Kurt Schaefer

Originally posted at ProgressMissouri.org

Senate Appropriations Chair Kurt Schaefer and Representative Chris Kelly this morning told Rex Sinquefield directly that they oppose his radical Everything Tax ballot initiatives.  The two members of the General Assembly were the headline speakers at a Show-Me Institute event in Columbia moderated by Sinquefield himself.

“It scares the bejesus out of me what's going to happen if we phase into this and we have a substantial dip in general revenue,” said Senator Schaefer, who also said he was “intrigued” by the concept of a higher sales tax, in general. But “I'm very concerned about what happens when it phases in, especially during the phase in, and whether or not we have a substantial dip in general revenue because we cannot take it right now.”

The Everything Tax “cannot pass and...is bad for the state of Missouri,” said Representative Kelly. “It's bad for the state of Missouri because it would produce less revenue and because it moves the burden so substantially downward.”  

Senator Kurt Schaefer, who represents Boone and Randolph counties, wants to keep federal infrastructure funds out of Missouri. On Tuesday, he suggested a resolution to refuse funds that might be available through President Obama's American Jobs Act. The White House has issued state specific information as to how the Jobs Act would help states.

Senator Schaefer doesn't think Missourians deserve a boost to our economy. Yet the Progressive States Network has pointed out that "reports around the nation this week indicated state economies stand to benefit significantly from the boost that would be provided by direct funding in the bill allowing them to put construction workers back to work rebuilding crumbling schools and infrastructure, and to make sure teachers, firefighters, and cops in their communities stay on the job." Read their report here. 

Proposed investments in Missouri look to be well over $1 billion, but just as in health care reform, the Show Me State doesn't even want to look.

"I'm very hesitant to derail anything that's a potential economic development or job-creation opportunity."

Senate Approps Chairman Kurt Schaefer on the GOP Callous Caucus' insistence on rejecting already-allocated federal dollars that would help Missouri communities

Jim Lembke and Brian Nieves

It's (almost) unanimous: nobody likes the plan from Sens. Jim Lembke (R-St. Louis), Jason Crowell (R-Cape Girardeau) and Brian Nieves (R-Washington) to reject $189M in federal funds for Missouri's schools:

Sen. Jim Lembke, R-St. Louis, is one of those who want Missouri to say ‘no’ to [$189 million in] federal education dollars; he contends the money is merely driving up the federal debt.

But budget leaders for the House, Senate and governor all say it makes little sense to reject the federal education money, because it would merely be redistributed to other states — not go toward paying down the federal debt.

“You can make a statement by not taking the money, but by doing that, all you’re doing is penalizing grade-school kids,” said Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Kurt Schaefer, R-Columbia.

H'ray bipartisanship!

House Budget Chairman Ryan Silvey (R-Kansas City) has also made it clear that he has no appetitite for his colleagues' crazy.  

Via the Associated Press and KWMU, I see that Sens. Jim Lembke (R-Lemay) and Jason Crowell (R-Cape Girardeau) are calling on the General Assembly to reject $189 million (!) from the federal government that has already been allocated to help school districts keep or rehire teachers.  From the AP's story on the matter:

"The state of Missouri should take a stand," said Lembke, R-St. Louis. "If the federal government's not going to live within their means, then we've got to show them how to do that."

Sen. Jason Crowell, R-Cape Girardeau, said he also is opposed to using the federal education money. Crowell said Missouri has relied on too many one-time patches for its budget and accepting the federal money would only delay cuts that would have to be made when the federal money is used up.

Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Kurt Schaefer, R-Columbia, declined to say whether he believed Missouri should accept or reject the special allotment of federal money.

Sen. Kurt Schaefer (R-Columbia) penned an op-ed for the Tribune yesterday calling for someone besides him to round up the cash and signatures to put a cigarette tax on the ballot in Missouri.  The state's cigarette tax is ridiculously low, and I think an increase makes sense -- both for the extra revenue and to create additional disincentives for smoking, which smoking and non-smoking taxpayers all pay for down the line. 

However, Schaefer's op-ed doesn't give any indication that he plans to do anything beyond expressing general support an increase at convenient times as he prepares for his re-election fight in 2012.  He poo-poos legislation proposed by Rep. Jamilah Nasheed (D-St. Louis) and others (HB181), saying it wouldn't raise cigarette taxes as much as he'd like because of Hancock Law limitations.  

Moreover, he hasn't sponsored or co-sponsored any legislation to date to send an increase directly to voters, which would get around any Hancock limits.

The general assumption on High Street is that Sen. Kevin Engler (R-Farminton) will be promoted by his Republican colleagues from Majority Floor Leader to President Pro Tem in the next legislative session.  However, as members prepare to return to Jefferson City for tomorrow's veto session, there is increased speculation that Engler's advancement is not a done deal. 

Depending on ambition and willingness to tolerate risk of Sens. Brad Lager, Jack Goodman, and Jim Lembke, a shake-up could be on the horizon.

As it stands now, Kurt Schaefer and David Pearce both appear to be on the hot seat.  Schaefer is currently the Vice-Chair of the Appropriations Committee, a spot openly coveted by Lembke.  Engler may be required to offer this spot to Lembke to prevent a Sleeper Cell coup.  Pearce is currently the Chair of the Education Committee, but contributes little to the Caucus -- could a grumpy Jane Cunningham be assuaged to support Engler's bid if she becomes the new Chair?

