ALEC 101 ...............................................................................................................................

4 The Corporate Bill Mill Remaking Missouri Law 4 Why is ALEC's Influence in Jefferson City Important? 6 Additional Resources on ALEC's Extreme Agenda 8 Missouri Legislators with ALEC Ties ........................................................................................ 9 ALEC Model Legislation Introduced In Missouri .................................................................... 11 Missouri Corporations with ALEC Ties .................................................................................. 14 Missouri Taxpayer Funds Spent on ALEC Memberships & Junkets ........................................ 15 Partisan Campaign Funds Spent on ALEC Memberships & Travel .......................................... 16 Receipts from ALEC to Partisan Campaign Accounts ............................................................. 22 ALEC Scholarships ................................................................................................................ 23 Untraceable ALEC-Related Lobbyist Gifts ............................................................................. 26 Head-to-Head comparisons of ALEC Models and Missouri legislations .................................. 34 Appendix: Charting Legislators' Ties to ALEC ........................................................................ 87

2

The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) is a corporate bill mill exerting extraordinary and secretive influence in the Missouri legislature and in other states. Through ALEC, corporations hand Missouri legislators wish lists in the form of "model" legislation that often directly benefit their bottom line at the expense of Missouri families. Behind closed doors, numerous ALEC model bills are crafted by corporations, for corporations. Elected officials who are members of ALEC bring ALEC legislation back to Missouri, where they claim them as their own ideas and important public policy innovations without disclosing that corporations crafted and pre-voted on the bills at closed-door meetings with legislators who are part of ALEC. ALEC provides legislators with a means to appear highly active in the legislative process by secretly abdicating their job drafting legislation to corporate special interests. "It is funded and dominated by free-market and corporate interests," writes the Kansas City Star, "who work with like-minded legislators to shield corporations from legal action, limit the rights of workers, disenfranchise voters, radically privatize the public education system, hinder the ability of government to regulate and curb polluters, and further skew our democracy in the favor of corporations and their political allies."

Progress Missouri has identified more than 40 Missouri bills that directly echo ALEC models. ALEC bills in Missouri include so-called right to work laws, bans on implementation of the Common Core State Standards, resolutions supporting the Keystone XL pipeline, an act relating to wireless communication towers, voter registration hurdles, a "parent trigger act," a "parents’ rights" resolution, purely political resolutions "reaffirming 10th amendment rights," a "private attorney retention act," an Anti-Affordable Care Act ballot measure, a resolution opposing food and beverage taxes, an "asbestos fairness act," a resolution supporting the electoral college, a "castle doctrine" law, a resolution encouraging congress to undermine Social Security, and a "private property protection act."

3

As noted by the Center for Media and Democracy's ALEC Exposed project, the American Legislative Exchange Council is not simply a lobbying group or a front group. It is much more powerful than that. Corporations behind ALEC's closed doors hand state legislators the changes to the law that they desire that directly benefit their bottom line. Along with legislators, corporations have membership in ALEC. Corporations sit on all nine ALEC task forces and vote with legislators to approve "model" bills, and also fund almost all of ALEC's operations. Participating legislators, who are overwhelmingly conservative Republicans, bring ALEC proposals back to Missouri and other statehouses as their own ideas and important public policy innovations, without disclosing that corporations crafted and pre-voted on the bills alongside legislators in closed-door meetings at fancy resorts. ALEC boasts that up to 1,000 of their bills are introduced by legislative members every year. ALEC describes itself as a "unique," "unparalleled" and "unmatched" organization. "ALEC is a group funded by corporations and conservative activists. It beguiles conservative state lawmakers with wining and dining at annual conferences and the chance to mingle with deep-pocketed donors. In return, lawmakers promote the group's 'model legislation,' bills aimed at things like stripping workers of protections and requiring photo identification to vote." - Kansas City Star, 04/6/2012 Why would a legislator be interested in advancing cookie-cutter bills that are giveaways for multinational corporations located outside of Missouri? ALEC's appeal rests largely on the fact that legislators receive trips, food and lodging that provide many part-time legislators and their families with vacations, along with the opportunity to rub shoulders with prospective donors to their political campaigns. For a few hours of work on a task force and a couple of workshops by ALEC experts, part-time legislators can bring the whole family to ALEC's annual convention, vote in private meetings with corporate lobbyists, stay in swank hotels and attend parties, all heavily subsidized by the corporate till. As the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported after the 2011 ALEC conference in New Orleans, "corporate benefactors made sure Missouri lawmakers attending the conference were well fed and hydrated."

4

As CMD and Common Cause have reported, ALEC also operates several ‘scholarship’ funds for legislators willing to carry their bills in capitols around the country. These funds are used to allow corporations to give thousands of dollars in gifts to legislators while avoiding the disclosure that might expose the conflicts of interests inherent in such a scheme. Scholarships are rarely disclosed to the public, and have been banned for ethics issues in at least three states. Corporations have recently come under scrutiny because of their relationship with ALEC and more than 40 have cut ties all together. Corporations that have dropped ALEC membership include: Coca-Cola Company, Pepsi, Kraft, Intuit, McDonald’s, Wendy’s, Mars, Arizona Public Service, Reed Elseiver, American Traffic Solutions, Blue Cross Blue Shield, YUM! Brands, Procter & Gamble, Kaplan, Scantron Corporation, Amazon.com, Medtronic, Wal-Mart, Johnson & Johnson, Dell Computers, John Deere & Company, CVS Caremark, MillerCoors, HewlettPackard, Best Buy, Express Scripts/Medco, Energy Solutions, Connections Academy, General Motors, Walgreens, Louis Dreyfus, Amgen, General Electric, Western Union, Sprint Nextel, Symantec, Reckitt Benckiser Group, Entergy, Wells Fargo, Merc, Sanofi. Bank of America, and WellPoint. However, as Barb Shelly of the Kansas City Star notes, ALEC remains a driving force for regressive proposals in the Missouri General Assembly. “There’s been no outcry from businesses begging the legislatures to clip the wings of unions. No, the pressure comes from outside groups. Republican legislators are willing to poison relationships and demean their states’ teachers, public safety workers and others in order to please their out-of-state bosses. These include the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation and National Tax Limitation Committee, both of which sent operatives to Jefferson City this session to fire up Republican lawmakers. Some of the language in the anti-union bills in Missouri and Kansas is strikingly similar to model bills drafted by ALEC.” - Kansas City Star, 03/20/2013

5

ALEC provides legislators with a means to appear highly active in the legislative process while outsourcing by transferring their role in drafting legislation to corporate special interests "It is funded and dominated by free-market and corporate interests," writes the Kansas City Star, "who work with like-minded legislators to push various agendas." And what are these various corporate agendas? Here is a taste: TAKING AWAY WORKERS' RIGHTS WHILE SHIELDING CORPORATIONS FROM ACCOUNTABILITY ALEC works fervently to promote laws that would shield corporations from legal accountability to Missouri citizens and limit the rights of workers in the state. The group's model legislation would roll back laws regarding corporate liability for harming state residents, workers' compensation and on-the-job protections, collective bargaining and organizing rights, prevailing wage and minimum wage laws. ALEC is a main proponent of bills that undermine organized labor by stripping public employees of collective bargaining rights and that weaken the power of workers in the private sector through so-called "right to work" laws. They also push "regulatory flexibility" laws that lead to massive deregulation of rules designed to protect the health of Missouri families. TAKING AWAY VOTERS' FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS ALEC is directly tied to the trend among state legislatures to limit the ability of American citizens to vote through restrictive "voter ID" laws. Using demonstrably false allegations of "voter fraud," right-wing politicians are pursuing policies that disenfranchise students and other at-risk voters--including the elderly and the poor--who are unlikely to have drivers' licenses with their current residence and who previously could vote showing proof of residence and other identification. By suppressing the vote of such groups of likely Democratic voters, ALEC's model "Voter ID Act" grants an electoral advantage to Republicans while undermining the fundamental right to vote in America. In addition, ALEC wants to make it easier for corporations to participate in the political process. The Public Safety and Elections Task Force included Sean Parnell of the Center for Competitive Politics, one of the most vociferous pro-corporate involvement elections groups in the nation, and promoted legislation that would devastate campaign reform and increase corporate influence in elections.

6

PRIVATIZING PUBLIC SCHOOLS Despite constitutional problems, negative impacts on public schools, bias against disadvantaged students, and comprehensive studies that demonstrate that private school voucher programs failed to make any substantial improvements to education, ALEC pushes vouchers as a way to privatize public education and transfer Missouri tax dollars from public institutions to private profits. Under the guise of "school choice," ALEC pushes bills with titles like "Parental Choice Scholarship Act" and the "Education Enterprise Act" that establish or expand private school voucher programs. PROTECTING POLLUTERS At the bidding of its major donors like Peabody Energy, Exxon Mobil and Koch Industries, ALEC is a powerful force behind state-level legislation that would hinder the ability of the people to curb polluters through governmental power. ALEC has previously said that carbon dioxide "is beneficial to plant and human life alike," and it promotes climate change denialism. The group's model legislation assails EPA emissions guidelines and greenhouse gas regulations, destabilizes regional climate initiatives, permits free-reign for energy corporations, and pushes for massive deregulation of some of the biggest polluters on the planet. UNDERMINING PUBLIC SYSTEMS AND STRUCTURES As states face challenging budget deficits, ALEC wants to make it more difficult to generate revenue in order to close shortfalls. Such bills include the "Super Majority Act," which makes it so complicated for legislatures to change tax policy that California voters overturned the law; the "Taxpayer Bill of Rights," which brought fiscal disaster to Colorado; and measures to eliminate capital gains and progressive income taxes. The main beneficiaries of ALEC's irresponsible fiscal policies are corporations and the wealthiest taxpayers.

7

For more information on the one-stop shop for corporations looking to identify friendly state legislators and work with them to get special-interest legislation, please see:  ALEC Exposed, a project of the Center for Media and Democracy ALECExposed.com "ALEC: The Voice of Corporate Special Interests In State Legislatures" People for the American Way, PFAW.org. "Beyond Dinner and a Movie: ALEC Actively Courts State Lawmakers" National Institute on Money and Politics, FollowTheMoney.org "Our Step-by-Step Guide to Understanding ALEC's Influence on Your State Laws." Pro Publica, ProPublica.org. "Legislating Under the Influence; Money, Power, and the American Legislative Exchange Council." Common Cause, CommonCause.org.

8

Identifying the list of Missouri legislators who are part of ALEC is a difficult task, because ALEC operates largely in secret. Even though it claims to be a legislative membership organization, there is no full list of legislators that are members of ALEC anywhere on their website. However, we do have a few sources open to us: the Missouri Ethics Commission, Sunshine Law requests with Capitol offices, and the Center for Media and Democracy. Progress Missouri has identified almost more than 60 Missouri legislators and politicians as ALEC members and supporters through state Sunshine Law requests and reviews of Missouri Ethics Commission data. The community of researchers supporting the Center for Media and Democracy's ALECExposed.com website have also identified additional Missouri politicians as ALEC members and supporters, all of whom are also listed below, bringing the total to over 60 elected officials. STATEWIDE OFFICER  Kinder, Peter STATE SENATORS  Brown, Dan  Dixon, Bob  Emery, Ed  Lamping, John  Munzlinger, Brian STATE REPRESENTATIVES  Allen, Sue  Bahr, Kurt  Burlison, Eric  Cierpiot, Mike  Colona, Mike (former member)  Cox, Stanley  Crawford, Sandy  Cross, Gary  Curtman, Paul  Diehl, John  Dugger, Tony  Elmer, Kevin

    

Nieves, Brian Parson, Mike Pearce, David Richard, Ron Rupp, Scott

  

Sater, David Wallingford, Wayne Wasson, Jay

           

Entlicher, Sue Frederick, Keith Funderburk, Doug Gatschenberger, Chuck Grisamore, Jeff Haefner, Marsha Hinson, Dave Jones, Caleb Jones, Tim Keeney, Shelley Kelley, Mike Koenig, Andrew

         

Korman, Bart Kratky, Michele Lant, Bill Lichtenegger, Donna Rowden, Caleb Rowland, Lyle Spencer, Bryan Sommer, Chrissy Torpey, Noel White, Bill

9

FORMER STATE LEGISLATORS  Bearden, Carl  Bivins, Walt  Brandon, Ellen  Crowell, Jason  Cunningham, Jane  Danner, Pat  Davis, Cynthia  Denison, Charlie  Ervin, Doug  Graves, Sam  Gross, Chuck  Hartzler, Vicky  Hoskins, Ted  Hubbard, Rodney  Hunter, Steve  Icet, Allen  Jetton, Rod  Jones, Kenny

                

Klindt, David Lembke, Jim Loudon, John Luetkemeyer, Blaine McCarthy, Karen McNary, Cole Nodler, Gary Pollock, Darrell Rector, Rex Ridgeway, Luann Schad, Rodney Schneider, Vicki Schoeller, Shane Smith, Jason Smith, Joe Talent, Jim Yates, Brian

10

Progress Missouri has more than 40 corporation-friendly bills introduced in the Missouri General Assembly with provisions that echo ALEC model bills. The following list does not include ALEC language snuck into larger legislation, or bills inspired by ALEC models but rewritten to match Missouri statutes. Year 2014 2014 2014 2014 2014 2014 2014 2014 2014 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 Bill SB546 HB1314 HJR44 HB1143 HB1099 HB1095 HB1094 HB1066 HB1053 HCR 19 SB 76 SB 238 SCR 7 SB 210 SB 158 SB 134 HCR 6 HB 95 HB 928 HB 91 HB 77 HB 616 Sponsor John Lamping Keith Frederick Bill Lant Bill White Eric Burlison Bill Lant Bill Lant Jeff Grisamore Donna Lichtenegger Caleb Rowden Dan Brown Ed Emery David Pearce John Lamping David Sater David Sater Chriss Sommer Bill White Eric Burlison Donna Lichtenegger Eric Burlison Kurt Bahr ALEC Model ALEC.org ALEC.org ALEC.org ALEC.org ALEC.org ALEC.org ALEC.org ALEC.org ALEC.org PRWatch.org ALECExposed.org ALECExposed.org PRWatch.org CommonCause.org ALECExposed.org ALECExposed.org ALECExposed.org ALECExposed.org HealthCareCompac t.org ALECExposed.org ALECExposed.org CommonCause.org 11 Topic ‘Health Care Freedom Act’ ‘Health Care Freedom Act’ So-called 'Right to Work' So-called 'Right to Work' So-called 'Right to Work' So-called 'Right to Work' So-called 'Right to Work' ‘Education Savings Account Act’ So-called 'Right to Work' Resolution in Support of Keystone XL Pipeline So-called 'Right to Work' So-called 'Right to Work' Resolution in Support of Keystone XL Pipeline Anti-Common Core State Standards "Health Care Choice Act for States” So-called 'Right to Work' "Reaffirming 10th Amendment rights" So-called 'Right to Work' Education/Healthcare Compact So-called 'Right to Work' So-called 'Right to Work' Common Core State Standards

Year 2013 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012 2011 2011 2011 2011 2011 2011 2011 2010 2010 2010 2010 2009 2008 2008 2008 2008

Bill HB 345 SB 547 SB 514 SB 438 HCR 7 HCR 50 HB2109 HB1539 HB 1086 SB 206 SB 197 SB 109 SB 1 HCR 12 HB393 HB255 SJR 25 SB 888 HCR 44 HB2236 HCR 13 SB 727 HCR 44 HB 2137 HB

Sponsor Mike Cierpiot Chuck Purgason Jason Crowell Robert Mayer Lyle Rowland Kurt Bahr Shane Schoeller Tim Jones Bill White Chuck Purgason Luann Ridgeway Jason Crowell Luann Ridgeway Lyle Rowland Tim Jones Stanley Cox Jane Cunningham Jason Crowell Joe Smith Stanley Cox Jim Guest Charlie Shields Bob Dixon Brian Yates Dwight Scharnhorst

ALEC Model ALECExposed.org ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALEC.org ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com Heartland.org ALECExposed.com 12

Topic Wireless Communication Towers So-called 'Right to Work' So-called 'Right to Work' So-called 'Right to Work' "Reaffirming 10th Amendment rights" "Parents Rights" Resolution Voter registration Hurdles "Parent Trigger Act" So-called 'Right to Work' So-called 'Right to Work' So-called 'Right to Work' So-called 'Right to Work' So-called 'Right to Work' "Reaffirming 10th Amendment rights" "Parent Trigger Act" "Private Attorney Retention Act" "Freedom of Choice in Healthcare Act" So-called 'Right to Work' Food and Beverage Resolution "Private Attorney Retention Act" "Reaffirming 10th Amendment rights" "Mortgage Fraud Act" Electoral college "Asbestos Fairness Act" “The Autism Scholarship

Year 2007 2006 2006 2005 2004 2000

Bill 1886 HB 189 SB 962 HB1103 HB877 SCR 22 HB 1798

Sponsor Kenny Jones Luann Ridgeway Kenny Jones Steve Hunter Peter Kinder Marilyn Williams

ALEC Model ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com

Topic Program Act” "Castle Doctrine" Law “Great Schools Tax Credit Program Act” "Castle Doctrine" Law So-called 'Right to Work' Personal Retirement Accounts "Private Property Protection Act"

13

PEABODY ENERGY Peabody Energy is the world’s largest private sector coal company, and is listed on ALEC”s corporate board. This massive producer of coal is a member of ALEC’s Energy, Environment, and Agriculture Task force. The largest coal corporation on Earth has met with Exxon Mobile, and Dow Chemical to hold an extraordinary influence on Missouri’s environmental policies, including attacks on renewable energy. ANHEUSER-BUSCH INBEV Anheuser-Busch was a member of ALEC’s Commerce, Insurance, and Economic Development Task Force, and has continued to participate in ALEC even after being purchased by InBev. ALEC’s CIED Task Force has been responsible for anti-worker initiatives like the Paycheck Protection scheme, and the ALEC model ‘Right to Work” act. SHOOK, HARDY & BACON LLP As of April, 2013, Victor Schwartz of Shook, Hardy & Bacon is listed as the Private Chair of the Civil Justice Task Force, and documents show he, and other employees of the firm have attended ALEC meetings, testified on behalf of ALEC in favor of bills, and lobbied in North Dakota (ALEC maintains that it does not lobby). Shook Hardy & Bacon has spearheaded ALEC’s tort-reform efforts for years, often bills that seem to benefit the firm’s clients. CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS Charter Communications is the fourth largest communications company in the country, selling telephone, cable television, and internet services. Charter is a member of ALEC’s Communications and Technology task force. The Task Force has been responsible for, among other things, protecting corporate Internet profits, and phone service profits.

