Capitol Report _31.doc by handongqp


									                                             May 18, 2009

                                 End-of-the-Session Report
  A total of 162 bills were Truly Agreed to and Finally Passed and sent to the Governor for final action
during the 2009 session of the General Assembly. As usual, some of the more controversial bills were
among the 15 bills TAFP’d on Friday, just ahead of the 6:00 PM deadline. The House adjourned early on
Thursday, and finished business about 10 minutes before the deadline, since leadership felt that there were
no other bills on which agreement could be reached in time. This was further evidence of significant
disagreements between House and Senate, many of which transcended party loyalties. Several of the “bills
of interest” included in these Weekly Reports fell into that category. An overview shows which measures
passed (some of them as provisions in omnibus bills), and which proposals failed:

                     PASSED                                                    FAILED

Ban on alcohol vaporizers (2 bills) – MYAA priority       Omnibus health care bill (SB 306, HB 156)
Grants for drop-out prevention in schools                 Drug testing of TANF applicants, recipients
“David’s Law,” DWI risk reduction program (2 bills)       Fund for the reduction of alcohol-related problems
Treatment option in criminal non-support cases            Food stamps for felons in recovery
Restrictions on alcohol activity on certain rivers        D.A.R.E. specialty license plate, with fund-raising
Workplace prevention program recognition                  Meth offender registry in DPS
Continuous alcohol monitoring (SCRAM) option              Drug testing of teachers, school personnel
Prescribing of drugs by Physician Assistants              Drug testing of drivers who hit pedestrians
Meth-related endangerment of the welfare of a child       Drug testing of rape victims
Sheriffs not needed in DWI-related search warrants        Drug testing of contractors in public works projects
Repeal of Chapter 312, “Nonintoxicating Beer”             Replacing some sales taxes with alcohol tax revenue
Expansion of Clinical Social Work Definition              School info on SCHIP to parents
Minor-in-Possession implied consent for BAC tests         Payment of MH duties of Boone County counselor
Crime Laboratory Review Commission                        Ban on under-age entry to drinking establishments
Two more hours to buy alcohol on Sunday mornings          De-criminalization of marijuana
Creation of two ARRA (federal stimulus) funds             Criminalization of maternal drug use
Standards for privately-operated jails                    Ban on smoking in public places
Healthcare professional workforce info collection         Tobacco tax increase from 17 to 33 cents per pack
Volunteer and Parents Incentive Program for schools       Required license for sale of tobacco products
Marital and Family Therapists added to MH services        Exemption of industrial hemp from drug laws
Drug court officials included in “tampering” law          Controlled substances monitoring system
MIP disqualification for commercial driver licenses       Ignition interlock for DUI first offenders

“Texting while driving” prohibited by under-21’s              Impaired physician program
Person with felony may serve alcohol at retail                Banning booze from the Capitol
KC festival district may sell alcohol at events               Coordinated school health program
Cigarettes must meet fire safety standards                    Commission on deaf and hearing-impaired
Firearms purchase allowed by DMH consumers                    TABOR-like constitutional limit on appropriations
Assault of law enforcement charges expanded                   Comprehensive HIV/AIDS program in prisons
                                                              Caseload standards for DMH and DSS
                                                              Concealed carry of weapons on college campuses
                                                Status of
                               Senate Bills Passed and Sent to the House/
                               House Bills Passed and Sent to the Senate
                                       1 – Reported to House/Senate
                                       2 – Referred to committee
                                       3 – Committee hearing scheduled
                                       4 – Committee hearing completed
                                       5 – Committee vote taken (exec)
                                       6 – Committee reported to the floor
                                       7 – Taken up for debate
                                       8 – Passed – Truly Agreed to and Finally Passed OR
                                       9 – Returned to Senate/House for concurrence
                                      10 – Concurrence or Conference* (see report narrative)

           Senate / House Bill (Shaded =Finally Passed)                    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10

