A 74-year-old resident of the Chillicothe women’s prison has
died of what appears to be natural causes.

The Missouri Department of Corrections reports the death of
Connie Sanders-Ford who was serving a life sentence from McDonald County for
first-degree murder and armed criminal action.

Corrections officials report Sanders-Ford was pronounced dead
shortly before five o’clock Monday morning.

You can follow Brent on X @GBrentKFEQ and St. Joseph Post @StJosephPost.

By BRENT MARTINSt. Joseph PostA 74-year-old resident of the Chillicothe women’s prison has
died of what appears to be natural causes.The Missouri Department of Corrections reports the death of
Connie Sanders-Ford who was serving a life sentence from McDonald County for
first-degree murder and armed criminal action.Corrections officials report Sanders-Ford was pronounced dead
shortly before five o’clock Monday morning.You can follow Brent on X @GBrentKFEQ and St. Joseph Post @StJosephPost.

Missouri Corrections officials report death at Chillicothe prison

BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/jason-hancock/">JASON HANCOCK</a> <a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2023/02/20/state-senator-throws-first-punches-of-2024-missouri-governors-campaign/">Missouri Independent</a>

A Missouri law declaring some federal gun regulations “invalid” is unconstitutional&nbsp;because it violates the U.S. Constitution’s supremacy clause, a federal appeals court in St. Louis unanimously ruled on Monday.&nbsp;

A three-judge panel of the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with a district court ruling from last year that&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2023/03/07/federal-judge-rules-missouris-second-amendment-preservation-act-unconstitutional/">blocked Missouri from enforcing the Second Amendment Preservation Act</a>, a law passed in 2021 that penalizes police for enforcing certain federal gun laws.

Among the law’s provisions is a $50,000 fine for law enforcement agencies that“infringe” on Missourians’ Second Amendment rights.

Some of the gun regulations deemed invalid by the law include imposing certain taxes on firearms, requiring gun owners to register their weapons and laws prohibiting “law-abiding” residents from possessing or transferring their guns.

“Because the (Second Amendment Preservation) Act purports to invalidate federal law in violation of the Supremacy Clause, we affirm the (district court’s) judgment,” Chief Judge Steven Colloton, a George W. Bush appointee, wrote in the unanimous opinion.&nbsp;

The U.S. Department of Justice filed the lawsuit challenging the law arguing it has undermined federal drug and weapons investigations. Late last year, the U.S. Supreme Court denied a request by Attorney General Andrew Bailey to allow Missouri to enforce the Second Amendment Preservation Act while its appeal is ongoing.

In a statement through his spokeswoman, Bailey said he is reviewing the decision. He added: “I will always fight for Missourians’ Second Amendment rights.”

Kansas City Mayor Quinton Lucas released a statement Monday afternoon praising the court’s decision.&nbsp;

“Two years ago, Missouri enacted an unconstitutional law, claiming to invalidate federal gun laws,” Lucas wrote. “The law was rejected in federal appeals court today…&nbsp;I am saddened that our state expended the time and energy of many in our legal system in service of this clearly unconstitutional effort.”

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/4/1681466878038.png" alt="Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey said in a statement that his office was reviewing the decision. file photo" />
 <figcaption>Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey said in a statement that his office was reviewing the decision. file photo</figcaption>
 </figure>BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/jason-hancock/">JASON HANCOCK</a> <a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2023/02/20/state-senator-throws-first-punches-of-2024-missouri-governors-campaign/">Missouri Independent</a>A Missouri law declaring some federal gun regulations “invalid” is unconstitutional&nbsp;because it violates the U.S. Constitution’s supremacy clause, a federal appeals court in St. Louis unanimously ruled on Monday.&nbsp;A three-judge panel of the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with a district court ruling from last year that&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2023/03/07/federal-judge-rules-missouris-second-amendment-preservation-act-unconstitutional/">blocked Missouri from enforcing the Second Amendment Preservation Act</a>, a law passed in 2021 that penalizes police for enforcing certain federal gun laws.Among the law’s provisions is a $50,000 fine for law enforcement agencies that“infringe” on Missourians’ Second Amendment rights.Some of the gun regulations deemed invalid by the law include imposing certain taxes on firearms, requiring gun owners to register their weapons and laws prohibiting “law-abiding” residents from possessing or transferring their guns.“Because the (Second Amendment Preservation) Act purports to invalidate federal law in violation of the Supremacy Clause, we affirm the (district court’s) judgment,” Chief Judge Steven Colloton, a George W. Bush appointee, wrote in the unanimous opinion.&nbsp;The U.S. Department of Justice filed the lawsuit challenging the law arguing it has undermined federal drug and weapons investigations. Late last year, the U.S. Supreme Court denied a request by Attorney General Andrew Bailey to allow Missouri to enforce the Second Amendment Preservation Act while its appeal is ongoing.In a statement through his spokeswoman, Bailey said he is reviewing the decision. He added: “I will always fight for Missourians’ Second Amendment rights.”Kansas City Mayor Quinton Lucas released a statement Monday afternoon praising the court’s decision.&nbsp;“Two years ago, Missouri enacted an unconstitutional law, claiming to invalidate federal gun laws,” Lucas wrote. “The law was rejected in federal appeals court today…&nbsp;I am saddened that our state expended the time and energy of many in our legal system in service of this clearly unconstitutional effort.”

Federal appeals court declares Missouri’s ‘Second Amendment Preservation Act’ unconstitutional

(Radio Iowa) - For the last time this summer, law enforcement agencies are ready to launch a STEP, or a Selective Traffic Enforcement Program.

 Iowa State Patrol spokesman Trooper Paul Gardner, from the Fort Dodge post, says STEP will put dozens of extra law enforcement officers on the roads during the upcoming holiday weekend, and they'll be seeking out speeders, impaired drivers and other lawbreakers. 

Gardner says parties are common over Labor Day, and so is drinking. He implores Iowans who are hosting events for the holiday to make sure their guests don't drive impaired by calling them a taxi or Uber, giving them a ride home or offering them a place to stay.

(Radio Iowa) - For the last time this summer, law enforcement agencies are ready to launch a STEP, or a Selective Traffic Enforcement Program. Iowa State Patrol spokesman Trooper Paul Gardner, from the Fort Dodge post, says STEP will put dozens of extra law enforcement officers on the roads during the upcoming holiday weekend, and they'll be seeking out speeders, impaired drivers and other lawbreakers. Gardner says parties are common over Labor Day, and so is drinking. He implores Iowans who are hosting events for the holiday to make sure their guests don't drive impaired by calling them a taxi or Uber, giving them a ride home or offering them a place to stay.

Iowa law enforcement will zero in on speeders, impaired drivers over holiday

Four lawsuits filed since mid-July argue that the state has intruded on interstate commerce and violated federal property rights protections

By RUDI KELLER&nbsp; <a href="https://missouriindependent.com/briefs/missouri-senate-committee-advances-bill-to-ban-texting-while-driving/">Missouri Independent</a>

Three major pharmaceutical companies and their national lobbying organization are suing Missouri to block&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/06/13/billions-at-stake-as-national-battle-over-drug-pricing-plays-out-in-missouri/">enforcement of a new state law</a>&nbsp;requiring them to give medical providers unlimited access to discounted drugs for their pharmacies.

In four federal lawsuits filed over the past month, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Abbvie and PhRMA, the lobbying arm of the pharmaceutical industry, argue that Missouri lawmakers unconstitutionally intruded into interstate commerce with&nbsp;<a href="https://www.senate.mo.gov/24info/BTS_Web/Bill.aspx?SessionType=R&amp;BillID=186" target="_blank">the bill passed this year</a>.

Under the bill, drugmakers must accept orders to deliver medications to providers eligible for discounts under&nbsp;<a href="https://www.hrsa.gov/opa" target="_blank">the 340B program</a>, named for the section of law where it is authorized. The bill allows eligible providers to have an unlimited number of contracts with pharmacies to dispense their prescriptions of drugs purchased under the program.

“Under the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution, Missouri has no authority to define who has access to 340B-priced drugs,” states the lawsuit filed last week by PhRMA in the Western District of Missouri.

The law takes effect on Wednesday. The plaintiffs in each case have asked for a preliminary injunction to block enforcement, but no hearings on the requests have been scheduled and only one case, filed Aug. 2 by Novartis, has had enough activity for the judge to schedule any proceedings.

Abbvie went first, filing its lawsuit July 22 in the Eastern District&nbsp; — 10 days after Gov. Mike Parson declined to sign the bill and instead&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/07/12/missouri-governor-allows-flawed-bill-on-drug-discounts-to-become-law/">allowed it to become law</a>&nbsp;despite his misgivings. The other three cases are filed with the Western District, which includes Jefferson City.

The lawsuits name Attorney General Andrew Bailey and members of the state Board of Pharmacy, which is responsible for enforcing the law. The board is given authority to investigate violations of the law and the attorney general has enforcement powers through the state Merchandising Practices Act.