14

There is a strange irony in spending taxpayer dollars to attend a group that is supposedly dedicated to ‘limited government’ to learn how to slash the public systems and structures upon which average citizens rely. Yet ALEC politicians in Missouri have put the state on the hook for thousands of dollars for travel and memberships with this corporate group. In an era of cuts to education and public services, Progress Missouri has found the following taxpayer-financed expenses to ALEC:
Fiscal Year 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 2012 2012 2012 2014 Agency/Individual Name Legislature Legislature Office of Lt. Governor Legislature Legislature Luanne Ridgeway Brian Nieves Legislature Legislature Category Description Professional Development Professional Development Professional Development Professional Development Professional Development Professional Development Travel Professional Development Professional Development Detail Description Organization Memberships Organization Memberships Convention, Conference & Training Fees Organization Memberships Organization Memberships ALEC Membership Dues Lambert airport to attend ALEC meeting Organization Memberships Organization Memberships, Publications Vendor Name American Legislative Exchange American Legislative Exchange American Legislative Exchange American Legislative Exchange American Legislative Exchange American Legislative Exchange Council n/a American Legislative Exchange American Legislative Exchange Payments $5,800.00 $50.00 $700.00 $915.00 $100.00 $100.00 $100.00 $100.00 $120.00

Source: Missouri Accountability Portal This snapshot is for the most recent four years, although the financial connections between Missouri politicians and ALEC go back much farther.

15

Since ALEC does not register as a lobbying organization, legislators’ travel to ALEC meetings and conferences is sometimes no t known until annual personal financial disclosure reports are filed. The following chart summarizes ALEC-related travel from MEC ethics disclosure documents.
Legislator Tim Jones Tim Jones Tim Jones Tim Jones Tim Jones Tim Jones Tim Jones Tim Jones Tim Jones Tim Jones Tim Jones Ed Emery Ed Emery Ed Emery Ed Emery Ed Emery Jason Smith Date 12/2/2012 7/28/2012 5/12/2012 4/28/2011 12/3/2011 8/3/2010 12/1/2010 7/15/09-7/18/09 12/2/09-12/4/09 5/1/09-5/2/09 12/4-12/7/09 5/1/09-5/2/09 12/1/09-12/5/09 8/5/2010 12/3/2010 5/7/2010 7/30/08-8/1/08 Amount $2,029.14 $1,251.58 $350.00 $353.80 $1,071.39 $2,419.62 $1,192.31 $500.00 $1,250.00 all exp covered by ALEC $1,504.45 $319.60 $1,969.45 $1,658.24 $1,350.67 $703.00 $500.00 Location Washington, DC Salt Lake City, UT Charlotte, NC Cincinnati, OH Phoeniz, AZ San Diego, California Washington, DC Atlanta, GA Washington, DC Memphis, TN Washington, DC Memphis, TN Washington, DC San Diego, California Washington, DC St. Louis Chicago, IL Notes 2012 States and Nation Policy Summit ALEC Annual Meeting ALEC 2012 Spring Task Force Summit ALEC Spring Task Force Summit ALEC States and Nation Policy Summit ALEC Annual Meeting ALEC States and Nation Policy Summit conference conference conference ALEC Legis. Conf Task Force State Chair's mtg. SNPS Meeting & Task Force State Chairman ALEC Annual Meeting State & National Policy Summit ALEC Task Force Meeting ALEC Natural legisation conference Ed Emery Ed Emery Self Self Self Party Involved Self and Spouse Self Self Self Self Self, Spouse, and Dependent Child (ren) Self myself myself myself

16

Legislator Jason Smith Jason Smith Jason Smith Jason Smith Jason Smith Jason Smith Jason Smith Jason Smith Jason Smith Jason Smith Bob Dixon Sandy Crawford Caleb Jones Caleb Jones Mike Kelley Andrew Koenig Andrew Koenig Andrew Koenig Andrew Koenig Andrew Koenig Andrew Koenig Andrew Koenig Donna Lichtenegger

Date 5/1/09-5/2/09 7/15/09-7/18/09 12/1/09-12/2/09 4/23/10-4/24/10 4/29/11-4/30/11 8/3/11-8/6/11 10/13/11 12/7/11-12/9/11 5/10/12-5/12/12 7/25/12-7/28/12 6/4/08-6/8/08 8/7/2011 7/25/2012 8/2/2011 10/28/2011 11/30/2012 5/10/2012 12/1/2010 11/30/2011 4/28/2011 12/3/2008 12/1/09-12/4/09 4/29/11-4/30/11

Amount $391.92 $500.00 $500.00 $500.00 $296.62 $600.00 $417.00 $500.00 $500.00 $1,161.74 $598.00 $600.00 $600.00 $600.00 $1,200.00 $500.00 $500.00 $500.00 $500.00 $409.61 $900.00 $446.87 $232.83

Location Memphis, TN Atlanta, GA Washington, DC San Diego, California Cincinnati, OH New Orleans, LA Los Angeles, CA Phoenix, AZ Charlotte, NC Salt Lake City, UT Missoula, MT New Orleans, LA Utah Louisiana Denver Washington DC Charlotte, NC Washington DC Scottsdale, AZ Cincinnati, OH Washington DC Washington DC Cincinnati, OH

Notes Spring Task Force mtg; ALEC ALEC Annual mtg. States & Nation Policy Summit Annual Spring Task Force ALEC Spring Task Force Summit Annual Meeting Tax Academy States & Nations Policy Summit 2012 Spring Task Force Summit/Reimbursement 2012 Annual Meeting Reimbursement ALEC Legislative Leaders Healthcare Summit Conference Conference Conference ALEC Education Conference Educational Conference Educational Conference Educational Conference Educational Conference Educational Conference ALEC Meeting ALEC Conference 2011 Spring Task Force Summit

Party Involved

self self self self

self Self Self Self Self and spouse Self Self Self Self Self

Self Self

17

Legislator Jim Lembke Jane Cunningham Jane Cunningham Jane Cunningham Jane Cunningham Jane Cunningham Jane Cunningham Jane Cunningham Jane Cunningham Jane Cunningham Jane Cunningham

Date 11/29/1012/2/10 4/30/09-5/2/09 7/13/09-7/18/09 9/25/09-9/26/09 12/1/09-12/3/09 4/29/2011 8/25/2012 8/7/2010 8/7/2010 12/2/2010 12/1/08-12/6/08

Amount $500.00 $853.70 $1,300.00 $675.20 $788.20 $584.00 $1,045.20 $1,063.98 $372.59 $423.60 $1,420.00

Location Washington DC Memphis, TN Atlanta, GA San Antonio, TX Washington, DC Cincinnati, OH Salt Lake City, UT San Diego, CA San Diego, CA Washington, DC Washington, DC

Notes ALEC Conference National Board Meeting (Marriott Memphis Downtown) National Board Meeting (Hyatt Downtown Atlanta) Higher Education Academy (Hotel Contessa) National Board Meeting (Grand Hyatt) National Legislators Conference Legislative Conference Board of Directors meeting and legislative conference Board of Directors meeting and legislative conference Board of Directors meeting National Board and Member Meeting (Marriott Wardman Park)

Party Involved Self Self Self Self Self Self Self Self self Self Self

18

PARTISAN Campaign FUNDS SPENT ON ALEC Memberships & Travel
Perhaps it is proper that campaign funds have been used frequently by politicians to attend ALEC’s secret meetings of lobbyists and corporate donors. ALEC claims to be non-partisan and claims to conduct zero lobbying, yet even member politicians seem to be confused on the nebulous purpose of ALEC.
Candidate Name Sandy Crawford Bart Korman Marsha Haefner Ed Emery Ed Emery Sue Allen Bryan Spencer Jason Smith Kevin Elmer Andrew Koenig Marsha Haefner John Diehl Jason Smith Andrew Koenig Tim Jones Gary Cross Andrew Koenig Jason Smith Gary Cross Charlie Denison Recipient ALEC ALEC American Legislative Exchange Council, Washington, DC American Legislative Exchange Council, Washington, DC American Legislative Exchange Council, Washington, DC American Legislative Exchange Council, Washington, DC American Legislative Exchange Council, Washington, DC American Legislative Exchange Council, Washington, DC Kevin Elmer ALEC, Washington, DC American Legislative Exchange Council, Washington, DC American Legislative Exchange Council, Washington, DC American Legislative Exchange Council, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC American Legislative Exchange Council, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC American Legislative Exchange Council, Washington, DC American Legislative Exchange Council, Washington, DC American Legislative Exchange Council, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC Date 11/07/2013 10/29/2013 06/17/2013 06/04/2013 03/31/2013 03/07/2013 03/03/2013 11/20/2012 11/16/2012 11/07/2012 10/12/2012 07/06/2012 05/30/2012 04/05/2012 02/10/2012 11/27/2011 11/20/2011 11/09/2011 09/13/2011 6/3/2011 Purpose Conference Fee Dues n/a Education Education Membership Membership Dues Registration Reimburse ALEC Dues Educational Expense Conference Tuition Fees Registration Educational Conference Sponsorship Conference Educational Registration Alec Membership Dues Amount 375.00 100.00 $475.00 $475.00 $150.00 $100.00 $200.00 $475.00 $375.00 $375.00 $375.00 $675.00 $475.00 $400.00 $450.00 $375.00 $475.00 $375.00 $100.00 $475.00

19

Candidate Name Caleb Jones Tim Jones (R-Eureka) Bart Korman Sue Allen Tim Jones (R-Eureka) Shane Schoeller Tony Dugger (R-Hartville) Luann Ridgeway (R-Clay County) Stanley Cox (R-Sedalia) Tim Jones (R-Eureka) Mike Colona (D-St. Louis) Michele Kratky Mike Colona (D-St. Louis) Andrew Koenig (R-St. Louis County) Tim Jones (R-Eureka) Jim Lembke (R-Lemay) Tim Jones (R-Eureka) Darrell Pollock Darrell Pollock Tim Jones (R-Eureka) Doug Funderburk (R-St. Peter's) Andrew Koenig (R-St. Louis County) Mike Colona (D-St. Louis) Doug Ervin

Recipient ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC

Date 4/7/2011 3/31/2011 2/16/2011 2/7/2011 1/31/2011 1/31/2011 1/25/2011 12/10/2010 12/8/2010 12/5/2010 11/28/2010 11/14/2010 11/10/2010 11/10/2010 11/3/2010 10/26/2010 9/23/2010 6/15/2010 6/15/2010 5/25/2010 2/13/2010 11/13/2009 10/20/2009 5/28/2009

Purpose Registration Registration Fee For Conference Dues Fee Registration Fee For Conference Membership Dues Membership Scholarship Funding Conference Registration Spring Conference Registration Fee Legislative Convention Airfare And Hotel Legislative Seminar & Membership Fee Alec Registration Registration Fee For Conference Conference Registration States & Nation Policy Summit Registration Fee Registration Registration Registration Fee-Conference Conference Fee Conference Conference Registration

Amount $100.00 $599.00 $100.00 $100.00 $150.00 $100.00 $100.00 $1,475.00 $150.00 $200.00 $425.00 $1,002.85 $425.00 $525.00 $200.00 $375.00 $375.00 $510.00 $510.00 $660.00 $410.00 $600.00 $350.00 $650.00

20

Candidate Name Doug Funderburk (R-St. Peter's) Enterprise Holdings PAC Jim Lembke (R-Lemay) Andrew Koenig (R-St. Louis County) Andrew Koenig (R-St. Louis County) Speaker Jetton Leadership Fund Gary Nodler (R-Joplin) Jack Goodman Grassroots For Hunter Brian Yates (R-Blue Springs) Tom Flanigan Source: MEC.MO.GOV

Recipient ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC American Legislative Exchange Council, Washington, DC

Date 5/14/2009 3/11/2009 1/20/2009 11/24/2008 11/19/2008 6/26/2008 5/16/2007 2/5/2007 1/25/2007 1/11/2007 09/012/2013

Purpose Annual Dues Contribution Dues Travel Expenses Membership Fee Legislative Magazine Registration Membership Registration Membership Dues For Official Office Dues

Amount $375.00 $2,500.00 $100.00 $896.07 $400.00 $375.00 $275.00 $200.00 $100.00 $100.00 100

21

ALEC claims to be a nonpartisan 501c3 organization, but regularly sends money to partisan candidate committee accounts in Missouri. The following chart summarizes donations from the ALEC corporate account and ALEC staff to Missouri candidates.
Politician Timothy W Jones Timothy W Jones Timothy W Jones Gary Cross Noel Torpey Andrew Koenig Charlie Denison Andrew Koenig Andrew Koenig Andrew Koenig Timothy W Jones Timothy W Jones Timothy W Jones Darrell Pollock Andrew Koenig Jane Cunningham Jane Cunningham Jane Cunningham Rodney Schad Donor American Legislative Exchange Council, Washington, DC American Legislative Exchange Council, Washington, DC American Legislative Exchange Council, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC American Legislative Exchange Council, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC ALEC, Washington, DC Lori Roman, Annapolis, MD 21401, ALEC Executive Director Todd Kruse, Apple Valley, MN 55124, ALEC Field Representative Todd Kruse, Apple Valley, MN 55124, ALEC Field Representative ALEC, Washington, DC Date 6/21/2012 8/31/2012 1/17/2012 1/13/2012 1/15/2012 6/08/2012 10/08/2011 1/16/2011 6/30/2011 4/27/2011 1/21/2011 3/10/2010 10/21/2010 9/17/2010 1/12/2009 4/17/2008 11/16/2007 11/16/2007 9/2/2008 Amount $350.00 $1,251.58 $1,071.39 $1,000 $600.00 $350.00 $600.00 $500.00 $287.61 $50.00 $1192.31 $500.00 $50.00 $1459.94 $896.07 $50.00 $75.00 $75.00 $500.00 Reimbursement for travel Refund for early registration Reimbursement Reimbursement for travel Note

Source: MEC.MO.GOV

22

The Center for Media and Democracy: "The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) has raised and spent an estimated $4 million in funds from its corporate backers since 2006 to pay for state lawmakers’ trips to meet with corporate CEOs and lobbyists at ALEC sponsored events at posh retreats, according to internal ALEC documents and other investigative work... "The scheme works like this: ALEC state chairs (hand-picked legislators and private-sector members) solicit corporate money that goes into a “Scholarship Fund” that is then used to pay for lawmakers’ trips. Records show that ALEC legislators know who’s paying their way— some state leaders even urge lawmakers to send thank-you notes to their patrons— but everyone else is kept in the dark. ALEC claims to the IRS that it does not have to report the money spent on elected officials because it is just holding the funds 'in trust' for lawmakers. But at the same time, it promises corporate donors that they can get a tax write-off for their donations." For more information, see the Center for Media and Democracy's "Buying Influence; How the American Legislative Exchange Council Uses Corporate-Funded “Scholarships” to Send Lawmakers on Trips with Corporate Lobbyists" report here. The following chart is found in said report:
Year 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 Person/Entity Ed Emery Eli Lilly Brent Hemphill & Associates, Inc Gamble & Schlemeier, Ltd. Vicki Schneider Cynthia Davis Ed Emery Marietta Rutledge Rodney Schad Doug Ervin Jason Smith Gamble & Schlemeier, Ltd. Brent Hemphill & Associates, Inc. Peabody Energy MO Cable Pac Doug Ervin Ed Emery $300.00 $200.00 $2,500.00 $300.00 $500.00 $848.26 $2,000.00 $200.00 $250.00 $500.00 $500.00 $1,435.40 $1,343.67 $500.00 $500.00 $475.00 Money In Money Out $296.30

23

Year 2008 2008 2008 2008 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006