SB 8 (Champion) – Crime lab review commission                              X   X   X   X   X    In HB 62
SB 9 (Champion) – MH professional to HealthNet Oversight Comm.             X   X   X   X   X   X FAILED
SB 26 (Ridgeway) – Ban on alcohol vaporizers       Also in HB 62           X   X   X   X   X   X X X X X
SB 44 (Pearce) – Regulations for private jails                             X   X   X   X   X   X X X X X
SB 58 (Stouffer) – Amendment of commercial driver license law              X   X   X   X   X   X In HB 83
SB 84 (Purgason) – Includes SB 93 (DWI signs) by amendment                 X   X   X   X   X   X In other bills
SB 93 (Green) – DWI risk reduction – memorial road signs                   X   X   X   X   X   X In other bills
SB 134 (Dempsey) – Specialty license plates, including D.A.R.E.            X   X   X   X   X   X X X X X
SB 140 (Smith) – Criminal non-support cases – ADA treatment option         X   X   X   X   X   X X X X X
SB 147 (Dempsey) – Workplace prevention program recognition                X   X   X   X   X   X X X X X
SB 171 (Griesheimer_ -- Liquor control – Includes the provisions of        X   X   X   X   X   X X X X X
         SB 188, SB 396, SB 426, HB 132, and HB 159 In HB 132
SB 188 (Dempsey) – Revisions (liberalization) of alcohol control law       X   X   X   X   X   X   In other bills
SB 262 ( Bartle ) – Courts and judicial proceedings CCR FAILED             X   X   X   X   X   X   X X X X
SB 291 (Shields) – Omnibus education bill, including at-risk students      X   X   X   X   X   X   X X X X
SB 296 (Scott) – Changes in law re professions, including prescribing of   X   X   X   X   X   X   X X X X
controlled substances by Physician Assistants and MH benefits
SB 306 (Dempsey) – Health care services FAILED – See HB 156                X   X   X   X   X X X X X           X
SB 313 (Nodler) – Two funds to receive federal ARRA stimulus money         X   X   X   X   X X X X X           X
SB 396 (Justus) – Denial, suspension, revocation of liquor licenses        X   X   X   X   X X In HB 132
SB 406 (Scott) – Prescribing of drugs by physician assistants              X   X   X   X     In SB 296
HB 8 (Icet) – FY2010 Appropriations for Dept.. of Public Safety            X   X   X   X   X X X X X           X
HB 9 (Icet) – FY2010 Appropriations for Dept. of Corrections               X   X   X   X   X X X X X           X
HB 10 (Icet) – FY2010 Appropriations for DMH and DHSS                      X   X   X   X   X X X X X           X
HB 11 (Icet) – FY2010 Appropriations for Dept. of Social Services          X   X   X   X   X X X X X           X
HB 21 (Icet) – FY2010 Appropriations from Federal Stimulus Fund            X   X   X   X   X X X X X           X

HB 22 (Icet) – FY2010-2011 App. From Fed. Budget Stabilization Fund            X     X   X   X   X X X X X X
HB 30 (Brandom) – Drug testing of TANF applicants, recipients                  X     X   X   X   X X X FAILED
HB 62 (Lipke) – Omnibus crime bill, including AWOL                             X     X   X   X   X X X X X X
HB 91 (Pollock) – Transportation issues, including “David’s Law”               X     X   X   X   X X X X X X
HB 96 (Wallace) – School discipline, liability, safety, and reporting          X     X   X   X   X X In SB 291
HB 132 (Fallert) – Hours of sale of alcohol on Sundays, omnibus bill           X     X   X   X   X X X X X X
HB 187 (Flook) – Omnibus court bill (includes HB 546, drug courts)             X     X   X   X   X X In SB 262
HB 326 (Sutherland) – Cleanup of Clinical Social Work definition               X     X   X   X   X X X X X X
HB 384 (Lipke) – Admin. Hearings, alcohol-related traffic offenses             X     X   X   X     In SB 26
HB 546 (J. Smith) – Drug court commissioners in family courts                  X     X   X   X   FAILED
HB 668 (K. Jones) – Concealed carry, weapons, incl. college campuses           X     X   X   X      FAILED
HB 683 (Schieffer) – Transportation issues, including David’s Law              X     X   X   X  X X X X X X
HB 685 (Bruns) – Search warrants for offenses related to DWI                   X     X   X   X  X X X X X X
HJR 23 (Icet) – TABOR – constitutional limit on appropriations                 X     X   X     FAILED
HJR 36 (Emery) – Replace income tax with retail sale and service tax           X     X   X   X     FAILED

                                          Governor’s Legislative Actions
   Readers are reminded that it takes the Governor’s signature to enact legislation. Omnibus bills may
contain objectionable items or technical glitches that may result in a veto. The Governor has 45 days to (a)
sign the bill, making it law; (b) veto the bill, in which case it is returned to the legislature where a 2/3 vote of
both the House and Senate is needed to override the veto; (c) not sign the bill within the prescribed time, or
(d) veto line-items, only on appropriations bills. Bills become effective on August 28, unless they contain
language to the contrary. Look for updates on the legislative action website for the Governor’s Office: They will appear in numerical order, as they are in this report.

   Only Truly Agreed to and Finally Passed version of bills are sent to the Governor. The entire list,
with links, is accessible at Any
versions that do not bear the TAFP title are suspect because changes may have been made in earlier versions.

                       Final Version of ADA Budget Bill Reduced by $1 Million
   The Conference Committee Substitute for HB 10, appropriations for FY2010 for the Dept. of Mental
Health and Dept. of Health and Senior Services, rejected the $1 million core restoration for substance abuse
treatment in the Senate bill. The Conference Committee’s recommendation, adopted by both House and
Senate, was almost $2 million more than the House’s recommendations, but was $1,301,976 less than the
Senate’s recommendations. Compared with the Senate version, the Truly Agreed to and Finally Passed bill’s
recommendations to the Governor contained $108,168 less from the General Revenue Fund, $193,808 less
from Federal Funds, and $1,000,000 less from the Federal Budget Stabilization Fund.