“It is difficult to convincingly argue that doing what a federal program requires is an irreparable harm,” Maria Lanahan, deputy solicitor general in the attorney general’s office, wrote in a filing arguing against a preliminary injunction in the Novartis lawsuit. “To the contrary, when Novartis complies with S.B. 751, it is helping covered entities that serve vulnerable populations.”

Bailey’s office did not respond to an email seeking comment on the cases.

The board is relying on Bailey to respond to the lawsuit. The law is self-enforcing and while the board could write rules about how it is to be followed, Executive Director Kimberly Brinston said.

“The board does not have a timeline to promulgate rules and has not made a decision on whether rules would be promulgated,” she said.

The Missouri Hospital Association and the Missouri Primary Care Association have asked to intervene in the Novartis lawsuit and will likely seek to join the other three, hospital association spokesman Dave Dillon said Monday.

“We are evaluating each case and intend to reinforce the work done by the General Assembly on behalf of Missouri’s hospitals, other providers and the communities they serve,” Dillon said.

The 340B program was created in 1992. It had two components — drug manufacturers had to deliver their products at a discount to eligible providers and eligible providers could only use the program to provide prescriptions to patients they treated directly.

Eligible providers included children’s hospitals, as well as hospitals that were sole providers in their community or designated “critical access hospitals” by providing care that would otherwise be absent, and those serving large numbers of indigent patients known as “disproportionate share hospitals.”

Other qualifying providers include federally qualified health care centers — clinics that receive grants to support operations so they can base charges on ability to pay — as well as clinics that serve AIDS patients, black lung victims and other debilitating diseases.

The use of contract pharmacies started in 1996, when the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services began allowing one contractor per provider as recognition that many providers did not have in-house pharmacies. But a change to allow unlimited contracting increased the number of contract pharmacies from 2,321 in 2010 to 205,340 in 2024, according to data from PhRMA provided to The Independent in June.

Nationally, pharmaceutical manufacturers&nbsp;<a href="https://www.hrsa.gov/opa/updates/2022-340b-covered-entity-purchases" target="_blank">sold nearly $100 billion in discounted drugs</a>&nbsp;in 2021 and 2022. Discounts averaged 60% from regular wholesale prices, the lobbying organization stated.

The pharmaceutical companies focus their criticism on the disproportionate share hospitals, who often contract with for-profit pharmacies to dispense the drugs. Those hospitals account for about 80% of all drugs purchased through the 340B program, $41.8 billion in 2022 and $34.3 billion the year before.

Pharmaceutical companies complain that the discounts are rarely passed on to patients. Instead, insurance companies and consumers pay retail prices and the extra profit is often split between the pharmacy and the provider.

“Make no mistake, the boom in contract pharmacies has been fueled by the prospect of outsized profit margins on 340B-discounted drugs,” AstraZeneca’s lawyers wrote in the complaint filed last week. “In short, the widespread proliferation of contract pharmacy arrangements since 2010 has transformed the 340B program from one intended to assist vulnerable patients into a multi-billion-dollar arbitrage scheme.”

The drugmakers have fought the expansion of contract pharmacies in a variety of ways. When Novartis sought in 2020 to limit the contracts to pharmacies within 40 miles of an eligible provider, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services issued a notice that it considered the limit a violation of the program’s rules.

An&nbsp;<a href="https://www.hhs.gov/guidance/sites/default/files/hhs-guidance-documents/340B-AO-FINAL-12-30-2020_0.pdf" target="_blank">advisory opinion on contracting</a>, later withdrawn, said the 340B program required delivery to a pharmacy on “the lunar surface, low-earth orbit, or a neighborhood…”

The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Pennsylvania ruled in January 2023 in a case against the federal agency that pharmaceutical companies&nbsp;<a href="https://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/213167p.pdf" target="_blank">could impose limits</a>&nbsp;on the number of pharmacies they would allow to purchase the discounted drugs.

After the 2023 ruling, Novartis tightened its rules to allow only one contracted pharmacy per covered provider, but only if the provider did not have an in-house pharmacy. Other manufacturers have imposed variations on the Novartis policies.

State efforts to counter the limits have ramped up in the past two years. Missouri is one of eight states to pass laws requiring drugmakers to deliver discounted medications to contract pharmacies.

Arkansas was one of the first. In March, the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Louis upheld the Arkansas law requiring drugmakers to allow covered providers to have an unlimited number of contract pharmacies.

In the motion to dismiss the Novartis lawsuit, the Missouri attorney general’s office relied heavily on that ruling, writing that it shows federal law does not prevent Missouri from passing a similar law.

The four lawsuits use a variety of legal theories to assail Missouri’s new law. Along with allegations of interfering with interstate commerce and regulating in an area reserved for federal action, the Abbvie lawsuit argues that its property rights are being violated.

“These abuses of the federal 340B program raise obvious concerns because the U.S. Constitution prohibits the government from forcing the transfer of property at confiscatory prices to private parties for their own private benefit,” the lawsuit states.

In the filing seeking to intervene in the Novartis case, the hospitals and primary care associations argued that the revenue from profits on 340B medications are essential support for their operations.

“Reducing access to those savings,” the filing states, “means hospitals are unable to underwrite critical but under-reimbursed services lines.”

