Put the wraps on the 93rd session

by Representative Jim Whorton

It seems like only a few weeks ago when Missouri’s House of Representatives was meeting for only a few minutes per day and many of us were critical of leadership for choosing not to move legislative proposals forward. We wrapped up the Second Regular Session of our 93rd General Assembly at 6:00 p.m. on May 12 and last week, was a fairly serious attempt to make up for lost time. Our activity in the chamber went on until 11:30 p.m. or midnight on some days and the bills we considered, finally moved quickly from the House to Senate and vice versa. Some of those were called omnibus bills by category such as “crime bill,” “judiciary bill,” “professional registration,” etc. Respective committee chairmen would commonly group several individual bills together with as many as 20 or more sections. Those omnibus bills would usually include all the categorical small bills which originated in that chamber of the General Assembly. Consequently, when the omnibus bill arrives in the secondary chamber, it was common to get “loaded up” by amending language from many other bills which had difficulty in making it out on their own merits. I think that process may be what originated the statement about not watching either “sausage” or “legislative bills” being made because it is an unpleasant sight.

Some of the bills which accumulated numerous components were handled quickly (sometimes at a very late hour) and I can assure you that none of us were completely knowledgeable about the entire bill. It was not uncommon to pass these bills with wide margins of bipartisan voting based on trust; however, a few of us occasionally would hear something during the brief explanation of a bill that made us uneasy enough to vote “no” based on facts or on suspicion about the unknown.

Some of the bills resulted in passage by nearly straight party line votes that illustrated the philosophical difference in opinions by our two major political parties on some issues. I will attempt to outline some of those differences concerning a few primary issues over the next weeks, when space allows.

One of the bills of local interests that received widespread support was the ethanol bill (CCR on SCS for HCS for HB 1270, 1027). Many of us feel it is a case of “not the best it could be;” rather, it is a case of “as good as could be agreed upon,” especially by a somewhat hurried process with a limited number of legislators involved. The bill provides that “generally,” on or after Jan. 1, 2008, all gasoline sold in Missouri shall be fuel ethanol-blended (10%) gasoline. There are several exceptions including, “if and whenever the blended ethanol gasoline is higher in cost than regular unblended gasoline at the terminal where available.” Also excluded from required ethanol blending are: 1) Aviation fuel or automotive gasoline used in aircraft. 2) Premium gasoline (91 octane) for use in older or special engines. 3) Any other exemption that may be determined to be necessary by the Missouri Department of Agriculture. I suspect we may see several growing pains over the “price issue,” partly because a lower grade of gasoline is brought to the terminal for “blending” with pure ethanol. My understanding is that it is not suitable for use without the ethanol supplement, and if “blending” doesn’t take place, then the terminal may not have adequate inventories of regular (87 octane) gasoline to meet demand. We’ll wait and see, but it’s possible our legislation on this issue may create unintended consequences for our ethanol industry.

If we can assist you during the interim with questions or concerns regarding any issue, please feel free to contact Pam at the Jefferson City office. Our number there is 573-751-1649 and the email address is [email protected]. You can also contact me at the district office at 660-359-3988. I hope everyone has an enjoyable and relaxing summer. I am looking forward to visiting with many of you throughout the district at various functions.