   Division of ADA Sections    FY2009 (HB 2010)       FY2010 (HB 10)    FY2010 (HB       FY2010 (HB 10)   FY2010 (HB 10)
            of DMH            CCS – Truly Agreed       As Introduced   10) Passed by      SCS Passed by   Truly Agreed to
      Appropriations Bill     to and Finally Passed        3/4/09        the House           Senate       & Finally Passed

   Administration                  2,402,820            2,341,133        2,341,133          2,341,133        2,341,133
   Prevention & Education         12,178,994           12,178,994       12,178,994         12,178,994       12,178,994
   Treatment                      95,541,537           97,620,723      100,832,378        103,742,448      102,440,472
   Compulsive Gambling               499,745                0             499,745            499,745          499,745

    SATOP Program               4,600,981       4,600,981       4,600,981       4,600,981        4,600,981
    Total                     115,224,077      116,741,831     120,453,231     123,363,301      122,061,325

   Totals for the Department of Mental Health is $1,211,794,318 compared with the total for FY2009 of
$1,159,524,427, an increase of 4.6 %.

                           General Revenue Fund                      $ 594,853,914
                           Federal Budget Stabilization Fund             5,891,995
                           Federal Funds                               568,777,355
                           Other Funds                                  42,271,054
                           Total                                    $1,221,794,318

                                Bills of Interest Sent to the Governor
   A total of 18 appropriations bills and 147 substantive bills were Truly Agreed to and Finally Passed in
the 2009 session of the General Assembly – a smaller number than in previous years. This was due in part to
conflicts between House and Senate, many of which transcended party loyalties. Listed below are 14 bills
that contain items of interest to advocates for prevention, treatment and recovery services in Missouri.
Summaries are provided by the House Research Staff in a document posted on May 16. Additional
information provided is in italics. Governor Nixon has already signed three bills sent to him: HB 14,
supplemental funds for FY2009, HB 15 (see below), and SB 313, creating two separate funds in the State
Treasury to receive and retain federal funds under the ARRA. Traditionally, bills are forwarded by the
Governor’s Office to the departments which may have a stake in the outcome, for review, comment,
identification of possible problems, and recommendation.

HB 62 – An omnibus crime bill, which affects 52 sections of law, including the following:

(1) Prohibits the use or possession of an alcohol beverage vaporizer. Any substance that has been
approved by the federal Food and Drug Administration as an over-the-counter or therapeutic drug product
administered by an authorized medical practitioner is exempt from this provision.

(2) Allows a judge to order a person who pleads guilty to or is found guilty of an intoxication-related traffic
offense to abstain from consuming or using alcohol as demonstrated by continuous alcohol monitoring or
verifiable breath alcohol testing as a condition of probation. [An “emergency clause” on this section means
that it will go into effect on the Governor’s signature rather than on the usual effective date of laws.]

(3) Specifies that any person younger than 21 years of age who purchases, attempts to purchase, or has in
his or her possession any nonintoxicating beer will be guilty of a misdemeanor [see HB 132, below, which
would make this provision irrelevant, since the “nonintoxicating beer” law would be repealed.]

(3) Any person younger than 21 years of age who purchases, attempts to purchase or has in his or her
possession any intoxicating liquor or who is visibly in an intoxicated condition will be deemed to have
given consent to a chemical test of tests of the person’s breath, blood, saliva, or urine for the purpose of
determining the alcohol or drug content of the person’s blood.

(4) Specifies that any person who possesses or uses a beer bong or other drinking device used to consume
similar amounts of alcohol or any large volume alcohol container holding more than four gallons of an
alcoholic beverage on any river in this state or who possesses an expanded polypropylene cooler on or
within 50 feet of any river in this state will be guilty of a class A misdemeanor. This section does not apply
to the Mississippi, Missouri or Osage rivers. [This is in response to a variety of problems encountered on
float trips. The original bill stipulated a container holding more than one gallon.]

 (5) Requires the Governor to designate one member of the Board of Probation and Parole as the vice-

(6) Removes the provision that requires the prosecuting attorney to appear on behalf of the Director of the
Department of Revenue in circuit court cases or hearings reviewing administrative decisions regarding
alcohol-related traffic offenses.

(7) Specifies that any person 21 years of age or younger who operates a moving vehicle while sending,
reading, or writing a text or electronic message will be guilty of an infraction.

(8) Expands the crime of assault of a law enforcement officer, emergency personnel, or probation and
parole officer in the first, second and third degrees to include a corrections officer. [If the person is
intoxicated or under the influence of a controlled substance, while driving a motor vehicle, and operates
with criminal negligence to cause physical injury, it is a class B felony.]

(9) Specifies that any person who possesses amphetamine or methamphetamine in the presence or
residence of a person younger than 17 years of age will be guilty of endangering the welfare of a child in
the first degree. [This is the only meth-related provision to be passed this year.]

(10) Establishes the Crime Laboratory Review Commission within the Department of Public Safety to
provide an independent review of any state or local crime laboratory receiving state-administered funds. The
commission must submit an annual report to the governor on its activities and any suggestions to improve
the quality management systems within the crime laboratories.

(11) Expands the crime of tampering with a judicial officer to include juvenile officers and deputy
juvenile officers.