Person/Entity Walter Bivens Reynolds American John Loudon Tim Jones Cynthia Davis Jim Lembke Crown Cork Comcast Allen Icet Rodney Schad Brian Yates Ed Emery Comcast Comcast Crown Cork Bayer HealthCare Doug Ervin John Loudon Walter Bivins Bryan Cave Strategies Gamble & Schlemeier, Ltd. Becky Currie Joe Smith Walter Bivins David G. Klindt Chuck Gross SBC Missouri Insurance Coalition Carl Bearden Ed Emery Rex Rector Rex Rector HTH Companies, Inc. Missouri Railroad Association Gamble & Schlemeier, LTD Missouri Soft Drink Association AT&T Ed Emery

Money In $400.00

Money Out $500.00 $500.00 $504.45 $499.06 $500.00

$5,000.00 $1,206.55 $500.00 $500.00 $1,049.04 $1,667.97 $1,788.32 $2,058.33 $1,000.00 $500.00 $500.00 $2,185.69 $500.00 $175.00 $500.00 $1,000.00 $1,085.60 $500.00 $881.55 $879.54 $1,100.00 $250.00 $1,000.00 $144.11 $110.88 $116.00 $500.00 $500.00 $500.00 $500.00 $4,000.00 $2,067.30

24

Year 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006

Person/Entity AT&T Chuck Gross Steve Hunter Cynthia Davis Milton & Rose D. Friedman Foundation Rex Rector Jim Lembke Verizon Transfer Carl Bearden

Money In $1,000.00

Money Out $803.99 $1,986.48 $500.00

$2,500.00 $1,833.55 $423.92 $1,000.00 $1,000.00

25

Some Missouri lobbyists abuse the ability to declare the recipients of their gifts as entire groups of officials, thereby limiting the public’s ability to know which legislators are wined and dined on ALEC-related trips. Even when the recipients of the gifts are clearly a small group of legislators, gifts have been reported as going to Entire General Assembly, MO House, MO Senate, All Statewide Elected Officials & All Legislators, or Caucuses. For example, EMBARQ lobbyist Charles Simino told the Missouri Ethics Commission that he gave $1,000 in Chicago Cubs tickets a 2008 ALEC event to the “Entire General Assembly.”
Name Doug Galloway Richard Moore Recipient ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY Date 8/8/2013 8/8/2013 Description ALEC dinner, Chicago Chicago, IL - ALEC Amount $248.33 $248.33 $248.33 CENTURYLINK CENTURYLINK ASSOCIATION OF MISSOURI ELECTRIC COOPERATIVES CERNER BRYAN CAVE LLP CENTURYLINK MISSOURI CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY Catalyst Group CERNER AT&T INC. AND AFFLIATES MISSOURI ENERGY DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION MISSOURI COLLEGE OF EMERGENCY PHYSICIANS Principal

Mary Scruggs Carrie Sherer Guy William Black Doug Galloway Tracy King

ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

8/9/2013 11/30/2012 7/27/2012 7/27/2012 7/27/2012

ALEC Conference, Chicago, IL Missouri State Night - ALEC ALEC Missouri Night Reception & Dinner Dinner sponsorship for ALEC meeting ALEC Missouri Night Reception/Dinner Sponsorship, Park City, UT Missouri Night – Alec, Salt Lake City, Utah Missouri Night at ALEC Conference Salt Lake City - Dinner at ALEC Dinner at ALEC Utah

$248.33 $1,135.78 $800.00 $1,000.00 $800.00

Daniel R. Pfeifer Carrie Sherer John R Sondag Trey Davis

ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE MAJORITY CAUCUS

7/27/2012 7/27/2012 7/26/2012 7/25/2012

$800.00 $800.00 $550.00 $1,371.84

William A Gamble

ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

3/28/2012

G2 Gallery, Jefferson City, MO/ALEC MO Night Reception

$125.00

26

Name William A Gamble William A Gamble William A Gamble William A Gamble Mary Scruggs

Recipient ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

Date 3/28/2012 3/28/2012 3/28/2012 3/28/2012 3/28/2012

Description G2 Gallery, Jefferson City, MO/ALEC MO Night Reception G2 Gallery, Jefferson City, MO/ALEC MO Night Reception G2 Gallery, Jefferson City, MO/ALEC MO Night Reception G2 Gallery, Jefferson City, MO/ALEC MO Night Reception ALEC reception - G2

Amount $125.00 $125.00 $500.00 $125.00 $1,000.00

Principal MISSOURI RAILROAD ASSOCIATION MISSOURI PHARMACY ASSOCIATION AMERISTAR CASINO HOTEL KANSAS CITY INC MISSOURI BEVERAGE ASSOCIATION ASSOCIATION OF MISSOURI ELECTRIC COOPERATIVES MISSOURI CABLE TELECOMMUNICATIONS ASSOCIATION MISSOURI TELECOMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION AT&T INC. AND AFFLIATES AT&T INC. AND AFFLIATES MISSOURI AUTOMOBILE DEALERS ASSOCIATION MISSOURI PETROLEUM COUNCIL -- A DIVISION OF THE AMERICAN PETROLEUM INSTITUTE MISSOURI CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY

Charles G Simino

ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

3/28/2012

Dinner at ALEC in Salt Lake City, UT

$1,000.00

Richard Telthorst

ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

3/28/2012

Sponsorship of ALEC Reception held at G2 Gallery, Jefferson City, MO. Refreshments during ALEC Conf @ Old Absinthe House, New Orleans LA Refreshments during ALEC Conf ALEC event, New Orleans, LA

$600.00

John R Sondag John R Sondag Phillip Schnieders

HOUSE MAJORITY CAUCUS HOUSE MAJORITY CAUCUS ALL STATEWIDE ELECTED OFFICIALS & ALL LEGISLATORS ALL STATEWIDE ELECTED OFFICIALS & ALL LEGISLATORS SENATE MAJORITY CAUCUS

8/5/2011 8/5/2011 8/5/2011

$44.00 $44.00 $836.29

Ryan C. Rowden

8/5/2011

Dinner - New Orleans, LA

$600.00

Tracy King

8/4/2011

Visit New Orleans, New Orleans, LA/Cocktail Tour

$182.00

27

Name William A Gamble William A Gamble John R Sondag John R Sondag Caroline Hoover Susan Henderson Moore Tracy King

Recipient SENATE MAJORITY CAUCUS SENATE MAJORITY CAUCUS HOUSE MAJORITY CAUCUS HOUSE MAJORITY CAUCUS HOUSE MAJORITY CAUCUS HOUSE MAJORITY CAUCUS HOUSE MAJORITY CAUCUS

Date 8/4/2011 8/4/2011 8/4/2011 8/4/2011 8/4/2011 8/4/2011 8/4/2011

Description Antoine's Restaurant, New Orleans, LA/Dinner reception Antoine's Restaurant, New Orleans, LA/Dinner reception MO Chamber Dinner during ALEC Conf @ GW Fins, New Orleans LA MO Chamber Dinner at ALEC ALEC Conference, New Orleans, LA Walking wine tour at New Orleans, LA Visit New Orleans, New Orleans, LA/Cocktail Tour Antoine's Restaurant, New Orleans, LA/Dinner reception Antoine's Restaurant, New Orleans, LA/Dinner reception ALEC in New Orleans, LA Missouri Night at ALEC in New Orleans, LA ALEC - New Orleans, LA

Amount $50.00 $25.00 $60.00 $60.00 $150.00 $180.00 $742.00

Principal MISSOURI RAILROAD ASSOCIATION MISSOURI BEVERAGE ASSOCIATION AT&T INC. AND AFFLIATES AT&T INC. AND AFFLIATES KANSAS CITY POWER & LIGHT STATE FARM INSURANCE COMPANIES MISSOURI CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY MISSOURI BEVERAGE ASSOCIATION INDEPENDENT COLLEGES & UNIVERSITIES OF MISSOURI AMEREN UE POLSINELLI SHUGHART PC

William A Gamble William A Gamble

HOUSE MAJORITY CAUCUS HOUSE MAJORITY CAUCUS

8/4/2011 8/4/2011

$25.00 $50.00

Catina "Tina" Shannon Susan Henderson Moore Mary Scruggs

ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ALL STATEWIDE ELECTED OFFICIALS & ALL LEGISLATORS ALL STATEWIDE ELECTED OFFICIALS & ALL LEGISLATORS ALL STATEWIDE ELECTED OFFICIALS & ALL LEGISLATORS

8/4/2011 8/4/2011

$763.86 $600.00

8/4/2011

$843.86

Ryan C. Rowden

8/4/2011

ALEC - New Orleans, LA

$843.86

ASSOCIATION OF MISSOURI ELECTRIC COOPERATIVES MISSOURI PETROLEUM COUNCIL -- A DIVISION OF THE AMERICAN PETROLEUM INSTITUTE

28

Name John R Sondag Charles G Simino

Recipient HOUSE MAJORITY CAUCUS ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

Date 8/3/2011 8/3/2011

Description Dinner during ALEC Conf at GW Fins, New Orleans Dinner at Antoine's Restaurant in New Orleans, LA Tour in New Orleans, LA

Amount $1,440.00 $400.00

Principal AT&T INC. AND AFFLIATES MISSOURI CABLE TELECOMMUNICATIONS ASSOCIATION MISSOURI CABLE TELECOMMUNICATIONS ASSOCIATION MISSOURI AUTOMOBILE DEALERS ASSOCIATION KANSAS CITY POWER & LIGHT MISSOURI AUTOMOBILE DEALERS ASSOCIATION ASSOCIATION OF MISSOURI ELECTRIC COOPERATIVES ARNOLD AND ASSOCIATES CENTURYLINK FORD MOTOR COMPANY MISSOURI AUTOMOBILE DEALERS ASSOCIATION EMBARQ BOEHRINGER-INGELHEIM PHARMACEUTICALS MISSOURI HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION

Charles G Simino

ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

8/3/2011

$846.43

Phillip Schnieders

Caroline Hoover

Phillip Schnieders Mary Scruggs

ALL STATEWIDE ELECTED OFFICIALS & ALL LEGISLATORS ALL STATEWIDE ELECTED OFFICIALS & ALL LEGISLATORS ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

8/3/2011

ALEC event in New Orleans, LA

$843.86

8/2/2011

ALEC Missouri Night sponsorship, New Orleans, LA/catered dinner ALEC reception, Jefferson City ALEC Conference in San Diego, CA

$600.00

3/28/2011 8/6/2010

$1,000.00 $600.00

Charles "Andy" Arnold Doug Galloway Tony Reinhart Phillip Schnieders Charles G Simino Debra Flores

ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

8/6/2010 8/5/2010 7/17/2009 8/1/2008 8/1/2008 8/1/2008

San Diego/Participation in the ALEC Missouri Night Reception Dinner at ALEC, San Diego Missouri Night Dinner at ALEC ALEC reception Tickets to Cubs baseball game at ALEC Missouri legislative reception at the annual meeting of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). Sponsorship for Missouri Night @ ALEC Mtg in Chicago

$600.00 $600.00 $400.00 $2,000.00 $1,000.00 $3,000.00

David C. Hale

ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

7/14/2008

$400.00

29

Name William A Gamble

Recipient ALL STATEWIDE ELECTED OFFICIALS & ALL LEGISLATORS ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

Date 11/8/2007

Description ALEC Scholarship Fund

Amount $500.00

Principal UNION ELECTRIC COMPANY MISSOURI ASSOCIATION FOR COMMUNITY ACTION MISSSOURI ASSOCIATION OF CLUB EXECUTIVES COMCAST MISSOURI ASSOCIATION FOR COMMUNITY ACTION MISSSOURI ASSOCIATION OF CLUB EXECUTIVES HARNESS & ASSOCIATES METRO NORTHPORT HEALTH SERVICES, INC. AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS OF MISSOURI EMBARQ AT&T INC, AND ITS AFFILIATES AT&T INC, AND ITS AFFILIATES KANSAS CITY POWER & LIGHT CO.

Phil Wright Ann Louise Michael Thomas W Krewson Phil Wright Ann Louise Michael Kathryn Ann Harness Kathryn Ann Harness Kathryn Ann Harness Kathryn Ann Harness Charles G Simino John R Sondag John R Sondag David C Christian

7/27/2007 7/27/2007 7/26/2007 7/26/2007 7/26/2007 7/26/2007 7/26/2007 7/26/2007 7/26/2007 7/26/2007 4/27/2007 4/27/2007 4/10/2007

ALEC's Missouri Night Sponsorship ALEC MO night ALEC Dinner in Philadelphia Missouri Night during ALEC ALEC conference dinner Dinner for Missouri Legislature at American Legislative Exchange Council Dinner for Missouri Legislature at American Legislative Exchange Council Dinner for Missouri Legislature at American Legislative Exchange Council Dinner for Missouri Legislature at American Legislative Exchange Council Dinner at the American Legislative Exchange Council Annual Meeting golf at ALEC Task Force Meeting Meal at State Night Dinner at ALEC Task Force Meeting sponsorship of ALEC reception

$400.00 $400.00 $954.68 $983.00 $950.00 $260.99 $225.00 $225.00 $225.00 $983.01 $414.15 $534.63 $600.00

30

Name Richard Telthorst

Recipient ENTIRE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

Date 4/10/2007

Description American Legislative Exchange Council Reception n/a n/a n/a

Amount $400.00

Principal MISSOURI TELECOMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION VERIZON ARNOLD AND ASSOCIATES VERIZON

John Kristan Jones Charles "Andy" Arnold John Kristan Jones

ALEC CAUCUS ALEC CAUCUS ALEC CAUCUS

7/21/2006 7/19/2006 6/19/2006

$600.00 $225.00 $209.50

31

Progress Missouri has more than 40 corporation-friendly bills introduced in the Missouri General Assembly with provisions that echo ALEC model bills. The following list does not include ALEC language snuck into larger legislation, or bills inspired by ALEC models but rewritten to match Missouri statutes.
Year 2014 2014 2014 2014 2014 2014 2014 2014 2014 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012 Bill SB546 HB1314 HJR44 HB1143 HB1099 HB1095 HB1094 HB1066 HB1053 SB 76 SB 238 SCR 7 SB 210 SB 158 SB 134 HCR 6 HB 95 HB 928 HB 91 HB 77 HB 616 HB 345 SB 547 SB 514 SB 438 HCR 7 HCR 50 HB2109 HB1539 HB 1086 Sponsor John Lamping Keith Frederick Bill Lant Bill White Eric Burlison Bill Lant Bill Lant Jeff Grisamore Donna Lichtenegger Dan Brown Ed Emery David Pearce John Lamping David Sater David Sater Chriss Sommer Bill White Eric Burlison Donna Lichtenegger Eric Burlison Kurt Bahr Mike Cierpiot Chuck Purgason Jason Crowell Robert Mayer Lyle Rowland Kurt Bahr Shane Schoeller Tim Jones Bill White ALEC Model ALEC.org ALEC.org ALEC.org ALEC.org ALEC.org ALEC.org ALEC.org ALEC.org ALEC.org ALECExposed.org ALECExposed.org PRWatch.org CommonCause.org ALECExposed.org ALECExposed.org ALECExposed.org ALECExposed.org HealthCareCompact.or g ALECExposed.org ALECExposed.org CommonCause.org ALECExposed.org ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com Topic ‘Health Care Freedom Act’ ‘Health Care Freedom Act’ So-called 'Right to Work' So-called 'Right to Work' So-called 'Right to Work' So-called 'Right to Work' So-called 'Right to Work' ‘Education Savings Account Act’ So-called 'Right to Work' So-called 'Right to Work' So-called 'Right to Work' Declaration of Support of Keystone XL Pipeline Anti-Common Core State Standards “Health Care Choice Act” So-called 'Right to Work' "Reaffirming 10 Amendment rights" So-called 'Right to Work' Education/Healthcare Compact So-called 'Right to Work' So-called 'Right to Work' Common Core State Standards Wireless Communication Towers So-called 'Right to Work' So-called 'Right to Work' So-called 'Right to Work' "Reaffirming 10 Amendment rights" "Parents Rights" Resolution Voter registration Hurdles "Parent Trigger Act" So-called 'Right to Work'
th th

32

Year 2011 2011 2011 2011 2011 2011 2011 2010 2010 2010 2010 2009 2008 2008 2008 2008 2007 2006 2006 2005 2004 2000

Bill SB 206 SB 197 SB 109 SB 1 HCR 12 HB393 HB255 SJR 25 SB 888 HCR 44 HB2236 HCR 13 SB 727 HCR 44 HB 2137 HB 1886 HB 189 SB 962 HB1103 HB877 SCR 22 HB 1798

Sponsor Chuck Purgason Luann Ridgeway Jason Crowell Luann Ridgeway Lyle Rowland Tim Jones Stanley Cox Jane Cunningham Jason Crowell Joe Smith Stanley Cox Jim Guest Charlie Shields Bob Dixon Brian Yates Dwight Scharnhorst Kenny Jones Luann Ridgeway Kenny Jones Steve Hunter Peter Kinder Marilyn Williams

ALEC Model ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALEC.org ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com Heartland.org ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com ALECExposed.com

