The St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Oct. 12

Missouri Supreme Court should uphold partial reversal of the state’s voter ID law.

The fate of Missouri’s new voter ID law - a Republican-created mess of unnecessary burdens that looks suspiciously like an attempt to thwart people from voting - is now in the hands of the state Supreme Court. It will rule on a lower-court judge’s decision throwing out part of the law, which required some people to sign a confusing sworn statement before voting.

The lower court should have thrown out this entire cynical law. But the portion that the court did throw out definitely should stay out in any future ruling.

The claim that significant numbers of individuals are fraudulently voting in modern American elections is a fiction, unsupported by any evidence beyond a few isolated anecdotes - even after the frantic efforts of a national voter-fraud commission appointed by President Donald Trump to ease his bruised ego at having lost the 2016 popular vote.

Republican politicians everywhere still promote the myth of voter fraud with an almost religious fervor. They have a vested political interest in pushing that myth: The GOP faces demographic challenges as America’s population gets younger and more diverse. Making it harder for young people, minorities and the poor to cast votes won’t affect the nonexistent problem of individual voter fraud.

Missouri Republicans in 2016 won a referendum amending the state constitution to require that voters show photo IDs before voting. In lobbying the public for it, they made it sound like common sense - why not require a photo ID to ensure no one votes twice? But they left out two crucial points: There was no indication that the “problem” they sought to solve actually existed, and an estimated 220,000 registered voters lacked drivers licenses or other photo IDs. Those voters tend to be poor or minority, and so more likely to vote Democratic.

For those without IDs, the law offered workarounds, all of them burdensome. They could present a utility bill or other document showing their address, along with a sworn affidavit, or cast a provisional ballot and come back to the polling place later with identification.

Citizens already must register to vote, a process that covers issues like address and identity, so these other requirements amount to jumping through unnecessary hoops. All of it should have been thrown out.

Senior Cole County Judge Richard Callahan last fall opted instead to invalidate just the affidavit requirement, ruling it was confusing. The state appealed, and the Missouri Supreme Court heard arguments late last month.

This law is nothing more than another chapter in the GOP’s ongoing fairy tale of voter fraud, a false story spun with the goal of hampering real people from exercising their right to vote. Anything that makes that effort less successful is a step in the right direction. The state Supreme Court should uphold the lower court’s ruling.

_____

The Joplin Globe, Oct. 11

Harassment undermines fair play, good sportsmanship

Meanness seems to be having a moment, and an incident under investigation that occurred Saturday at Missouri Southern State University homecoming game prompts concern that moment has arrived here.

MSSU is reviewing what it characterized as “inappropriate behavior” during Saturday’s homecoming game with the University of Central Missouri at Fred G. Hughes Stadium.

Reports surfaced that some MSSU fans moved into seats on the opposing team’s side and were drinking, yelling vulgarities, spilling beer on opposing fans’ blankets and blowing smoke in their faces. Regardless of what the investigation reveals, the behavior was concerning enough that MSSU President Alan Marble declared it “inappropriate and unacceptable,” and Marble issued a public apology.

The incident in the stands shows the need to reinforce the distinction between healthy rivalry and offensive behavior. We could talk about the rise of rudeness. We could make connections between this and the explosion of name-calling and invective on social media. We could relate it to the increase of clannish attitudes in political discourse and the disappearing concept of the “loyal opposition.” We could say we too often define ourselves by differences rather than similarities. We could say this thuggishness grows out of the “us versus them” attitude that pervades the culture.

We could also dismiss the behavior as youthful hijinx gone too far. We could say that the homecoming enthusiasm got a little out of hand. We could blame the alcohol. We could say, “They’re in college. Kids will be kids.”

We could say any or all of that. And while the above could be argued, it misses the most important point.

Behavior such as that reported demonstrates a failure to recognize that the fans on the other side feel the same way about their team that we feel about ours. It takes positive zeal for the homecoming football game and turns it into an objectionable experience. Rather than rooting for one side, such behavior amounts to harassing the other.