HB 91 -- Establishes David’s Law and the Heroes Way Interstate Interchange Designation Program
and designates certain memorial highways and bridges

   The bill requires the Department of Transportation to establish a drunk driving risk reduction awareness
program to be known as "David's Law," including drunk driving victim memorial sign program. The
department must adopt, by rules and regulations, program guidelines for the application for an placement of
signs including, but not limited to, the sign application and qualification process, the procedure for the
dedication of signs, and procedures for the replacement or restoration of any signs that are damaged or
stolen. Any person may apply to the department to sponsor a drunk driving victim memorial sign in
memory of an immediate family member who died as a result of a motor vehicle accident caused by a person
who was shown to have been operating a motor vehicle in violation of an alcohol-related traffic law at the
time of the accident. A person who is not a member of the victim's immediate family may also make a
request if he or she submits the written consent of a victim's immediate family member.

   The department will charge the sponsoring party a fee to cover the department's cost in designing,
constructing, placing, and maintaining the sign. Signs will remain in place for ten years and may be renewed
for another 10 years after payment of appropriate maintenance fees. The signs developed by the department
will feature the words "Drunk Driving Victim!", the initials of the deceased victim, the month and year in
which the victim of the drunk driving accident was killed, and the phrase “Think About It!” No person,
other than a department employee or designee, may erect a drunk driving victim memorial sign.

[“David” is David Louis Poenicke, who was killed in 1984 in a DUI crash. The legislation was inspired by
his sister Gail Rehme, who started working on it three years ago. For further background on this measure,
see Weekly Legislative Report #5, March 6, 2009, for the bill as found at that time in SB 84.]

HB 132 – Sale of Liquor

(1) Regulates nonintoxicating beer in the same manner as intoxicating liquor by repealing Chapter 312,
RSMo, and removing all references to Chapter 312 and nonintoxicating beer. [The term is a misnomer with
a 70-year history, since it refers to so-called “3.2 beer,” which is in fact intoxicating.]

(2) Allows a business to employ a person who has been convicted of a felony unrelated to the
manufacture or sale of intoxicating liquor. Currently, a business may not be granted or retain a liquor license
if the business employs a person convicted of a felony who directly engages in the retail sale of liquor.

(3) Allows certain charitable, fraternal, religious, service, or veterans’ organizations that are exempt
from federal taxes and have or are qualified to have a license to sell intoxicating liquor by the drink on their
premises to open on Sundays at 9:00 a.m. instead of 11:00 a.m. [Mentioned during the debate was that this
was requested primarily for the purpose of church picnics on Sunday morning. Other Sunday licenses
already allow sale at 9:00 a.m.]

(4) Allows a restaurant bar without an onsite brewery that serves 45 or more different types of draft beer to
sell 32 fluid ounces or more of beer to customers for consumption off the premises.

(5) Limits a person or business to having five liquor licenses rather than the current limit of three.

(6) Allows a Kansas City festival district promotional association to obtain a license to sell intoxicating
liquor and nonintoxicating beer for consumption at the businesses and common areas within the festival
district. The city must conduct a public hearing on the promotional association’s proposed plan regarding
the festival and obtain written approval for the event from 50% of the property owners, business owners, and
residents within the district. No minors will be allowed to enter the festival district during a festival event
that serves liquor, and no one will be allowed to take an alcoholic beverage outside the festival district

[The bill has several other provisions dealing with definitions, price discounts, repeal of monthly price
schedules to be filed with the Division of Alcohol and Tobacco Control, merchandising by wholesalers,
invoicing, timing of shipments, etc.]

HB 116 – Crimes Against Transit Workers and Judicial Officers

(1) This bill expands the crime of assault of a law enforcement officer, emergency personnel, or pro-
bation and parole officer in the first, second and third degrees to include a transit operator or an employee
of a mass transit system while on duty or in operation of his or her official vehicle.

 (2) Juvenile officers, deputy juvenile officers, drug court commissioner-judges, family court
commissioner-judges, and administrative law judges are added to the list of individuals who are considered a
judicial officer as it relates to the crime of tampering with a judicial officer.

[This is the only reference to drug courts in the bills that passed this year.]

HB 326 – Licensed Mental Health Professionals

(1) This bill revises the definition of “clinical social work” to include community organization, planning,
and evaluation and prohibits any entity, public or private, from using any title or abbreviation for identifying
a volunteer or employee as a social worker unless he or she meets the required licensing criteria.

(2) Marital and family therapists are added to the list of mental health professions in which insurance
companies, health services corporations, and health maintenance organizations are required, subject to
contractual provisions, to provide coverage for mental health benefits.

HB 481 – Courts and Judicial Proceedings

This omnibus judicial bill changes a number of laws regarding courts and judicial proceedings. The
summary contains 35 sections, one of which reads as follows:

Allows an individual 18 years of age or older who was found incompetent under Section 632 by admission
either voluntarily or involuntarily into a mental health facility to petition the probate court for a removal of
the disqualification to purchase, possess, or transfer a firearm. Individuals must prove that they no
longer suffer from the condition that rendered them incompetent and that they pose no danger to themselves
or others.

HB 683 -- Transportation

The summary of the MoDOT Drunk Driving Victim Memorial Sign Program (“David’s Law”) is identical
to the summary contained in HB 91, above.

In addition, the bill prohibits the expungement of a minor in possession charge or for being found guilty
with a blood-alcohol content of at least .04 for the holder of a commercial driver’s license [CDL] or a
person operating a commercial motor vehicle when the violation occurred. Any person will be disqualified
from driving a commercial motor vehicle for a period of not less than one year if convicted for the first
violation of an alcohol-related violation.

