Bryan Pratt

I guess this new TV ad from Rep. Will Kraus (R-Lee's Summit) attacking Rep. Bryan Pratt (R-Blue Springs) means that he isn't worried about Rep. Gary Dusenberg (R-Blue Springs) in the SD8 primary. 

Note that Kraus and Bill Stouffer are using the same DC media firm, CRAFT | Media / Digital. 

Yesterday afternoon, it was reported that Bryan Pratt was removed from the House Rules Committee by Speaker Ron Richard because Pratt would not commit to supporting the tax incentives bill in the ongoing special sessions. “It is frustrating that because I want to vote against giving Missouri taxpayer dollars to keep large corporations in business, I am no longer allowed to serve on that committee,” Pratt said in a press release.

More from KMBC's Micheal Mahoney: "Speaker Ron Richard continues to rule with an iron hand in the Special Session on the Claycomo Ford plant (see previous post). Jackson County St. Rep and Speaker Pro Tem Bryan Pratt has been yanked off the important rules committee for opposing the bill. Pratt says it happened after he told Speaker Richard he thought the Claycomo measure was a “bail out bill”, and that he and his Eastern Jackson County constituents oppose it."

I'd post an excerpt, but it's best if you just go read his whole post on the Missourinet Blog about last week's "ethics" "debate" in the House.

The Missouri House just approved the Senate's proposal to allow voters to express their feelings about the new federal health care law in the August primary election. If passed, it would add a provision into state statute intended to block the federal government from taxing people who choose not to buy health insurance, though no one seems to know how such a prohibition would work.  Truthfully, it's just a symbolic vote, pushed by the most conservative of legislators to give their tea party supporters a warm and fuzzy feeling.

But just because it may be a meaningless statute doesn't mean it's devoid of political consequences.  Specifically, Republican candidates who have positioned themselves as the 'true conservatives' in their primaries stand to benefit from an excited tea party base.  A few candidates come to mind...

Rep. Will Kraus (R-Lee's Summit) is running against Rep. Bryan Pratt (R-Blue Springs) and Rep. Gary Dusenberg (R-Blue Springs) to be the next State Senator from the 8th District (Matt Bartle is term limited).  Pratt played a key role in last week's shenanigans in the House, and has already been pummeled in the press for his absurd rhetoric and cynical leadership. 

Kraus voted for Thursday's ridiculous legislation, but has distanced himself from the House GOP leadership on the issues of ethics. He was one of three Republicans to sign the discharge petition to force the bipartisan ethics reform bill (opposed by Pratt) onto the House Calendar, bypassing the House Rules Committee (on which Pratt sits). 

Friday, he said he was "disappointed" in Thursday's bill, pointing to three critical components of an effective ethics reform bill" ignored by his leadership:

“While I voted for the bill because I think ethics reform is necessary and important, we in the House could have taken the opportunity to address comprehensive ethics reform, and we failed to do so.”

Missourinet's Brent Martin breaks down yesterday's ethics debate circus in the House :

I’LL SEE YOUR DISCHARGE PETITION AND RAISE YOU ONE MASSIVE, UNCONSTITUTIONAL BILL

Ethics reform has sparked an all out political war in the Missouri House, no small achievement for a measure that stood on the doorstep of passage after clearing a House committee on a unanimous vote.

Debate Thursday on the House floor had nothing to do with ethics. It had everything to do with raw, political power...

The theatre fell flat. The politics were sharp edged...

Honest people can disagree about public policy regarding abortion. But yesterday's debate in the Missouri House of Representatives on HB 1327 & HB 2000 from Reps. Cynthia Davis (R-O'Fallon) and Bryan Pratt (R-Blue Springs) was ridiculous. 

One of the more controversial portions of the Pratt/Davis proposal would require providers to notify prosecutors if any woman under age 18 seeks an abortion without a court order, in both the woman's home county and the county of the provider. 

During the debate, Rep. Pratt and Rep. Brian Nieves (R-Union) decided that anyone who voted against the bill -- and this provision -- was actively "protecting rapists."

NIEVES: If a person votes against this legislation, to me, it says very clearly and profoundly that they are in favor of increasing the number of abortions and...

PRATT: Protecting rapists.

NIEVES: ...somehow creating this protective category for those who would rape underage girls.

PRATT: You're right gentleman. You're absolutely right.

Listen:

This morning before the House Children and Families Committee, Rep. Bryan Pratt (R-Blue Springs) presented his new informed consent/coercion bill (HB2000) which would, among other things, require providers to notify prosecuting attorneys about any abortions provided to women under the age of 17.

Current law requires providers to notify authorities of any pregnancies/abortions for girls under the age of 14. 

That, however, did not stop Pratt from telling the committee that his law could have helped prevent some of the abuse allegedly committed by five men arrested in Lafayette County in November for sex crimes against children.  The alleged abuse by the men in the Mohler family is incredibly disturbing (you can read more here); among other things, a key witness in the case says she had an abortion at age 11 1/2. 

Pratt told the committee his bill could prevent similar abuse in the future. 

Rep. Gary Dusenberg (R-Blue Springs) breaks the news: "pay to play" exists in the state legislature.

“Whether we admit it or not, it exists,” said Rep. Gary Dusenberg, R-Blue Springs, in an appearance before the House Committee on Government Accountability and Ethics Reform. “When people with lots of money get to say what bills are heard or not, that is not fair. These incidents do not pass the smell test, folks. You can say that they do, but they don’t.” [..]

Dusenberg is unusual in the sense that few Republicans support the restoration of [campaign contribution] limits. He is also one of the few lawmakers speaking out about the “pay to play” accusations.

“It is what it is, and we have to correct it, and if you can’t take a stand on what you believe in, you should not be here in the first place,” Dusenberg said. “It reflects on the people down here in the General Assembly.”