Hjb57 And Sjr42 - Amendment To The State Constitution! (Title Edited)

[Chief Grey Bear]

What this is, is an amendment to the constitution of this state that requires legislative approval of all rules and regulations of all state angencies. So like Chris stated, it won't matter what the biologist say, it will depend on what the money says. But you can also choose to live in the land of JD's world. Because that is the whole reason the legislature wants control. Because up to this point they have not been able to influence the MDC. That is why there is also a battle over control of Missouri's deer population. The republican controlled legislature is working to have deer come under the control of the Missouri Dept of Ag. Only so the 30 or so deer farms in this state, as I reported to you guy's just a few weeks ago, will not have to follow any regulations set forth by the MDC. For which they have no control over. Yet.

[Chief Grey Bear]

Maybe this will explain it better to you than what JD posted.

http://www.senate.mo.gov/14info/pdf-bill/intro/SJR42.pdf

[jdmidwest]

Same bill as my link. And it will go to a public vote at the polls for all Missourians to decide, that will be the time to stop it.

MDC should not fall under the powers of this bill as they are not funded by State Taxpayer Dollars collected by the State. They are funded by a sales tax and license fees and are governed by their own board of directors.

As far as moving the Deer Farming over to the Dept of Ag to regulate, I could see that as a logical move as it is a Agricultural venture, not wildlife conservation.

[Justin Spencer]

I don't think anyone wants to see politicians have any power over MDC decisions whatsoever. It's tough enough for the biologists to get agreement, get the talking heads involved and lord knows what will happen.

[Chief Grey Bear]

Same bill as my link. And it will go to a public vote at the polls for all Missourians to decide, that will be the time to stop it.

MDC should not fall under the powers of this bill as they are not funded by State Taxpayer Dollars collected by the State. They are funded by a sales tax and license fees and are governed by their own board of directors.

As far as moving the Deer Farming over to the Dept of Ag to regulate, I could see that as a logical move as it is a Agricultural venture, not wildlife conservation.

Uhh yeah its the same Bill. Its the Bill I am talking about. I see no reason to wait until the very end to try and stop this. With the current political climate, we could very well loose.

You do understand that it is those very farms that introduced CWD into the wild population due to no restrictions? The wild deer populaiton brings in about $1 Billion dollars to this state. I can't see any reason to let a $20 million at best entity, with practicaly no employees, dictate the future of the thousands of mom and pops across the state.

[Wayne SW/MO]

I'm always somewhat leery of red flags concerning the legislature and the MDC. The commission was created by the constitution and not the legislature. For the legislature to change any part of it, it woulds have to go through the people.

This proposal is between the legislature and the executive branch agencies, of which the MDC is not an executive branch agency.

I suspect the DU's legislative director, or whom ever, doesn't understand the place that the MDC occupies in the state.

I'm no lawyer, but I don't see anything to change that.

[Al Agnew]

A few points.

1. Start with number 3 on the criteria for negating a rule. "So arbitrary and capricious...unreasonable burden...". Who decided whether it is arbitrary and capricious and is an unreasonable burden? The legislative committee. If you think that there's no chance the legislative committee will not say that just about anything they don't agree with is arbitrary and capricious and an unreasonable burden, you're delusional.

2. Now go back to number 1. "An absence of statutory authority...". Does MDC have specific statutory authority to produce more trophy deer or trophy smallmouth? It could easily be envisioned that the committee would say they don't since there is no specific language like that in the enabling legislation outlining MDC's purposes. And keep in mind this isn't just about MDC. Does MO DNR have specific authority to keep hog farm waste out of the rivers? You KNOW that it's easy for politicians to twist legal language.

3. What about number 2..."in conflict with state law"? What would keep the legislature from passing a law concerning wildlife management? That's all they'd have to do, and then MDC couldn't have any rule that contradicted that law.

4. Number 4..."substantially endanger public health, safety, or welfare"...again, it's the committee that would be determining it's a "substantial danger", and public health, safety, or welfare can mean just about anything.

5. Well, you get the picture...numbers 5 and 6 again are things that the committee defines.

6. MDC and DNR are both funded by state sales taxes. I believe that falls into the "state tax" thing. DNR gets some money directly from the legislative process, so it would most certainly be covered.

I can't believe some of you guys don't see a problem with all this.

[Chief Grey Bear]

Thank you Al.

[Wayne SW/MO]

"Shall the constitution of the state of Missouri be amended to guarntee a legislative check on the executive power to promulgate administrative rules which are unlawful, arbitrary, and capricious, dangerous to the public, excessive or inconsistent with the original purpose of the law, with all such legislative decisions subject to the check of judicial review"

I still fail to see how you, Kevin and Al, insert the MDC in this? It is NOT an executive agency, don't you agree?

[SpoonDog]

MDC is an executive agency, Wayne.

http://www.mo.gov/government/guide-to-missouris-government//