Politico's Dave Catanese posted a series of interesting tweets on Saturday about Tom Schweich's campaign for State Auditor.  In chronological order:

• 8:38 PM - Bad buzz about Schweich from even those who support him. He's steamed he has a primary when he cut a deal. Ala [Florida Governor Charlie] Crist, welcome to the NFL.
   
• 9:14 PM - GOPer says Schweich needs to learn from @RoyBlunt in approach. Roy takes his licks, but smiles, brushes off like Jay-Z. Schweich gets mad.
   
• 9:32 PM - Schweich should devote a speech to his $500 contrib. to @clairecmc. Say if the GOP wants to b party that excludes indys, it won't prevail.
   
• 9:41 PM - No, @allenicet [primary opponent Allen Icet] doesn't inspire. But Schweich is turning people off. RT @davesmith3: @davecatanese is @alanicet really crushing it THAT much?

Missourian columnist George Kennedy laments the partisanship and lack of progress in the General Assembly in his latest column: "A month into their session, Missouri’s legislators haven’t done much but talk," he writes. 

Kennedy points to legislators like Sen. Bill Stouffer (R-Napton) who "wander beyond their competence" with resolutions about federal issues, and also picks up on Sen. Kurt Schaefer's ridiculous complaints that federal grant money for rail projects was spent on rail projects. 

Sen. Kurt Schaefer (R-Columbia) is unhappy that federal Recovery Act money awarded to the state for improvements to the rail corridor between Kansas City and St. Louis is being spent on improvements to the rail corridor between Kansas City and St. Louis. According to this article in the Missourian, Schaefer would rather spend the money on the Ellis Fischel Cancer Center. 

While it would be great if the state were flush with cash and could fund everything Schaefer wanted, he doesn't seem to have a plan yet for how the state should lie to the federal government and funnel $23 million in transportation money to a hospital in his district.

I'm a little slow on this, but Sen. Kurt Schaefer last week proposed freezing state legislators' per diems to save a little money for the state (SB 730).  His bill would not impact the 18% raise lawmakers are scheduled to receive, but would just keep the daily allowance provided to legislators at last year's level.  They'd continue to receive $87.20 per day, instead of an increased $103.20 per diem.

I'm all about saving some money, and would never question a politician's motivations in sponsoring legislation (e.g., I would never suggest that his bill is mostly about helping Schaefer get his name in the newspaper, and would do nothing to address the state's rather significant revenue shortfalls).  But if Schaefer really wanted to impress folks, why doesn't he promise to never take per diems again?  The whole purpose of per diems is to help workers afford the increased meal and apartment/lodging expenses that come with working away from their homes.  Considering the fact that Schaefer lives 30 minutes from Jefferson City (like many, many other folks who work in Jefferson City), and considering Sen. Charlie Shield's insistence that lobbyists will keep paying for Senators' meals, why does Schaeffer take a per diem at all? 

Update: I misunderstood the Post-Dispatch story, and incorrectly stated that legislators were in line for a pay raise. A boneheaded mistake on my part. 

How odd is it that State Sen. Kurt Schaefer has hired a firm to spam his constituents with robo calls on behalf of the Ellis Fischel Cancer Center? 

Schaefer admits he hasn't bothered to call the Governor's office himself about the funding in question. Yet he's decided the most effective strategy for exercising his influence at the Capitol is to have other people lob in calls on his behalf. This seems highly irregular, at best.

What happened to Kurt Schaefer, The Great Negotiator?

Rather than fight for Missouri's families, GOP state legislators insist on fighting amongst themselves. In a must-read piece for The Beacon, Jason Rosenbaum touches on many of the big fights at the Capitol slowing down legislation: Senate Republicans v. House Republicans, Jason Crowell v. Kurt Schaefer, Jeff Roe v. Rod Jetton, John Griesheimer v. "outside forces", John Griesheimer v. Rod Jetton, Kurt Schaefer v. Rod Jetton, Jason Crowell v. Jeff Roe and David Barklage, Jason Crowell's ego v. Ron Richard's ego, Allen Icet v. Gary Nodler, Kevin Engler v. perpetrators of physical violence... 

[W]ith roughly a month to go before lawmakers adjourn for the year, Republicans seem to be turning their aim away from the Democratic governor and instead targeting each other.

Some Senate Republicans are lobbing stinging attacks, questioning the ethics and motivations of their colleagues. Various factions seem miles apart on two of the biggest bills: 1) an economic development package and 2) a proposal to allow utility companies to recover financing costs for the construction of nuclear power plants....

The animosity among Republican lawmakers has been noticeable, going beyond simple differences of opinion.

Just another day in Jeff City:

[Sen. Kurt Schaefer, R-Columbia] who wrote the new version of the Ameren nuclear plant bill, was offended by the robo-calls his constituents received about the bill. The calls were paid for by Noranda, who hired former House Speaker Rod Jetton as a political consultant to help oppose the Ameren bill....

In debate on the floor, Schaefer asked [Jason Crowell, R-Cape Girardeau], who also employs Jetton as a consultant, if he was paying for the robo-calls. Crowell said no and retorted that Schaefer was getting bad information from two other GOP consultants, David Barklage and Jeff Roe.

Barklage is an Ameren lobbyist. Roe is also being paid to work on the Ameren bill, Crowell said.

“Ameren has got Jeff Roe and David Barklage hired on this thing and they hate Rod Jetton,” Crowell said...

Sigh.