cried as his son laughed back at him and reached for his arms.

Suddenly, in his excitement, the little boy jumped to the floor and danced in a circle, clapping his hands and giggling. What a beautiful reaction to hearing voices for the first time.

That pure joy reminded me of the moment I decided to give my heart to Jesus. I couldn’t quit smiling and sharing Him with everyone I met. Maybe I didn’t dance as I told my friends and family about the Lord, but inside I couldn’t contain the jig my heart was dancing at my newfound faith.

Sadly, as I got older, I forgot that excitement for what He did for me and almost (dare I say it) became complacent about my gift of eternity. I guess I could explain my fading enthusiasm by saying that as I got older, I was more dignified in my walk with the Lord.

But to be honest, I think that I began to take it for granted and I allowed my extraordinary relationship with Jesus to become ordinary (ouch). Can you identify?

Let us never forget what He did for us. Our hope is not in the temporary but in the eternal. Remember the excitement of asking the God of the Universe to live in your heart?

He is still the same Father now as He was when you first met Him face to face. His truth has not changed. Jesus willingly died for every single one of us. He longs for a relationship with us, His children.

Share the exciting news of Jesus and His mercy and grace, forgiveness and love. And while you are at it, don’t forget to dance.

Father, I never want to take for granted the gift of eternal life that you have given to me. May I share it with enthusiasm with everyone I meet. In Jesus’ Name. Amen.

R.A.P. it up . . .

Reflect

• Do you remember how you felt the moment you asked Jesus into your heart?

• How does that excitement compare with how you feel today?

Apply

• For one week, make it your goal to share the joy you have as a child of God with one person every day.

• At the end of that week, write down all the responses you received. Could they see your excitement in your heart for the Lord?

Power

• Romans 12:11 (NIV) “Never be lacking in zeal, but keep your spiritual fervor, serving the Lord.”

• I Corinthians 15:58 (NIV) “Therefore, my dear brothers, stand firm. Let nothing move you. Always give yourselves fully to the work of the Lord, because you know that your labor in the Lord is not in vain.”

• Colossians 3:23 (NIV) “Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as working for the Lord, not for men.”

(For more of Nancy Hughes' writing, check out her blog, Encouragement from the War Room.)

Kim Frencken: Personalized learning versus differentiation

Personalized learning gives a student more power in the content decision making process, while differentiation focuses on the same content, but at different skill levels.

Personalized learning encourages students to ask what they need to learn. Differentiated learning addresses the various learning styles and abilities of a student. 

Personalized learning creates a learning experience for each student while differentiated learning adapts the learning experiences for each student.

Sounds great, doesn't it? But... I'm a skeptic and I don't normally just take someone's word for something. I want to see how it fits into my classroom and how it will affect my kids. So.....

I started investigating and asking some questions. Asking kids what they wanted to learn. Answers hit the wall like spaghetti. Only not much stuck. 

Most of the educators I talked to were so overwhelmed by curriculum demands that creating personal lessons wasn't even possible, even if they had time to spend creating them after doing all of the other paperwork. So...

Back to the investigative drawing board. Yes, it is correct that personalized learning involves creating curriculum for each student's requests, not adapting existing curriculum. It also takes time to implement and appears to be difficult, if not impossible, when you have no control over the curriculum. I never found an answer for my #1 question: How do kids know what they need to learn if they haven't been taught about all of the possibilities they can explore?

It all brings me back to the beginning. I'm no closer to an answer than I was...

Or maybe I am. Personalized learning has a nice ring to it. A student-centered approach to learning. Implementing more project based experiences. But, as I read this my blood pressure rises. 

While it creates a nice exploratory experience for my kids, it creates an increase in my stress and workload. My students may learn about the learning process, but are they learning what they need to know? 

Not one student wanted to know about multiplication. No one asked to learn about the Civil War. No one asked for instruction on creating more interesting sentences. Not even with prompting. Not with creating graphics to guide them in determining what they wanted to learn. Every student request was centered on kid-friendly, fun things.

I'm all about differentiating instruction to meet the needs of each learner and adapting a lesson to meet their interest is also important, but opening the door to this type of educational freedom seems like opening Pandora's box. Don't kids need to know what they need to know before they can tell us what they need to know?

Will I be given support and time to create these experiences for my students? I guess that remains to be seen, and I'll keep searching for answers to improve my student's educational experiences.
(For more of Kim Frencken's writing and information about her educational products, check out her blog, Chocolate For the Teacher.)

