Denny Hoskins

Rep. Denny Hoskins (R-Warrensburg) has responded to questions first posed here about his use of state resources for campaign videos.  The end of this week's video (all four minutes here):

It's still odd for Hoskins to be using his taxpayer-supported office for campaign activities, but I'll take him at his word about his campaign hiring someone to film and produce each of the videos.

Rep. Denny Hoskins (R-Warrensburg) has recently posted two campaign videos to his new YouTube channel as part of a new series of "Capitol Reports."  At least one of those videos is filmed inside his taxpayer-supported Capitol office.

Unlike other legislators who post videos to YouTube as part of their official communications, Hoskins has clearly identified the clips as campaign efforts.  Both videos close with the disclaimer, "Paid for by Citizens for Hoskins." 

Why is Hoskins filming his campaign videos in the Capitol?  And who's working the camera?

Well this is odd: less than 24 hours after blaming deadbeat tenants and the bad economy for his $20,316 overdue tax bill, Rep. Denny Hoskins paid off his entire debt.

It's unclear how Hoskins, a professional accountant, came up with the money so quickly.  In his statement yesterday to the media, Hoskins said they had a "plan" to collect delinquent rent, and reminded his constituents that he's not "immune from the economic recession."

If the money was so readily available -- why he didn't pay his tax bill before it appeared in the newspaper? 

DigitalBurg.com and The Daily Star-Journal are reporting that freshman Rep. Denny Hoskins (R-Warrensburg) owes more than $20,000 in past due property taxes and fines on property taxes he owns with his brother. A full $4,200 of that total are penalties for the delinquencies.

While many families are indeed struggling in this rough economy, Hoskins has made his fiscal management skills and CPA credentials a central part of his campaigning. 

If you haven't seen it yet, Show Me Progress' pair of weekend posts on Rep. Denny Hoskins' (R-Warrensburg) town hall meetings are good examples of citizen journalism. 

In the first, Hoskins struggles to give a straight answer as to why he both supported and opposed a proposed consumption tax (a/k/a "Fair Tax").  When a constituent asked Hoskins why he changed his mind -- from support to opposition -- Hoskins didn't really have a good answer.

Late yesterday afternoon, as GOP Leaders were running out the clock to avoid votes on health care for the working poor and autism coverage, Denny Hoskins' private prisons bill was brought up for debate. No doubt, the leadership was hoping to give Hoskins a feather in his cap to balance out some of the problems he's had in his first session. 

But during the debate on the measure, for reasons unknown, Rep. Brian Nieves thought he'd found the perfect opportunity to respond to Thursday's post about his offensive mocking of the ongoing national debate about the utility, legality and wisdom of torturing terrorist suspects and detainees. In the clip below, you can Nieves embark on a second disconcerting rant about (the first one is here), apparently upset that I'd questioned his devotion to waterboarding.

A spot-on editorial from the Warrensburg Daily Star-Journal:

Rep. Denny Hoskins should have shouted "no" at Sen. Delbert Scott and the ill-conceived bill to reduce public information about elected officials; instead, Hoskins erred on the side of government secrecy by agreeing to handle Scott's bill in the House.

The bill would hide information from the public about elected officials in 61 cities, including Knob Noster. Public officials now fill out a form naming their potential conflicts of interest. Voters should know if a real estate dealer on a city council might have land of interest to the city, whether a banker is involved with city deposits, whether a developer might seek friendlier zoning laws and so forth. A simple form helps do this, but Hoskins and Scott want to end disclosures in some cities under the premise that the forms are a bother and might discourage people from public service.

The premise is hogwash....

Read More »

Consistent with the GOP leadership's disdain for anything resembling reasonable ethic reform, Rep. Denny Hoskins (R-Warrensburg) and Sen. Delbert Scott (R-Lowry City) are expected to continue their work this week to actually reduce basic disclosure requirements for 61 municipalities across the state.

Current law requires elected officials, candidates for elective office and certain other officials in political subdivisions with operating budgets of over $1 million to file financial interest statements.  However, if Scott and Hoskins are successful passing their legislation (SB66), the budget floor will be increased to $2 million, effectively exempting 61 new towns from this basic open government requirement.

Here's a key portion of Hoskins' attempt to explain why the public deserves less transparency last week:

(A transcript of this debate between Hoskins and Rep. John Burnett is up at Show Me Progress.)

Before he was rescued from himself by Floor Leader Steve Tilley, Hoskins failed to present any compelling arguments for relaxing the disclosure requirements.  His best excuse was that some people in some towns sometimes don't fill out financial interest statements like they should -- but a refusal to comply with existing transparency rules is hardly a good reason to have less transparency.

I guess it's contagious.

Inspired by the courageous leadership of Rep. Tim Jones, Rep Denny Hoskins (R-Warrensburg) just couldn't find the chamber when it came time to vote on an amendment allowing folks to carry concealed weapons on college campuses. The amendment was approved 106-41, with Hoskins nowhere to be found.

In completely unrelated news, Hoskins has been pressed on the issue of concealed weapons on college campuses in UCM's student newspaper, The Muleskinner. Two weeks ago, a letter was written asking Hoskins to examine the issue of weapons on campus in light of the Virginia Tech tragedy. Hoskins didn't like that, and in response, employed a somewhat unorthodox damage control strategy which involved a public confrontation with the student letter-writer on campus. Predictably, Hoskins' tantrum ended escalated the whole thing, and even got him some press in the Warrensberg Daily Star-Journal.

The Missouri House Veterans Committee voted 6-5 yesterday against a proposal by Rep. Stephen Webber (D-Columbia) that would pay deployed state employees the difference between their regular pay and their military pay

Committee Chairman David Day (R-Dixon) opposed the bill because it would single out those on active military duty for "special treatment."

I have a real concern with separating out one relatively small segment and saying, "We’re going to give you this special safety net that we’re not going to provide anyone else."

If any segment of the population is undeserving of special treatment, it's those self-absorbed nogoodnicks on active duty. At least they kept the special treatment for deployed politicians intact.

I can't help but wonder what legislators say to their constituents when they're asked to explain their opposition to policies that help struggling families. Especially those that just squeaked out wins in 2008 -- how do their spin their votes to inspire supporters for 2010? 

Consider some basic stats that must be going through their minds, sliced into 163 pieces:

• More than 200 individuals in the average House district could receive health care -- at no cost to the state -- if Republicans drop their opposition to the hospitals' health care agreement.
• Last month, House Republicans blocked a proposal to reduce health care premiums and increase access for about 125 children per House district.
• All told, there are more than 825 uninsured children in the average House district.

And then consider how close these contests were in 2008:

• In District 121, Denny Hoskins only won by 122 votes
• In District 120, Scott Largent only won by 353 votes
• In District 7, Mike Lair only won by 428 votes