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2019/10/1572037176389.png" alt="File photo -Missouri is being sued over a new law requiring drugmakers to deliver prescriptions discounted under the 340B program to any pharmacy contracting with a qualified provider.&nbsp;" />
 <figcaption>File photo -Missouri is being sued over a new law requiring drugmakers to deliver prescriptions discounted under the 340B program to any pharmacy contracting with a qualified provider.&nbsp;</figcaption>
 </figure><h2>Four lawsuits filed since mid-July argue that the state has intruded on interstate commerce and violated federal property rights protections</h2>By RUDI KELLER&nbsp; <a href="https://missouriindependent.com/briefs/missouri-senate-committee-advances-bill-to-ban-texting-while-driving/">Missouri Independent</a>Three major pharmaceutical companies and their national lobbying organization are suing Missouri to block&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/06/13/billions-at-stake-as-national-battle-over-drug-pricing-plays-out-in-missouri/">enforcement of a new state law</a>&nbsp;requiring them to give medical providers unlimited access to discounted drugs for their pharmacies.In four federal lawsuits filed over the past month, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Abbvie and PhRMA, the lobbying arm of the pharmaceutical industry, argue that Missouri lawmakers unconstitutionally intruded into interstate commerce with&nbsp;<a href="https://www.senate.mo.gov/24info/BTS_Web/Bill.aspx?SessionType=R&amp;BillID=186" target="_blank">the bill passed this year</a>.Under the bill, drugmakers must accept orders to deliver medications to providers eligible for discounts under&nbsp;<a href="https://www.hrsa.gov/opa" target="_blank">the 340B program</a>, named for the section of law where it is authorized. The bill allows eligible providers to have an unlimited number of contracts with pharmacies to dispense their prescriptions of drugs purchased under the program.“Under the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution, Missouri has no authority to define who has access to 340B-priced drugs,” states the lawsuit filed last week by PhRMA in the Western District of Missouri.The law takes effect on Wednesday. The plaintiffs in each case have asked for a preliminary injunction to block enforcement, but no hearings on the requests have been scheduled and only one case, filed Aug. 2 by Novartis, has had enough activity for the judge to schedule any proceedings.Abbvie went first, filing its lawsuit July 22 in the Eastern District&nbsp; — 10 days after Gov. Mike Parson declined to sign the bill and instead&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/07/12/missouri-governor-allows-flawed-bill-on-drug-discounts-to-become-law/">allowed it to become law</a>&nbsp;despite his misgivings. The other three cases are filed with the Western District, which includes Jefferson City.The lawsuits name Attorney General Andrew Bailey and members of the state Board of Pharmacy, which is responsible for enforcing the law. The board is given authority to investigate violations of the law and the attorney general has enforcement powers through the state Merchandising Practices Act.“It is difficult to convincingly argue that doing what a federal program requires is an irreparable harm,” Maria Lanahan, deputy solicitor general in the attorney general’s office, wrote in a filing arguing against a preliminary injunction in the Novartis lawsuit. “To the contrary, when Novartis complies with S.B. 751, it is helping covered entities that serve vulnerable populations.”Bailey’s office did not respond to an email seeking comment on the cases.The board is relying on Bailey to respond to the lawsuit. The law is self-enforcing and while the board could write rules about how it is to be followed, Executive Director Kimberly Brinston said.“The board does not have a timeline to promulgate rules and has not made a decision on whether rules would be promulgated,” she said.The Missouri Hospital Association and the Missouri Primary Care Association have asked to intervene in the Novartis lawsuit and will likely seek to join the other three, hospital association spokesman Dave Dillon said Monday.“We are evaluating each case and intend to reinforce the work done by the General Assembly on behalf of Missouri’s hospitals, other providers and the communities they serve,” Dillon said.The 340B program was created in 1992. It had two components — drug manufacturers had to deliver their products at a discount to eligible providers and eligible providers could only use the program to provide prescriptions to patients they treated directly.Eligible providers included children’s hospitals, as well as hospitals that were sole providers in their community or designated “critical access hospitals” by providing care that would otherwise be absent, and those serving large numbers of indigent patients known as “disproportionate share hospitals.”Other qualifying providers include federally qualified health care centers — clinics that receive grants to support operations so they can base charges on ability to pay — as well as clinics that serve AIDS patients, black lung victims and other debilitating diseases.The use of contract pharmacies started in 1996, when the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services began allowing one contractor per provider as recognition that many providers did not have in-house pharmacies. But a change to allow unlimited contracting increased the number of contract pharmacies from 2,321 in 2010 to 205,340 in 2024, according to data from PhRMA provided to The Independent in June.Nationally, pharmaceutical manufacturers&nbsp;<a href="https://www.hrsa.gov/opa/updates/2022-340b-covered-entity-purchases" target="_blank">sold nearly $100 billion in discounted drugs</a>&nbsp;in 2021 and 2022. Discounts averaged 60% from regular wholesale prices, the lobbying organization stated.The pharmaceutical companies focus their criticism on the disproportionate share hospitals, who often contract with for-profit pharmacies to dispense the drugs. Those hospitals account for about 80% of all drugs purchased through the 340B program, $41.8 billion in 2022 and $34.3 billion the year before.Pharmaceutical companies complain that the discounts are rarely passed on to patients. Instead, insurance companies and consumers pay retail prices and the extra profit is often split between the pharmacy and the provider.“Make no mistake, the boom in contract pharmacies has been fueled by the prospect of outsized profit margins on 340B-discounted drugs,” AstraZeneca’s lawyers wrote in the complaint filed last week. “In short, the widespread proliferation of contract pharmacy arrangements since 2010 has transformed the 340B program from one intended to assist vulnerable patients into a multi-billion-dollar arbitrage scheme.”The drugmakers have fought the expansion of contract pharmacies in a variety of ways. When Novartis sought in 2020 to limit the contracts to pharmacies within 40 miles of an eligible provider, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services issued a notice that it considered the limit a violation of the program’s rules.An&nbsp;<a href="https://www.hhs.gov/guidance/sites/default/files/hhs-guidance-documents/340B-AO-FINAL-12-30-2020_0.pdf" target="_blank">advisory opinion on contracting</a>, later withdrawn, said the 340B program required delivery to a pharmacy on “the lunar surface, low-earth orbit, or a neighborhood…”The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Pennsylvania ruled in January 2023 in a case against the federal agency that pharmaceutical companies&nbsp;<a href="https://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/213167p.pdf" target="_blank">could impose limits</a>&nbsp;on the number of pharmacies they would allow to purchase the discounted drugs.After the 2023 ruling, Novartis tightened its rules to allow only one contracted pharmacy per covered provider, but only if the provider did not have an in-house pharmacy. Other manufacturers have imposed variations on the Novartis policies.State efforts to counter the limits have ramped up in the past two years. Missouri is one of eight states to pass laws requiring drugmakers to deliver discounted medications to contract pharmacies.Arkansas was one of the first. In March, the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Louis upheld the Arkansas law requiring drugmakers to allow covered providers to have an unlimited number of contract pharmacies.In the motion to dismiss the Novartis lawsuit, the Missouri attorney general’s office relied heavily on that ruling, writing that it shows federal law does not prevent Missouri from passing a similar law.The four lawsuits use a variety of legal theories to assail Missouri’s new law. Along with allegations of interfering with interstate commerce and regulating in an area reserved for federal action, the Abbvie lawsuit argues that its property rights are being violated.“These abuses of the federal 340B program raise obvious concerns because the U.S. Constitution prohibits the government from forcing the transfer of property at confiscatory prices to private parties for their own private benefit,” the lawsuit states.In the filing seeking to intervene in the Novartis case, the hospitals and primary care associations argued that the revenue from profits on 340B medications are essential support for their operations.“Reducing access to those savings,” the filing states, “means hospitals are unable to underwrite critical but under-reimbursed services lines.”

Drugmakers sue to block Missouri law on federal prescription discounts

BY&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/cbates/">CLARA BATES</a> <a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2022/09/21/missouri-judge-once-again-delays-decision-on-closing-agape-boarding-school/">Missouri Independent</a>

Missouri’s Planned Parenthood affiliates are asking the state administrative hearing commission to block a new law that prohibits the organization from being reimbursed for serving Medicaid patients.&nbsp;

The&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/03/28/missouri-looks-to-mirror-arkansas-law-that-forced-planned-parenthood-to-turn-away-patients/">law</a>&nbsp;goes into effect on Wednesday.

Nearly one in five Planned Parenthood patients in Missouri is insured through MO HealthNet, the state’s Medicaid program that serves low-income and disabled residents and has long banned funding for abortion.

The complaint to the Missouri Administrative Hearing Commission was filed after Missouri’s two Planned Parenthood affiliates say they received notifications of their termination from Medicaid, effective Wednesday.

“Despite an already overburdened health care safety net for Missouri Medicaid patients,” Planned Parenthood Great Plains and Planned Parenthood Great Rivers wrote in a joint press release, “lawmakers prioritized the legislative ‘defunding’ of Planned Parenthood this last session, harming Missourians with low incomes and forcing them to search for other providers.”

It’s the third — and Republicans hope final — attempt to end Medicaid reimbursements to any health centers affiliated with abortion providers.

Planned Parenthood alleges the state’s new restrictions violate federal Medicaid law, which protects patients’ right to choose their health care providers.&nbsp;

The Missouri Department of Social Services, which oversees the state’s Medicaid program, didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Abortion has been banned in Missouri since 2022, but Planned Parenthood clinics in Illinois and Kansas continue to perform the procedure. In Missouri, Planned Parenthood clinics provide services such as contraceptive care, STI testing, cancer screenings and wellness checks.

Critics of the law have argued it would primarily harm low-income Missourians who could be forced to find a new provider through the state’s already strained public health safety net if Planned Parenthood cannot foot the bill for these patients long-term. This could delay critical and potentially life-saving care.

In Missouri, women on Medicaid are 10 times more likely to die within one year of pregnancy than those on private insurance, according to an August multi-year report on maternal mortality published by the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services.

“The impact of defunding efforts will only further destabilize Missouri’s fragile safety net,”&nbsp; said Michelle Trupiano, executive director of Missouri Family Health Council in Monday’s press release, “by straining providers, extending wait times, and unnecessarily creating additional barriers for people accessing basic healthcare services.”

Planned Parenthood clinics in Missouri have been without Medicaid reimbursements for more than two years as prior attempts by Republicans to pass similar restrictions through the state budget were litigated and struck down in court.&nbsp;

Planned Parenthood says it will&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/05/09/missouri-planned-parenthood-medicaid-parson-law/">continue to serve Medicaid patients</a>&nbsp;despite the new law.

Some clinics, including Planned Parenthood Great Rivers, have offset the cost of care with private fundraising, according to the press release.

“Planned Parenthood’s doors remain open so patients can get the affordable, accessible care they rely on,” said Richard Muniz, interim president &amp; CEO of Planned Parenthood Great Rivers, “as we challenge the state’s latest, illegal attempt to exclude us from participating in the Medicaid program.”

