Home » Politics/Policy » Recent Articles:

Sunday Poll: Should Prior Marijuana Possession Convictions Be Expunged When A State Approves Recreational Use?

June 2, 2019 Drug Policy, Featured, Metro East, Sunday Poll Comments Off on Sunday Poll: Should Prior Marijuana Possession Convictions Be Expunged When A State Approves Recreational Use?
Please vote below

On Friday the Illinois House passed a

https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/legal-pot/illinois-poised-be-11th-state-legalize-recreational-marijuana-use-n1012721

https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/legal-pot/illinois-poised-be-11th-state-legalize-recreational-marijuana-use-n1012721

recreational marijuana bill, it was approved by the Senate earlier in the week. When signed by Gov Preitzker Illinois will become the 11th state to legalize recreational marijuana — the first to do so through the legislative process instead of at the ballot.

One provision is the basis for today’s poll:

The governor will pardon past convictions for possession of up to 30 grams, with the attorney general going to court to expunge or delete public records of a conviction or arrest. For possession of 30 to 500 grams, an individual or a state’s attorney may petition the court to vacate and expunge the conviction, but prosecutors may object, with a judge to make the decision. [Chicago Tribune]

To save you doing the conversion:

  • 30 grams is 1.06 ounces
  • 500 grams is 17.6 ounces.

Ok, here’s today’s poll:

This poll will close at 8pm tonight.  I’ll share my thoughts on Wednesday morning.

— Steve Patterson

 

St. Louis Board of Aldermen: New Board Bills Week 7 of 2019-2020 Session

May 31, 2019 Board of Aldermen, Featured Comments Off on St. Louis Board of Aldermen: New Board Bills Week 7 of 2019-2020 Session
St. Louis City Hall

The St. Louis Board of Aldermen will meet at 10am today, their  7th meeting of the 2019-2020 session. However, they have two weeks labeled #1 so they list this as week week 6.

Today’s agenda includes seven (7)  new bills:

  • B.B.#48 – Oldenburg – An Ordinance recommended by the Planning Commission pertaining to the Zoning Code, Title 26; repealing Section Five of Ordinance 70942, codified as Section 26.52.020 and 26.52.025 of the Revised Code, pertaining to Use Regulations and Conditional Uses of the “I” Central Business District, and enacting in lieu thereof a new section on the same subject matter; repealing Section Six of Ordinance 70942, codified as Section 26.60.020 of the Revised Code, pertaining to Use Regulations of the “K” Unrestricted District, and enacting in lieu thereof a new section on the same subject matter; and containing a severability and an emergency clause.
  • B.B.#49 – Moore – Pursuant to Ordinance 68937, an ordinance authorizing the honorary street name Johnny B. Furr Way, which shall begin at the intersection of Cote Brilliante and Annie Malone Drive and run east on Cote Brilliante to the intersection of Cote Brilliante and Whittier.
  • B.B.#50 – J. Boyd – An ordinance recommended by the Parking Commission making appropriation for payment of the operating expenses, capital equipment and improvement expenses, including lease purchase agreements involving Parking Division assets, and debt service expenses of the Parking Division of the Treasurer’s Office, Kiel & City Hall Parking Facilities, Information Technologies Office, Argyle Parking Facility, Chouteau Building & Parking Facility, Williams Paper Parking Facility, Central Downtown Parking Facility, Buckingham Parking Facility, Cupples Parking Facility and Justice Parking Facility for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2019 and ending June 30, 2020, amounting in the aggregate to the sum of Seventeen Million, Nine Hundred Seventy -Six Thousand, Four Hundred Eighty- One Dollars and containing an emergency clause.
  • B.B.#51 – Howard – An ordinance authorizing and directing the Fire Commissioner, on behalf of the Mayor and the City, to enter into and execute a Grant Agreement with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Assistance to Firefighters Grant, to fund the Cancer Prevention Initiative, upon approval of the Board of Estimate and Apportionment, and to expend funds by entering into contracts or otherwise for grant purposes and containing an emergency clause.
  • B.B.#52 – Coatar – An ordinance approving a Redevelopment Plan for 1014-1018 Olive.
  • B.B.#53 – Todd – An ordinance approving a Redevelopment Plan for 4629-4631 & 4715 Washington.
  • B.B.#54 – Todd – An ordinance approving a blighting study and Redevelopment Plan for 5125 Enright.

The meeting begins at 10am, past meetings and a live broadcast can be watched online here. See list of all board bills for the 2019-2020 session — the new bills listed above may not be online right away.

— Steve Patterson

 

Sunday Poll: Should Gov Parsons Sign Bill To Ease Motorcycle Helmet & Vehicle Inspection Requirements; Increase Vehicle Registration Fees?

May 26, 2019 Board of Aldermen, Featured, Missouri, Politics/Policy Comments Off on Sunday Poll: Should Gov Parsons Sign Bill To Ease Motorcycle Helmet & Vehicle Inspection Requirements; Increase Vehicle Registration Fees?
Please vote below

A bill on the desk of Missouri Gov Parsons, if signed by July 14th, would change a number of things, including:

  • Allow motorcyclists 18 and older, with health insurance, to ride without having to wear a helmet.
  • Cars 5-10 years old, with less than 150,000 miles, would no longer need safety inspections every two years. Vehicles older than 10 years or with 150k miles would still need state inspection. No mention of emissions testing.
  • Increase vehicle registration and drivers license fess.
  • Allow a left turn on a red light. Currently Missouri law doesn’t permit these turns. I blogged about this in 2015, see Left Turn On Red Not Allowed In Missouri.

This bill on the governor’s desk is the subject of today’s poll.

Today’s poll will close at 8pm.

— Steve Patterson

 

St. Louis Board of Aldermen: New Board Bills Week 6 of 2019-2020 Session

May 23, 2019 Board of Aldermen, Featured Comments Off on St. Louis Board of Aldermen: New Board Bills Week 6 of 2019-2020 Session
St. Louis City Hall

The St. Louis Board of Aldermen will meet at 10am today, their  6th meeting of the 2019-2020 session.

They usually meet on Fridays, but are meeting today because of Memorial Day weekend.

Today’s agenda includes one new bill — on a topic I posted about back in November:

  • B.B.#47 – Murphy – An ordinance prohibiting persons and entities selling or offering for sale consumer goods or services at retail in the City from refusing to accept cash as a form of payment to purchase goods and services unless otherwise provided in this ordinance.

The meeting begins at 10am, past meetings and a live broadcast can be watched online here. See list of all board bills for the 2019-2020 session — the new bills listed above may not be online right away.

— Steve Patterson

 

Opinion: Access To Birth Control, Abortion, Must Remain Legal

May 22, 2019 Featured, Politics/Policy Comments Off on Opinion: Access To Birth Control, Abortion, Must Remain Legal
Missouri Capital, Jefferson City, MO, April 2011

In an ideal world there would be zero abortions, but reality is often less than ideal. Women get raped, sometimes by a relative. They can also find themselves pregnant at inopportune times.

Pregnancies have been terminated for centuries, regardless of laws.

Abortion bans, unsurprisingly, have always been about racism, controlling women.

The state [Alabama] first made abortion a crime a bit more than 150 years ago, and others passed similar measures through the middle of that century. Prior to that wave of legislation, common law had allowed abortion until quickening, when the woman first perceived fetal movement — usually around the middle of a pregnancy. Only at the point of quickening was life recognized as having begun. A small group of elite physicians working to professionalize medicine initiated a campaign to criminalize the practice of “bringing on the menses.” They aimed to eliminate their competition by casting midwives and “irregular” doctors as criminals.

To gain legislative support, these doctors raised questions about exactly who was having babies, who was aborting and who should populate the nation. They knew well-to-do white women were having fewer children, and that the families of immigrants, Catholics and, after the Civil War, freedpeople, were larger. To put it plainly: Lawmakers hoped to force middle-class white women to have more babies by removing the option of abortion, thus preventing the country from being “taken over” by “foreigners” and people of color. (Time)

Even when laws banned abortion, women with means & connection could still terminate their unwanted pregnancy. From a woman who’s now 74:

When I was 23, I had an illegal abortion arranged by the Clergy Consultation Service on Abortion. I was young, in no position to raise a child, and had gotten pregnant by a man I barely knew. The Clergymen’s Committee was a group of ministers and rabbis who arranged for physicians to provide safe, albeit illegal abortions in different cities in the U.S. and Puerto Rico. Though I lived in New York, mine was scheduled in a city about an hour’s flight away.

My parents helped pay for the procedure and my friends knew about it, but I chose to go to this appointment alone. What I was doing was illegal and I didn’t want to implicate friends or family. I flew to Pittsburgh and caught a bus to the center of town, near the hotel room where I met the doctor. He was an older gentleman, a respected doctor at one of the local hospitals, and though he was pleasant as he explained what he would be doing, I noticed that his instruments were wrapped in a soiled cloth. (HuffPost)

Some want abortions to go back underground, into back allies again.

Laws that restrict access to abortion are not an effective way to end or greatly reduce the number of abortions because people will continue to have abortions regardless of the law. We actually know how to reduce the number of abortions. Most of those ways involve being honest about how and when people have sex and giving people the information they need to have sex responsibly.

Yet most who favor these highly restrictive laws do not seem terribly interested in pursuing policies that would do any of these things. Every state that has passed a restrictive law around abortion in recent weeks requires that sex education “stress” abstinence. Neither Alabama nor Missouri mandates sex education, though when it is taught, both states require that it emphasize the importance of “sex only within marriage.” Georgia, which does mandate sex education, does not require that information about contraception be included.

This simple fact suggests to me, when I am in a less generous mood, that they are not concerned about preventing abortions. They are instead interested in enforcing their own reactionary views with regard to women and sex. (VOX)

If we really want to reduce the number of abortions then we need to all work to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies. This means increasing realistic sex education classes, increasing access to contraceptives (including Plan B), and allowing all women, regardless of races/means, to control their own bodies.

Most of you, like most of the country, agree.  Non-Scientific results from the recent Sunday Poll:

Q: Should Roe v. Wade be overturned?

  • Yes, absolutely! 7 [16.28%]
  • Yes: 0 [0%]
  • Sure: 0 [0%]
  • Neither yes or no: 0 [0%]
  • Probably not: 0 [0%]
  • No: 6 [13.95%]
  • Definitely not! 30 [69.77%]
  • Unsure/No Answer: 0 [0%]

Hopefully Roe v Wade will not be overturned.

— Steve Patterson

 

Advertisement



FACEBOOK POSTS

Archives

Categories

Advertisement


Subscribe