Topic So-called 'Right to Work' So-called 'Right to Work' So-called 'Right to Work' So-called 'Right to Work' "Reaffirming 10 Amendment rights" "Parent Trigger Act" "Private Attorney Retention Act" "Freedom of Choice in Healthcare Act" So-called 'Right to Work' Food and Beverage Resolution "Private Attorney Retention Act" "Reaffirming 10 Amendment rights" "Mortgage Fraud Act" Electoral college "Asbestos Fairness Act" “The Autism Scholarship Program Act” "Castle Doctrine" Law “Great Schools Tax Credit Program Act” "Castle Doctrine" Law So-called 'Right to Work' Personal Retirement Accounts "Private Property Protection Act"
th th

33

For decades, Republican politicians and powerful corporate interests have pushed so-called right to work bills that are all about politics -- not economics. This legislation is designed by ALEC corporate interests and their allied politicians to harm their political opponents by eliminating public employee unions seen as supporting elected officials that look out for workers' interests. 2014 Legislators Sponsoring this ALEC legislation in Missouri: Bill Lant, Bill White, Eric Burlison Donna Lichtenegger, Dan Brown, Ed Emery 2013 Legislators Sponsoring this ALEC legislation in Missouri: Sen. Dan Brown, Rep. Bill White, Sen. David Sater, Sen. Ed Emery, Rep. Eric Burlison, Rep. Donna Lichtenegger. 2013 Legislators Co-sponsoring this ALEC legislation in Missouri: Rick Brattin, Eric Burlison, Speaker Tim Jones, John Diehl, Donna Lichtenegger, Bill Lant, Lynn Morris, Bill Reiboldt, Kevin Elmer, Keith Frederick, Kurt Bahr, Dave Schatz, Bill White, Tony Dugger, Robert Ross, Steve Cookson, Sonya Anderson, Mike Kelley. Legislators previously sponsoring this ALEC legislation in Missouri: Former Senate President Pro Tem Rob Mayer, Former Sen. Jason Crowell, Former Sen. Chuck Purgason, Former Sen. Luann Ridgeway, Rep. Bill White, Former Rep. Steve Hunter Legislators previously co-sponsoring this ALEC legislation in Missouri: Barney Fisher, Ed Emery, Don Phillips, Todd Smith, Mike Dethrow, Mike Cunningham, Theresa Sander, Kathy Chinn, Marilyn Ruestman, Dennis Wood, Brad Roark, Davis Day, Rex Rector, Bill Deeken, Tom Self, Otto Bean, Peter Myers, Brian Munzlinger, Steve Hobbs, Kevin Wilson, And John Quinn (CoSponsors of HB 877) Missouri Bills: HJR44, HB1143, HB1099, HB1095, HB1094, HB1053, SB 514, SB 438, SB 547,SB 1, SB 109, SB 197, SB 206, SB 888, HB877, HB 1086, SB 76, SB 134, SB 238, HB 77, HB 91, HB 95 ALEC Model: http://j.mp/alec_rtw 34

ALEC Model Legislation http://j.mp/alec_rtw

MO Language in SB 514, SB 438, SB 547,SB 1, SB 109, SB 197, SB 206, SB 888, HB877, HB 1086, SB 76, SB 134, SB 238, HB 77, HB 91, HB 95 290.590. 1. As used in this section, the term "labor organization" means any organization of any kind or agency or employee representation committee or union which exists for the purpose in whole or in part of dealing with employers concerning wages, rates of pay, hours of work, other conditions of employment, or other forms of compensation. No person shall be required as a condition or continuation of employment to: (1) Become or refrain from becoming a member of a labor organization; (2) Pay any dues, fees, assessments, or other similar charges however denominated of any kind or amount to a labor organization; (3) In lieu of the payments listed under subdivision of this subsection, pay to any charity or other third party any amount equivalent to, or on a pro rata basis, any dues, fees, assessments, or other charges required of members of a labor organization.

Section 3. {Labor organization.} The term "labor organization" means any organization of any kind, or agency or employee representation committee or union, that exists for the purpose, in whole or in part, of dealing with employers concerning wages, rates of pay, hours of work, other conditions of employment, or other forms of compensation No person shall be required, as a condition of employment or continuation of employment: (A) to resign or refrain from voluntary membership in, voluntary affiliation with, or voluntary financial support of a labor organization; (B) to become or remain a member of a labor organization; (C) to pay any dues, fees, assessments, or other charges of any kind or amount to a labor organization; (D) to pay to any charity or other third party, in lieu of such payments, any amount equivalent to or a pro-rata portion of dues, fees, assessments, or other charges regularly required of members of a labor organization; or (E) to be recommended, approved, referred, or cleared by or through a labor organization. Section 6. {Agreements in violation, and 35

3.

ALEC Model Legislation http://j.mp/alec_rtw

MO Language in SB 514, SB 438, SB 547,SB 1, SB 109, SB 197, SB 206, SB 888, HB877, HB 1086, SB 76, SB 134, SB 238, HB 77, HB 91, HB 95

actions to induce such agreements, declared illegal.} Any agreement, understanding, or practice, written or oral, implied or expressed, between any labor organization and employer that violates the rights of employees as guaranteed by provisions of this chapter is hereby declared to be unlawful, null and void, and of no legal effect… Any agreement, understanding, or practice, written or oral, implied or expressed, between any labor organization and employer that violates the rights of employees as guaranteed under this section is declared to be unlawful, null and void, and of no legal effect.

36

Talking Points Memo summary: “Heading into the 2014 legislative session, the American Legislative Exchange Council is pushing new model legislation that aims to undermine the federal health care reform law. The only problem is: It's probably illegal. Here's what the bill says: If an insurance company accepts tax subsidies that trigger Obamacare's employer mandate -- in other words, if an employee at a company with more than 50 employees goes onto an Obamacare exchange to purchase insurance and gets financial help through the law -then that insurer would be prohibited from continuing to do business in that state. The effect is that if an insurer is doing business with the Obamacare exchange, it's putting itself at risk of being banned from operating in a state with this law in place. That would either force insurers to pull out of the exchanges or to decline to accept subsidies, which would unravel the foundation of the exchanges -- or actually take their business out of the state.”

ALEC Model Legislation http://www.alec.org/modellegislation/health-care-freedom-act/ 3. If a health insurance issuer operating in the state of Missouri accepts any remuneration that may result in the imposition of penalties contrary to the public policy set forth in this section or section 1.330, such issuer's license to transact business in the state of Missouri shall be suspended by the director of the department of insurance, financial institutions and professional registration immediately and until such time as the issuer represents it has returned that remuneration to its source and will decline any such future remuneration. Such suspensions shall not be construed as impairing the right of contract.

MO Language in HB1314

(B) If a health insurance issuer violates division (A) of this section, the issuer’s license to issue new business in the state on the federal exchange established by the Affordable Care Act shall be suspended immediately and until such time as the issuer represents it has returned that remuneration, credit, or subsidy to its source and will decline any such future remuneration, credit, or subsidy. Such suspensions shall not be construed as impairing the right of contract or the right to continue or renew existing business in the state.

5. The attorney general shall take such action

(C) The attorney general shall take such action

37

ALEC Model Legislation http://www.alec.org/modellegislation/health-care-freedom-act/ as is provided in this subsection in the defense or prosecution of rights protected under section 1.330 and this section

MO Language in HB1314

as is provided in {insert appropriate state law} in the defense or prosecution of rights protected under this chapter. Section 4. Other Obligations of Attorney General. The attorney general shall seek injunctive and any other appropriate relief as expeditiously as possible to preserve the rights and property of the residents of the state, and to defend as necessary the state, and its officials, employees, and agents, in the event that any law or regulation violating the public policy set forth in this chapter is enacted by any government, subdivision, or agency thereof.

It is the duty of the attorney general to seek injunctive and any other appropriate relief as expeditiously as possible to preserve the rights and property of the residents of the state of Missouri, and to defend as necessary the state of Missouri, its officials, employees, and agents in the event that any law or regulation violating the public policy set forth in section 1.330 and this section, is enacted by any government, subdivision, or agency thereof.

ALEC Model Legislation http://www.alec.org/modellegislation/health-care-freedom-act/ until such time as the issuer represents it has returned that remuneration to its source and will decline any such future remuneration. Such suspensions shall not be construed as impairing the right of contract.

MO Language in SB546

until such time as the issuer represents it has returned that remuneration, credit, or subsidy to its source and will decline any such future remuneration, credit, or subsidy. Such suspensions shall not be construed as impairing the right of contract

5. The attorney general shall take such action 38

(C) The attorney general shall take such action

ALEC Model Legislation http://www.alec.org/modellegislation/health-care-freedom-act/ as is provided in this subsection in the defense or prosecution of rights protected under section 1.330 and this section. It is the duty of the attorney general to seek injunctive and any other appropriate relief as expeditiously as possible to preserve the rights and property of the residents of the state of Missouri, and to defend as necessary the state of Missouri, its officials, employees, and agents in the event that any law or regulation violating the public policy set forth in section 1.330 and this section, is enacted by any government, subdivision, or agency thereof.

MO Language in SB546

as is provided in {insert appropriate state law} in the defense or prosecution of rights protected under this chapter. The attorney general shall seek injunctive and any other appropriate relief as expeditiously as possible to preserve the rights and property of the residents of the state, and to defend as necessary the state, and its officials, employees, and agents, in the event that any law or regulation violating the public policy set forth in this chapter is enacted by any government, subdivision, or agency thereof.

39

Center for Media and Democracy summary: This "model" legislation helps create financial incentives for people to take their children out of the public school system and support "private" for-profit, religious or other primary and secondary schools. As noted in the bill's own description, as of 2008, no state had a statute like this that reduced or offset the taxes of parents who make up to $190,000 a year, for taking their minor children out of the public school system. ALEC Model ‘Education Savings Account Act’ (A) Any parent of an eligible student shall qualify for the state to make a grant to their child’s education savings account if the parents sign an agreement promising: (1) To provide an education for the eligible student in at least the subjects of reading, grammar, mathematics, social studies, and science; (2) Not to enroll their eligible student in a district or charter school. HB 1066 As Introduced by Representative Grisamore 2. To enroll a qualified student for a Missouri empowerment account, the parent of the qualified student shall sign an agreement to do the following: (1) Provide an education for the qualified student in at least the subjects of reading, grammar, mathematics, social studies, and science; (2) Not enroll the qualified student in a school district or charter school

40

In 2013, Representative Caleb Rowden and Senator David Pearce introduced ALEC resolutions supporting the Keystone XL pipeline project as their own. Rowden’s support for the ALEC agenda is especially notable as he introduced the resolution below just one month after taking office as a State Representative The ALEC model even seems to be copied directly from TransCanada’s talking points. This seems to be literally putting the talking points of a multinational oil company into a bill. ALEC Model Legislation PRWatch.org WHEREAS, The United States relies – and will continue to rely for many years – on gasoline, diesel and jet fuel despite the recent focus on renewable and alternative sources of energy, and WHEREAS, In order to fuel our economy, the United States will need more oil and 8 natural gas while also requiring additional alternative energy sources. […] NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, That we, the members of the {insert legislative body} of the state of {insert state}, 2013 MO Language in HCR 19, sponsored by Caleb Rowden WHEREAS, the United States relies - and will continue to rely for many years - on gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel, as well as renewable and alternative sources of energy; and WHEREAS, in order to fuel our economy, the United States will need more oil and natural gas while also requiring additional alternative energy sources; and […] NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the members of the House of Representatives of the Ninety-seventh General Assembly, First Regular Session, the Senate 2013 MO Language in SCR 7 Sponsored by David Pearce WHEREAS, the United States relies - and will continue to rely for many years - on gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel, as well as renewable and alternative sources of energy; and WHEREAS, the United States accounts for 20 percent of world energy consumption and is the world’s largest petroleum consumer.

[…] NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the members of the Missouri Senate, Ninety-seventh General Assembly, First Regular Session, the House of Representatives concurring

41

ALEC Model Legislation PRWatch.org

2013 MO Language in HCR 19, sponsored by Caleb Rowden concurring therein, hereby strongly:

2013 MO Language in SCR 7 Sponsored by David Pearce therein, hereby

support continued and increased development and delivery of oil derived from North American oil reserves to American refineries;

(1) Support continued and increased development and delivery of oil derived from North American oil reserves to United States refineries;

support continued and increased development and delivery of oil derived from North American oil reserves to American refineries and hereby urge the United States Congress to: support continued and increased development and delivery of oil from Canada to the United States; and urge the President to support the continued and increased importation of oil derived from the Bakken formation in Montana, North Dakota and South Dakota as well as Canadian oil sands; and

urge Congress to support continued and increased development and delivery of oil from Canada to the United States;, and

(2) Urge the United States Congress to support continued and increased development and delivery of oil from Canada to the United States; (3) Urge the President of the United States to support the continued and increased importation of oil derived from the Bakken formation in Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota, as well as Canadian oil sands;

urge Congress to ask the U.S. Secretary of State to approve the Keystone XL pipeline project that has been awaiting a presidential permit since 2008 to ensure America’s oil independence, improve our national

(4) Urge the United States Secretary of State to approve the newly routed pipeline application from TransCanada to reduce dependence on unstable governments, create new jobs, improve our national security, and 42

ask the U.S. Secretary of State to approve the newly-routed pipeline application from TransCanada to reduce dependence on unstable governments, create new jobs, improve our national security, and

ALEC Model Legislation PRWatch.org security, reduce the cost of gasoline, create new jobs, and strengthen ties between the United States and Canada ; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the Clerk of the {insert legislative body} transmit 60 duly authenticated copies of this resolution to the Speaker and Clerk of the United States 61 House of Representatives, to the President Pro Tempore and Secretary of the United 62 States Senate, to the members of the {insert state) Congressional delegation, and to the 63 news media of {insert state}.

2013 MO Language in HCR 19, sponsored by Caleb Rowden strengthen ties with an important ally; and

2013 MO Language in SCR 7 Sponsored by David Pearce strengthen ties with an important ally; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Chief Clerk of the Missouri House of Representatives be instructed to prepare properly inscribed copies of this resolution for the President of the United States, the President Pro Tem of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, and each member of the Missouri Congressional delegation.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Secretary of the Missouri Senate be instructed to prepare properly inscribed copies of this resolution for the President of the United States, the President Pro Tem of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, and each member of the Missouri Congressional delegation

43

Common Core Standards have been adopted in more than 40 states, including Missouri. Despite being approved by administrations and legislatures of both parties throughout the country, ALEC supported a resolution opposing the standards. In ALEC, this resolution was sponsored by the Goldwater Institute, a far right Arizona think tank funded by the Koch Brothers. The Common Core standards seek to raise state academic standards, subject to state approval, without imposing a national curriculum. Missouri Bills: HB616, SB 210 2013 Sponsors & Cosponsors: Kurt Bahr, Tim Jones, Andrew Koenig, Doug Funderburk, Bryan Spencer, Bill Lant, Dwight Scharnhorst, Paul Curtman, Rick Brattin, Mark Parkinson, Lyndall Fraker, Nick Marshall, Sandy Crawford, Paul Fitzwater, Caleb Jones, John Diehl ALEC Model Legislation CommonCause.org 2013 MO Language in HB616 Section A. Chapter 161, RSMo, is amended by adding thereto one new section, to be known as section 161.855, to read as follows: The State Board of Education may not adopt, and the State Department of Education may not implement, the Common Core State Standards developed by the Common Core State Standards Initiative. Any actions taken to adopt or implement the Common Core State Standards as of the effective date of this section are void ab initio. Neither this nor any other statewide education standards may be adopted or implemented without the approval of the Legislature. 161.855. Notwithstanding any other law, the state board of education shall not adopt, and the department of elementary and secondary education shall not implement, the Common Core State Standards developed by the Common Core Standards Initiative. Any actions taken to adopt or implement the Common Core State Standards as of the effective date of this section are void. Common Core State Standards or any other statewide education standards shall not be adopted or implemented without the approval of the general assembly.

44

The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) Model Wireless Communications Tower Siting Act sets guidelines and limits for municipalities on the regulation of new and existing wireless towers and antennas. Generally, the act allows cities and towns to enforce the same local zoning and construction laws on cell tower siting that apply to other development, but attempts to legislate against discriminatory treatment of wireless service providers. HB345 Sponsors & Cosponsors: Mike Cierpiot, Doug Funderburk, Dave Schatz, Charlie Davis, Ron Hicks, Don Gosen ALEC Model Legislation ALECExposed.org Antenna: Communications equipment that transmits and receives electromagnetic radio signals used in the provision of all types of wireless communications services. Collocation: The placement or installation of wireless facilities, on existing structures, including towers, buildings, utility poles, and water tanks in a manner that negates the need to construct a new free standing support structure such as a tower Utility pole: A structure owned and/or operated by a public utility, municipality, electric membership corporation or rural electric cooperative that is designed (3) Charge an application fee, consulting fee or other fee associated with the submission, review, processing and approval of a permit that is not required for other types of commercial development within the authority’s jurisdiction. Fees 2013 MO Language in HB345 (2) "Antenna", communications equipment that transmits or receives electromagnetic radio signals used in the provision of any type of wireless communications services; (8) "Collocation", the placement or installation of a new wireless facility on existing structure, including electrical transmission towers, water towers, buildings, and other structures capable of structurally supporting the attachment of wireless facilities in compliance with applicable codes; (15) "Utility pole", a structure owned or operated by a utility that is designed specifically for and used to carry lines, cables, or wires for telephony, cable television, or electricity, or to provide lighting; (10) Charge an application fee, consulting fee, or other fee associated with the submission, review, processing, and approval of an application that is not required for similar types of commercial development

45

ALEC Model Legislation ALECExposed.org imposed by a local authority or by a thirdparty entity providing review or technical consultation to the local authority, cannot exceed what is usual and customary. In no case should total charges and fees exceed ____ for a collocation or ______ for the placement and construction of a new wireless facility and/or support structures.