The crime of assault of a corrections officer, law enforcement officer, emergency personnel, or probation
and parole officer in the first, second, and third degrees is expanded to include a highway worker in a
construction or work zone (see HB 62, above).

HB 685 – Search Warrants for Certain Traffic-Related Offenses

This bill specifies that the State Highway Patrol does not have to be accompanied by the county sheriff when
it serves search warrants for offenses relating to driving while intoxicated and for the investigation of motor
vehicle traffic accidents. The patrol will not be required to notify the county sheriff of any search warrant
for offenses relating to driving while intoxicated.

SB 26 – Alcohol Beverage Vaporizers

This bill prohibits the use or possession of an alcohol beverage vaporizer and exempts any substance that
has been approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration as a therapeutic drug product, is
contained in an approved over-the-counter drug product, or is administered lawfully by an order of an
authorized medical practitioner as it relates to Section 578.255, RSMo, regarding the illegal possession, use,
or abuse of certain substances. [Same provision as in HB 62, above]

SB 44 – Private Jails

This bill changes the laws regarding private jails…. Specifies that a private jail is a facility not owned or
operated by the state, a county, or a municipality which confines or detains prisoners; ……. Requires the jail
administrator to arrange for necessary health care services and provide adequate food, clothing and
bedding; …… Prohibits the delivery of illegal drugs or contraband to private jails; …. [There are
currently two such jails in Missouri but more are anticipated, though there is also concern about the effect of
profit motive on the quality of jail operations.]

SB 140 – Criminal Nonsupport

This bill allows criminal nonsupport courts to be established by any circuit court to provide an
alternative for the criminal disposal of criminal nonsupport cases. The court must combine judicial
supervision, substance abuse treatment, education, vocational or employment training, work programs, and
support payment plans for the participant. Charges and penalties may be reduced or modified based upon
the successful completion of the program or support payment plan. Courts may place incarcerated persons
on work release subject to conditions mandating child support and any arrearage.

The bill establishes a 10-member Criminal Nonsupport Courts Coordinating Commission to coordinate
and allocate resources made available through the newly created Criminal Nonsupport Court Resources Fund
to assist circuit courts…. [During debate on this measure, legislators frequently made reference to
successful drug courts and indicated parallels between drug courts and this new type of court program.]

SB 147 – Missouri Healthy Workplace Recognition Program

This bill requires the Governor’s Council on Physical Fitness and Health to establish and develop the
Missouri Healthy Workplace Recognition Program to recognize employers with more than 50 employees
for excellence in promoting health, wellness, and prevention. The bill specifies the minimum criteria to
receive the official state recognition. Each year five employers will be designated as the healthiest places
to work in Missouri. The information will be posted on the state’s web site, and the employer will receive a
plaque for this recognition.

SB 291 -- Education
This omnibus education bill makes numerous changes in Missouri education law. Two of them will be of
particular interest to readers, especially those that work with school-based prevention programs:

(1) Creates the Persistence to Graduation Fund for use by the Department of Elementary and Secondary
Education for grants to implement dropout prevention strategies. The department must establish a
procedure for school districts to apply for a grant. A grant for a term of one to five years must be available
to a school district having at least 60% of its students eligible for a free or reduced-price lunch. The
department must give preferences to school districts proposing a holistic approach to drop-out
prevention. [defined in the bill]. The Department may stop payments to a district if it determines that the
district is misusing funds or if the district's program is deemed ineffectual, upon 30 days’ notice. The
department must annually report by January 15 to the General Assembly on the recipients and amount of
grants for the preceding five years.

(2) Creates the Volunteer and Parents Incentive Program, to reimburse parents or volunteers who donate
time at certain schools. Eligible individuals must donate time at a school in an unaccredited or provisionally
accredited district or at a district that has at least 59% at-risk students. For every 100 hours donated, the
department will provide, subject to appropriations, a reimbursement for three credit hours at a public
institution of higher learning located in Missouri, not to exceed $500 every two years.

Others provisions in the bill deal with use of seclusion rooms, Senior Cadets Program, Charter Schools,
School Flex Program, P-20 Council, public access to educational materials and records, Parents Bill of
Rights, special administrative boards, changes in school district, boundary lines, Preschool Plus Grant
Program, virtual courses, changes in funding formula, Foster Care Education Bill of Rights, physical
education requirements, teacher certification, employee background checks, Teacher Choice Compensation
Package, supplemental educational services programming, four-day school week option, school make-up
days resulting form inclement weather, compulsory attendance age, home school credits defined, etc.

SB 296 – Professional Registration

This bill changes to laws regarding the licensure of certain professions in the Division of Professional
Registration within the Department of Insurance, Financial Institutions and Professional Registration; the
State Legal Expense Fund; endowed care cemeteries; health care information collection; prescriptive
authority for physician assistants; and marital and family therapists and adopted the Nurse License Compact.
[Two of these provisions are:]

(1) Each board or commission established under the Division of Professional Registration is authorized to
collect and analyze information needed to support workforce planning and policy development. This
information will be considered confidential so as to not identify a specific health care provider.

