Missouri Senate breaks tradition to end filibuster

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. -- The Missouri Senate has always taken to heart the motto inscribed in its chamber: "Free and fair discussion is the firmest friend of the truth."

While in the House of Representatives debate is cut off whenever a majority of members have had enough, the tradition is different in the upper chamber.

So long as one senator has something to say -- and not necessarily something relevant -- the discussion goes on. And on. And on.

The filibuster is considered so sacrosanct that the Senate's action Friday to end prolonged debate on a bill on concealed weapons was considered a momentous occasion.

State Sen. Harold Caskey, D-Butler, said calling for a forced vote on the bill was a difficult choice, especially because a group of his fellow Democrats were driving the filibuster.

"It was the toughest decision I've made in 27 years in the Senate, but this issue has been around so long we needed to get it behind us," Caskey said.

The bill passed 23-7 and goes back to the House because of Senate changes. It would allow Missourians 23 years of age or older who don't have criminal records to obtain a permit to carry a concealed weapon.

Missouri voters narrowly rejected a similar proposal in April 1999. The present effort would not require a statewide vote.

Five senators must request a vote to end debate. Caskey was joined by four Republican senators in making the request.

Except for two instances, in 1999 and 1982, where the move was undertaken to move forward after a senator offered a floor amendment and then left the building, thus bringing the Senate to a standstill, the procedure hadn't been attempted since 1977. It was last successful in 1972.

The vote to end the filibuster passed 20-11. Some senators who favored the bill voted against ending debate because of worries about setting a bad precedent.

"When you support something, you've got to be awfully careful because next time they might do it to you," said state Sen. Jim Mathewson, D-Sedalia.

Senate President Pro Tem Peter Kinder, R-Cape Girardeau, said he didn't expect the move to shatter traditions.

"It is explicitly contemplated in our rules but has been the custom not to use it frequently," Kinder said. "I hope it will be a long time before it is used again."

Minority Floor Leader Ken Jacob, D-Columbia, disagreed and accused Kinder of engineering the outcome.

"I think they will use it all the time," Jacob said. "We'll become the House."

Although Jacob strongly opposes concealed weapons, he voted for the bill as a strategic matter. His affirmative vote enables him to request additional action on the bill.

The more than 11-hour debate spanned two days and followed an almost 10-hour filibuster on an abortion bill that was finally cracked at 3 a.m. Thursday.

Both debates were short in comparison to a 30-hour filibuster in March on tort reform. Kinder's threat of forcing a vote helped to bring that debate to an end.

Gov. Bob Holden has vowed to veto the bill. However, there could be sufficient legislative support to override him.

DNR limits

Add restrictions to the Department of Natural Resources' regulatory authority to the growing list of bills Holden may veto.

The measure would, among other things, require that state environmental regulations not exceed federal guidelines, except in cases where there is no federal standard or the tighter regulation is needed to protect human life or health.

It would also require DNR to obtain a court order to obtain a company's internal records relating to environmental issues and make it a crime for a whistleblowing worker to disclose such information without his employer's knowledge.

State Rep. Peter Myers, R-Sikeston, handled the bill in the House, which returned the bill to the Senate for further action following a 91-61 vote.

In a statement, Holden labeled the bill "extremist legislation."

However, the governor did not explicitly threaten a veto, as he has with the concealed-weapons bill, various pieces of anti-abortion legislation and the state budget, which he considered underfunded.

Sunday liquor sales

A decade after Missouri legalized Sunday liquor sales, lawmakers are considering allowing those sales to begin earlier in the day.

A bill passed by the House would allow Sunday sales to begin at 9 a.m., two hours earlier than currently allowed.

The change is intended to accommodate the sponsors of sporting events and other activities where alcohol is served that may begin earlier than 11 a.m.

Cities, however, would retain the right to pass local ordinances preventing sales prior to 11 a.m.

Under existing law, alcohol may be sold beginning at 6 a.m. on all other days of the week. Sales hours on those days would not be altered.

Although the bill had previously cleared the Senate, that chamber must again approve it because of House changes.

mpowers@semissourian.com

(573) 635-4608