2013 MO Language in HB345 within the authority's jurisdiction. Fees imposed by an authority for or directly by a third-party entity providing review or technical consultation to the authority must be based on actual, direct, and reasonable administrative costs incurred for the review, processing, and approval of an application. In no case should total charges and fees exceed five hundred dollars for a collocation application or one thousand five hundred dollars for an application for a new wireless …

46

According to the Associated Press, the bill "would enable parents, if a majority agreed, to convert a public school to a charter or get vouchers to send their children elsewhere if they're unhappy with their current school… Dave Wright, president of the Missouri School Boards' Association, called the bill's three options 'simple and unproven' and inadequate for solving schools' complex problems. He also said parents of a single school shouldn't be given direct power over it because their decisions affect local property owners who pay taxes to the school district." This legislation would allow a single vote to undermine the opportunity for a generation or more of children to attend public schools, while redirecting tax dollars from public schools to private institutions including for-profit school companies, even potentially "online" school companies that would receive a huge portion of per pupil fees without the expense of providing buildings, desks, sports, and the other social education of schools. ALEC's education task force includes numerous for-profit education corporations like K12 Inc., Insight Schools, and Bridgepoint Education. Legislators sponsoring this ALEC legislation in Missouri: Tim Jones, ALEC State Co-Chair Legislators co-sponsoring this ALEC legislation in Missouri: Scott Dieckhaus, Cole McNary, Jay Barnes, Todd Richardson, Andrew Koenig, Shane Schoeller and Gary Cross (HB 393). Gary Fuhr, Bill Lant, Stanley Cox, Galen Higdon, and Doug Funderburk (HB 1539) Missouri Bills: HB393, HB1539 ALEC Model: http://j.mp/alec_trigger ALEC Model Legislation Section 1: {Short Title} This act may be cited as the "Parent Empowerment and Choice Act" or the "Parent Trigger Act." Section 2. {Definitions} For purposes of this article, the following definitions apply: (A) "Parent" means the natural or adoptive parent or guardian of a dependent child. HB393 160.1200. 1. The provisions of sections 160.1200 to 160.1206 shall be known as the "Parent Empowerment and Choice Act" or the "Parent Trigger Act". 2. As used in sections 160.1200 to 160.1206, the following terms mean:

(1) "Parent", the natural parent or adoptive parent or guardian of a dependent child;

47

ALEC Model Legislation (B) "School district of enrollment" means a school district other than the school district in which the parent of a pupil resides, but in which the parent of the pupil nevertheless intends to enroll the pupil pursuant to this article. (C) "School district of residence" means a school district in which the parent of a pupil resides and in which the pupil would otherwise be required to enroll pursuant to state code. Section 3. {Parent Empowerment} For all public schools where more than onehalf of the parents or legal guardians of pupils attending the school, or a combination of more than one-half of the parents or legal guardians of pupils attending the school and the elementary or middle schools that normally matriculate into a middle or high school, as applicable, sign a petition requesting the local educational agency to implement one or more of the three interventions identified pursuant to Section (5), the local educational agency shall implement the option requested by the parents. Section 4. {Intervention Implementation} The local educational agency shall notify the Superintendent and the state board upon receipt of a petition and upon its final disposition of that petition. The local education agency is given 180 days to implement the chosen model of reform.

HB393 (2) "School district of enrollment", a school district other than the school district in which the parent of a pupil resides, but in which the parent of the pupil nevertheless intends to enroll the pupil under sections 160.1200 to 160.1206; (3) "School district of residence", a school district in which the parent of a pupil resides and in which the pupil would otherwise be required to enroll under state law.

160.1202. 1. For all public schools where more than fifty percent of the parents of pupils attending school, or a combination of more than fifty percent of the parents of pupils attending the school and the elementary or middle schools that normally matriculate into a middle or high school, as applicable, sign a petition requesting the local educational agency to implement one or more of the three interventions identified under subsection 3 of this section, the local educational agency shall implement the option requested by the parents.

2. The local educational agency shall notify the superintendent and the state board upon receipt of a petition and upon its final disposition of that petition. The local educational agency shall have one hundred eighty days to implement the chosen model of reform.

48

Rep. Stanley Cox (R-Sedalia) has publicly acknowledged that 'his' legislation was modeled on an ALEC proposal, spurred by concern about fees paid to private lawyers as part of the national settlement with tobacco companies. (Missouri Lawyers Media, 03/20/11, and Summary of HB 255, 2011) For decades, ALEC has been funded in part by tobacco companies and their lawyers. Reynolds sits on ALEC's board and also sponsors cigar parties at ALEC resort meetings. Legislators previously sponsoring this ALEC legislation in Missouri: Stanley Cox Legislators previously co-sponsoring this ALEC legislation in Missouri: Bob Nance and Chuck Gatschenberger (HB 255), Chuck Gatschenberger, Bryan Stevenson, and Walt Bivins (HB 2236). Missouri Bills: HB255, HB2236 ALEC Model: http://j.mp/alec_attorney ALEC Model Section 1. {Title} This act may be known as the Private Attorney Retention Sunshine Act Section 2. {Definitions} A. For the purposes of this Act, a contract in excess of $1,000,000 is one in which the fee paid to an attorney or group of attorneys, either in the form of a flat, hourly, or contingent fee, and their expenses, exceeds or can be reasonably expected to exceed $1,000,000. B. For the purposes of this Act, "fees" shall include any compensation for legal services however measured, including but not limited to flat, hourly, and contingent fees. HB255 484.500. 1. This act shall be known as the "Private Attorney Retention Act".

2. (1) For the purposes of this section, a contract in excess of one million dollars is one which the fee paid to an attorney or group of attorneys, either in the form of a flat, hourly, or contingent fee, and their expenses, exceeds or can be reasonably expected to exceed one million dollars. (2) For purposes of this section "fees" shall include any compensation for legal services however measured, including but not limited to flat, hourly, and contingent fees.

49

ALEC Model Section 3. {Procurement} Any state agency or state agent that wishes to retain a lawyer or law firm to perform legal services on behalf of this state, where the fees and expenses for such services will exceed or can be reasonably expected to exceed one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000), shall not do so until an open and competitive bidding process has been undertaken. [Refer to existing state thresholds and requirements for procuring outside services by bid] Section 4. {Oversight} No state agency or state agent shall enter into a contract for legal services exceeding one million dollars ($1,000,000) without the opportunity for legislative review of the terms of the contract in accordance with Section 5. Section 5. {Implementation} A. Except as provided in Section 5(E), any state agency or state agent proposing to enter into a contract for legal services exceeding $1,000,000 shall file a copy of the proposed contract with the clerk of the House of Representatives and shall also accompany such proposed contract with a written statement that identifies:

HB255 3. Any state agency or state agent that wishes to retain a lawyer or law firm to perform legal services on behalf of this state, where the fees and expenses for such services will exceed or can be reasonably expected to exceed one hundred thousand dollars, shall not do so until an open and competitive bidding process has been undertaken.

4. No state agency or state agent shall enter into a contract for legal services exceeding one million dollars without the opportunity for legislative review of the terms of the contract in accordance with the provisions of subsection 5 of this section. 5. (1) Except as provided in subdivision (5) of this subsection, any state agency or state agent proposing to enter into a contract for legal services exceeding one million dollars shall file a copy of the proposed contract with the clerk of the house of representatives and shall also accompany such proposed contract with a written statement that identifies:

(1) the reasons the state should retain private counsel and the consideration of alternatives;

(a) The reasons the state should retain private counsel and the consideration of alternatives;

50

"House Bill 2109 is horrendous for a variety of reasons," wrote the St. Louis Post-Dispatch on April 11, 2012. "Examining its origins, its sloppy construction and its potentially devastating results sheds light on how far modern conservative ideals have drifted from what Mr. Reagan had espoused for the Republican Party." This bill makes it more difficult for American citizens residing in Missouri to register to vote using IDs and proof of residency that have traditionally been accepted for decades in the state. The bill was a product of ALEC’s notorious Public Safety and Elections Task Force, which also promoted the controversial Voter ID legislation, which swept into states in 2010 and 2011. After increasing public pressure, ALEC claimed to have disbanded this task force in April 2012, yet its bills and laws live on. Legislators previously sponsoring this ALEC legislation in Missouri: Shane Schoeller Missouri Bills: HB2109 ALEC 'Taxpayer and Citizen Protection Act' Model: http://j.mp/alec_voterreg HB2109 house.mo.gov Alabama HB56 legislature.state.al.us http://latindispatch.com 2. (1) A person applying to (k) Evidence of United States register with an election citizenship shall be authority or a deputy demonstrated by one of the registration official shall following documents, or a identify himself or herself by legible photocopy of one of presenting a form of personal the following documents: identification that provides evidence of United States citizenship. All such forms presented under this subsection shall be kept confidential by the election authority, and shall include one of the following: (a) A copy of a birth (2) The applicant's birth certificate[, a Native certificate that verifies American tribal document, United States citizenship to 51 ALEC's Taxpayer and Citizen Protection Act alecexposed.org (F) The county recorder shall reject any application for registration that is not accompanied by satisfactory evidence of United States citizenship. Satisfactory evidence of citizenship shall include any of the following:

(2) A legible photocopy of the applicant's birth certificate that verifies citizenship to

HB2109 house.mo.gov other proof of United States citizenship,] that verifies United States citizenship to the satisfaction of the election authority; (b) A valid Missouri drivers license or [other form of personal identification at the time of registration] nondriver license, or a drivers license or nondriver identification card issued by the equivalent governmental agency of another state if such license or card indicates that the person has presented proof of United States citizenship upon application for such license or card;

Alabama HB56 legislature.state.al.us http://latindispatch.com the satisfaction of the county election officer or Secretary of State.

ALEC's Taxpayer and Citizen Protection Act alecexposed.org the satisfaction of the county recorder.

(1) The applicant's driver's license or nondriver's identification card issued by the division of motor vehicles or the equivalent governmental agency of another state within the United States if the agency indicates on the applicant's driver's license or nondriver's identification card that the person has provided satisfactory proof of United States citizenship.

(c) Pertinent pages of the applicant's United States valid or expired passport identifying the applicant and the applicant's passport number, or presentation to the election authority of the applicant's United States passport; (d) The applicant's United States naturalization documents or the number of the certificate of

(3) Pertinent pages of the applicant's United States valid or expired passport identifying the applicant and the applicant's passport number, or presentation to the county election officer of the applicant's United States passport. (4) The applicant's United States naturalization documents or the number of the certificate of 52

(1) The number of the applicant's driver License or nonoperating identification license issued after October 1, 1996 by the Department of Transportation or the equivalent Governmental agency of another state within the United States if the agency indicates on the applicant's driver license or nonoperating identification license that the person has provided satisfactory proof of United States citizenship. (3) A legible photocopy of pertinent pages of the applicant's United States passport identifying the applicant and the applicant's passport number or presentation to the county recorder of the applicant's united states passport. (4) A presentation to the county recorder of the applicant's United States naturalization documents or

HB2109 house.mo.gov

Alabama HB56 legislature.state.al.us http://latindispatch.com naturalization. If only the naturalization. If only the number of the certificate of number of the certificate of naturalization is provided, naturalization is provided, the the applicant shall not be applicant shall not be included in the registration included in the registration rolls until the number of the rolls until the number of the certificate of naturalization is certificate of naturalization is verified with the United verified with the United States Citizenship and States Bureau of Citizenship Immigration Services, or its and Immigration Services by successor agency, by the the county election officer or election authority or the the Secretary of State, secretary of state, under 8 pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § U.S.C. Section 1373(c), as 1373(c). amended;

ALEC's Taxpayer and Citizen Protection Act alecexposed.org the number of the certificate of naturalization. If only the number of the certificate of naturalization is provided, the applicant shall not be included in the registration rolls until the number of the certificate of naturalization is verified with the United States immigration and naturalization service by the county recorder.

53

Makers of high-fructose corn syrup beverages and other fast foods have underwritten ALEC's operations over the years while also supporting bills to limit taxes being proposed to address the increase in health care costs attributable to diseases related to the consumption of these products. ALEC legislators have helped advance the agenda of such corporations. Legislators sponsoring or co-sponsoring this ALEC bill in Missouri: Joe Smith, Larry Wilson Missouri Bills: HCR 44, ALEC Model: http://j.mp/alec_food ALEC Model Food and Beverage Resolution WHEREAS this global recession has spread economic stress across all income levels, with lower and middle-income Americans especially hard hit; WHEREAS a frugal lifestyle and stretching the daily living expenses is a necessity for hardworking lower and middle income Americans; WHEREAS governments faced with their own economic shortfalls reflexively pursue indiscriminate taxes rather than reigning in expenditures; WHEREAS it is vital that public policy makers help hardworking Americans retain their tenuous hold on financial security by shielding them from even more burdensome discriminatory taxes; and NOW THEREFORE, LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT: __________________________fully supports hardworking Americans, and opposes all efforts – federally and on the state level – to impose discriminatory taxes on food and/or beverages. HCR 44 in 2010 Whereas, this global recession has spread economic stress across all income levels, with lower- and middle income Americans especially hit hard; and Whereas, a frugal lifestyle and stretching the daily living expenses is a necessity for hardworking lower- and middle-income Americans; and Whereas, governments faced with their own economic shortfalls reflexively pursue indiscriminate taxes rather than reigning in expenditures; and Whereas, it is vital that public policymakers help hardworking Americans retain their tenuous hold on financial security by shielding them from even more burdensome discriminatory taxes: Now, therefore, be it resolved that the members of the House of Representatives of the Ninety-fifth General Assembly, Second Regular Session, the Senate concurring therein, fully support the hardworking Americans and oppose all efforts, federally and on the state level, to impose discriminatory taxes on food or beverages. 54

This bill is based on an NRA-conceived bill that first passed in Florida in 2005 and then was adopted as an ALEC model at a closed-door meeting later that year with ALEC Criminal Justice Task Force co-chair Wal-Mart (the largest seller of long guns and ammunition) at the helm. Key provisions of this bill have been supported by ALEC legislators in 34 states, by the NRA's count, and have resulted in an increase in people shot, including unarmed citizens killed, by people asserting that they are immune from prosecution as a result of these changes made by this law. The "Castle Doctrine" is a deceptive misnomer because Missourians and Americans from every other state already had a long-standing right of self-defense in their homes (their "castles") but this law expands the circumstances in which a person can shoot to kill another person and get immunity from prosecution and civil damages for the death of another. The bill was a product of ALEC’s notorious Public Safety and Elections Task Force, which also promoted the controversial Voter ID legislation, which swept into states in 2010 and 2011. After increasing public pressure, ALEC claimed to have disbanded this task force in April 2012, yet its bills and laws live on. NOTE: ALEC claims that the organization no longer promotes or supports these laws. Legislators previously sponsoring this ALEC legislation in Missouri: Kenny Jones Legislators previously co-sponsoring this ALEC legislation in Missouri: Rodney Schad, Charles Portwood, Barney Fisher, Gary Dusenberg, James Whorton, Doug Ervin, Belinda Harris, Brian Baker, Timothy Flook, Therese Sander, Raymond Weter, Brian Munzlinger, Walt Bivins, Cynthia Davis, Jason Smith, Marilyn Ruestman, Mike McGhee, David Sater, Edward Robb, Danielle Moore, and Michael Frame (HB 189). Peter Myers, Timothy Meadows, James Whorton, Doug Ervin, Brian Munzlinger, Jason Smith, Mike Dethrow, Bill Deeken, Tom Loehner, Michael Parson, and Rodney Schad (HB 1103) Missouri Bills: HB 189, HB1103 ALEC Model: http://j.mp/alec_castle

55

ALEC Castle Doctrine Act Section 1. {Home Protection, Use of Deadly Force, Presumption of Fear of Death or Harm} 1. A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if: a. The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully or forcefully entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person's will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and b. The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred. 2. The presumption set forth in Subsection (1) does not apply if: a. The person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling residence, or vehicle, such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person; or b. The person or persons sought to be

2007: HB 189 563.043.