(2) Physician assistants are allowed when delegated through a physician supervision agreement to
prescribe Schedule III, IV, and V controlled substances. Supervising physicians retain the right to limit
specific drugs or schedules a physician assistant may prescribe. Physician assistants are prohibited from
prescribing controlled substances to themselves or family members and are limited to prescribing a one 24-
hour supply of Schedule III drugs without a refill. Physician assistants who are authorized to prescribe must
register with the Federal Drug Enforcement Administration and the federal Bureau of Narcotics and
Dangerous Drugs. Pharmacists are required to list the name of the physician assistant and the supervising
physician on the prescription label.

(3) Marital and family therapists are added to the list of mental health care professions in which
insurance companies, health service corporations, and health maintenance organizations are required to
provide coverage for mental health care benefits. These benefits will include up to two visits a year.

SB 313 – Federal Economic Stimulus Funds

This bill creates two separate funds in the state treasury to receive moneys provided under the federal
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. The Federal Budget Stabilization Fund will consist
of moneys received from the federal act which are intended to assist with state budget stabilization and the
Federal Stimulus Fund will consist of all other moneys received under the act that are not otherwise
allocable to the Federal Budget Stabilization Fund. Money received relating to unemployment compensation
and the federal Safe Drinking Water program are excluded from the depository requirements. The State
Treasurer is authorized to create new funds as necessary to avoid any conflict with federal law which
prohibits the commingling of certain federal funds.

[The Senate and House also approved SCR 27, which creates the Joint Committee on Oversight of Federal
Stimulus and Stabilization Funds. This committee shall study ways to maximize the amount of federal funds
received under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 and provide oversight to ensure that
the funds are properly spent. SCR’s do not go to the Governor for action.]

              Final Push for TANF Drug Testing Fails in Final Days of Session

   After a delay of 9 days, the Senate Committee Substitute for HB 30 (Brandom) was heard in the Senate’s
Committee on Governmental Accountability and Fiscal Oversight on May 13. It was reported out with a “do
pass” recommendation and taken up for debate on the Senate Floor within hours. Senator Jack Goodman (R-
Mt. Vernon) offered a Senate Substitute, debated briefly, ran into strong opposition from several Senators,
but was not called for a vote. After admitting that the bill “wasn’t quite complete” but arguing that it would
be a step in the right direction, Sen. Goodman put the bill on the Informal Calendar – where bills go to die --
with the Senate Substitute pending. That is where it remained until the end of the session. The Senate
Substitute was similar to the original bill, i.e. it did not contain the provisions for drug testing of
recipients of tax credits or public officials. It is summarized as follows on the bill’s web page:

    SS/SCS/HB 30 (Goodman) This act requires the Department of Social Services to develop a
    program to screen and test each work-eligible applicant or work-eligible recipient who is
    otherwise eligible for temporary assistance for needy families benefits. The program shall provide
    for the screening of such applicant or recipient who the department has reasonable cause to believe
    engages in illegal use of controlled substances. Such applicants or recipients shall be assigned to a
    case worker from the family support division for an interview to determine the level of use or abuse
    of illegal controlled substances. If after conducting the interview, the case worker still has
    reasonable cause to believe that the recipient engages in abuse of illegal controlled substances, the
    applicant or recipient shall be tested for controlled substances. Any applicant or recipient who is
    found to have tested positive for the use of a controlled substance after an administrative hearing
    shall be declared ineligible for temporary assistance for needy families benefits for a period of one
    year from the date of the administrative hearing decision. The department shall refer an
    applicant or recipient who tested positive for the use of a controlled substance under this act
    to an appropriate substance abuse treatment program approved by the division of alcohol and
    drug abuse within the department of mental health. Other members of a household which

    includes a person who has been declared ineligible for TANF benefits shall, if otherwise eligible,
    continue to receive TANF benefits as protective or vendor payments to a third-party payee for the
    benefit of the members of the household. The department shall promulgate rules to develop the
    screening and testing provisions of this section.

   Rep. Brandom was successful in getting the original language of HB 30 included as an amendment to SB
306 (Dempsey), the high-profile health care bill, but that bill failed on the final day due to significant
disagreements between Senate and House. Senate leadership did not appoint members to a conference

                        Survey of Public Attitudes Finds Little Agreement
                             on “What the Government Should Do”
   The Hazelden Foundation’s Center for Public Advocacy has published its Results from the Fall 2008
National Study of Public Attitudes Toward Addiction (
Some of the results have been reported in various news outlets, including Join Together, but one question
appears to have escaped attention. Respondents were asked “In what way, if any, should the government
change its approach to dealing with problems stemming from the illegal use of drugs and/or alcohol?”
Here are the results:
                                    28% Don’t know
                                    14% Harsher penalties
                                     7% Education programs
                                     7% Legalize some drugs
                                     7% More treatment
                                     7% Better treatment
                                     5% No treatment needed
                                    26% Other ideas*

*“Other ideas,” in alphabetical order:

   Alcohol should be illegal
   Better insurance coverage
   Border control
   Community outreach programs
   Consistent laws in each state
   Don’t jail first-time offenders
   Go after the drug dealers
   Higher age limits for consumption of alcohol
   Less funding for programs
   Less racist/biased penalties
   Lessen the penalties
   Look at it as an illness
   Lower age limit for consumption of alcohol
   Mandatory drug testing
   More faith-based programs
   More family support
   More funding for programs

