Proposed constitutional amendments discussed at county Democratic meeting

The Moniteau County Democratic Club met Thursday, July 24, at the Lions Club Pavilion at Proctor Park in California. About 25 people were present for the meeting and ice cream.

Hickory County District 1 Commissioner J.C. Owsley was the invited speaker. In addition to being county commissioner, he is a farmer, former teacher, university employee and former meat inspector.

Resa Dudley introduced the speaker. She and Taunia Adams moderated the event. After Owsley's comments on the five proposed constitutional amendments, which are on the Aug. 5 primary election ballot, those present engaged in a vigorous discussion. Following the presentation and discussion on the proposed amendments, those present discussed the information presented. Several commented that after listening to the presentation and discussion that they would likely vote no on all the amendments, while others favored proposed amendments 1, 5 and 9. One person wondered if it would make a difference if all the amendments as proposed actually passed.

Owsley began by commenting that in his opinion "the Missouri Constitution has become a bulletin board to hang things on." He said, by comparison, the state's Constitution is very long and addresses more than it needs to. He then presented his viewpoint on the individual proposed amendments.

Owsley said he thought Amendment 1, commonly known as the "right to farm" amendment, "is pretty vague and doesn't tell me much." He brought up bills signed into law in 1975 on farming "which were probably needed." He said the amendment is so vague it will load up the courts with litigation. In Owsley's opinion as a Missouri farmer raising cattle and horses, he has all the protection he needs. He is concerned about the Missouri Farm Bureau Alliance involvement in what he believes is a deceptive proposal. He is also concerned about a lot of corporate money pushing for passage of the right to farm amendment.

Chuck Massengill, retired veterinarian and current farmer, spoke about the money coming in from outside the state, much of it from the Humane Society of the United States. He said about 80 percent of the money spent in opposition of the amendment is from out-of-state sources. In Massengill's opinion, the right to farm amendment is protective and preemptive. He also brought up Initiative Petition Proposition B, another emotional item on a previous ballot, which he said put half of the dog kennels in the state out of business with an arbitrary limit of 50 dogs. "And those were the good ones," he said.

Regarding proposed Amendment 5, Owsley commented that the language would override some of the Constitution. "We learned after the Civil War that federal law trumps state law," he said. He said there there is already a right to keep and bear arms, but he doesn't think guns should be in school.

Van Adams commented that the word "unalienable" comes from radical right wing groups. "It has the smell of revolution against my country," he said.

On proposed Amendment 7, Owsley commented that it is a regressive tax. If it passes, the sales tax for roads and bridges will shift the burden to the poor.

Adams said he doesn't want the poor to pay more taxes.

Another person present said since she and her husband pay so much for fuel, the poor who buy tobacco, alcohol and other things should pay part of the cost of keeping up the roads. She also made the point that the state has to have good infrastructure and thinks the costs will more evenly spread as a sales tax.

Owsley commented that he is against proposed Amendment 8, creating a veterans lottery ticket, to use the funds for veterans services.

Retired teacher Phil Lewis replied that it is similar to the casinos, which were supposed to add money for schools. When funds came in, the money from the legislature was cut, so about the same amount went to schools.

On Amendment 9, Owsley said it is "almost null and void." It is to guarantee people security in their electronic communications, and a warrant would be necessary to search cell phones. It was said that a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruled that to search a cell phone, a warrant is needed.

John Kay said this proposed Amendment 9 gives extra ammo to defense attorneys. He also commented that amendments to the constitution should be limited to something of importance.