A Weak Begins Anew

Call it a supplement, if you wish, but in my last newsletter, there was more I meant to note about the weakness (not the wokeness) of Missouri.

The latest travesty tries to one-up the previous one (bolding is mine in the cited passage):

The law, which goes into effect Jan. 1, 2023, makes it a felony to sleep on state-owned land, such as under highway overpasses and bridges. After one warning, anyone found illegally camping on state-owned land could face a $750 fine or a Class C misdemeanor charge punishable by up to 15 days in prison.

The law authorizes the state attorney general to sue cities that don’t enforce the ban. It further penalizes cities with rates of homelessness higher than the state average by taking away state funding for unhoused services.

The measure also bars cities and organizations from using state and federal grants to build permanent housing for the unsheltered. Rather, that money must be directed to build temporary camps.

Phew, that’s a lot of really awful provisions for one bill.

Since it’s illegal to trespass on private property, if a homeless person can’t get permission to sleep there, their only remaining choices are to sleep on county or city owned property. But cities that permit that might increase their homeless population above the state average where they can lose funding for services for the homeless.

And building affordable housing for them is a no go too. So essentially, it doesn’t just criminalize poverty and ignore all the potential causes of that poverty (car accident, workplace accident, unaffordable rent, mental illness, fleeing from abuse, addiction, etc) but it criminalizes cities and towns that try to aid the homeless. They can only provide temporary camps, essentially mirroring all they now currently have. (Yay! Let’s outlaw compassion! And permanent solutions!)

But wait… there’s more!

People wanting to stay at the temporary camps must submit to mental health and substance-use evaluations, which contradicts the current federally backed “Housing First” model, which says no one should have to meet requirements to seek shelter.

So states’ rights allows Missouri to compel homeless people to jump through hoops to live in a tent - temporarily - or they can refuse and get temporary shelter in a jail cell. And after either temporary wears off, what then? A repeat of the temporary. If enforced, the temporary becomes a series of 15 days of jail time plus one night out, to get re-arrested.

Of course, the real intent here is to convince the homeless people to move to another state entirely. Homelessness will never be cured; this is just a fresh model of vagrancy laws, outlawing vagrancy to force you to be a vagrant. Why do I suspect their next step will be forced labor for 10 cents an hour (neo-slavery)?

Can it get worse? Sure! The Show Me state will Show Us How!

Again, the bolding is mine:

December 2020 was a turbulent month for Danielle Drake, 32, of Lake of the Ozarks. On December 1, her husband said he was going out with a friend, but he lied. He was actually having an affair. She filed for a divorce less than a week later, on December 7.

Then, not long before Christmas, Drake found out she was pregnant.

Drake knew immediately she had to file a second, amended petition for divorce. She also knew the impact her pregnancy would have on the divorce proceedings. Drake, who earned a law degree from University of Missouri Kansas City has been practicing family law for two years, was well aware that in Missouri, women who are pregnant can't get a divorce.

Missouri law states that a petition for divorce must  provide eight pieces of information, things like the residence of each party, the date of separation, and, notably, “whether the wife is pregnant.” If the answer is yes, Drake says, "What that practically does is put your case on hold."

There is a lot of disagreement online about whether pregnant Missouri women can get divorced. The RFT spoke to multiple lawyers who handle divorce proceedings and they all agreed that in Missouri a divorce can't be finalized if either the petitioner (the person who files for divorce) or the respondent (the other party in the divorce) is pregnant.

So let’s see how this scenario can play out. If Drake’s husband has his affair, she finds out, an argument ensues, and he throws her out. Now, she’s homeless and is forced to live in a tent or a jail cell. Or she can move but can’t get assistance to move if the neighboring state permits abortions. And she can’t divorce her cheating husband.

What did Drake do to deserve this predicament?

If Missouri stays true to form, they’ll next outlaw pregnant women leaving the state at all, so homeless pregnant women will be jailed repeatedly till they have their babies. After that, maybe forced adoption since these repeat offenders clearly don’t deserve to raise a family.

Yeah, sounds a lot like a return to slavery or the forced relocation of indigenous tribes. And why not? Had she been a better wife, her horndog husband would never have had an affair.

I know, some of this has been speculation, adding a few things Missouri hasn’t done … yet. And who wants to go to work on a Monday on such a down note?

But after years of trying to find upsides and cloud linings of silver, it sure seems like worst case scenarios have kept playing out for nearly 7 years running. And don’t forget who Missouri elected as Senator: the first Senator calling for overturning the 2020 election results, among other idiocies.

The call to Make America Great Again is yielding some awful results. Instead of Reagan comparing the country to ’a shining city on a hill’ with a beacon of freedoms, we may be witnessing its transition to a shunning shitty on a hell.

Show Me otherwise, Missouri.