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/3/1648771341385.png" alt="" />
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure>BY&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/cbates/">CLARA BATES</a> <a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2022/09/21/missouri-judge-once-again-delays-decision-on-closing-agape-boarding-school/">Missouri Independent</a>Missouri’s Planned Parenthood affiliates are asking the state administrative hearing commission to block a new law that prohibits the organization from being reimbursed for serving Medicaid patients.&nbsp;The&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/03/28/missouri-looks-to-mirror-arkansas-law-that-forced-planned-parenthood-to-turn-away-patients/">law</a>&nbsp;goes into effect on Wednesday.Nearly one in five Planned Parenthood patients in Missouri is insured through MO HealthNet, the state’s Medicaid program that serves low-income and disabled residents and has long banned funding for abortion.The complaint to the Missouri Administrative Hearing Commission was filed after Missouri’s two Planned Parenthood affiliates say they received notifications of their termination from Medicaid, effective Wednesday.“Despite an already overburdened health care safety net for Missouri Medicaid patients,” Planned Parenthood Great Plains and Planned Parenthood Great Rivers wrote in a joint press release, “lawmakers prioritized the legislative ‘defunding’ of Planned Parenthood this last session, harming Missourians with low incomes and forcing them to search for other providers.”It’s the third — and Republicans hope final — attempt to end Medicaid reimbursements to any health centers affiliated with abortion providers.Planned Parenthood alleges the state’s new restrictions violate federal Medicaid law, which protects patients’ right to choose their health care providers.&nbsp;The Missouri Department of Social Services, which oversees the state’s Medicaid program, didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.Abortion has been banned in Missouri since 2022, but Planned Parenthood clinics in Illinois and Kansas continue to perform the procedure. In Missouri, Planned Parenthood clinics provide services such as contraceptive care, STI testing, cancer screenings and wellness checks.Critics of the law have argued it would primarily harm low-income Missourians who could be forced to find a new provider through the state’s already strained public health safety net if Planned Parenthood cannot foot the bill for these patients long-term. This could delay critical and potentially life-saving care.In Missouri, women on Medicaid are 10 times more likely to die within one year of pregnancy than those on private insurance, according to an August multi-year report on maternal mortality published by the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services.“The impact of defunding efforts will only further destabilize Missouri’s fragile safety net,”&nbsp; said Michelle Trupiano, executive director of Missouri Family Health Council in Monday’s press release, “by straining providers, extending wait times, and unnecessarily creating additional barriers for people accessing basic healthcare services.”Planned Parenthood clinics in Missouri have been without Medicaid reimbursements for more than two years as prior attempts by Republicans to pass similar restrictions through the state budget were litigated and struck down in court.&nbsp;Planned Parenthood says it will&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/05/09/missouri-planned-parenthood-medicaid-parson-law/">continue to serve Medicaid patients</a>&nbsp;despite the new law.Some clinics, including Planned Parenthood Great Rivers, have offset the cost of care with private fundraising, according to the press release.“Planned Parenthood’s doors remain open so patients can get the affordable, accessible care they rely on,” said Richard Muniz, interim president &amp; CEO of Planned Parenthood Great Rivers, “as we challenge the state’s latest, illegal attempt to exclude us from participating in the Medicaid program.”

Planned Parenthood challenges new Missouri law blocking Medicaid payments to its clinics

Farm Credit System institutions made almost 133,000 loans to young, beginning, or small U.S. producers in 2023, delivering on their critical mission to support rural communities and agriculture. A new Farm Credit Administration Report underscores Farm Credit’s commitment to the next generation of agricultural producers through strategic lending and support initiatives. 

Farm Credit System institutions made almost 133,000 loans to young, beginning, or small U.S. producers in 2023, delivering on their critical mission to support rural communities and agriculture. A new Farm Credit Administration Report underscores Farm Credit’s commitment to the next generation of agricultural producers through strategic lending and support initiatives.

Farm credit delivers support to young, beginning, and small farmers

(Radio Iowa) - Waterloo School board members will vote tonight (Monday) to either withdraw a 165-million-dollar plan to merge the city’s high schools or put it on the November ballot for voter approval. 

Waterloo Superintendent Jared Smith says significant updates are needed to address the old buildings and to provide easier access to the district's career center. The merger plan was to be funded with an existing statewide sales tax that didn’t require voter approval when the school board passed it in July, but voters brought a petition to the board two weeks ago asking the plan to be put on the ballot. 

Smith says the merger would improve graduation rates because more students would have easier access to the career center. The plan would have all 10th through 12th graders go to one high school that’s currently serving as Central Middle School.

(Radio Iowa) - Waterloo School board members will vote tonight (Monday) to either withdraw a 165-million-dollar plan to merge the city’s high schools or put it on the November ballot for voter approval. Waterloo Superintendent Jared Smith says significant updates are needed to address the old buildings and to provide easier access to the district's career center. The merger plan was to be funded with an existing statewide sales tax that didn’t require voter approval when the school board passed it in July, but voters brought a petition to the board two weeks ago asking the plan to be put on the ballot. Smith says the merger would improve graduation rates because more students would have easier access to the career center. The plan would have all 10th through 12th graders go to one high school that’s currently serving as Central Middle School.

Vote is tonight on proposal to merge Waterloo's high schools

BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/megcunningham/">MEG CUNNINGHAM</a>

Evergy confused and angered its Missouri customers in 2023 when it rolled out time-of-use rates that meant prices would run highest when people use the most electricity.

Missourians, especially those on fixed incomes, complained of high costs and having to choose between things like groceries and their medications or powering their homes during peak hours.

Now, Evergy Missouri West, which has a monopoly on service for much of the western part of Missouri outside of Kansas City, is heading back to its regulator to ask for more from the 340,000 users in the region. (<a href="https://thebeaconnews.org/stories/2024/08/26/evergy-west-rate-increase-2025/" target="_blank">Here’s how you can weigh in</a>.)

Evergy wants the Public Service Commission to OK a 13.99% increase in electric rates, giving the company up to&nbsp;<a href="https://dailyenergyinsider.com/news/42672-evergy-files-rate-request-with-missouri-regulators/" target="_blank">$104.5 million more in revenue&nbsp;</a>a year. In 2023, the company reported&nbsp;<a href="https://investors.evergy.com/news-releases/news-release-details/evergy-announces-2023-results-declares-quarterly-dividend-and" target="_blank">$731 million</a>&nbsp;in earnings.

“As people do we pick between: are we eating, or are we paying our power bill?” said Kelly Smith, who showed up to testify at a&nbsp;<a href="https://psc.mo.gov/VideoDetail.aspx?Id=6753" target="_blank">public hearing</a>&nbsp;in St. Joseph on the proposed rate hike. “My bill is just shy of $300. I work all the time. I’m hardly ever home.&nbsp; … My thermostat is set to 75 degrees.”

The Public Service Commission held several hearings across Evergy’s coverage area in late July. Dozens of Missourians, including lawmakers, showed up to argue against the rate hike. They shared stories of $700 bills, finding every energy-efficient upgrade to their home they could and making tough choices about which bills to pay.

Just because the company asked for a rate increase doesn’t mean it’ll get what it asked for. The commission started an 11-month review in February. It will decide in December how much rates might go up starting Jan. 1.

Why is Evergy asking for a rate increase?

Evergy argues it needs the higher rates to recoup money it spent on two natural-gas plants and for a range of upgrades to withstand severe weather and surges of demand for electricity.

The upgrades in the grid have already been made, said Gina Penzig, a spokesperson for Evergy.

“We make the investments and the power grid, and then we go to the commission and ask to recover those investments,” Penzig said.&nbsp; “So we are asking for money that the company has already spent.”

The company is asking for funds to aid in its purchase of part of a natural-gas plant in Pleasant Hill to generate more electricity for the region. It’s also reupping its longtime request to make back some of the cost of transporting power from a natural-gas plant in Mississippi to Missouri, a request the state regulators have previously denied.

Evergy has conducted studies that show transmitting the energy from Mississippi to Missouri is the most cost-effective method of serving some customers. If they can’t recover those costs, Evergy may have to revisit the issue in the future to find another way to transmit that energy, Penzig said.

The rate hike request alarmed some Evergy customers, which drew the attention of lawmakers. They’d already been hearing complaints about the time-based plans&nbsp;<a href="https://www.eenews.net/articles/missouri-overhauls-electric-rates-raising-rewards-and-risks-for-customers/" target="_blank">mandated</a>&nbsp;by the commission.

“They said that the average customer was supposed to have a rate decrease,” said Rep. Dean VanSchoiack, a Republican who represents parts of the state north of St. Joseph. “I’ve not met that average customer yet.”

He takes issue with how Evergy is passing along the costs of its upgrades to customers, who don’t have the choice of simply switching providers if they can’t keep up with the bill.

“From what I understand right now — 13.99% — it’s mostly to cover the expenses they did upgrading their poles and lines,” VanSchoiack said. “I was in business. You have to make money…but there are certain costs of doing business that you don’t get to expense right away.”

But because utility companies are monopolies, they aren’t faced with the same burdens of a typical business in a free market.

“Utilities are basically glorified construction companies,” said Geoff Marke, the chief economist at the Missouri Office of Public Counsel, a sort of ombudsman. “When they build assets, they make a return on it. So they have a perverse incentive to build as much as they can.”

Evergy says its rates lag its peers across the country. But the OPC said that lacks context.

When Evergy was formed in 2018 from the merger of Kansas City Power and Light Co. and Westar, regulators froze its rates for five years.

In 2018, the Missouri General Assembly passed a law that allowed&nbsp;<a href="https://themissouritimes.com/four-years-after-sb564s-grid-investments-electric-rates-stagnant/" target="_blank">utilities to access plant-in-service accounting</a>, which spreads out the cost of investments over years. Those costs are typically passed on to the consumer.

“I’d say it’s much less ‘We didn’t ask for anything,’” said John Clizer, the senior counsel for the Office of Public Counsel, “and much more about ‘We delayed asking for a lot of things, but you are still going to pay for all of that.’ They may not have gotten the rate increases, but you’re also seeing all these other increases to certain charges.”