Worst of all, the actions reported turn the positive goals of college sports on their heads. The college football field and the stands are part of an institute of learning, but some may have learned the wrong lesson. Fair play, sportsmanship, tradition, connection, camaraderie, passion, even entertainment are reasons to take to the field and to fill the stands. An attempt to harass or humiliate the opposing team or its fans undermines these.

Rivalry should never mean disrespect.

_____

The Kansas City Star, Oct. 12

Greitens’ Confide use cost Missouri dearly. Governments should ban secret messaging apps

Missouri State Auditor Nicole Galloway was right when she said government agencies can’t abandon their responsibility to maintain records.

But in Missouri, skirting accountability seems to have become the norm - not the exception.

Former Gov. Eric Greitens’ penchant for secrecy and his use of self-deleting apps have cost taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal bills.

The tab so far to defend Greitens’ use of the self-deleting text message app Confide: a whopping $366,000. And the price tag continues to grow under successor Mike Parson.

As it turns out, governing in secret is a pricey - and wrong-headed - proposition.

In a letter posted to the auditor’s website and sent to county governments and municipalities around the state, Galloway asked cities and counties to prohibit officials and employees from using applications or programs that destroy messages pertaining to public business.

“These applications allow for public business to be conducted in secret and prevent taxpayers from holding government accountable,” Galloway wrote.

Several local governments in the Kansas City area told The Star Editorial Board that they discourage the use of such apps. But none have written policies prohibiting the practice.

Which raises the question: How serious are government officials about ensuring transparency?

Not only is public officials’ use of self-destroying apps unethical, it’s also a violation of state statute. Under Missouri law, texts, emails or electronically-stored records pertaining to official public business must be retained.

Greitens’ case serves as a cautionary tale that destroying official records could prove to be an expensive legal morass.

In Kansas City, Mayor Quinton Lucas says his office does not condone the use of self-destructing apps.

“I have no interest in any program like that,” Lucas said.

Raytown City Administrator Damon Hodges said the city’s policy for electronic communication and internet usage encourages transparency.

“We stress the use of e-mail while conducting official business,” he said.

City officials in Blue Springs, Independence, and Lee’s Summit said they have no official policy restricting the use of such apps. Neither do other governmental agencies in Jackson, Cass, Clay and Platte counties.

Dan Ross, executive director of the Missouri Municipal League, said Galloway’s guidance underscores existing law and called this a nonissue.

“Cities are well aware of record retention laws,” he said.

But are they?

A 2017 lawsuit contends that Greitens’ office used Confide to avoid Missouri’s open records laws.

Greitens resigned last year amid several legal and ethical claims. Parson, the former lieutenant governor, replaced him.

Attorneys billed taxpayers more than $200,000 while Greitens was in office. Another $161,000 has been spent on legal fees since Parson took over in June 2018.

Greitens’ administration negotiated the legal defense agreement with Bryan Cave, a Kansas City-based law firm. But the legal battle continues on Parson’s watch.

The former governor admitted that he used Confide to communicate with aides but denied running afoul of the law.

From 2014 to 2018, the Missouri State Highway Patrol used a similar app called Silent Phone. Greitens’ staff also used Silent Phone in 2017.

Missourians expect government to be open and honest when conducting public business, as Galloway said in her letter.

Galloway, a Democrat is challenging Parson, a Republican, in the 2020 governor’s race. But transparency and open government shouldn’t be a partisan issue.

Enacting measures to ensure that messages or any other communications are retained is vital to meet record-keeping obligations.

Simply discouraging the use of self-deleting app or assuming that officials know what’s expected of them is not sufficient.

“Banning self-destructing text messaging by public entities, officials and employees is another step to ensuring transparency, and is the best antidote to any perceived or actual government impropriety,” Galloway wrote.

In Missouri, a lot of local, county and state government entities still have work to do on that front.

Sign up for Daily Newsletters Manage Newsletters

Copyright © 2020 The Washington Times, LLC.