   More law enforcement
   More research
   More sympathy
   Re-evaluate current laws
   Regulate media
   Regulate prescription drugs
   Shouldn’t lose jobs over addiction
   Stop importing from drug producing countries
   Treat each case individually

   This may be a more accurate reflection of what legislators hear from their constituents than some of
the other surveys that have been done. The Hazelden survey found that 20% of the respondents “strongly
agree” and 50% “agree” with the statement that “insurance should cover addiction treatment.” Also, 56%
“agree” and 21% “strongly agree” that “addiction treatment should be part of healthcare reform,” and 27%
“strongly agree” and 56% “agree” that first-time offenders should get treatment rather than prison time.
These favorable responses seem to be at odds with responses to the question about what government should
do – perhaps because Americans do not connect the dots between what is desirable and how to achieve it.

   Hazelden describes its survey as a national telephone survey (October-November, 2008) of 1,000
nationally representatives Americans, balanced by key demographic factors, with a margin of error of plus
or minus 3%. The survey has a special focus on words consumers use to describe addiction and addicts, in
addition to questions about attitudes toward addiction and treatment, consumer awareness, and impact on
families and the workplace.

                     Calls for Re-Examination of U.S. Drug Policy Intensify
    Secretary of State Hilary Clinton’s call for new efforts to reduce the demand for illegal drugs was
echoed by Gil Kerlikowske, President Obama’s nominee for Director of the Office on National Drug
Control Policy (ONDCP) during confirmation hearings by the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee on April
1. The text of Chief Kerlikowske’s testimony, as well as letters of support from various organizations, are
accessible at Coverage of
that hearing and statements made by the “drug czar” nominee will be included in next week’s report.

   The drug issue has also received attention in the popular media, notably an article in the March 29, 2009
Parade Magazine. U.S. Senator Jim Webb (D-Va) says that it’s time to change the law. He writes in that
the U.S. has by far the world’s highest incarceration rate. “With 5% of the world’s population, our country
how houses nearly 25% of the world’s reported prisoners,” he writes.

       “Drug offenders, most of them passive users or minor dealers, are swamping our prisons.
       According to data supplied to Congress’ Joint Economic Committee, those imprisoned for
       drug offenses rose from 10% of the inmate population to approximately 33% between
       1984 and 2002. Experts estimate that this increase accounts for about half the dramatic
       escalation in the total number imprisoned over that period. Yet locking up more of these
       offenders has done nothing to break up the power of the multibillion-dollar illegal drug
       trade. Nor has it brought about a reduction in the amounts of the more dangerous
       drugs—such as cocaine, heroin, and methamphetamines—that are reaching our citizens.”

   Sen. Webb is introducing legislation to create a national commission to look at every aspect of our
criminal justice system. “I believe that it is time to bring together the best minds of America to confer,
report, and make specific recommendations about how we can reform the process. This commission will be
tasked with giving us clear answers to hard questions, including:

     Why are so many Americans currently in prison compared with other countries and our own history?
     What is this policy costing our nation, both in tax dollars and in lost opportunities?
     How can we reshape our nation’s drug policies?
     How can we better diagnose and treat mental illness?
     How can we end violence within prisons and increase the quality of prison administrators?
     How can we build workable re-entry programs so that our communities can assimilate former offenders
      and encourage them to become productive citizens?
     How can we defend ourselves against the growing scourge of violent, internationally based gang

 Ed. Note: The commission should be encouraged to spend most of its time working on solutions, rather than
dwelling on compilation of statistics and status reports.

                 Huge Turnover Expected in 2011 Missouri General Assembly
   The 2010 Election will see many new names in the races for seats in the State House of Representatives
and State Senate. As a result of term limits (8 years in the House; 8 years in the Senate), at least 55 of the
163 members of the House will be ineligible to run for re-election. At least 10 of the 34 members of the
State Senate will be ineligible. These are the minimums; more open seats may be created by decisions of
other members to retire -- or other unforeseen reasons. The following lists are those

              Representative           Party         District     Hometown
              Bivins, Walt               R              97         St. Louis
              Bringer, Rachel            D               6         Palmyra
              Brown, Jason               R              30         Platte City
              Bruns, Mark                R             113         Jefferson City
              Burnett, John              D              40         Kansas City
              Cooper, Wayne              R             155         Osage Beach
              Corcoran                   D              77         St. Ann
              Cunningham, Mike           R             145         Rogersville
              Davis, Cynthia             R              19         O’Fallon
              Deeken, Bill               R             114         Jefferson City
              Dethrow, Mike              R             153         Alton
              Dixon, Bob                 R             140         Springfield
              Dougherty, Curt            D              53         Independence
              Dusenberg                  R              54         Blue Springs
              Emery, Ed                  R             126         Lamar
              Ervin, Doug                R              35         Kearney
              Guest. Jim                 R               5         King City
              Harris, Belinda            D             110         Hillsboro
              Hobbs, Steve               R              21         Mexico
              Hoskins, Ted               D              80         Berkeley

