An intraparty schism opened Thursday among legislative Democrats as the party’s leader in the Missouri House blasted state Senate Democrats for their silence during a 70-minute debate on a proposal to replace the state income tax with increased sales taxes.
Speaking to reporters at a news conference, House Minority Leader Ashley Aune of Kansas City said she was surprised by the way the debate, which began about 11:30 p.m. Wednesday, played out.
The only moment when any of the eight Democrats present for the debate said anything was when state Sen. Stephen Webber of Columbia thanked the Republican handler, state Sen. Curtis Trent of Springfield, for good-faith negotiations that took many of the specific cuts out of the proposed constitutional amendment.
“I can’t imagine a scenario in which I would sit down on the largest proposal to raise taxes for Missourians,” Aune said.
In the 163-member House, each representative gets a very limited time to speak on any bill or amendment. In the 34-member Senate, any member gaining control of the floor can keep it as long as they can stand and speak.
The only involuntary way to stop a Senate debate is with a written motion, signed by 10 members, to invoke the motion called the previous question, or PQ. If passed, the PQ forces an immediate vote on whatever is being discussed.
Aune said Senate Democrats should have used every possible method to block — or at least slow down — passage of the tax overhaul.
“I would fight to the very end,” she said.
The proposal passed on an 18-11 vote, with three Republicans — each of whom spoke against the plan during debate — joining the eight Democrats present in opposition. The vote paves the way for action, likely next week, in the Missouri House that would put the measure before voters later this year.
The proposal is Republican Gov. Mike Kehoe’s top priority for the year. After passage he can decide whether it will be on the August or November ballot.
Senate Minority Leader Doug Beck of Affton defended his caucus’ tactics in a news conference after the Senate’s Thursday session. Democrats decided to leave it to the proposal’s Republican critics to carry the opposition message, he said.
“We’ve been telling everybody what this will do for five months,” Beck said. “We thought it was more important that senators, Republican senators like Lincoln Hough, Mike Moon and Joe Nicola, speak their piece to let everybody know there is some bipartisan opposition to this.”
When he was in front of reporters, Beck ran through his criticisms of the measure in just a few minutes. It will, he said, impose tax increases on Missourians who currently pay no income tax — people who can least afford it.
And it will be difficult to make the sales tax broad enough or the rate high enough to replace all the revenue from the income tax, he said. That will dry up funding for state services, he said.
“It’s going to be like ‘The Hunger Games’ around here in this state, where you have desperate parties pitting against each other to try to get funds,” Beck said. “And it shouldn’t be that way. And we’re not talking about lavish things. We’re just talking about basic services for folks who need things to be able to realize their full potential.”
In a statement before taking questions, Beck said the tactical decisions were taken to avoid a motion to shut off debate.
“There was bipartisan opposition to creating this tax, but ultimately there were not enough anti-tax Republicans to prevent a PQ,” Beck said.
Republicans never told Democrats they were ready to use the PQ motion, Senate Majority Leader Tony Luetkemeyer of Parkville told reporters at a Thursday news conference.
The goal in negotiations over the wording of the proposal was to prevent a filibuster, he said.
“The only agreement was that there would not be a filibuster,” Luetkemeyer said. “There was no agreement that nobody was going to not speak on the legislation.”
The House sponsor of the proposal, Republican state Rep. Bishop Davidson of Republic, said he was awake and listening.
“It was a little surprising,” Davidson said. “We were expecting there to not be a filibuster, but not speaking at all is different than not filibustering.”
Davidson said in an interview with The Independent that he’s comfortable with the Senate rewrite of his proposal. The Senate threw out revenue targets and baselines that would trigger specific tax rate reductions, a fixed date target for total repeal of the personal income tax and a provision eliminating the tax when the rate fell below 1.4%.
Instead, if passed, the proposal would direct lawmakers to set triggers and baselines in statute. It also allows five years for the Legislature to write a new sales tax law with additional goods and services subject to tax.
There is no limit to the kinds of goods or services that could be taxed and no limit on the rate. The state currently has a 3% sales tax for general revenue. With earmarked state sales taxes and local options stacked on top, most locations in Missouri charge 7% to 8%, with rates as high as 12% in a few locations.
Local and earmarked rates could be adjusted downward if the expanded tax base produces significant amounts of new revenue.
“It treats the Constitution more as a framework than a law book, and took out some of the specifics, but kept a constitutional mandate and a constitutional directive that if the people pass this, they are telling their legislature that they shall eliminate their income taxes, utilizing growth over time,” Davidson said.
The Senate session that began at 1 p.m. Wednesday lasted almost 12 hours. Throughout the day, Democrats dragged out discussion of other bills while Trent, Webber and other members privately negotiated the legislation to be presented for debate.
The good feeling from successful negotiations shouldn’t blot out the need to give legislation a full public airing, Aune said.
“Legislators sometimes forget that this is the people’s house,” she said. “This is the Capitol Building. This is where the people of Missouri should come to really understand what their state government is doing and how that’s going to affect their lives. And so for senators to be okay with negotiating this behind closed doors and not making a robust and public opposition to this on the floor of the Senate, that does surprise me a little bit.”
Other than the symbolic significance of passing the measure on the day that income tax returns are due, there was no hurry to finish the Senate’s work on the legislation. The legislative session ends on May 15 at 6 p.m.
While Democrats in the House and Senate are divided over tactics on the tax proposal, Nicola, elected in 2024, is souring on the way the entire legislative process is conducted.
Nicola, a Republican from Grain Valley, said at a news conference that he opposed the bill for a variety of reasons. He criticized GOP leadership for bringing it up so late at night.
“We can have this bill come to the floor anytime,” Nicola said. “It seemed rushed, it seemed pushed, and it’s after midnight, and the people aren’t here.”
Nicola also said he’s been shut out of communication about Republican tactical plans and negotiating positions.
“I was told we weren’t voting on that bill last night,” he said. “It was going to be Monday.”
He wasn’t invited to share his views in the negotiations, he said.
“They say any senator can be a part of any meeting anywhere,” Nicola said. “Well, where is it and what time is it? Do I go around to every office and start opening doors and saying, ‘is there a meeting going on?’’
He gets his best information, Nicola said, from lobbyists. That’s how he knew Democrats weren’t going to talk on the tax proposal, he said.
“I would have been surprised,” Nicola said, “if I wasn’t told ahead of time that there was some kind of deal that worked out and they were going to be fine with it.”