The Public Service Commission’s options&nbsp;

The Public Service Commission consists of five members and has the power to approve the rate increase as is, deny it or respond with a rate different than what Evergy asked for. The commissioners are appointed by the governor. Gov. Mike Parson has appointed all but one of the current members, who have a staff of over 200 at their disposal.

The commission is&nbsp;<a href="https://thebeaconnews.org/stories/2024/01/24/kansas-city-energy-bills-regulation-utility-commissions/" target="_blank">structured like</a>&nbsp;its regulatory counterpart in Kansas, the Kansas Corporation Commission. The KCC has three members, also appointed by the state’s governor. They approved a&nbsp;<a href="https://thebeaconnews.org/stories/2023/11/21/kansas-regulators-give-evergy-a-smaller-electrical-rate-hike-than-it-asked-for/" target="_blank">rate increase in November</a>&nbsp;for Evergy’s central Kansas customers, also to cover costs associated with power plant investments and new infrastructure.

The proposed rate increase comes as many Republicans in Jefferson City are looking to regulate the regulator. After frustration over the time-based plans, some lawmakers want to add two more people to the commission and require more varied professions. &nbsp;Some proposed legislation looks to require some members to have farming or utility backgrounds.

Kayla Hahn is the current chair of the commission. She was most recently Parson’s policy director. Three other members previously served in the Missouri General Assembly. The most recent addition to the commission is John Mitchell, who spent over three decades in various roles at Burns &amp; McDonnell Engineering in Kansas City.

Renew Missouri, a group that advocates for the state to move toward cleaner energy sources, says the most recent appointment is breaking from the traditional model.

“Generally it’s been lawmakers and aides to the governor who are on there,” said James Owen, the group’s executive director. “I think it’s good to see different professions represented there.”

Some lawmakers, like VanSchoiack, want to see commissioners who aren’t necessarily politicians.

“They’re working too much for the power companies, not enough for the people,” VanSchoiack said.

Owen said the commission is “pro-utility.”

“They need to be confronted with the fact this is not just some line on a balance sheet,” Owen said. “It is actually real people who are struggling and suffering.”

VanShoiack isn’t confident that all of the legislature or Republican leadership sees the need to take another look at the structure of the commission.

“We need to be looking at things that really do truly help people,” VanShoiack said. “I think we’d be better off if we did try to focus more on some of these issues and less on the political issues.”

This&nbsp;<a href="https://thebeaconnews.org/stories/2024/08/26/evergy-west-2025-rate-increase/" target="_blank">article</a>&nbsp;first appeared on&nbsp;<a href="https://thebeaconnews.org/" target="_blank">Beacon: Missouri</a>&nbsp;and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/11/1669224062037.png" alt="Evergy headquarters in downtown Topeka, Kansas (Sherman Smith/Kansas Reflector)." />
 <figcaption>Evergy headquarters in downtown Topeka, Kansas (Sherman Smith/Kansas Reflector).</figcaption>
 </figure>BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/megcunningham/">MEG CUNNINGHAM</a>Evergy confused and angered its Missouri customers in 2023 when it rolled out time-of-use rates that meant prices would run highest when people use the most electricity.Missourians, especially those on fixed incomes, complained of high costs and having to choose between things like groceries and their medications or powering their homes during peak hours.Now, Evergy Missouri West, which has a monopoly on service for much of the western part of Missouri outside of Kansas City, is heading back to its regulator to ask for more from the 340,000 users in the region. (<a href="https://thebeaconnews.org/stories/2024/08/26/evergy-west-rate-increase-2025/" target="_blank">Here’s how you can weigh in</a>.)Evergy wants the Public Service Commission to OK a 13.99% increase in electric rates, giving the company up to&nbsp;<a href="https://dailyenergyinsider.com/news/42672-evergy-files-rate-request-with-missouri-regulators/" target="_blank">$104.5 million more in revenue&nbsp;</a>a year. In 2023, the company reported&nbsp;<a href="https://investors.evergy.com/news-releases/news-release-details/evergy-announces-2023-results-declares-quarterly-dividend-and" target="_blank">$731 million</a>&nbsp;in earnings.“As people do we pick between: are we eating, or are we paying our power bill?” said Kelly Smith, who showed up to testify at a&nbsp;<a href="https://psc.mo.gov/VideoDetail.aspx?Id=6753" target="_blank">public hearing</a>&nbsp;in St. Joseph on the proposed rate hike. “My bill is just shy of $300. I work all the time. I’m hardly ever home.&nbsp; … My thermostat is set to 75 degrees.”The Public Service Commission held several hearings across Evergy’s coverage area in late July. Dozens of Missourians, including lawmakers, showed up to argue against the rate hike. They shared stories of $700 bills, finding every energy-efficient upgrade to their home they could and making tough choices about which bills to pay.Just because the company asked for a rate increase doesn’t mean it’ll get what it asked for. The commission started an 11-month review in February. It will decide in December how much rates might go up starting Jan. 1.<h2>Why is Evergy asking for a rate increase?</h2>Evergy argues it needs the higher rates to recoup money it spent on two natural-gas plants and for a range of upgrades to withstand severe weather and surges of demand for electricity.The upgrades in the grid have already been made, said Gina Penzig, a spokesperson for Evergy.“We make the investments and the power grid, and then we go to the commission and ask to recover those investments,” Penzig said.&nbsp; “So we are asking for money that the company has already spent.”The company is asking for funds to aid in its purchase of part of a natural-gas plant in Pleasant Hill to generate more electricity for the region. It’s also reupping its longtime request to make back some of the cost of transporting power from a natural-gas plant in Mississippi to Missouri, a request the state regulators have previously denied.Evergy has conducted studies that show transmitting the energy from Mississippi to Missouri is the most cost-effective method of serving some customers. If they can’t recover those costs, Evergy may have to revisit the issue in the future to find another way to transmit that energy, Penzig said.The rate hike request alarmed some Evergy customers, which drew the attention of lawmakers. They’d already been hearing complaints about the time-based plans&nbsp;<a href="https://www.eenews.net/articles/missouri-overhauls-electric-rates-raising-rewards-and-risks-for-customers/" target="_blank">mandated</a>&nbsp;by the commission.“They said that the average customer was supposed to have a rate decrease,” said Rep. Dean VanSchoiack, a Republican who represents parts of the state north of St. Joseph. “I’ve not met that average customer yet.”He takes issue with how Evergy is passing along the costs of its upgrades to customers, who don’t have the choice of simply switching providers if they can’t keep up with the bill.“From what I understand right now — 13.99% — it’s mostly to cover the expenses they did upgrading their poles and lines,” VanSchoiack said. “I was in business. You have to make money…but there are certain costs of doing business that you don’t get to expense right away.”But because utility companies are monopolies, they aren’t faced with the same burdens of a typical business in a free market.“Utilities are basically glorified construction companies,” said Geoff Marke, the chief economist at the Missouri Office of Public Counsel, a sort of ombudsman. “When they build assets, they make a return on it. So they have a perverse incentive to build as much as they can.”Evergy says its rates lag its peers across the country. But the OPC said that lacks context.When Evergy was formed in 2018 from the merger of Kansas City Power and Light Co. and Westar, regulators froze its rates for five years.In 2018, the Missouri General Assembly passed a law that allowed&nbsp;<a href="https://themissouritimes.com/four-years-after-sb564s-grid-investments-electric-rates-stagnant/" target="_blank">utilities to access plant-in-service accounting</a>, which spreads out the cost of investments over years. Those costs are typically passed on to the consumer.“I’d say it’s much less ‘We didn’t ask for anything,’” said John Clizer, the senior counsel for the Office of Public Counsel, “and much more about ‘We delayed asking for a lot of things, but you are still going to pay for all of that.’ They may not have gotten the rate increases, but you’re also seeing all these other increases to certain charges.”<h2>The Public Service Commission’s options&nbsp;</h2>The Public Service Commission consists of five members and has the power to approve the rate increase as is, deny it or respond with a rate different than what Evergy asked for. The commissioners are appointed by the governor. Gov. Mike Parson has appointed all but one of the current members, who have a staff of over 200 at their disposal.The commission is&nbsp;<a href="https://thebeaconnews.org/stories/2024/01/24/kansas-city-energy-bills-regulation-utility-commissions/" target="_blank">structured like</a>&nbsp;its regulatory counterpart in Kansas, the Kansas Corporation Commission. The KCC has three members, also appointed by the state’s governor. They approved a&nbsp;<a href="https://thebeaconnews.org/stories/2023/11/21/kansas-regulators-give-evergy-a-smaller-electrical-rate-hike-than-it-asked-for/" target="_blank">rate increase in November</a>&nbsp;for Evergy’s central Kansas customers, also to cover costs associated with power plant investments and new infrastructure.The proposed rate increase comes as many Republicans in Jefferson City are looking to regulate the regulator. After frustration over the time-based plans, some lawmakers want to add two more people to the commission and require more varied professions. &nbsp;Some proposed legislation looks to require some members to have farming or utility backgrounds.Kayla Hahn is the current chair of the commission. She was most recently Parson’s policy director. Three other members previously served in the Missouri General Assembly. The most recent addition to the commission is John Mitchell, who spent over three decades in various roles at Burns &amp; McDonnell Engineering in Kansas City.Renew Missouri, a group that advocates for the state to move toward cleaner energy sources, says the most recent appointment is breaking from the traditional model.“Generally it’s been lawmakers and aides to the governor who are on there,” said James Owen, the group’s executive director. “I think it’s good to see different professions represented there.”Some lawmakers, like VanSchoiack, want to see commissioners who aren’t necessarily politicians.“They’re working too much for the power companies, not enough for the people,” VanSchoiack said.Owen said the commission is “pro-utility.”“They need to be confronted with the fact this is not just some line on a balance sheet,” Owen said. “It is actually real people who are struggling and suffering.”VanShoiack isn’t confident that all of the legislature or Republican leadership sees the need to take another look at the structure of the commission.“We need to be looking at things that really do truly help people,” VanShoiack said. “I think we’d be better off if we did try to focus more on some of these issues and less on the political issues.”This&nbsp;<a href="https://thebeaconnews.org/stories/2024/08/26/evergy-west-2025-rate-increase/" target="_blank">article</a>&nbsp;first appeared on&nbsp;<a href="https://thebeaconnews.org/" target="_blank">Beacon: Missouri</a>&nbsp;and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.<figure>
 <img src="https://thebeaconnews.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/iconbeacon-150x150.png?crop=1" alt="" />
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure><figure>
 <img src="https://thebeaconnews.org/?republication-pixel=true&amp;post=24033" alt="" />
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure>