Icet, Allen           R         84       Wildwood
Kingery, Gayle        R        154       Poplar Bluff
Kuessner, J. C.       D        152       Eminence
LeVota, Paul          D         52       Independence
Liese, Albert         D         79       Maryland Heights
Lipke, Scott          R        157       Jackson
Meiners, Kate         D         46       Kansas City
Munzlinger, Brian     R          1       Williamstown
Nieves, Brian         R         98       Washington
Pratt, Bryan          R         55       Blue Springs
Richard, Ron          R        129       Joplin
Ruestman, Marilyn     R        131       Joplin
Salva, Ray            D         51       Sugar Creek
Sander, Therese       R         22       Moberly
Schaaf, Rob           R         28       St. Joseph
Schlottach, Charlie   R        111       Owensville
Schoemehl, Sue        D        100       St. Louis
Self, Tom             R        116       Cole Camp
Skaggs, Trent         D         31       Kansas City
Smith, Joe            R         14       St. Charles
Spreng, Michael       D         76       Florissant
Stevenson, Bryan      R        128       Webb City
Sutherland, Mike      R         99       Warrenton
Viebrock, Jim         R        134       Republic
Vogt, Michael         D         66       St. Louis
Wallace, Maynard      R        143       Thornfield
Walsh, Gina           D         69       St. Louis
Wasson, Jay           R        141       Nixa
Wildberger, Ed        D         27       St. Joseph
Wilson, Kevin         R        130       Neosho
Wilson, Larry         R        119       Flemington
Witte, Terry          D         10       Vandalia
Wood, Dennis          R         62       Kimberling City
Yaeger, Patricia      D         96       St. Louis
Yates, Brian          R         56       Lee’s Summit

Senator               Party   District   Hometown
Bartle, Matt          R         8        Lee’s Summit
Bray, Joan            D        24        St. Louis
Champion, Norma       R        30        Springfield
Clemens, Dan          R        20        Marshfield
Days, Rita            D        14        St. Louis
Griesheimer, John     R        26        Washington
Nodler, Gary          R        32        Joplin
Scott, Delbert        R        28        Clinton
Shields, Charlie      R        34        St. Joseph

              Vogel, Carl                  R                  6        Jefferson City

                  Drug Courts Receive Strong Legislative Support in Missouri
                     FAVOR Asks: Is Your Drug Court Fit for Recovery?
       Drug courts are mentioned regularly by legislators on both sides of the aisle as an effective way of
dealing with people who are addicted and who are drug law offenders. It is argued that they not only help
people get clean and sober, with appropriate coercion or incentive, but they save money by reducing the
number of people who are incarcerated, thereby avoiding overcrowding in our correctional facilities and the
need to build even more prisons. These sentiments were heard again several times in the debate on HB 30,
the bill that would require drug testing of TANF applicants and recipients (see Weekly Report #10).

   Faces & Voices of Recovery has published a set of criteria for Drug Courts to determine how well its
participants continue progress in their recovery. The national network describes its Recovery Check-Up as
“a tool that you can use to think about the ways that your program is building bridges to the recovery
community and opportunities for individuals to achieve and sustain their recovery from addiction. A
recovery focus will increase your ability to be successful in getting individuals the support they need while
they are in your program and as they transition out into the community.”


          A vision of long-term recovery for participants is expressed in the Drug Court’s mission
          Your Advisory Board includes former participants who are in long-term recovery and community-
          based representatives of the recovery community
          Your staff and volunteers include people in long-term recovery and their family members
          Your staff are involved in activities that are addressing the special stigma and discrimination faced by
          people in recovery with criminal records
          Your staff receives ongoing specific training on addiction and recovery policies and practices including
          updates on research, support services, recovery community organizations, resources and attends Open
          12-step meetings

          Receive an information packet about Drug Court and resources for help
          Involved in putting together the recovery plan
          Provide added incentives for individuals who attend family counseling
          Family members are referred to Al-Anon, recovery community organizations and other supports
          Encouraged to attend Drug Court sessions, meetings and outings, and are consulted throughout
          the individual’s participation in Drug Court
          Family members and supporters are consulted before the individual graduates


          Your Drug Court educates all participants, family members and supporters about the recovery
          Your Drug Court embraces the importance of individual choice in planning a program for long-term
          recovery:            ____ Choice of goals
                               ____ Choice of treatment methods
                               ____ Choice of service workers

         Your Drug Court embraces the importance of matching and understanding individual participants’
         characteristics with the methods and services that will best help them get and sustain recovery


         Have a volunteer program that includes people in long-term recovery
         Have an Alumni program that includes participants and their families
         Provide and maintain a listing of Twelve Step meetings and other self-help groups
         Provide and maintain linkages with faith-based recovery support resources
         Provide and maintain linkages to secular recovery support resources
         Provide and maintain linkages to sober housing, recovery homes and other housing opportunities
         Provide and maintain linkages to “recovery-friendly” jobs, employers and training
         Recovery-oriented questions are included in the exit questionnaire and all program evaluation for
         Monitor and assess the percentage of participants who are linked to a community of recovery prior to

Faces and Voices of Recovery, 1010 Vermont Ave. N.W. #708, Washington, DC 20005 – 202.737.0690:


To top