Introduced by Representative Mike Moon (Republican - District 157), this amendment would exempt prescriptions written for patients who have been diagnosed with chronic pain. As I am against Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs in general, I voted yes on this amendment in hopes that it's adoption might hurt the chances of the final bill passing. Sadly, this amendment was not adopted, and failed on a roll call vote.
Tony Lovasco's Voting Record
Vote explanations will be listed below for recorded "roll call" votes made on pertinent matters (amendments, bill passage, committee actions, etc). Roll call votes on routine procedural actions such as approving the daily House journal are not generally listed. If a particular action is notable for special or unusual reasons, it may be included in this list despite falling into a category not normally documented.
Introduced by Representative Jason Chipman (Republican - District 120), this amendment requires that all doctors utilize the Prescription Drug Monitoring Program (PDMP) outlined in HB-188, and includes penalty provisions if they fail to do so. He argued that in order for PDMP to be at all effective, everyone must be mandated to utilize it.
Introduced by Representative Jered Taylor (Republican - District 139), this amendment adds Marijuana to the list of covered medicines subjected to monitoring by HB 188.
Representative Nick Schroer (Republican - District 107) offered amendment 0895H01.22H to HB 445. That amendment allows members of the General Assembly to close records containing personal information, constituent case files, or documentation of their deliberative decision making process from disclosure under Missouri's Sunshine Law. I am very much in favor of those provisions, and even filed a bill
HB 445 as originally written would prohibit all types of lobbyists from making any type of expenditure for local government officials, school board members, and other members of similar governing bodies. In my opinion that is a somewhat unnecessary restriction - it would be a far better approach to simply require such lobbyist expenditures to be reportable to the Missouri Ethics Commission (as has long been required of similar expenses on state General Assembly members). However the bill sponsor (Shamed Dogan, Republican - District 98) also offered amendment 0895H01.23H during perfection,
HCS HB 397, sponsored by Mary Elizabeth Coleman (Republican - District 97), should have been an easy "yes" vote for me. Instead, it was a reluctant one. This bill's primary stated purpose was to assure that victims of sex trafficking are treated as victims, not offenders. That's a principle I can easily get behind. However that's not all this bill does, and that made the choice more difficult.
Prior to this bill, Missouri law indicated that a person under the age of 18 could assert an affirmative defense to the charge of prostitution if they could demonstrate they were acting under coercion. Unfortunately, many victims of sex trafficking cannot prove such coercion. This bill changes the standard, and allows an affirmative defense to prostitution simply if one can demonstrate they were under age at the time. This is a very good improvement. In addition, this bill specifies that coercion is also an affirmative defense for those over the age of 18, recognizing that not all victims of trafficking are children. If the bill had stopped there, this would have been an easy "yes" vote for me, with no reservations or major concerns. But it didn't.
This resolution outlines the Rules of Procedure that govern the conduct of the investigation of complains of ethical misconduct by a member of the House. They are mostly unchanged from last session, however there were a few additions relating to the names and identifying information of accusers being redacted from official reports of the initial investigative committee. This change allows an investigation to proceed, while protecting the privacy of potential victims. If the complaint proceeds to a preliminary hearing, an unredacted report is provided to the accused, so that their right to face their accuser is preserved.
While I did not ever have an opportunity to meet Representative Cloria Brown, she is spoken highly of by many, and I'm told she was a pleasant and well-meaning individual. That said, I am not generally a fan of renaming roads or bridges for the purpose of making a memorial, political statement or other such non-policy related intention. I am willing to make exceptions in cases where no taxpayer funds are expended, the naming is ceremonial in nature (e.g.
House Resolution 7 (HR7) provides a list of rules that govern operations of the MO House of Representatives. The vote on HR7 was "as amended", and was a final vote to adopt the rule package.
During the amendment process, a variety of issues were discussed and voted on. I'd previously spoken about 0026h0225h, which was a roll call vote. But the other amendments were voted on via voice votes. I'd like to touch on some of the more notable ones here:
This amendment to HR7 (The Rules of the 100th General Assembly) would have added the words "to the extent allowed by law" to the section of the rules that allows House members to refrain from disclosing records pertaining to communications with constituents. It's intent was to undermine the purpose of a rule which indicated that it is the policy of the House of Representatives to allow discretion to its members regarding the release of such communications in response to a Sunshine request. Given the recent passage of Constitutional Amendment 1 (which among other things subjects the General Assembly to the Sunshine law), adding "to the extent allowed by law" would have likely invalidated the remainder of the House rule, therefore rendering it useless.