1. A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if: (1) The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering or had unlawfully and forcibly entered a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person's will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and (2) The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred. 2. The presumption set forth in subsection 1 of this section does not apply if: (1) The person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, or vehicle, such as an owner, lessee, titleholder, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person; or (2) The person or persons sought to be

56

ALEC Castle Doctrine Act removed is a child, grandchild, or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive force is used; or c. The person who uses defensive force is engaged in a criminal activity or is using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further a criminal activity; or d. The person against whom defensive force is used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in [insert appropriate reference to state/commonwealth code, which defines the term "law enforcement officer" or similar], who enters or attempts to enter a dwelling, residence, or vehicle in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with applicable law, or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person entering or attempting to

2007: HB 189 removed is a child or grandchild, or is otherwise in the lawful custody of or under the lawful guardianship of the person against whom the defensive force is used; or (3) The person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity; or (4) The person against whom the defensive force is used is a law enforcement officer who enters or attempts to enter a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person entering or attempting to enter was a law enforcement officer

57

This resolution represents an attempt to re-interpret the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution in order to thwart federal regulations. Although it is not mentioned in this resolution, one of the objectives of such efforts is to make it more difficult to regulate polluters whose products may endanger the health and safety of Missouri families. 2013 Legislators sponsoring this legislation: Chrissy Sommer 2013 Legislators Co-sponsoring this legislation: Mike Kelley Legislators previously sponsoring this ALEC legislation in Missouri: Lyle Rowland (HCR 7 & HCR 12), Jim Guest (HCR13) Legislators previously co-sponsoring this ALEC legislation in Missouri: Don Phillips, Rodney Schad, Paul Curtman, Thomas Long, Bill Lant, Paul Fitzwater, Melissa Leach, Craig Redmon, Cloria Brown, Charlie Denison, Marsha Haefner, Wanda Brown, Sue Allen, Kathie Conway, Tony Dugger, Andrew Koenig, Mike Thompson, Lyndall Fraker, and Kent Hampton. Doug Ervin (HCR13). Missouri Bills: HCR 7, HCR 12, HCR 13, HCR 6 ALEC Model: http://j.mp/alec_tenther

ALEC Model "Reaffirming 10th Amendment Rights WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States specifically provides that, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people"; and WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment was part of the original Bill of Rights, which was proposed on September 25, 1789, ratified by three-fourths of the states, and went into effect on December 15, 1791; and

2013: HCR 6 WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads as follows: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people"; and

WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being that

58

ALEC Model "Reaffirming 10th Amendment Rights

2013: HCR 6 specifically granted by the Constitution of the United States and no more; and

WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment limits the scope of federal power and prescribes that the federal government was created by the states specifically to be an agent of the states, rather than the states being agents of the federal government; and WHEREAS, when taking the oath of office, all members of the General Assembly of [Insert State] solemnly swear that they will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of {Insert State} ; and WHEREAS, many federal mandates are in direct violation of the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and infringe upon both the reserved powers of { Insert State} and the people's reserved powers; and WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court ruled in New York v. United States, 505 U.S. 144 (1992), that Congress may not simply commandeer the legislative and regulatory processes of the states by commanding them to enact and enforce regulatory programs; and WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court, in Printz v. United States/Mack v. United States, 521 u.s. 898 (1997), reaffirmed that the Constitution of the United States established a system of "dual sovereignty"

WHEREAS, the scope of power defined by the Tenth Amendment means that the federal government was created by the states specifically to be an agent of the states; and WHEREAS, today, in 2012, the states are demonstrably treated as agents of the federal government; and

WHEREAS, many federal mandates are directly in violation of the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States; and

WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court has ruled in New York v. United States, 112 S. Ct. 2408 (1992), that Congress may not simply commandeer the legislative and regulatory processes of the states; and

WHEREAS, a number of proposals from previous administrations and some now pending from the present administration and from Congress may further violate the Constitution of the United States: 59

ALEC Model "Reaffirming 10th Amendment Rights that retains "a residuary and inviolable sovereignty" by the states; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that { Insert State} hereby claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States; and

2013: HCR 6

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the members of the Missouri House of Representatives, Ninety-seventh General Assembly, Second Regular Session, the Senate concurring therein, hereby claims sovereignty for the State of Missouri under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States; and

60

ALEC claims on its website that "Missouri...passed the ALEC model as a statute." From ALEC.org: "In December 2008, ALEC adopted as model legislation the Freedom of Choice in Health Care Act, which helps states block a government requirement to purchase health insurance. Now 42 states have either introduced or announced that they will introduce ALEC's Freedom of Choice in Health Care Act. Six states (Virginia, Idaho, Arizona, Georgia, Louisiana, and Missouri) passed the ALEC model as a statute, and two states (Arizona and Oklahoma) passed the model as a constitutional amendment. An active citizen initiative is also underway in Mississippi." Missouri has long had a requirement that drivers purchase automotive insurance, and the federal bill was based on efforts to ensure that all Americans were included in the pool of people with health insurance and access to health care. The United States Supreme Court upheld the Affordable Care Act, including the individual mandate. Legislators previously sponsoring this ALEC legislation in Missouri: Jane Cunningham Legislators previously co-sponsoring this ALEC legislation in Missouri: Jim Lembke, Kevin Engler, Gary Nodler, Delbert Scott, Brad Lager, Rob Mayer, John Griesheimer, Matt Bartle, Tom Dempsey, Norma Champion, Jason Crowell, Luann Ridgeway, Jack Goodman, Bill Stouffer, Eric Schmitt, Chuck Purgason, Scott Rupp, Kurt Schaefer, Dan Clemens, and Carl Vogel Missouri Bills: SJR 25 ALEC Claim: http://www.alec.org

61

ALEC’s Health Care Choice For States Act is a bill to allow health insurance to be sold across state lines. This idea would abdicate Missouri’s control over its health care to other states, like Mississippi and Alabama. A policy like this would create a race to the bottom, allowing health insurance corporations to circumvent Missouri’s policies by setting up policies in other states, and selling insurance to Missourians below Missouri’s standards.

ALEC Model Legislation ALECExposed.org A. The {insert state legislative body} recognizes the need for individuals, employers, and other purchasers of health insurance coverage in this state to have the opportunity to choose health insurance plans that are more affordable and flexible than existing market policies offering accident and sickness insurance coverage. Therefore, the {insert state legislative body} seeks to increase the availability of health insurance coverage by allowing insurers authorized to engage in the business of insurance in selected states to issue accident and sickness policies in {insert state}. B. The selected out-of-state insurers shall not be required to offer or provide statemandated health benefits required by {insert state} law or regulations in health insurance policies sold to {insert state} residents. C. Each written application for participation in

2013 MO Language in SB 158 376.684. 1. The Missouri general assembly recognizes the need for individuals, employers, and other purchasers of health insurance coverage in this state to have the opportunity to choose health insurance plans that are more affordable and flexible than existing market policies offering accident and sickness insurance coverage. Therefore, the Missouri general assembly seeks to increase the availability of health insurance coverage by allowing insurers authorized to engage in the business of insurance in selected states to issue accident and sickness policies in Missouri. 2. The selected out-of-state insurers shall not be required to offer or provide state mandated health benefits required by Missouri law or regulations in health insurance policies sold to Missouri residents.

3. Each written application for participation in

62

ALEC Model Legislation ALECExposed.org an out-of-state health benefit plan shall contain the following language in boldface type at the beginning of the document: 1. “This policy is primarily governed by the laws of {insert state where the master policy is filed}; therefore, all of the rating laws applicable to policies filed in this state do not apply to this policy, which may result in increases in your premium at renewal that would not be permissible in a {insert state}approved policy. Any purchase of individual health insurance should be considered carefully since future medical conditions may make it impossible to qualify for another individual health policy. For information concerning individual health coverage under a {insert state}-approved policy, please consult your insurance agent or the {insert state Department of Insurance or similar agency}.” D. Each out-of-state health benefit plan shall contain the following language in boldface type at the beginning of the document: 1. “The benefits of this policy providing your coverage are governed primarily by the laws of a state other than {insert state}. While this health benefit plan may provide you a more affordable health insurance policy, it may also provide fewer health benefits than

2013 MO Language in SB 158 an out-of-state health benefit plan shall contain the following language in boldface type at the beginning of the document: "This policy is primarily governed by the laws of (insert state where the master policy is filed); therefore, all of the rating laws applicable to policies filed in this state do not apply to this policy, which may result in increases in your premium at renewal that would not be permissible in a (insert state)approved policy. Any purchase of individual health insurance should be considered carefully since future medical conditions may make it impossible to qualify for another individual health policy. For information concerning individual health coverage under a (insert state)-approved policy, please consult your insurance agent or the (insert state Department of Insurance or similar agency)." 4. Each out-of-state health benefit plan shall contain the following language in boldface type at the beginning of the document: "The benefits of this policy providing your coverage are governed primarily by the laws of a state other than (insert state). While this health benefit plan may provide you a more affordable health insurance policy, it may also provide fewer health benefits than those

63

ALEC Model Legislation ALECExposed.org those normally included as state mandated health benefits in policies in {insert state}. Please consult your insurance agent to determine which state-mandated health benefits are excluded under this policy.”

2013 MO Language in SB 158 normally include as state mandated health benefits in policies in (insert state). Please consult your insurance agent to determine which state-mandated health benefits are excluded under this policy."

64

This legislation by then-Senator Peter Kinder "urges Congress to amend the Social Security Act and other statutes to allow Missouri citizens to voluntarily opt-out of the federal Social Security System and invest their Social Security taxes in personal retirement accounts." The effort to privatize social security has been funded since the mid-1970s by the Koch family and other billionaires. Workers have a variety of options for personal retirement accounts that risk being gambled and lost on Wall Street, in addition to the guaranteed income provided by Social Security to older and disabled Americans. Most Americans do not realize that the future solvency of the Social Security fund could be secured by taxing all income earned rather than the current loophole for people who earn more than $105,000 a year or who earn all their income from capital gains. Taking more funds out of the social security pool for private investment in Wall Street would weaken the fund and increase the risk to workers of having no pension income or social safety net as they age or if they become disabled. Legislators previously sponsoring this ALEC legislation in Missouri: Peter Kinder Missouri Bills: SCR 22 ALEC Claim: http://j.mp/alec_privatizess

ALEC Model on Personal Retirement Accounts WHEREAS, Social Security is a federal program that does not recognize the retirement needs of many Americans; and WHEREAS, Social Security tax revenues alone will be insufficient to pay current benefits as early as the year 2015; and WHEREAS, the Social Security Trust Funds may be completely exhausted by the year 2037; and WHEREAS, the investment return on Social Security contributions made by workers today is significantly below that available from other sources; and

2004: SCR 22 WHEREAS, Social Security is a federal program that does not recognize the retirement needs of many Missourians; and WHEREAS, Social Security tax revenues alone will be insufficient to pay current benefits as early as the year 2015; and WHEREAS, the Social Security Trust Funds may be completely exhausted by the year 2037; and WHEREAS, the investment return on Social Security contributions made by workers today is significantly below that available from other sources; and

65

ALEC Model on Personal Retirement Accounts WHEREAS, workers deserve the opportunity to invest more productively for their own retirements; and WHEREAS, more retirement investment opportunities might dramatically increase workers' savings rate and retain more young adults who otherwise would leave the state for jobs elsewhere; and WHEREAS, the unfunded liability of the Social Security system exceeds $9 trillion, according to the Chairman of the Federal Reserve System; and WHEREAS, many workers are already facing very low or even negative rates of return on their lifetimes of Social Security contributions; and WHEREAS, the aging of the U.S. population means that fewer and fewer active workers will be supporting more and more retirees under today's pay-as-you-go financing for Social Security; and WHEREAS, this ratio of retirees to workers has shrunk from 15 to 1 in 1950 to less than 3 to 1 today and soon will fall to less than 2 to 1; and WHEREAS, raising payroll or income taxes to compensate for this demographic shrinkage will mean that today's workers get an even worse return on their federal retirement contributions than they do now; and WHEREAS, broadly cutting Social Security

2004: SCR 22 WHEREAS, workers deserve the opportunity to invest more productively for their own retirements; and WHEREAS, more retirement investment opportunities might dramatically increase workers' savings rate and retain more young adults who otherwise would leave the state for jobs elsewhere; and WHEREAS, the unfunded liability of the Social Security system exceeds $9 trillion, according to the Chairman of the Federal Reserve System; and WHEREAS, many workers are already facing very low or even negative rates of return on their lifetimes of Social Security contributions; and WHEREAS, the aging of the United States population means that fewer and fewer active workers will be supporting more and more retirees under today's pay-as-you-go financing for Social Security; and WHEREAS, this ration of retirees to workers has shrunk from 42 to 1 in 1935 when the program was first started, to less than 3 to 1 today and soon fall to less than 2 to 1; and WHEREAS, raising payroll or income taxes to compensate for this demographic shrinkage will mean that today's workers get an even worse return on their federal retirement contributions than they do now; and

WHEREAS, broadly cutting Social Security 66

ALEC Model on Personal Retirement Accounts benefits also would worsen rates of return; and WHEREAS, states and localities that allow their own employees to invest a portion of their taxes for retirement have shown that workers can do better for themselves with such accounts than under Social Security; and

2004: SCR 22 benefits also would worsen rates of return; and WHEREAS, states and localities that allow their own employees to invest a portion of their taxes for retirement have shown that workers can do better for themselves with such accounts than under Social Security; and

67

From the Center for Media and Democracy: "This 'model'... attempts to dress up the effort to privatize the American tradition of public education as a parental right, creating a political wedge issue while also elevating these privatization efforts to "constitutional" status, which can then be used as a weapon to strike down any statute that is purported to infringe on the rights granted by this vague amendment." Legislators previously sponsoring this ALEC legislation in Missouri: Kurt Bahr Legislators previously co-sponsoring this ALEC legislation in Missouri: Mellissa Leach, Paul Fitzwater, Rick Brattin, Sandy Crawford, Diane Franklin, Chrissy Sommer, Ronald Schieber, Sue Allen, Lindell Shumake, Tim Jones, John McCaherty, Thomas Long, Wayne Wallingford, Steven Tilley, Brent Lasater, Eric Burlison, Andrew Koenig, Mark Parkinson, Nick Marshall, and Mike Kelley Missouri Bills: HCR 50 ALEC Claim: http://j.mp/alec_parental ALEC Model Legislation Be it resolved that the state constitution be amended to read as follows: The right of parents to direct the upbringing and education of their children shall not be infringed. The legislature shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this section. MO Language in 2012: HCR 50 WHEREAS,

the right of parents to direct the upbringing and education of their children is a fundamental right protected by the Constitution of the United States and the State of Missouri; and

68

This bill focuses on home-owners rather than on the mortgage industry and its fraudulent and deceptive lending practices that left numerous Missouri families with escalating interest and balloon payments nearly impossible to repay in exchange for short-term lower payments by the homeowner and major income and profits to banks through re-financing schemes. Legislators previously sponsoring this ALEC legislation in Missouri: Charlie Shields Legislators previously co-sponsoring this ALEC legislation in Missouri: Michael Gibbons Missouri Bills: SB 727 ALEC Claim: http://j.mp/alec_mortgagefraud ALEC Model Legislation Mortgage Fraud Act As used in this Act: MO Language in 2008: SB 727 4. For the purposes of this section the following terms shall have the following meanings: (1) "Mortgage lending process", the process through which a person seeks or obtains a residential mortgage loan including solicitation, application, origination, negotiation of terms, third-party provider services, underwriting, signing, closing, and funding of the loan; A person commits residential mortgage fraud if, with the intent to defraud, the person engages in any of the following practices: (1) Knowingly makes any deliberate misstatement, misrepresentation, or omission during the mortgage lending process that is relied on by a mortgage lender, borrower, or other party to the mortgage lending process; (2) Knowingly uses or facilitates the use of any deliberate misstatement, misrepresentation, or omission during the mortgage lending process that is relied on by a mortgage lender, 69

(A) "Mortgage lending process" means the process through which a person seeks or obtains a mortgage loan, including solicitation, application, or origination, negotiation of terms, third-party provider services, underwriting, signing and closing, and funding of the loan. (A) A person commits the offense of mortgage fraud if the person does any of the following with the intent to defraud: (1) knowingly makes any material misstatement, misrepresentation, or omission during the mortgage lending process, intending that it be relied upon by a mortgage lender, borrower, or any other party to the mortgage lending process; (2) knowingly uses or facilitates the use of any material misstatement misrepresentation, or omission, during the

ALEC Model Legislation Mortgage Fraud Act mortgage lending process, intending that it be relied upon by a mortgage lender, borrower, or any other party to the mortgage lending process; (3) files or causes to be filed with any county recorder in {insert state} any document that the person knows contains a material misstatement, misrepresentation, or omission; or (4) receives any proceeds or any compensation in connection with a mortgage loan that the person knows resulted from a violation of this section.