Evergy is hoping its regulators OK higher electric bills for its Missouri customers

(Radio Iowa) - The last holiday of summer is just ahead and tens of thousands of Iowans will hit the road for the Labor Day weekend. 

Triple-A-Iowa spokesman Brian Ortner says the record-breaking summer travel season will wrap up with Labor Day weekend travel expected to be up nine percent compared to last year. He says the cost of domestic travel is down two percent. He says with most Iowa kids are already back in school, regional road trips tend to be the most popular Labor Day option for families. 

Gas prices vary widely across Iowa. The most expensive fuel is reported in Dubuque at three-45 a gallon, while Sioux City has the cheapest gas at two-98.

(Radio Iowa) - The last holiday of summer is just ahead and tens of thousands of Iowans will hit the road for the Labor Day weekend. Triple-A-Iowa spokesman Brian Ortner says the record-breaking summer travel season will wrap up with Labor Day weekend travel expected to be up nine percent compared to last year. He says the cost of domestic travel is down two percent. He says with most Iowa kids are already back in school, regional road trips tend to be the most popular Labor Day option for families. Gas prices vary widely across Iowa. The most expensive fuel is reported in Dubuque at three-45 a gallon, while Sioux City has the cheapest gas at two-98.

Labor Day Travel Expected To Be Up

(Radio Iowa) - The latest data from the Iowa Association of Realtors shows home prices are up by more than six percent last month compared to July of last year. 

There was a two-point-seven percent increase in the total number of homes sold in Iowa and the median price was 15-thousand dollars higher when this July's prices are compared to prices in July of 2023. However, from June to July, pending home sales declined about two percent. 

The president of the Iowa Association of Realtors says inventory is the bright spot in Iowa's housing market. Over 77-hundred Iowa homes were on the market in July. That's 22-point-six percent more than July of last year.

(Radio Iowa) - The latest data from the Iowa Association of Realtors shows home prices are up by more than six percent last month compared to July of last year. There was a two-point-seven percent increase in the total number of homes sold in Iowa and the median price was 15-thousand dollars higher when this July's prices are compared to prices in July of 2023. However, from June to July, pending home sales declined about two percent. The president of the Iowa Association of Realtors says inventory is the bright spot in Iowa's housing market. Over 77-hundred Iowa homes were on the market in July. That's 22-point-six percent more than July of last year.

Home prices, number of listings are up in Iowa

The state constitution now requires regulators to put more rules in place to protect children from accidental consumption and poisoning

By REBECCA RIVAS &nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/briefs/missouri-senate-committee-advances-bill-to-ban-texting-while-driving/">Missouri Independent</a>

Marijuana companies face a hard deadline to meet Missouri’s new plain packaging requirements on Sept. 1 — more than a year after the rule was initially put in place.&nbsp;

For decades, there’s been a&nbsp;<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20120320142534/http://www.acosh.org/resources/GenericPackaging.pdf" target="_blank">global movement</a>&nbsp;urging “plain packaging” on tobacco products — or packaging with limited colors and frills — after numerous studies found it makes cigarettes less appealing to young people.&nbsp;

Missouri is now a<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2023/06/22/missouri-to-be-testing-ground-on-plain-packaging-for-cannabis-products/">&nbsp;testing ground</a>&nbsp;to see if plain packaging has the same impact for recreational marijuana.

When voters passed the&nbsp;<a href="https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=XIV%20%20%202&amp;constit=y" target="_blank">constitutional amendment</a>&nbsp;to legalize recreational marijuana in 2022, it included a provision that labels and packaging for marijuana-related products, “shall not be made to be attractive to children.”

Now under new state rules, packaging can only be one primary color, and it can have up to two logos or symbols that can be a different color or several different colors.

“This approach to packaging is familiar to all of us,” said Amy Moore, director of Missouri’s Division of Cannabis Regulation, during a legislative committee hearing last year. “You think about the cereal aisle versus tobacco packaging or over-the-counter medicines.”

The initial deadline for compliance was May 1, but regulators heard from licensees that potential delays in global shipping could impact their ability to receive the packaging in time.&nbsp;

Now starting on Sept. 1, marijuana manufacturers must package and label all products in division-approved designs before sending them to a dispensary.&nbsp;

Dispensaries can continue to sell non-compliant products they already have in the store until Nov. 1.

The new rules also require the division to pre-approve the labels, a process that didn’t exist under medical marijuana rules.&nbsp;

Nick Rinella,&nbsp;CEO of Hippos Cannabis, said companies have seen delays in the state’s approval of their submitted designs.

“The state just doesn’t have the manpower to go through and approve them,” Rinella said. “And until they’re approved, they can’t go onto the shelves in their new packaging.”

Since the approval process opened on Sept. 1, 2023, the division has received nearly 150,000 submissions, said Lisa Cox, spokeswoman for the division.

Half of those were submitted within the last 60 days.

“Licensees have had a year to submit applications for approval,” Cox said, “and five months’ notice that they should not expect another extension.”

Cox said all applications are being processed within 60 days.

The constitution says that no marijuana facility can sell edible marijuana-infused candy in shapes or packages that are attractive to children or that are easily confused with commercially sold candy that does not contain marijuana. Penalties include fines of up to $5,000 and a loss of a business license.&nbsp;

The packaging requirements are part of Missouri’s new&nbsp;<a href="https://health.mo.gov/safety/cannabis/pdf/19csr100-proposed-rules-filed-051523.pdf" target="_blank">cannabis regulation rules&nbsp;</a>that went into effect on July 30, 2023.&nbsp;

In the division’s first draft of proposed rules last year, it required companies to have only one color on the label.&nbsp;

That&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2023/05/08/marijuana-industry-state-regulators-at-odds-over-rules-targeting-packaging-aimed-at-kids/">caused an uproar</a>&nbsp;from the Missouri Cannabis Trade Association, which argued in a letter to lawmakers that marijuana businesses had already invested “many millions” in packaging designs. And companies did so, the trade association contends, because “attractive, interesting, and attention-grabbing packaging is essential to effectively advertise and promote marijuana product sales.”

After the pushback from both MoCann Trade and some legislators, the agency changed the rule to allow “limited colors.” Another compromise, Moore told lawmakers, was allowing for QR codes on the labels to send consumers to their website for more information.&nbsp;

Missouri becomes one of few states that require plain packaging in the adult-use cannabis market, according to the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.networkforphl.org/resources/cannabis-regulation-resource-collection/" target="_blank">Network for Public Health Law</a>. The others include Connecticut, Massachusetts and New Jersey.&nbsp;

Moore said the rules align with what voters asked for in the constitutional amendment. The requirements regarding children’s safety are more stringent than what was included in the&nbsp;<a href="https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=XIV++++1&amp;bid=51540&amp;constit=y" target="_blank">constitutional amendment legalizing medical marijuana</a>&nbsp;in 2018.

“We have to notice that,” she said, “and say, ‘Apparently we’re to do more, we’re to do better for children and for health.”

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/8/1724690719448.png" alt=" Under Missouri’s new cannabis regulations, labels and packages for marijuana-related products must have limited colors and can’t appeal to children or resemble candy. (Photo by Rebecca Rivas/The Missouri Independent)" />
 <figcaption> Under Missouri’s new cannabis regulations, labels and packages for marijuana-related products must have limited colors and can’t appeal to children or resemble candy. (Photo by Rebecca Rivas/The Missouri Independent)</figcaption>
 </figure><h2>The state constitution now requires regulators to put more rules in place to protect children from accidental consumption and poisoning</h2>By REBECCA RIVAS &nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/briefs/missouri-senate-committee-advances-bill-to-ban-texting-while-driving/">Missouri Independent</a>Marijuana companies face a hard deadline to meet Missouri’s new plain packaging requirements on Sept. 1 — more than a year after the rule was initially put in place.&nbsp;For decades, there’s been a&nbsp;<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20120320142534/http://www.acosh.org/resources/GenericPackaging.pdf" target="_blank">global movement</a>&nbsp;urging “plain packaging” on tobacco products — or packaging with limited colors and frills — after numerous studies found it makes cigarettes less appealing to young people.&nbsp;Missouri is now a<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2023/06/22/missouri-to-be-testing-ground-on-plain-packaging-for-cannabis-products/">&nbsp;testing ground</a>&nbsp;to see if plain packaging has the same impact for recreational marijuana.When voters passed the&nbsp;<a href="https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=XIV%20%20%202&amp;constit=y" target="_blank">constitutional amendment</a>&nbsp;to legalize recreational marijuana in 2022, it included a provision that labels and packaging for marijuana-related products, “shall not be made to be attractive to children.”Now under new state rules, packaging can only be one primary color, and it can have up to two logos or symbols that can be a different color or several different colors.“This approach to packaging is familiar to all of us,” said Amy Moore, director of Missouri’s Division of Cannabis Regulation, during a legislative committee hearing last year. “You think about the cereal aisle versus tobacco packaging or over-the-counter medicines.”The initial deadline for compliance was May 1, but regulators heard from licensees that potential delays in global shipping could impact their ability to receive the packaging in time.&nbsp;Now starting on Sept. 1, marijuana manufacturers must package and label all products in division-approved designs before sending them to a dispensary.&nbsp;Dispensaries can continue to sell non-compliant products they already have in the store until Nov. 1.The new rules also require the division to pre-approve the labels, a process that didn’t exist under medical marijuana rules.&nbsp;Nick Rinella,&nbsp;CEO of Hippos Cannabis, said companies have seen delays in the state’s approval of their submitted designs.“The state just doesn’t have the manpower to go through and approve them,” Rinella said. “And until they’re approved, they can’t go onto the shelves in their new packaging.”Since the approval process opened on Sept. 1, 2023, the division has received nearly 150,000 submissions, said Lisa Cox, spokeswoman for the division.Half of those were submitted within the last 60 days.“Licensees have had a year to submit applications for approval,” Cox said, “and five months’ notice that they should not expect another extension.”Cox said all applications are being processed within 60 days.The constitution says that no marijuana facility can sell edible marijuana-infused candy in shapes or packages that are attractive to children or that are easily confused with commercially sold candy that does not contain marijuana. Penalties include fines of up to $5,000 and a loss of a business license.&nbsp;The packaging requirements are part of Missouri’s new&nbsp;<a href="https://health.mo.gov/safety/cannabis/pdf/19csr100-proposed-rules-filed-051523.pdf" target="_blank">cannabis regulation rules&nbsp;</a>that went into effect on July 30, 2023.&nbsp;In the division’s first draft of proposed rules last year, it required companies to have only one color on the label.&nbsp;That&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2023/05/08/marijuana-industry-state-regulators-at-odds-over-rules-targeting-packaging-aimed-at-kids/">caused an uproar</a>&nbsp;from the Missouri Cannabis Trade Association, which argued in a letter to lawmakers that marijuana businesses had already invested “many millions” in packaging designs. And companies did so, the trade association contends, because “attractive, interesting, and attention-grabbing packaging is essential to effectively advertise and promote marijuana product sales.”After the pushback from both MoCann Trade and some legislators, the agency changed the rule to allow “limited colors.” Another compromise, Moore told lawmakers, was allowing for QR codes on the labels to send consumers to their website for more information.&nbsp;Missouri becomes one of few states that require plain packaging in the adult-use cannabis market, according to the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.networkforphl.org/resources/cannabis-regulation-resource-collection/" target="_blank">Network for Public Health Law</a>. The others include Connecticut, Massachusetts and New Jersey.&nbsp;Moore said the rules align with what voters asked for in the constitutional amendment. The requirements regarding children’s safety are more stringent than what was included in the&nbsp;<a href="https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=XIV++++1&amp;bid=51540&amp;constit=y" target="_blank">constitutional amendment legalizing medical marijuana</a>&nbsp;in 2018.“We have to notice that,” she said, “and say, ‘Apparently we’re to do more, we’re to do better for children and for health.”

Deadline for Missouri’s new marijuana plain packaging is Sept. 1

A pair of Republican state legislators and an anti-abortion activist filed a lawsuit Thursday asking a judge to block an abortion-rights constitutional amendment from appearing on the Nov. 5 ballot.&nbsp;

State Sen. Mary Elizabeth Coleman, state Rep. Hannah Kelly and Kathy Forck<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2023/08/07/gop-legislators-file-lawsuit-challenging-cost-estimate-of-missouri-abortion-rights-amendment/">&nbsp;sued last year challenging the cost estimate for a proposed constitutional amendment</a>&nbsp;rolling back Missouri’s ban on abortion.&nbsp;

The campaign behind the proposal ultimately&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/08/13/missouri-voters-will-decide-whether-to-legalize-abortion-in-november/">turned in enough signatures to earn a spot on the November ballot</a>, where it is set to appear as Amendment 3.&nbsp;

On Thursday, Coleman, Kelly, Forck and Marguerite Forrest, the operator of a shelter for homeless pregnant women in St. Louis County, filed a new lawsuit in Cole Circuit Court arguing that the decision to place the amendment on the ballot should be reversed.

The amendment violates the Missouri Constitution, the lawsuit argues, because it illegally includes more than one subject. It also fails to specify the laws and constitutional provisions that would be repealed if it were approved by voters, the lawsuit argues.&nbsp;

In a joint statement released to the media, the plaintiffs said Amendment 3&nbsp;is a “direct threat to the lives of Missouri women by erasing the will of voters who chose to protect the safety of women and the child by electing strong pro-life leaders.”

Rachel Sweet, campaign manager for Missourians for Constitutional Freedom, which is supporting Amendment 3, called Thursday’s lawsuit “yet another baseless and desperate attempt from politicians to silence Missouri voters and prevent them from being heard. We will not let that happen.”

Sweet said she is confident the courts will “see through this thinly veiled effort to block Missouri voters and dismiss it swiftly.”

Missouri was the first state to ban abortion after the 2022 U.S. Supreme Court ruling overturning the constitutional right to the procedure. Since then, abortion has been virtually illegal, with limited exceptions only in cases of medical emergencies. There are no exceptions for survivors of rape or incest.

If approved by voters, Amendment 3 would legalize abortion up until the point of fetal viability, an undefined period of time generally seen as the point in which the fetus could survive outside the womb on its own, generally around 24 weeks, according to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.&nbsp;

Such an amendment would return Missouri to the standard of the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, which also legalized abortion up to the point of fetal viability. Missouri’s amendment also includes exceptions after viability “to protect the life or physical or mental health of the pregnant person.”

Missouri’s amendment also states that women and those performing or assisting in abortions cannot be prosecuted. Under current Missouri law, doctors who perform abortions deemed unnecessary can be charged with a class B felony and face up to 15 years in prison. Their medical license can also be suspended or revoked.

The lawsuit filed Thursday argues that Amendment 3 illegally includes more than one subject, in part because of its use of the phrase “fundamental right to reproductive freedom.”&nbsp;

The lawsuit argues this phrase is “unlimited in scope” and is “systematically neutralizing all laws, existing or future, that attempt to limit this new, limitless ‘right to reproductive freedom.’” It lays out numerous restrictions on abortion and other laws that could be repealed by Amendment 3 if it were approved by voters, including restrictions on when abortions can be performed and bans on certain stem cell research.&nbsp;

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/8/1724676157886.png" alt="Students hold up anti-abortion signs at the Midwest March for Life on May 1 at the Missouri State Capitol (Anna Spoerre/Missouri Independent)." />
 <figcaption>Students hold up anti-abortion signs at the Midwest March for Life on May 1 at the Missouri State Capitol (Anna Spoerre/Missouri Independent).</figcaption>
 </figure>BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/jason-hancock/">JASON HANCOCK</a> <a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2023/02/20/state-senator-throws-first-punches-of-2024-missouri-governors-campaign/">Missouri Independent</a>A pair of Republican state legislators and an anti-abortion activist filed a lawsuit Thursday asking a judge to block an abortion-rights constitutional amendment from appearing on the Nov. 5 ballot.&nbsp;State Sen. Mary Elizabeth Coleman, state Rep. Hannah Kelly and Kathy Forck<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2023/08/07/gop-legislators-file-lawsuit-challenging-cost-estimate-of-missouri-abortion-rights-amendment/">&nbsp;sued last year challenging the cost estimate for a proposed constitutional amendment</a>&nbsp;rolling back Missouri’s ban on abortion.&nbsp;The campaign behind the proposal ultimately&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/08/13/missouri-voters-will-decide-whether-to-legalize-abortion-in-november/">turned in enough signatures to earn a spot on the November ballot</a>, where it is set to appear as Amendment 3.&nbsp;On Thursday, Coleman, Kelly, Forck and Marguerite Forrest, the operator of a shelter for homeless pregnant women in St. Louis County, filed a new lawsuit in Cole Circuit Court arguing that the decision to place the amendment on the ballot should be reversed.The amendment violates the Missouri Constitution, the lawsuit argues, because it illegally includes more than one subject. It also fails to specify the laws and constitutional provisions that would be repealed if it were approved by voters, the lawsuit argues.&nbsp;In a joint statement released to the media, the plaintiffs said Amendment 3&nbsp;is a “direct threat to the lives of Missouri women by erasing the will of voters who chose to protect the safety of women and the child by electing strong pro-life leaders.”Rachel Sweet, campaign manager for Missourians for Constitutional Freedom, which is supporting Amendment 3, called Thursday’s lawsuit “yet another baseless and desperate attempt from politicians to silence Missouri voters and prevent them from being heard. We will not let that happen.”Sweet said she is confident the courts will “see through this thinly veiled effort to block Missouri voters and dismiss it swiftly.”Missouri was the first state to ban abortion after the 2022 U.S. Supreme Court ruling overturning the constitutional right to the procedure. Since then, abortion has been virtually illegal, with limited exceptions only in cases of medical emergencies. There are no exceptions for survivors of rape or incest.If approved by voters, Amendment 3 would legalize abortion up until the point of fetal viability, an undefined period of time generally seen as the point in which the fetus could survive outside the womb on its own, generally around 24 weeks, according to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.&nbsp;Such an amendment would return Missouri to the standard of the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, which also legalized abortion up to the point of fetal viability. Missouri’s amendment also includes exceptions after viability “to protect the life or physical or mental health of the pregnant person.”Missouri’s amendment also states that women and those performing or assisting in abortions cannot be prosecuted. Under current Missouri law, doctors who perform abortions deemed unnecessary can be charged with a class B felony and face up to 15 years in prison. Their medical license can also be suspended or revoked.The lawsuit filed Thursday argues that Amendment 3 illegally includes more than one subject, in part because of its use of the phrase “fundamental right to reproductive freedom.”&nbsp;The lawsuit argues this phrase is “unlimited in scope” and is “systematically neutralizing all laws, existing or future, that attempt to limit this new, limitless ‘right to reproductive freedom.’” It lays out numerous restrictions on abortion and other laws that could be repealed by Amendment 3 if it were approved by voters, including restrictions on when abortions can be performed and bans on certain stem cell research.&nbsp;

Lawsuit seeks to knock Missouri abortion-rights amendment off Nov. 5 ballot

WASHINGTON —While talks continue to accomplish a cease-fire in the Israel-Hamas war, U.S. forces continue to face attacks in the Red Sea and Yemen.

On Friday&nbsp;U.S. forces killed&nbsp;Abu-’Abd al-Rahman al-Makki, a senior leader and commander with the Al-Qaeda linked terrorist group, Hurras al-Din, in a U.S. drone Strike in northwestern Syria, according to a statement from the U.S. Central Command.

He was responsible for overseeing terrorist operations from Syria.

Also on Friday, U.S. forces successfully destroyed one Iranian-backed Houthi missile system in a Houthi-controlled area of Yemen and on August 22, destroyed two Iranian-backed Houthi drones over the Red Sea and and another in a Houthi-controlled area of Yemen.  

On August 21, U.S. forces successfully destroyed an Iranian-backed Houthi surface-to-air missile and radar system in a Houthi-controlled area of Yemen.

WASHINGTON —While talks continue to accomplish a cease-fire in the Israel-Hamas war, U.S. forces continue to face attacks in the Red Sea and Yemen.On Friday&nbsp;U.S. forces killed&nbsp;Abu-’Abd al-Rahman al-Makki, a senior leader and commander with the Al-Qaeda linked terrorist group, Hurras al-Din, in a U.S. drone Strike in northwestern Syria, according to a statement from the U.S. Central Command.He was responsible for overseeing terrorist operations from Syria.Also on Friday, U.S. forces successfully destroyed one Iranian-backed Houthi missile system in a Houthi-controlled area of Yemen and on August 22, destroyed two Iranian-backed Houthi drones over the Red Sea and and another in a Houthi-controlled area of Yemen. On August 21, U.S. forces successfully destroyed an Iranian-backed Houthi surface-to-air missile and radar system in a Houthi-controlled area of Yemen.

Deadly week for U.S. forces in the Middle East

HOLT COUNTY—One person died and two were injured in an accident in an accident just before 3:30a.m. Sunday in Holt County.

The Missouri State Highway Patrol reported a 2016 Chevy Malibu driven by Chelsey J. Guyer, 21, Fillmore, was northbound on U.S. 59

The car crossed the center line and struck a southbound 2018 Ford Ecosport driven by Angela S. Woods, 57, Oregon, Missouri.&nbsp; After impact both vehicles traveled into the ditch.

Woods was pronounced dead at the scene and was transported to Chamberlin Funeral Home in Oregon.&nbsp; Atchison-Holt ambulance transported Guyer to Mosaic in St. Joseph. She was later air-lifted to Truman Medical Center.

Andrew County EMS transported a passenger in the Chevy Peyton A. Ohnemus, 28, Oregon, Missouri, to Mosaic Life Care. Guyer was not wearing a seat belt, according to the MSHP.

HOLT COUNTY—One person died and two were injured in an accident in an accident just before 3:30a.m. Sunday in Holt County.The Missouri State Highway Patrol reported a 2016 Chevy Malibu driven by Chelsey J. Guyer, 21, Fillmore, was northbound on U.S. 59The car crossed the center line and struck a southbound 2018 Ford Ecosport driven by Angela S. Woods, 57, Oregon, Missouri.&nbsp; After impact both vehicles traveled into the ditch.Woods was pronounced dead at the scene and was transported to Chamberlin Funeral Home in Oregon.&nbsp; Atchison-Holt ambulance transported Guyer to Mosaic in St. Joseph. She was later air-lifted to Truman Medical Center.Andrew County EMS transported a passenger in the Chevy Peyton A. Ohnemus, 28, Oregon, Missouri, to Mosaic Life Care. Guyer was not wearing a seat belt, according to the MSHP.

Missouri woman dead, 2 injured after car, SUV crash

(Radio Iowa) - At least two more Iowa schools have recently moved to ban smart phones from high school classrooms. 

Cell phones were already prohibited in elementary and middle school classrooms in the Carroll Community School District, but the ban now extends to the high school. High schoolers WILL be allowed to put their cell phones, smart watches and ear buds in their lockers -- and check them during lunch or between classes. 

In May, Des Moines Hoover High School administrators announced students would not be allowed to use smart phones, AirPods or other personal electronics during the school day. High schoolers in Ottumwa may take their phones to school, but have to store the devices in their locker all day.

(Radio Iowa) - At least two more Iowa schools have recently moved to ban smart phones from high school classrooms. Cell phones were already prohibited in elementary and middle school classrooms in the Carroll Community School District, but the ban now extends to the high school. High schoolers WILL be allowed to put their cell phones, smart watches and ear buds in their lockers -- and check them during lunch or between classes. In May, Des Moines Hoover High School administrators announced students would not be allowed to use smart phones, AirPods or other personal electronics during the school day. High schoolers in Ottumwa may take their phones to school, but have to store the devices in their locker all day.

More schools move to ban cell phones, smart watches

(Radio Iowa) - A sweltering, late summer heat wave that would've been expected during the Iowa State Fair will arrive this weekend instead.

 Meteorologist Marvin Percha, at the National Weather Service, says most of the state will see high temperatures this afternoon in the 70s and low 80s, but that will change tomorrow, as highs again climb into the mid to upper 90s, and heat indices bound into triple digits. 

(Radio Iowa) - A sweltering, late summer heat wave that would've been expected during the Iowa State Fair will arrive this weekend instead. Meteorologist Marvin Percha, at the National Weather Service, says most of the state will see high temperatures this afternoon in the 70s and low 80s, but that will change tomorrow, as highs again climb into the mid to upper 90s, and heat indices bound into triple digits. Percha says Sunday may be the hottest day, and he anticipates the steamy weather will last well into next week.

Kbct