Jason Smith: President Trump's steadfast leadership is a testament to his love of our country

(From Eighth District Congressman Jason Smith)

Next Tuesday night, Congress, the Supreme Court, and the Cabinet will gather on the floor of the House of Representatives for the President’s address on the State of the Union.

Speaking from a stained wood lectern to a crowd of roughly one thousand – and tens of millions more on TV – President Trump will reaffirm the many accomplishments from his three years in office and outline a vision for the coming year. It will be a historic speech. 

President Trump will be the first president to address the nation as a Commander-in-Chief impeached in the United States House of Representatives by just a single party. This fact is a testament to his resilient leadership as well as the absurdity of the Left’s constant opposition to his tenure.

President Trump has accomplished much in the past three years. Right off the bat, he put brilliant legal mind Neal Gorsuch on the Supreme Court and has since appointed and confirmed Brett Kavanaugh and over 150 other judges who interpret laws based on what they actually say instead of how they feel about a particular issue. 

I’m also looking forward to hearing him discuss the booming U.S. economy and our record low unemployment rate of just 3.5%. When an economy sustains a low unemployment rate, businesses raise wages to attract workers to their firms. We can see that happening now as wages rose 2.9% in 2019. 

Thanks to pro-growth policies over the past three years such as tax and regulatory relief, Missourians take home more money every paycheck. Additionally, the signing of the United States Mexico Canada Agreement (USMCA) this past week will add $68 billion to the US economy over the next six years.

The economy has been helped along by historic regulatory reform that removes governments from the lives of private citizens. Currently, the quagmire of federal environmental review is a major impediment to overhauling our nation’s infrastructure. President Trump’s changes mean that, for Southern Missourians, highway projects like the scheduled renovations to US-67 south of Poplar Bluff will start earlier, finish quicker, and require fewer taxpayer dollars than before.

The President will also talk about his commitment and decisive action to protect all American lives at home and abroad. Earlier this month, after Iranian-backed militias killed an American defense contractor, President Trump put the world on notice that he will not tolerate attacks on American citizens and authorized the extinction of the Iranian terror leader responsible for the attacks.

Just as President Trump protects Americans abroad, he has also taken steps to protect Americans-to-be, the unborn, at home. He took action to end federal research that used fetal tissue taken from abortion procedures and changed US policy to stop taxpayer funds from supporting the abortion industry. Recently, he became the first US president to speak to hundreds of thousands of pro-life demonstrators on the National Mall.

If Nancy Pelosi and House Democrats had to give a similar rundown of their accomplishments over the past year, they couldn’t. 

Since President Trump took office, the Left has been obsessed with just one thing – impeaching the duly-elected President of the United States. Now, as the Senate trial comes to a close, the damage they have done to the country is clear. 

Catering to their far-left, neo-Socialist base, House Democrats have warped the most serious constitutional remedy available to the American people into nothing more than a flippant political gesture that can be weaponized against any president that the Left dislikes.

My guest this year is Poplar Bluff Chief of Police Danny Whiteley, and he will join me in the audience and in our nation’s capital next week. 

I invited Chief Whiteley because of the great work he has done to fight the scourge of opioids in Southern Missouri. Having been in law enforcement for over 40 years, he has seen for himself the horrific effects that opioid addiction has on victims, families, and communities. 

My experience visiting the US-Mexico border showed me exactly how many drugs and human traffickers can flow through an unsecured border. While 110 miles of new barriers have been built, and 466 miles are either under construction or in the planning phase, there are still hundreds of miles left unsecured and unfunded. I hope that Chief Whiteley’s visit to the capital reinforces the importance of finally approving funding for a full border wall in Congress.

On Tuesday night, I pray the Left will listen to the President’s State of the Union Address with an open mind and recognize the extent of the progress they have opposed. 

President Trump’s steadfast leadership is a testament to his love of our country and his belief in the American people. Hopefully our nation will be able to move forward as we always have: as one nation, under God with liberty and justice for all.

All right, I'll say it- The impeachment nonsense was a hoax and a witch hunt

I have waited to write this until the outcome of the current impeachment trial of President Donald Trump is a foregone conclusion, but now that it appears the Senate will acquit him on Wednesday, I am no longer going to wait to share my thoughts.

President Trump says that the Democrats have been out to get him from the start and that no president in history has ever had to go through such harassment.

I will concede that it probably seems that way to someone like Trump or many of those in the media who have been echoing those thoughts, people whose knowledge of history is probably limited to their Twitter history, but that is not the case.