MO Language in 2008: SB 727 borrower, or other party to the mortgage lending process;

(4) Files or causes to be filed with the office of the county recorder of any county of this state any document relating to a residential mortgage loan that the person knows to contain a deliberated misstatement, misrepresentation, or omission. (3) Receives any proceeds or other moneys in connection with a residential mortgage loan that the person knows resulted from a violation of subdivisions (1) or (2) of this subsection;

70

This bill would make it more difficult for states and cities to regulate polluting industries, factory farms, or other activities by embracing a re-interpretation of the Fifth Amendment to allow a property owner to claim a "regulatory" taking of property if a regulation affects property values. Such an interpretation makes it more difficult for the people's representatives to protect the health and safety of Missouri families from businesses that attempt to use their property in ways that expose others to harm or nuisances. Legislators previously sponsoring this ALEC legislation in Missouri: Marilyn A. Williams Legislators previously co-sponsoring this ALEC legislation in Missouri: Gary Wiggins, Sam Leake, Kenneth Legan, Bill Ransdall, Phillip Britt, Peter Myers, James Graham, Daniel Hegeman, Dan Ward, Jerry McBride, Denny Merideth, Bill Foster, Todd Richardson, Mark Elliot, Martin (Bubs) Hohulin, Jim Kreider, and Lanie Black Missouri Bills: HB 1798 ALEC Model: ALECExposed.com Model Private Property Protection Act Section 3. {Inverse condemnation.} (A) Regulatory takings. Whenever implementation by the State or any of its political subdivisions of any regulatory program operates to reduce the fair market value of real property for the uses permitted at the time the owner acquired the title, or {insert date}, whichever is later, the property shall be deemed to have been taken for the use of the public. Such regulatory programs include, but are not limited to, land use planning or zoning programs. (B) Compensation Required. The owner or user shall have the right to require condemnation by and just compensation from the governmental unit, or units, when MO Language in 2000: HB 1798 523.254. 1. Whenever implementation by the state or any of its political subdivisions of any regulatory program operates to reduce by at least twenty percent the fair market value of real property for the uses permitted at the time the owner acquired the title, or on the effective date of sections 523.250 to 523.262, whichever is later, the property shall be deemed to have been taken for the use of the public.

2. The owner of the property which suffered the regulatory taking shall have the right to require condemnation by and just compensation from the governmental unit, or 71

Model Private Property Protection Act more than one governmental unit is involved, imposing the regulation resulting in decreased value, or to receive compensation for the reduction in value caused by government action, and in either case to have such compensation determined by a jury. When more than one governmental unit is involved, the court shall determine the proportion each unit shall be required to contribute to the compensation. (C) Fair Market value. The compensation shall be for the full value of the interest taken or for the full amount of the decrease in fair market value. (D) Conditional waivers prohibited. Governmental units subject to the provisions of this Act shall not make waiver of the provisions of this Act a condition for approval of the use of real property or the issuance of any permit or other entitlement. Plaintiffs may accept an approval of use, permit, or other entitlement granted by the governmental unit without compromising their rights under this Act if: (1) A written reservation of rights is made at the time of acceptance of said authorization, permit, or other entitlement; or (2) By oral statement made before the governmental unit granting the authorization, permit, or other entitlement at a public meeting at which the governmental unit renders its decision. (3) The owner or user may make his/her reservation in either or both forms.

MO Language in 2000: HB 1798 units if more than one governmental unit is involved, imposing the regulation resulting in decreased value, or to receive compensation for the reduction in value caused by government action, and in either case to have such compensation determined by a jury. If more than one governmental unit is involved, the court shall determine the proportion each unit shall be required to contribute to the compensation. Compensation is required pursuant to this section only in instances where the fair market value of the property is reduced by at least twenty percent. 3. Governmental units subject to sections 523.250 to 523.262 shall not make waiver of the provisions of sections 523.250 to 523.262 a condition for approval of the use of real property or the issuance of any permit or other entitlement. Plaintiffs may accept an approval of use, permit or other entitlement granted by the governmental unit without compromising their rights pursuant to sections 523.250 to 523.262 if: (1) A written reservation of rights is made at the time of acceptance of such authorization, permit or other entitlement; (2) By oral statement made before the governmental unit granting the authorization, permit or other entitlement at a public meeting at which the governmental unit renders its decision; (3) The owner or user may make his or her reservation in either or both forms.

72

Model Private Property Protection Act Section 4. {Exceptions.} No compensation shall be required by virtue of this Act if the regulatory program is an exercise of the police power to prevent uses noxious in fact or demonstrable harm to the health and safety of the public. A use shall be deemed a noxious use if, and only if, it amounts to a public

MO Language in 2000: HB 1798 4. When any regulatory program resulting from a zoning ordinance operates to change a permitted use and the fair market value of the affected real property is the same or greater than before the effective date of the implementation of the regulatory program, no compensation shall be paid pursuant to sections 523.250 to 523.262.

73

This bill exists to benefit one corporation, and one corporation only: Crown Cork Holdings, f.k.a. Crown Cork and Seal. Traditionally, assets and liabilities must be transferred together in a sale of a company. This bill would alter that traditional rule to the detriment of Americans harmed by the sale of products that contributed to the assets being transferred, thus thwarting responsibilities for injuries and harm. This bill benefits Crown by reducing its liability to asbestos damage related lawsuits, by making it harder for cancer victims to sue Crown. The bill has been advanced in ALEC by representatives of Missouri based Shook, Hardy, and Bacon LLP. The law firm is the current head of ALEC’s Civil Justice Task Force, and has advised Crown Cork and lobbied for the bill. Thanks to ALEC, this bill has passed in at least 15 states. It should also be noted that Crown Cork was a large donor to the ALEC scholarship fund around the time this bill passed, and Rep. Yates, the bill’s primary sponsor received funds from the ALEC scholarship fund. Legislators previously sponsoring this ALEC legislation in Missouri: Brian Yates Legislators previously co-sponsoring this ALEC legislation in Missouri: Bryan Pratt Missouri Bills: HB 2137 ALEC Model: Asbestos Fairness Act ALEC Model Successor Asbestos-Related Liability Fairness Act "Asbestos claim" means any claim, wherever or whenever made, for damages, losses, indemnification, contribution, or other relief arising out of, based on, or in any way related to asbestos, including: the health effects of exposure to asbestos, including any claim for: personal injury or death; mental or emotional injury risk of disease or other injury; or the costs of medical monitoring or surveillance, to the extent such claims are recognized under state law; Any claim made by or on behalf of any MO Language in 2008's HB 2137

"Asbestos claim", any claim, wherever or whenever made, for damages, losses, indemnification, contribution, or other relief arising out of, based on, or in any way related to asbestos, including: The health effects of exposure to asbestos, including a claim for: Personal injury or death; Mental or emotional injury; Risk of disease or other injury; or The costs of medical monitoring or surveillance;

any claim made by or on behalf of any person 74

ALEC Model Successor Asbestos-Related Liability Fairness Act person exposed to asbestos, or a representative, spouse, parent, child, or other relative of the person; and Any claim for damage or loss caused by the installation, presence, or removal of asbestos; (2) "Corporation", a corporation for profit, including a domestic corporation organized under the laws of this state or a foreign corporation organized under laws other than the laws of this state; "Successor" means a corporation that assumes or incurs, or has assumed or incurred, successor asbestos-related liabilities.

MO Language in 2008's HB 2137

exposed to asbestos, or a representative, spouse, parent, child, or other relative of the person; and any claim for damage or loss caused by the installation, presence, or removal of asbestos. (2) "Corporation", a corporation for profit, including a domestic corporation organized under the laws of this state or a foreign corporation organized under laws other than the laws of this state; (3) "Innocent successor", a corporation that assumes or incurs or has assumed or incurred successor asbestos-related liabilities that is a successor and became a successor before January 1, 1972, or is any of that successor corporation's successors; and that after a merger or consolidation did not continue in the business of mining asbestos, in the business of selling or distributing asbestos fibers, or in the business of manufacturing, distributing, removing, or installing asbestoscontaining products that were the same or substantially the same as those products previously manufactured, distributed, removed, or installed by the transferor; (4)"Successor asbestos-related liabilities", any liability, whether known or unknown, asserted or unasserted, absolute or contingent, accrued or unaccrued, liquidated or unliquidated, or due or to become due, which are related in any way to asbestos claims and were assumed or incurred by a 75

(d) "Successor asbestos-related liabilities" means any liabilities, whether known or unknown, asserted or unasserted, absolute or contingent, accrued or unaccrued, liquidated or unliquidated, or due or to become due, that are related in any way to asbestos claims (as defined by this Act, as

ALEC Model Successor Asbestos-Related Liability Fairness Act well as any claims for damage or loss caused by the installation, presence, or removal of asbestos) and that were assumed or incurred by a corporation as a result of or in connection with a merger or consolidation, or the plan of merger or consolidation related to the merger or consolidation, with or into another corporation or that are related in any way to asbestos claims

MO Language in 2008's HB 2137

corporation as a result of or in connection with a merger or consolidation or the plan of merger or consolidation related to the merger or consolidation with or into another corporation or which are related in any way to asbestos claims based on the exercise of control or the ownership of stock of the corporation before the merger or consolidation.

76

Resolutions like this seek to defend a procedural rule in the Constitution that thwarts direct democracy by American citizens and has resulted in people being elected to the presidency who did not win a majority of the actual votes by American citizens. The bill was a product of ALEC’s notorious Public Safety and Elections Task Force, which also promoted the controversial Voter ID legislation, which swept into states in 2010 and 2011. After increasing public pressure, ALEC claimed to have disbanded this task force in April 2012, yet its bills and laws live on. Legislators previously sponsoring this ALEC legislation in Missouri: Bob Dixon Legislators previously co-sponsoring this ALEC legislation in Missouri: Mark Parkinson Missouri Bills: HCR 44 ALEC Model: http://j.mp/alec_attorney ALEC Model Resolution http://ow.ly/5Ncca WHEREAS, the Founding Fathers rejected having the President of the United States elected by a national popular vote and instead chose the Electoral College system; and WHEREAS, the current Electoral College system encourages presidential candidates to campaign in large metropolitan areas and also in rural areas and small states; and WHEREAS, the current Electoral College system ensures that the winning Presidential candidate has support from multiple regions of the country; and WHEREAS, the current Electoral College system respects the Founders' strong belief that individual states should have a vital role in electing the President of the United States; 77 HCR44 http://ow.ly/5Ncd3 Whereas, the Founding Fathers rejected having the President of the United States elected by a popular vote and instead chose the electoral college system; and

Whereas, the current electoral college system encourages presidential candidates to campaign in large metropolitan areas and also in rural areas and small states; and Whereas, the current electoral college system ensures that the winning presidential candidate has support from multiple regions of the country; and Whereas, the current electoral college respects the Founding Fathers' strong belief that individual states should have a vital role in electing the President of the United States;

ALEC Model Resolution http://ow.ly/5Ncca and WHEREAS, the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact diminishes the importance of individual states in presidential elections; and WHEREAS, the current Electoral College system respects the separation of and balance of power and authority between the States and the Federal government; and WHEREAS, the current Electoral College system ensures that (insert state)'s electoral votes are awarded based on how the majority of the State's citizens vote; WHEREAS, under the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, (insert states)'s electoral votes could be awarded to a candidate that the majority of the State's citizens did not vote for; and WHEREAS, the current Electoral College system is better suited to handle recounts because they happen at the state level, which is more manageable than if they were to happen at the national level as they might if the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact were adopted; and WHEREAS, the current Electoral College system creates a needed balance between agrarian and industrial interests; and WHEREAS, the current Electoral College system best preserves our two-party system 78

HCR44 http://ow.ly/5Ncd3 and Whereas, the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact diminishes the importance of individual states in presidential elections; and Whereas, the current electoral college system respects the separation of and balance of power and authority between the States and the Federal government; and Whereas, the current electoral college system ensures that Missouri's electoral votes are awarded based on how the majority of the State's citizens vote; and Whereas, under the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, Missouri's electoral votes could be awarded to a candidate that the majority of the State's citizens did not vote for; and Whereas, the current electoral college system is better suited to handle recounts because they happen at the state level, which is more manageable than if they were to happen at the national level as they might if the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact is adopted; and Whereas, the current electoral college system creates a needed balance between agrarian and industrial interests; and Whereas, the current electoral college system best preserves our two-party system and

ALEC Model Resolution http://ow.ly/5Ncca and prevents the fracture of America's political structure; and WHEREAS, the United States Congress has rejected over 1000 amendments to the Constitution to change the Electoral College, including amendments to change to a popular vote system; and WHEREAS, the constitutionality of the National

HCR44 http://ow.ly/5Ncd3 prevents the fracture of America's political structure; and Whereas, the United States Congress has rejected over 1000 amendments to the Constitution to change the electoral college, including amendments to change to a popular vote system; and Whereas, the constitutionality of the National

79

ALEC’s Great Schools Tax Credit Program Act combines two of ALEC’s primary objectives, cutting public schools to give to private schools, and giving corporations tax breaks; and it is the worst of both worlds. The act is set up to give corporations a tax credit for any donations they make to an organization granting ‘scholarships’ to students. This end-around voucher system uses tax credits rather than direct payments, but is nonetheless state support for private education; and the ALEC model acknowledges a significant fiscal impact to the legislation, depleting resources that could go to public schools. The ALEC model also acknowledges that the credit may have little impact on education at all, stating “Drafted this way, the tax credit will necessarily reward many families who are already financing their child's education.” Not only will it reward individuals for actions already taken, the bill would reward corporations for actions already taken, lowering their tax burden for no improvement in education at all. The bill seeks to create incentives to advance private education at the expense of public education, but may well simply be a tax giveaway. Legislators previously sponsoring this ALEC legislation in Missouri: Luann Ridgeway Missouri Bills: SB 962 ALEC Model:ALECExposed.com The Great Schools Tax Credit Program Act Section 2. {Definitions} (B) "Eligible student" means a student who: (1) is a member of a household whose total annual income the year before he or she receives an educational scholarship under this program does not exceed an amount equal to 2.5 times the income standard used to qualify for a free or reduced-price lunch under the national free or reduced-price lunch program established under 42 USC Section 1751 et seq. Once a student receives a scholarship under this program, the student will remain eligible regardless of household income until the student graduates high school or reaches 21 MO Language in 2006: SB 962 (3) "Eligible student", a student who: (a) Is a member of a household whose total annual income during the year before he or she receives an educational scholarship under this program does not exceed an amount equal to one hundred eight-five percent of the income standard used to qualify for a free or reduced price lunch under the national Free or Reduced Price Lunch Program established under 42 U.S.C. Section 1751, et seq. Once a student receives a scholarship under this program, the student will remain eligible regardless of household income until the student graduates high school or reaches twenty-one years of age; 80

The Great Schools Tax Credit Program Act years of age;1 (2) was eligible to attend a public school in the preceding semester or is starting school in [state] for the firsttime;2 (3) Resides in [state] while receiving an educational scholarship.

MO Language in 2006: SB 962

(b) Was eligible to attend a public school in the preceding semester or is starting school in Missouri for the first time; and (c) Resides in any city not within a county, any home rule city with more than four hundred thousand inhabitants and located in more than one county, or in any school district supervised by a special administrative board appointed by the state board of education under the provisions of subsection 3 of section 162.081, RSMo, within the state of Missouri while receiving an educational scholarship;

(C) "Low-income eligible student" means a student who qualifies for a free or reducedprice lunch under the national free or reduced-price lunch program established under 42 USC Section 1751 et seq.3 (D) "Parent" includes a guardian, custodian, or other person with authority to act on behalf of the child. (E) "Department" means the state Department of Revenue. (F) “Qualifying school” means either a public school outside of the resident school district, or any private school that provides education to elementary and/or secondary students (6) "Qualified school", either a public elementary or secondary school outside of the district in which a student resides or a nonpublic elementary or secondary school in 81 (4) "Parent", includes a guardian, custodian, or other person with authority to act on behalf of the child;

The Great Schools Tax Credit Program Act and has notified the Department of its intention to participate in the program and comply with program requirements. (G) Educational scholarships” means grants to students to cover all or part of the tuition and fees at either a qualifying private school or a qualifying public school, including transportation to a public school outside of a student’s resident school district. (H) “Scholarship Granting Organization” means an organization that complies with the requirements of the state’ school scholarship tax credit program and provides or is approved to provide educational scholarships to students attending qualifying school of their parent’s choice.

MO Language in 2006: SB 962 our state that complies with all of the requirements of the program;

(7) "Scholarship granting organization", an organization that complies with the requirements of this program and provides education scholarships to students attending qualified schools of their parents' choice.

82

The corporate leadership of ALEC’s Education Task Force has included for -profit school companies like K-12 Inc., Bridgepoint Education, and Connections Academy. Bills that deplete public school funds in order to subsidize private schools provide direct benefit to those corporations. Recognizing that not every state would be able to pass a large voucher system, ALEC has presented an array of bills to advance small school voucher programs. Some of these bills use a foot-in-the-door technique, appealing to the heartstrings in order to advance an agenda to privatize education. Legislators previously sponsoring this ALEC legislation in Missouri: Dwight Scharnhorst Legislators previously co-sponsoring this ALEC legislation in Missouri: Tom Self Missouri Bills: HB 1886 ALEC Model: ALECExposed.com The Autism Scholarship Program Act (A) The legislative service agency may contract with one or more qualified researchers who have previous experience evaluating school choice programs to conduct a study of the program with funds other than state funds. MO Language in 2008: HB 1886 163.411. 1. The department shall conduct a study of the program with funds other than state funds. The department may contract with one or more qualified researchers who have previous experience evaluating similar programs. The department may accept grants to assist in funding this study. 2. The study shall assess: (1)The level of participating satisfaction with the program; students'

(B) The study shall assess: (1) the level of participating students' satisfaction with the program; (2) the level of parental satisfaction with the program; (3) the percentage of participating students who were victimized18 because of their special needs status at their resident school district compared with the percentage so victimized at their participating school;

(2) The level of parental satisfaction with the program; (3) The percentage of participating students who were bullied or harassed because of their special needs status at their resident school district compared to the percentage so bullied or harassed at their qualified school;

83

The Autism Scholarship Program Act (4) the percentage of participating students who exhibited behavioral problems at their resident school district compared with the percentage exhibiting behavioral problems at their participating school; (5) the class size experienced by participating students at their resident school district and at their participating school; and (6) the fiscal impact to the state and resident school districts of the program. (C) The researchers who conduct the study shall: (1) apply appropriate analytical and behavioral science methodologies to ensure public confidence in the study; (3) provide the legislature with a final copy of the evaluation of the program.

