Statewide Electrician License Advancing in the House

Posted on by Patrick Ishmael

From hair braiders to physicians, Show-Me Institute analysts have supported a lot of important licensure reform initiatives over the years, but one area we haven’t addressed recently is the licensure of electricians. Unlike many other states, Missouri does not have a statewide license for its electricians, which—given our skepticism of many state licensing regimes—would seem at first glance to be a good thing for free marketeers.

The problem is that in the absence of state action, local governments have imposed their own licensing regimes on their respective electricians, effectively requiring already-qualified electricians to re-license if they want to practice in, say, Springfield, if they aren’t already licensed there. In that respect, the plight of Missouri electricians parallels that of doctors who can’t easily practice across state lines: Onerous licensing requirements create barriers to entry that negatively impact practitioners and also reduce options (and increase prices) for local customers who would benefit from greater access to these services.

That regulatory tension may be relieved if a Senate bill currently before the House becomes law. SB 240 would allow local municipalities to continue licensing electricians, but it would also require them to accept a statewide electrician license without also requiring the local licensing requirements be fulfilled. Moreover, the bill would grandfather many electricians operating already under a local license into the statewide licensing framework. That means that a longtime electrician with a local license could access a statewide license, and with that statewide license, she could access other municipalities—whether a city had its own licensing regime or not. Also worth noting: the bill passed the Senate unanimously. Given the slow pace of other legislation through that chamber this session, unanimous passage of this bill is amazing in its own right. 

Whether the bill passes the House remains to be seen, but electrician licensure reform certainly deserves consideration. Our ongoing skepticism of state licensing remains in effect, and as time goes by, regular audits of the effect of electrician licensure would be necessary to ensure it does not fall victim to regulatory capture. Future legisuatures should also consider national reciprocity measures for these licenses so that Missouri electricians and customers are able to work where they want, and hire who they want at the best price. That said, the proposed reform—which ultimately simplifies life for Missouri electricians and customers alike—would be an improvement over the current licensing system in effect in the state.

What Happened to Course Access?

Posted on by Michael Q. McShane

In the early days of this legislative session, course access seemed primed for success. Both the House and Senate held hearings for course access bills for which there were zero witnesses in opposition. The Governor made it clear that it was a priority of his office as well. One version of the bill passed the House, and the other made it out of committee in the Senate. And then . . . nothing.

It is no secret that the Missouri Senate is a tumultuous place in these waning days of the legislative session. But as the final days of the calendar tick away, it’s looking increasingly likely that course access isn’t going to happen this year.  This would be a shame, for several reasons.

First, a course access program would address a serious problem in our state. As we have reported for some time now, hundreds of districts in our state have zero students enrolled in AP classes or advanced math and science classes. Other districts lack access to quality career and technical education because they simply don’t have the capacity to offer such programs. Course access could help solve this problem and amplify what smaller schools and school districts are doing to try and meet the needs of their students.

Second, it would help bridge the urban/rural divide. Education policy debates in the state often break along urban and rural fault lines. Rural folks think that the state is too narrowly focused on Kansas City and St. Louis, and to be honest, this is often a fair assessment. A program designed specifically to help rural school districts (though urban and suburban students would benefit as well) could help establish common ground across the state.

Finally, passage of course access legislation would be an example of bipartisan comity that the education policy community could build upon in the future. In our polarized times, there is less and less that unites people across the political spectrum. Education policy is not spared from this trend. Course access is an issue to which legislators on both sides of the aisle have contributed their support. It would be awful to squander that.

All is not lost. The legislature, and particularly the Senate, still has time to consider the course access bills before it.  Here’s hoping they make use of their final days to score a big win for students, our state, and our political culture.

Join the Pension Discussion!

Posted on by James V. Shuls

Pension discussions are all the rage these days. Don’t believe me? Just check out the Post-Dispatch.

A few days ago, an op-ed by a retired teacher made some inaccurate claims about Missouri’s teacher pension system. Today, the Post-Dispatch graciously ran a letter by yours truly in which I rebut them.  Primarily, I discuss the pension system’s underfunding, the potential for retirees to lose some of their income, and who would benefit from changing the retirement plan.

Additionally, David Nicklaus, business columnist for the Post-Dispatch, has an article in which he highlights my forthcoming paper in the Journal of Education Finance. Nicklaus writes:

Teachers love their pensions. A generous monthly check at the end of one’s career helps make the important, and sometimes underappreciated, profession worthwhile.

I wonder if teachers in Missouri’s lower-paying rural districts realize, though, that their pension contributions help subsidize the retirements of their better-paid counterparts in districts like Rockwood and Clayton.

It is great to see all of this attention going to an important topic that affects so many hard working Missourians. 

Resolution for Article V Convention Deserves Serious Consideration

Posted on by Patrick Ishmael

It’s been said that you can’t teach an old dog new tricks, but can you remind an old dog of long-forgotten tricks? That theme (and variation) are relevant to a bill currently being debated in the Missouri legislature that would amend the U.S. Constitution and rein in federal power through a little-used section of Article V.

How would legislators do it? As our readers may know, the most commonly attempted way to amend the Constitution has been via a two-thirds vote of Congress and ratification by three-quarters of the states. But perhaps less known is that two-thirds of the states themselves can call their own constitutional conventions for the purpose of independently proposing amendments to the Constitution. As the National Archives notes, “None of the 27 amendments to the Constitution have been proposed by constitutional convention.” That no amendments have been proposed in this way,  however, doesn’t mean amendments can’t or won’t be, and if supporters of a Missouri Senate resolution have their way, the 28th Amendment will be the first of its kind to have been initiated by the states themselves.

There’s a lot in the resolution itself about what it intends to do and how, but here’s the heart of the resolution:

Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved by the members of the Missouri Senate, Ninety-ninth General Assembly, First Regular Session, the House of Representatives concurring therein, hereby apply to Congress, under the provisions of Article V of the United States Constitution, for the calling of a convention of the states limited to proposing amendments to the United States Constitution that impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limit the terms of office for its officials and members of Congress;

Later provisions lay out the precise nature of the convention and what it may consider—it’s worth your time to read—but the key reform elements of the bill are clear enough: federal fiscal limitations, federal power limitations, and federal term limitations. Beyond that, the exact reforms are open to debate, albeit circumscribed by the reform language of the bill itself to prevent a runaway convention. Resolutions like this one have passed in ten other states and may also pass later this year in North Carolina, as well, so it’s certainly an active idea nationally.

Twelve states aren’t enough to initiate a convention, of course; to initiate it, thirty-four states will have to pass similar resolutions. But the objectives of the resolution here are worthwhile enough, and its prospects plausible enough, to highlight here. If the bill passes the House, Missouri would become either the 11th or 12th state to sign on to this initiative. We’ll keep you posted if that happens.

Session Notes: House Sends PLA Reform to the Governor

Posted on by Patrick Ishmael

Yesterday the Missouri House of Representatives passed SB 182, the Senate version of project labor agreement (PLA) reform. PLA reform was a top issue this year for the Show-Me Institute that we featured in our Blueprint and testified on earlier this year. We have written about the issue on the blog, and spoken about it on the airwaves and elsewhere, so I won’t rehash the importance of PLA reform. Suffice to say, I am happy to see progress on this labor legislation and hope that it will be just one of many market-oriented successes we’ll see this year.

Support Us

The work of the Show-Me Institute would not be possible without the generous support of people who are inspired by the vision of liberty and free enterprise. We hope you will join our efforts and become a Show-Me Institute sponsor.

Donate
Man on Horse Charging