During the past year, I have researched a president who was threatened with impeachment numerous times by those in the other party, almost from the beginning of his presidency and many of the same things that have happened in the Trump Administration happened during his presidency.

In some cases, Harry S. Truman did nearly the same things Trump has done, though with considerably different motivation.

In both 1948 and 1951, President Truman ordered that all subpoenas to federal departments from the
Senate Investigating Committee that was looking into the infiltration of Communists into federal government positions be rejected.

Both times, impeachment proceedings were threatened by House Republicans and recommended by Senate GOP members.

On August 8, 1948, Sen. Homer Ferguson, R-Michigan, the Investigating Committee chairman, advocated a "showdown" with the president, saying, "Presidential arrogance is becoming intolerable."








Though it never reached the stage of drawing up articles of impeachment, the threats were being made and the action contemplated by Congress.

In 1950, after Sen. Joseph McCarthy, R-Wisconsin, claimed, without any evidence, there were more than 200 Communists in the State Department, Truman again issued a blanket denial to respond to subpoenas from Sen. Millard Tydings' Investigating Committee.

The attempt in 1950 was for the committee to gain access to confidential loyalty files, files which Truman had pledged would not be turned over, a condition that had been promised to the governmental employees who signed them.

Truman's order extended to subpoenas that had been issued to Secretary of State Dean Acheson, Attorney General J. Howard McGrath and Civil Service Commission Chairman Harvey B. Mitchell.

Truman, responding through his press secretary and not through a weaponized Twitter account said he was standing on constitutional grounds and that the executive branch did not have to surrender its files or documents to a coordinate branch (Congress). He never used the phrase witch hunt, though considering what Sen. McCarthy unleashed upon the U. S., it would have been far more appropriate in this instance.

The final major impeachment threat against President Truman came after he relieved General Douglas MacArthur of his duties, something that he did in person and by traveling overseas to meet him. Truman accepted the responsibility of his office and did not deal with MacArthur's dismissal in a telegram of less than 280 characters.

The firing of MacArthur, who was a popular military leader and was being touted as a potential rival of Truman's for the 1952 presidential nomination, drove a dagger through President Truman's approval ratings and immediately brought a round of cries for impeachment.

From the April 12, 1951 New York Times:

The Republican leaders of Congress raised  the threat today that they might try to impeach President Truman for breaking General of the Army Douglas MacArthur as supreme commander of the Allied powers in the Pacific.

Similarly to the way things have developed during the Trump impeachment saga, all of the Democrats rallied around President Truman, even the southern Democrats who had been adamantly opposed to the president because of his position on civil rights issues.

Though President Truman was never impeached, the Republicans threatened it throughout his presidency.

One difference between the Trump presidency and the Truman presidency did not have to suffer through the terrors of social media or the 24-hour news cycle.

Still, if anyone had to endure a hoax and a witch hunt, it was not the current president but President Truman.

***
My book The Buck Starts Here: Harry S. Truman and the City of Lamar is available at the Lamar Democrat office, the Truman Birthplace and Barton County Chamber of Commerce in Lamar and Changing Hands Book Shoppe, Always Buying Books and the Book Guy in Joplin or in paperback and e-book at the Amazon links below.

Cold facts lead judge to dismiss case against Joplin woman who kept dead husband in the freezer

A felony abandonment of a corpse charge against a Joplin woman who kept her husband in a freezer in her bedroom for a year after he died were dismissed Friday in Jasper County Circuit Court.

Judge Joseph Hensley followed the old saying that you can't abandon a corpse when you're keeping it right by you in a bedroom freezer.

There were no other charges against Barbara Jean Watters, 67, who was charged shortly after her husband Paul Barton's body was discovered when the Joplin Police Department executed a search warrant at her home at 2602 S. Vermont Avenue November 12. Barton had died in December 2018.







Judge Hensley outlined the facts in the case in his ruling:

Defendant and her husband, Paul Barton, lived together in Joplin, but slept in separate beds in different rooms. Mr. Barton died in his bedroom. 

The Defendant subsequently drug him into her bedroom using a blanket from his bed. Using a wooden ramp, she lifted and placed his wrapped body in a working freezer she previously purchased for that purpose. 

The freezer, and Barton’s body, remained in Defendant’s bedroom until JPD executed a search warrant on November 12th, 2019. 

Neither Defendant nor anyone else notified the Jasper or Newton County Coroner’s office regarding Mr. Barton’s death when he passed away. There is no suggestion Mr. Barton died of anything other than natural causes.