MO Language in 2008: HB 1886 (4) The percentage of participating students who exhibited behavioral problems at their resident school district compared to the percentage exhibiting behavioral problems at their qualified school; (5) The class size experienced by participating students at their resident school district and at their qualified school; and (6) The fiscal impact to the state and resident school districts of the program.

3. The study shall be completed using appropriate analytical and behavioral sciences methodologies to ensure public confidence in the study.

4. The department shall provide the general assembly with a final copy of the evaluation of the program by December 31, 2009.

84

ALEC recently adopted the Health Care Compact as a model bill, and Missouri passed a bill to join the Health Care Compact in 2011. Governor Nixon let the bill go into law without his signature. The bill seeks to abolish federal healthcare programs, not only the Affordable Care Act, but Medicaid and Medicare as well. The bill’s objective is to abolish federal control, yet continue to have the federal government tax the same, and provide the funding in a block grant to the states; as unlikely a prospect as that would be. In 2013, Missouri saw two bills introduced, almost identical to the Health Care Compact dealing with Education and Energy. The education compact would likely abolish federal education programs like Head Start, and school nutrition programs, and in theory give states a blank check. The energy compact seeks to restrict federal enforcement of the Clean Air Act, and might end federal energy assistance and federal energy efficiency programs. Because of the cookie-cutter nature of these education and energy bills, it is extremely difficult to assess what their impact might be. For a bill seeking to end federal involvement with entire sectors of government, the nature of essentially cutting “health care” and inserting “education” creates such badly drafted legislation with incredibly far reaching yet entirely nebulous effects. Missouri Bills: HB 423 HB 928 HB 1038 ALEC Model: healthcarecompact.org 2013 Sponsors: Eric Burlison 2013 Co-sponsors: Tim Jones, Doug Funderburk, Steve Cookson, Bryan Spencer, Dwight Scarnhorst, Lyle Rowland, Mike Cierpiot, John Diehl, Mike Lair The Health Care Compact Sec. 2. Pledge. The Member States shall take joint and separate action to secure the consent of the United States Congress to this Compact in order to return the authority to regulate Health Care to the Member States consistent with the goals and principles articulated in this Compact. The Member States shall improve Health Care policy within their respective jurisdictions and according to the judgment and discretion of each Member MO Language in 2013: HB928 Section 2. Pledge. The Member States shall take joint and separate action to secure the consent of the United States Congress to this Compact in order to return the authority to regulate Education to the Member States consistent with the goals and principles articulated in this Compact. The Member States shall improve education policy within their respective jurisdictions and according to the judgment and discretion of each Member State. 85

The Health Care Compact 33 States. Sec. 3. Legislative Power. The legislatures of the Member States have the primary responsibility to regulate Health Care in their respective States. Sec. 4. State Control. Each Member State, within its State, may suspend by legislation the operation of all federal laws, rules, regulations, and orders regarding Health Care that are inconsistent with the laws and regulations adopted by the Member State pursuant to this Compact. Federal and State laws, rules, regulations, and orders regarding Health Care will remain in effect unless a Member State expressly suspends them pursuant to its authority under this Compact. For any federal law, rule, regulation, or order that remains in effect in a Member State after the Effective Date, that Member State shall be responsible for the associated funding obligations in its State.

MO Language in 2013: HB928

Section 3. Legislative Power. The Legislatures of the Member States have the primary responsibility to regulate Education in their respective States. Section 4. State Control. Each Member State, within its State may suspend by legislation the operation of all Federal laws, rules, regulations, and orders regarding Education that are inconsistent with the laws and regulations adopted by the Member State pursuant to this Compact. Federal and State laws, rules, regulations, and orders regarding education will remain in effect unless a Member State expressly suspends them pursuant to its authority under this Compact. For any Federal law, rule, regulation, or order that remains in effect in a Member State after the Effective Date, that Member State shall be responsible for the associated funding obligations in its State.

86

The following chart documents just some of financial connections between state legislators and ALEC. Additional financial information is being examined.
Legislator Party & Hometown R- Town & Country Documentation of Membership Dues Paid? YES Received Campaign Contribution from ALEC ? Gifts Received & ALEC Events Attended Attended ALEC conference in San Diego in 2010. The trip was paid for by the American Physical Therapy Association. Connections to known ALEC Bills and other associations In 2011, used campaign funds to pay ALEC membership fee. Health & Human Services and International Relations Task Force member. Bahr, Kurt Bivins, Walt R-St. Charles R-St. Louis Sponsored HB 616. Signed ALEC letter defending polluters. (See letter here) From 2009-2010, ALEC provided Brandon with $1000 for travel and lodging expenses related to ALEC conferences in Atlanta, GA and San Diego, CA Sponsored SB 76. Health & Human Services Task Force Member. Sponsored HB 77. In 2011, used campaign funds to pay for hotel rooms at ALEC meeting. Cierpiot, Mike R-Jackson Sponsored HB 345

Allen, Sue

Brandon, Ellen

R- Cape Girardeau

Brown, Dan Burlison, Eric

R-Rolla R-Springfield

87

Legislator

Party & Hometown D-St. Louis

Documentation of Membership Dues Paid? YES

Received Campaign Contribution from ALEC ?

Gifts Received & ALEC Events Attended

Connections to known ALEC Bills and other associations In 2010, used campaign funds to pay ALEC $425 in membership fees. Also, see St. Louis Post Dispatch story describing ties here

Colona, Mike

Cox, Stanley

R-Sedalia

Used campaign funds on ALEC conference registration.

Signed ALEC letter defending polluters. (See letter here) In 2010, used campaign funds to pay for ALEC conference registration. Sponsored HB 255 Civil Justice Task Force Member.

Crawford, Sandy

R-Buffalo

Commerce, Insurance, and Economic Development Task Force Member. YES $1,000 Attended conference 11/27/11 In 2011, used campaign funds to pay ALEC membership fee. SB 888

Cross, Gary

R- Lee's Summit R-Cape Girardeau

Crowell, Jason

88

Legislator

Party & Hometown R-Chesterfield

Documentation of Membership Dues Paid?

Received Campaign Contribution from ALEC ? $200

Gifts Received & ALEC Events Attended From 2001-2010, ALEC provided Jane Cunningham with more than $33,000 in lodging and travel expenses related to ALEC board meetings and conferences. She attended over 30 such meetings and conferences. Locations included: Chicago, IL, Las Vegas, NV, San Francisco, CA, San Diego, CA, New Orleans, LA, Phoenix, AZ, Hilton Head, SC (2), Washington, DC (7), Jackson Hole, WY…

Connections to known ALEC Bills and other associations Member of ALEC board from 2005 to 2010, according to forms filed with IRS by ALEC and an ALEC press release. In 2007 she was the Secretary of the ALEC Board of Directors, and in 2008 she was the Treasurer. Sponsor of SJR25/Proposition C

Cunningham, Jane

Curtman, Paul Denison, Charlie

R-Pacific R-Springfield YES $600 Used campaign funds to pay ALEC dues.

Tax and Fiscal Policy Task Force Member. In 2011, used campaign funds to pay $475 on ALEC dues. Telecommunications and Information Technology Task Force member. YES HCR 44 Paid ALEC dues with taxpayer dollars.

Diehl, John

R-Town & Country R-Greene

Dixon, Bob

89

Legislator

Party & Hometown R-Hartville

Documentation of Membership Dues Paid? YES

Received Campaign Contribution from ALEC ?

Gifts Received & ALEC Events Attended

Connections to known ALEC Bills and other associations In 2011, used campaign funds to pay ALEC membership fee. Public Safety and Elections Task Force Member.

Dugger, Tony

Elmer, Kevin

R- Nixa

YES

Reimbursed $375 from his campaign account for ALEC dues 11/16/2012. Signed ALEC letter defending polluters. (See letter here) Former State Chairman; Legislator of Year, 2006 Sponsored SB 238.

Emery, Ed

R-Lamar

YES

Entlicher, Sue Ervin, Doug

R-Bolivar R- Kearney From 2007-2009, ALEC provided Ervin with over $4500 for travel and lodging expenses related to ALEC conferences in Atlanta, GA, Durham, NC, San Diego, CA, Washington, DC (2), Chicago, IL, Philadelphia, PA, and Hilton Head, SC.

Public Safety and Elections Task Force Member Spent $650 of campaign funds on ALEC registration in 2009.

Frederick, Keith Funderburk, Doug

R-Rolla R-St. Peter's YES

Health & Human Services Task Force Member. In 2009 and 2010, spent $785 in campaign funds on ALEC membership and conference fees.

90

Legislator

Party & Hometown R-St. Clair D-Berkeley D-St. Louis R-Joplin

Documentation of Membership Dues Paid?

Received Campaign Contribution from ALEC ?

Gifts Received & ALEC Events Attended

Connections to known ALEC Bills and other associations Public Safety and Elections Task Force Member. Legislator of Year, 2009 Legislator of Year, 2007

Hinson, Dave Hoskins, Ted Hubbard, Rodney Hunter, Steve

YES

Used campaign funds to register for an ALEC event.

In 2011, used campaign funds to pay ALEC registration fee. Sponsored HB 877

Jetton, Rod

R- Marble Hill

Spent campaign funds on ALEC legislative magazine in 2008. YES Used campaign funds to register for ALEC event. In 2011, campaign used funds to pay for ALEC registration fees. Sponsored HB 189 YES $1,292.31 Used campaign funds to register; received multiple golf gifts at 2010 ALEC conference from lobbyists Travis Brown and John Sondag. In 2008-2010, ALEC provided Jones with more than $6,800 for travel and lodging expenses related to ALEC conferences, including two conferences in Washington, DC, one conference in Atlanta, GA, one conference in Memphis, TN, and one conference in San Diego, CA. Signed ALEC letter on defending polluters. Spent over $2000 in campaign funds on ALEC conference registration fees and ALEC membership fees. Sponsored HB393 and HB 1539 State Chairman (See here)

Jones, Caleb

R-California

Jones, Kenny Jones, Tim

R-Clarksburg R-Eureka

Keeney, Shelley

R-Marble Hill

International Relations Task Force Member.

91

Legislator

Party & Hometown R-Lamar R-Statewide

Documentation of Membership Dues Paid?

Received Campaign Contribution from ALEC ?

Gifts Received & ALEC Events Attended

Connections to known ALEC Bills and other associations Education Task Force Member.

Kelley, Mike Kinder, Peter

Attended 2010 ALEC Conference w/ taxpayer funds Also attended numerous ALEC conference as Senator San Diego, 1995 New Orleans, 1997 Chicago, IL, 1998 Nashville, TN, 1999 New Orleans, 1999 Los Angeles, 2001 Washington, DC, 2002

Sponsored SCR 22 Spoke at 2010 Conference.

Koenig, Andrew

R-Winchester

YES

$2,583.68

In 2008-2010, ALEC provided Koenig with more than $1,800 for travel and lodging expenses related to three ALEC conferences in Washington, DC. Used $896 in campaign funds to travel to ALEC events.

In 2008, 2009, and 2010 used campaign funds to pay over $1500 on ALEC membership and conference fees. Tax and Fiscal Policy Task Force Member. In 2011, used campaign funds to pay ALEC membership dues. In 2010, used $1000 in campaign funds on aircraft travel and lodging for ALEC event. Sponsored SB 210

Korman, Bart

R- High Hill

YES

Used campaign funds to pay ALEC membership dues. Used campaign funds to travel to ALEC events.

Kratky, Michele

D-St. Louis

Lamping, John

R-St. Louis County

92

Legislator

Party & Hometown R-Joplin

Documentation of Membership Dues Paid?

Received Campaign Contribution from ALEC ?

Gifts Received & ALEC Events Attended

Connections to known ALEC Bills and other associations Commerce, Insurance and Economic Development Task Force Member.

Lant, Bill

Lembke, Jim

R-Lemay

YES

Used campaign funds to pay for ALEC membership dues and registration fees.

In 2009 and 2010, used $475 in campaign funds to pay ALEC registration and membership fees. Health & Human Services Task Force Member. Sponsored HB 91

Lichtenegger, Donna

R-Jackson

McNary, Cole

Former State Rep RChesterfield and Failed State Treasurer Candidate R-La Belle R-Washington YES YES

$300

In 2010, ALEC provided McNary with $600 for travel and lodging expenses related to ALEC conferences in Washington, DC and San Diego, CA.

Munzlinger, Brian Nieves, Brian

Paid ALEC dues with taxpayer dollars. In 2009, used $350 in campaign contributions for the purpose of an ALEC conference. Civil Justice Task Force Member. Paid ALEC dues with taxpayer dollars.

93

Legislator

Party & Hometown R-Joplin

Documentation of Membership Dues Paid?

Received Campaign Contribution from ALEC ?

Gifts Received & ALEC Events Attended Used campaign funds

Connections to known ALEC Bills and other associations In 2006 and 2007, used $500 in campaign contributions for ALEC registration fees. Public Safety and Elections Task Force Member. Paid ALEC dues with taxpayer dollars.

Nodler, Gary

Parson, Mike

R-Bolivar

YES

Pearce, David Pollock, Darrell Richard, Ron

R-Warrensburg R-146 R-Joplin $1459.94

Sponsored SCR 7 Commerce, Insurance and Economic Development Task Force Member. YES Donated $1,475 in campaign funds for ALEC scholarships in 2010. Paid ALEC dues with taxpayer dollars.

Ridgeway, Luann

R-Clay County

Rupp, Scott

R-Wentzville

Lobbyist reported “Meals, Food, & Beverage for Rupp staffer Rachel Hassani at the 2013 ALEC conference in Chicago. Sponsored HCR 7 Sponsored SB 134 & SB 158 $500 Signed ALEC letter defending polluters. (See letter here)

Rowland, Lyle Sater, David Schad, Rodney

R-Cedarcreek R-Cassville R-Versailles

94

Legislator

Party & Hometown Former State Rep R-Willard, Failed 2012 Secretary of State candidate, and MO GOP Executive DIrector R-Salem

Documentation of Membership Dues Paid? YES

Received Campaign Contribution from ALEC ?

Gifts Received & ALEC Events Attended In 2008-2009, ALEC Shane Schoeller with $1,500 for travel expenses related to ALEC conferences, including one conference in Washington, DC, and one conference in Atlanta, GA.

Connections to known ALEC Bills and other associations In 2011, Schoeller's campaign used funds to pay for ALEC membership dues. Tax and Fiscal Policy Task Force member.

Schoeller, Shane

Smith, Jason

In 2008-2009, ALEC provided Smith with almost $2,000 in travel expenses related to ALEC conferences, including one conference in Washington, DC, one conference in Atlanta, GA, one conference in Memphis, TN, and one conference in Chicago, IL

In 2011, used $375 on in campaign funds on ALEC registration fees. State Chairman (See here). Tax & Fiscal Policy Task Force Member. Sponsored HCR 44 Sponsored HCR 6

Smith, Joe Sommer, Chrissy Spencer, Bryan Torpey, Noel Wallingford, Wayne

R-St. Charles R-St. Charles R-Wentzville RIndependence YES $600 Lobbyist reported $49.00 in gifts to Suzy Wallingford, a spouse or child, for the August 2013 ALEC meetings in Chicago. R-Nixa YES

Tac and Fiscal Policy Task Force Member.

Wasson, Jay

Paid ALEC dues with taxpayer dollars.

95

Legislator

Party & Hometown R-Joplin

Documentation of Membership Dues Paid?

Received Campaign Contribution from ALEC ?

Gifts Received & ALEC Events Attended

Connections to known ALEC Bills and other associations Sponsored HB 1086, HB 91, HB 95 Health and Human Services Task Force Member.

White, Bill

Yates, Brian

R-Lee's Summit

YES

Used campaign funds to pay for membership dues.

In 2007, used campaign funds to pay for ALEC membership dues.

Sources:  Missouri Ethics Commission  ALEC.org ALEC.org  Task Force Membership referenced from ALECExposed.com http://alecexposed.org/w/images/7/72/ALEC_State_Chairmen_Exposed.pdf  ALEC.org http://www.alec.org/AM/PDF/NRTF/EPALetterforSenate.pdf  SourceWatch.org http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=ALEC_Politicians  Turner Report research shows that all of the following attended the 2010 ALEC conference: Darrell Pollock, R-Lebanon, John Diehl, R-Town and Country; Doug Funderburk, R-St. Peter's; Chuck Gatschenberger, R-Lake St. Louis; Sue Allen, R-St. Louis; Ellen Brandom, R-Sikeston; Cole McNary, RChesterfield; Jason Smith, R-Salem; Ed Emery, R-Lamar; and Timothy Jones, R-Eureka, Jane Cunningham, R-Chesterfield; John Griesheimer, RWashington; and Luann Ridgeway, R-Smithville. http://rturner229.blogspot.com/2010/10/taxpayers-lobbyists-foot-bill-for.html

96

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful