Just hold on here a minute! I felt like screaming when I first heard Dr. Margie Vandeven was reinstated as Commissioner of Missouri Education. Ann Gassel believes firing her was good for Missouri and here are points of why she feels that way about the appointment.

  • Vandeven failed to submit reports of any new tests’ validity or reliability to the Speaker of the House or the Senate as required by law.
  • The Missouri State Board of Education requested a list of issues the education department would need to discuss with legislators- nothing was submitted.
  • Rigging a state contract to give a private company, $385,000 for education reform in K.C.
  • Failed to submit a consolidated Education plan for review
  • Vandeven has hidden test score results from the public

Click on the link below to see more detail to these allegations. Ann points out, Vandeven repeatedly fails to follow procedure and shows her “ineptitude or willful deceit.”


To further point out why Dr. Vandeven should not be hired back, Missouri test scores have gone down. Go here for that in depth article https://www.educationviews.org/what-got-lost-in-the-vandeven-kerfuffle/

House passes PDMP

PDMP is a law enforcement tool being sold as Doctor tool.

Surveillance is the purpose and not just opioid usage.  St. Louis County PDMP killed more people than ever before and they don’t tell you, see chart.  Citizens should note this day in history, When a slim majority of Republicans, made up of House leadership who owe the Health care lobby political favors and freshman who have no institutional knowledge on the issues of this bill, voted with the Democrats to seize your private health information as well as details that identify you personally, which are coveted by hackers for identity theft, medicare and medicaid fraud and blackmail.  Not surprisingly, no amendments were allowed that the bill sponsor admitted would make the bill better..  The most notable would have required the Doctors and Pharmacists to actually use the database prior to prescribing or dispensing opioids.  Every claim that the proponents spout as the need for the database are 

,for all practical purposes negated without 100% participation. It is counter intuitive for the health care lobby to require the bill sponsor to withdraw the bill if required to use the database.   Perhaps the Doctors know that the opponent claims are true.  The Health care lobby are talking out of both sides of their mouth.  Kill the bill if made mandatory, support it if not.  All best practices say that it has to be mandatory.  So what is really up?  Put your thinking caps on folks.  Forty-nine states have PDMP and no state has experienced a sustained decrease, in fact no state is lower today than before they implemented PDMP.  The sponsor of the bill touts a study that a newly implemented robust PDMP reduces opioid related deaths by 1.12 deaths per 100,000 people.  The study evaluated data from 1999 to 2013 comparing 32 states that implemented PDMP during that time period and the two remaining states that had not, Missouri and New Hampshire.  What she didn’t  say is they had to throw out West Virginia data in order to make that claim.  Fast forward to 2017 with 4 more years of data available.  New Hampshire implemented a robust PDMP in 2014, in 2013 the year of the study their opioid related death rate was 7.1 deaths per 100,000.  CDC data shows that the year it implemented 2014, their opioid related death rate jumped to 17.5 and as of 2017 a whopping 30.9 opioid related deaths per 100,000 population.  You don’t have to believe me read New Hampshire’s scathing

audit report of 2017 or this news summary.  This study was so fatally flawed it begs the question, Why was a federal grant used ?  Was it to put pressure on Missouri?  One co-author is an Associate Professor at Vanderbilt University located in Tennessee and another is an official of Tennessee Dept. of Health who used Federal funds for the study and then sited the study to apply for additional federal PDMP Funding.  By the way, Tennessee’s death rate was 9.9 in 2013, 2017 death rate 16.1.  You tell me sounds like the fix is in.  The Feds are desperate to complete the nationwide database network that contains drugs not just associated with the opioid epidemic, but drugs such as anti-anxiety, and anti-depressants some which are considered mental health drugs.  Put your thinking caps on and ask why track those?  Watch for follow up articles as this bill enters the state senate.  If you think that PDMP is not good for Missouri, contact you state senator by going to https://www.senate.mo.gov/LegisLookup/Default.aspx

You could be a lobbyist


Missouri Ethics Commission court ruling could force you to register as a lobbyist and fine you.

If your are a member of a union, church or virtually any other organization and irritate a lawmaker at the  State Capital you could be fined and required to register as a lobbyist and pay the required fee.  According to Wikipedia, the First Amendment of the US Constitution guarantees the right to petition government for redress of grievances.   This is the right to make a complaint to, or seek the assistance of, one’s government, without the fear of punishment or reprisals.  That’s right, just because you don’t receive payment from the organization or give the legislator a gift the Federal Appeals Court believes you meet the Missouri Ethics Commission definition of a Lobbyist.

Several years ago Ron Calzone a co-founder of Missouri First ran afoul of some powerful state legislators and thus the victim in this case.  The following is Ron Calzone’s  background and comments on the Appeals Court decision.

First of all, no additional help is needed on the legal front.  Between the Freedom Center of Missouri (Dave Roland) and the Institute for Free Speech, I have some of the best lawyers on this issue we could find.  They are with the case as far as we can take it, including the U.S. Supreme Court.  (Donations to the Freedom Center are, however, always a good idea.)

The opinion handed down this week was by a three judge 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel.  One of the three judges really called the other two on the carpet in his dissenting opinion.  See the attachment.

The third judge pointed out error in facts assumed by the majority opinion, most notably the fact that not only do I not receive anything of value, neither do I give anything of material value. (Gifts, etc.)  The majority opinion erroneously said that we did not raise that argument, but the dissenting judge include a whole page of footnotes proving my lawyers DID make that argument.

That should make the success of our next move more likely.  We intend to ask the entire 8th Circuit — all 15 judges — to review the case en banc. They have the power to reverse the opinion.  If that doesn’t work, we will ask SOCTUS to take it up, but that’s a long shot that will take years to work through.


First, understand that there are two legal actions under way:

1) The original ethics complaint is still not resolved.  This is the one in which the Lobbyist Guild, a corporation, filed an illegal complaint.  (Only a “natural person” can file a complaint.) Of course, that means MEC broke the law by accepting the complaint.  That’s the case Judge Beetem ruled with us on, saying just that — MEC broke the law.  He totally dismissed the case.

MEC, with Josh Hawley representing them, appealed that finding to the Western Court of Appeals, which didn’t disagree with Judge Beetem’s findings, but said that he should have sent the case back to the Administrative Hearing Commission instead of dismissing it himself.

That original case has been on hold while we were hashing our the second, federal, case.  MEC may take that case back up right away, or they may wait to see if the 8th Circuit grants our request for an en banc review.   I suspect they will wait.

Before the government can make me do anything or fine me, this case must be completed.

2) The second case is one that WE filed in federal court against MEC.  In that case, we accused them of violating the constitutions. The “mechanics” of the ethics complaint (e.g. the fact that it was a corporation, not a natural person that filed the complaint) was not at issue in the federal case. It was purely about the constitutionality of the Missouri lobbyist statute, or MEC’s application of it.

We were on the attack in this case, MEC was on the defense.

This was also the most important case. If I get off on the first case because of the technical issue of who filed the complaint, that doesn’t help us in the future — we activists will still be at risk of ethics complaints.  That is especially true if your are part of any sort of organization, to include anything from a Tea Party group, a right to life group, a NARAL, Farm Bureau, Missouri Baptist Association, etc.


The dissenting judge wrote:

It [the majority opinion] does not appear to treat a member of a religious or civic organization who has been “designated” to attend a “Lobby Day” any differently from Calzone, who advocates on behalf of Missouri First. The law seemingly sweeps up all unpaid political advocacy by anyone who acts on behalf of someone else, no matter how often it occurs and regardless of its purpose.

By sweeping so widely, Missouri’s law endangers the free exchange of ideas. Indeed, a political adversary, an unscrupulous government official, or even a legislator tired of being held accountable could simply submit a complaint to the Commission accusing a politically active citizen of lobbying—that is, speaking out—without first registering as a lobbyist. It may just be simpler for a citizen to skip a lobbying day or pass up the opportunity to call a legislator rather than having to complete tedious paperwork or risk sizeable fines and criminal penalties.

Note that the majority opinion pointed to a case involving the NRA executive director. That opinion concluded that he had to register as a lobbyist for sending a mailer out telling people how they should vote!  He was, of course, paid, so that’s different than us, but the 8th circuit just removed that difference, since they are saying not being paid doesn’t absolve one from registration requirements.  The only conclusion I can draw is that they are saying the state could make you register as a lobbyist just for sending mailers out, even if you don’t talk to legislators!

See what they said, here:

In NRA, we held that the activity that warranted requiring the NRA’s executive director to register and report as a lobbyist was his mailing of letters to Minnesota residents urging them to vote a specific way. NRA, 761 F.2d at 511. It was because of this activity alone, not campaign contributions or the fact that the executive director was paid by the NRA, that we found the director needed to register as a lobbyist.


I think this case and the continuing issue needs as much publicity as we can muster.  The court needs to know that we are upset, and Missouri legislators especially need to know that citizens will not sit still for the this chilling opinion and the existing statute that makes the opinion dangerous.

Every organization you can think of needs to be aware of this court opinion threatens their activities. As the dissenting judge wrote, every member of a religious or civic organization who has been “designated” to attend a “Lobby Day” is threatened by this. They should be encouraged to contact their state rep and senators to fix the law that the courts have made such a mess of.

We will continue to fight the legal battle, but in the mean time we should work for a bill that says if you don’t take money or give things of material value you don’t have to register as a lobbyist.
Full text of court ruling click Here



By Merryman Wagnel 


“Hypocrisy is the contrivance of a false appearance of virtue or goodness, while concealing real character or inclinations, especially with respect to religious and moral beliefs; hence in a general sense, hypocrisy may involve dissimulation, pretense, or a sham. Hypocrisy is the practice of engaging in the same behavior or activity for which one criticizes another. In moral psychology, it is the failure to follow one’s own expressed moral rules and principles. American  political journalist Michael Gerson says that political hypocrisy is ‘the conscious use of a mask to fool the public and gain political benefit.'[3]” Wikipedia Current examples are rife today, especially with the party that follows the Saul Alinsky method of “accuse your opponent of what it is that you actually do.”  Today, Democrats decry the “plight of immigrant children,” deliberately leaving out the term “illegal” – to obfuscate the real issue, of course.  When questioned, Snopes says that the Democrats did not pass this law. The following is from their website: “ Public Law 107-296, “H.R.5005 — Homeland Security Act of 2002.” A primary claim of the meme was that the legislation in question was passed “by the Democrats.”
But, in fact, the bill was passed by the 107th Congress in November 2002. The 107th Congress met from 3 January 2001 until 2 January 2003, during which time the September 11th attacks occurred in the latter part of their first year. On the date of Public Law 107- 296’s passage (25 November 2002), Senate.gov provided its majority as Republican, not Democrat: Majority Party (November 12, 2002 – January 3, 2003) – Republican, 50 seats; Minority Party – Democrat, 48 seats; Other Parties – 2; Total Seats = 100. 
Replying to @MadCanuk and 3 others: “MadCanuk, this is only happening to illegal immigrants. And for those outraged, this law was passed in 2002 in the Senate by a vote of 90-9. The likes of Clinton, Feinstein, Schumer, Biden, Reid

Mo. Legislation of interest

 Bills of interest introduced in the General Assembly



This 2019 year in Missouri may mark extraordinary changes for the abortion question. There are 10 bills that relate to abortion so far this session. As you can well imagine, there is a wide range of bills from far left to so called far right. For example, the central idea of the “heartbeat bill”, HB 126 sponsored by Nick Schroder, states:

“Requires the use of a fetal heartbeat detection test prior to an abortion and prohibits an abortion if a fetal heartbeat is detected.”

Now, with Super Majorities in both chambers and the Governor office being Republican, this bill should have no problem being passed. The bill has been read for the second time but has not been placed on the house calendar for a hearing. Only three co-sponsors have signed on to this bill.

On the other side of the abortion debate is the HB 536 by Rep. Judy Morgan. The bill would “Establish the Respect Women’s Abortion Decision Act” This bill is self explanatory and has not been placed on the calendar for debate. Go to https://www.house.mo.gov/Bill.aspx?bill=HB536&year=2019&code= for additional information.


Rep. Dan Stacy has several bills relating to changing how we vote. They are:

HB 26 – (0330H.02I)
Changes the law regarding primary elections

HB 27 – (0344H.02I)
Requires all state and federal offices to use an instant runoff voting method

HB 28 – (0345H.02I)
Requires all local elections to use an instant runoff voting method

HB 29 – (0334H.01I)
Modifies provisions relating to absentee voting

The summaries for these bills can be found at: https://www.house.mo.gov/


Senator Cindy O’Laughlin has an exciting bill with SB 73 which requires local school districts and charter schools to identify students reading ability and provide interventions from K through 4th grades for those who fall behind. The bill also requires the authority to develop these plans will fall within the local schools rather than the State Board of Education. Find more about this bill at: https://www.senate.mo.gov/19info/bts_web/Bill.aspx?SessionType=R&BillID=10

Procedures and Rules:

Rep Mike Moon Proposed the following:  

*Form committees based upon member preferences (rather than appointments made by the Speaker or a staff member);

*Allow committees to elect chairs;

Still don’t know how to vote?

Green Dragon GazetteStill don’t know how to vote?

The FIRST AND FOREMOST rule of voting on amendments and propositions appearing on ANY ballot is this:  “If you don’t know (how you should vote), then vote NO!”  Changes made here are much harder to get rid of than even the worst law on the books passed by legislatures!  DON’T SCREW THINGS UP WORSE!–

–It is a “Two-Fer” this November 6.  Proposition D should be unconstitutional!  There are actually 3 different topics in this and it was challenged and SHOULD have been struck down by the Missouri Supreme Court, but it was NOT!  You can “Show-Me” your ire on this kind of a bum’s rush and vote No on Prop D, and vote NOT to retain the Supreme Court and Apellate judges that didn’t think this obviously unconstitutional proposition was actually unconstitutional!  Nothing like more and more gas taxes to screw up Trump’s improving economy, or better for shuffling money around to departments that can’t seem to properly handle the tax dollars they are getting now!  And a POX on the Republicans promoting higher taxes!  NOT in the party platform, people!–Claire McCaskill REALLY IS to blame for an equally unconstitutional monstrosity called Obamacare.  Well, tell her “Thanks for Obamacare, Claire” on Tuesday and vote her sorry, privileged, 36 years in office butt OUT of office!  If she has been representing Missourians, particularly on the subject of Obamacare, I am an alien creature from Mars… (then link to James article–I’m sure that will fit the narrative here)–Amendment 1 may sound pretty, but it is the ugliest and dirtiest trick maybe ever about to be played on Missourians…or at least that there has been attempted in a VERY long time!  Most everything therein the legislature has actually already taken care of (and to the detriment of Missourians’ freedom of speech, but that’s an article for another time), so why is this amendment even there?  Well, one of 2 reasons.  Remember busing a few years ago where they bused kids from one neighborhood to another to try to equalize the racial and economic make up of schools?  And remember how Affirmative Action works in the workplace where you have to hire to a quota to make things more “fair” regardless of an employees’ skills?  The redistricting proposed in this amendment is BUSING FOR REPUBLICANS and/or AFFIRMATIVE ACTION FOR DEMOCRATS!  Not only would any given district no longer represent an area’s group of constituents with similar views and concerns, but all districts would be renumbered, and its district lines would NO LONGER BE DECIDED IN A NON-PARTISAN MANNER!  DON’T FALL FOR THIS, PLEASE!–Studies (honest ones, anyway) show that teenage marijuana use facilitates the use of more powerful drugs (particularly opioids), that there is a gateway effect, and that there IS more teenage use of marijuana in states that have legalized marijuana–even medical marijuana.  Is this what you want for your kids in Missouri?  Then by all means, vote yes on the marijuana ballot issues…see more at the 101 minute video, https://marijuanavideos101.com/2018/11/03/the-marijuana-opioid-connection-separating-the-myths-from-the-facts/   The meat of the matter begins at 15:00 to about 28:00 if you don’t want to listen to the entire 101 minutes before election day…Abigail Adams

Sparks Fly


Students Win

Students Protecting All Rights for Kids or SPARK is a group of students from Camdenton High school in Camdenton, Missouri who have caught our attention. They are taking up the mantel exposing unfair practices of political bias and propaganda. During a recent telephone interview, we were told they had formed about 4 years ago while still in Middle School. The group asked the Principal to review six lessons of concern for political bias. They were directed to The School Board who refused to listen to their concerns. The kids did not give up, however and collected over 50 signatures to petition the board. A review committee eventually agreed to take a look at the course work. Three of these lessons were taken out of the curriculum. Review of these lessons can be seen here:


Students to provide a safety Net

Their short term goal is to improve the educational process and provide a “safety net” for all students in the Camdenton School District. That is, so that students will have an option of voicing their concerns about curriculum choices that contain bias or propaganda toward a political ideology. Long term they hope to take their cause throughout Missouri and the Nation.

We have all been told Common Core is no longer in our Missouri Schools. Well, the only thing that has changed is the name; the name now is: Missouri Learning Standards. The Common Core Label is printed right on their school work. The main point though is not necessarily Common Core; the students wish to stop the political bias.

To be fair, the Principal made it clear that he had already reviewed some of the curriculum and had them removed. See the letter from the Principal at the web page above.

We applaud anyone standing up for students and what is right. The SPARK group should give us all hope for a future where we can speak out against unfair and bias treatment. They can be reached at the following: 573-286-6293 or 573-286-4924 and email is joinsparknow@gmail.com; also face book under SPARK. A web page has been developed and you can access it here www.joinspark.tk donations are being accepted so they can travel and spread the word.

A copy of this article was submitted to the principle of Camdenton High School requesting comment. To date no response has been received.


Dear Santa

Dear Santa

Green Dragon Gazette


For Christmas this year, Mason wants to learn about how he can become an independent human being. Maxwell wants to learn more about how to be a moral, well-mannered human being. Dylan wants to learn about leadership and being an influencer—not just about how to follow along behind all the other lemmings. And Brody wants to learn how his own ideas might become important to people’s lives, and how to become an entrepreneur someday.

Lofty ambitions, no doubt, and not from 6-year-olds full of wonder and beliefs that Santa can bring nearly anything you ask him to, but the wise, wishful thoughts of four 16, 17, and 18 year-olds at Camdenton High School in Camdenton, Missouri who started SPARK—Students Protecting All Rights for Kids. Your first thought might be, adults helped them a lot with this idea. But no. Brothers Mason and Brody Petska, Dylan O’Neal, and Maxwell Spurgeon seem to come by their leadership skills naturally, and despite the anti-American, anti-Christian, anti-morality-of-any-kind indoctrination of the Camdenton public school system, they are putting their talents to good use with the SPARK movement.

It started in the 2014-2015 school year. The two Petska brothers and friends Dylan and later Maxwell, were aghast at the nastiness of teachers and assistant principals who treated students unfairly and even unkindly in an atmosphere already akin to the same colors and attitudes that might be more common in a Missouri Department of Corrections facility than a middle school building. The four told us that one teacher in particular called the students “retarded slugs,” the tamest name-calling they cared to share with us. Makes one shudder to think what else these students were labeled. Who are the bullies again? And HOW are kids learning to bully each other exactly?

Finally having had enough, they wrote a letter to the principal and collected the signatures of 50 of their fellow students for that letter. Things slowly but surely changed, with said teacher and other school officials eventually beginning to be held accountable. Principal Paula Brown even changed the depressing gray walls into a more colorful and pleasant décor. It didn’t end there, unfortunately, as for each year that they advanced in high school, they found several more completely unacceptable situations, even as they continued to try to address situations one step at a time. Their complaints make one wonder where the “adults in the room” actually were: students punished for what they believe, indoctrinations at every turn, the lack of accountability of the administration, assistant principals, and teachers; the slanted assignments they were being given, and where the money the school system receives is actually going. They find it unconscionable the amount of data collected on them without permission from them OR their parents, how the internet works in their school to show them all the bad about their country and heritage but none of the good, and how, as one of them said, subtle inserts in study materials of their English classes constantly impressing students how horribly “white people suck!”

Still, for all the school’s worsening of Common Core garbage (now called Missouri Learning Standards– https://dese.mo.gov/ –yeah, we BET they want our feedback!) in their sophomore year, and which as of January 2018 has been ratcheted up even more, these “brilliant” Common Core/Missouri Learning Standards’ tactics have had an unexpected consequence. The constant bashing of conservative and traditional values at every turn in their lessons has led many students to start doing their own research. And so, while the current high school climate could be dubbed “MORE” Lies My Teacher Told Me (1995), we still find reason to say, “Yes, Virginia, there really IS a Santa Claus!”

See companion article “ Sparks Fly”   by Abigail Adams

No Time For Missouri Times…


No Time For Missouri Times…

Commentary in Bold text

Scott Faughn, the man, the myth, the legend–already launching the flotsam for AG. For background on Scott Faughn and his Missouri Times, see here:


In his recent post where he proclaims “My column on what’s next for the Missouri Times,” he starts out blaspheming the names of Bev Randles and Saundra McDowell, two EXCELLENT choices for the new AG, but now probably out of the running thanks to their names crossing his word doc. White guys calling the shots kinda thing, Scott?

State Treasurer Eric Schmitt – No. Not a good choice. His family should come first.

Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft – His office is supposed to be more than just about elections, MODidYaKnow? Yeah, oh, I don’t know…Missouri corporations, starting a business in MO, Missouri historical records and archives, UCC business, notaries…meh, who needs all THAT stuff?

The attorneys:

Former-State Senator Kurt Schaefer – Maybe. But couldn’t that get too political? We remember his Planned Parenthood attack–tho we weren’t complaining about the target. C’mon! Clinic doctors with no hospital admitting privileges in case something goes wrong? Are you just IDIOTIC?!?! Maybe only women understand how stupid this is? Oh–wait–scratch that–a lot of PP women and doctors thought it was perfectly okay, too, didn’t they?

“Former Republican House minority leader David Steelman – He would provide quotes for days and is one of the leading Republican attorneys in the state. He even ran for the office in 1992. With his wife Sarah Steelman serving as Commissioner of Administration and himself serving as chairman of the University of Missouri Board of Curators, he is almost certainly uninterested, but if he was, it would be a very well run office and an office providing the best copy in the state to the reporting class.” Are you KIDDING me? You think that kind of PILLOW TALK and quasi-NEPOTISM is a GOOD thing???

Bill Corrigan – Need a St. Louisan to protect MO law and order in farm country? Doubtful…

“Former United States Attorney Todd Graves – Graves proved himself to be committed to a cause more than a personality this fall. He was a big reason the Republicans had field game Tuesday. He is one who is unlikely to be interested in the position, but would be a natural fit” Are you KIDDING ME AGAIN? If MO GOP is his claim to fame on this election cycle, he’d better go run and hide! It was PATHETIC! LOTS of people STILL upset about the suspension of Rule 11, and that is just how it all STARTED! It ended with a REALLY GOOD and CONSCIENTIOUS Saundra McDowell losing by a mere 135,571 votes against an INCUMBENT, and VERY LIKELY lost because she got LITTLE OR NO HELP from the MO GOP on a STATEWIDE race! SHAMEFUL!!!

Abigail Adams


Amendment 1 will effectively nullify the requirement of US citizenship so illegals can vote in state elections

If this were Lost in Space the robot would be warning Will Robinson of eminent danger. Clean Missouri will appear as Amendment 1 to the state Constitution this November. Unfortunately, unsuspecting citizens will go into the voting booth armed with a ballot that has a cliff notes version of a
drastic change to the Constitution of this state. If you do not know the details of this amendment and just rely on what it says on the ballot, or the propaganda from TV ads, you would probably say it sounds good and vote yes. However, there is some very troubling language in this bill and the net
effect makes one elected official the most powerful person in this state and no it’s not the governor, it’s the auditor. When all is said and done, the auditor will pick one person to redraw the legislative districts based on some pretty interesting demographic criteria and in particular a new category the courts will enforce because it will now be a constitutional mandate.  So not only are racial minorities mandated a guaranteed amount of representation, but also minorities by language. This Constitutional
amendment effectively nullifies the statutory requirement of US citizenship.  Here is the exact wording that some slick lawyer and leftist judges will use to grant illegals voting rights in state elections.

Notwithstanding any other provision of this Article, districts shall not be drawn with the intent or result of denying or abridging the equal opportunity of racial or language minorities to participate in the political process or diminishing their ability to elect representatives of their choice, whether by themselves or by voting in concert with other persons.

Citizens should be particularly leery when assessing petition ballot initiatives.  There is no real public vetting process with public hearings and floor debate typically done when the General Assembly passes a bill to be placed on the ballot for voter approval. It takes serious money to fund the collection of signatures of registered voters in 6 of 8 congressional districts and lots of boots on the ground in order to do so. Voter’s need to know where the source of money comes from and seek to find the motive behind the proposal not just in the short term but the long term effect of the language of a constitutional amendment. The campaign finance reform is mere fluff meant to create a positive response from the voter and provide camouflage for the real intent of this amendment. The net effect of
the redistricting process will be to dilute the power of rural voters by lumping large chunks of sparsely populated rural counties in with portions of densely populated urban areas. Under current redistricting
guidelines, St. Louis City has approximately 10 State Representatives. Under the new guidelines that could double at the expense of rural voters. A vote NO on Amendment 1 is the only prudent choice.