Bill overturning protections for Section 8 renters a step away from Missouri governor's desk
Sen. Nick Schroer, a Defiance Republican, speaks on the Senate floor in April 2025 (Annelise Hanshaw/Missouri Independent).
Local laws prohibiting landlords from discriminating against tenants who receive public assistance would be unenforceable under legislation approved by the Missouri Senate Tuesday night.
The bill takes aim at ordinances passed in several Missouri cities to protect tenants from discrimination based on the source of their income — especially tenants who use federal housing choice vouchers, known as Section 8 vouchers, to pay rent. It now returns to the House, which approved it earlier this year.
If the House approves of the changes made in the Senate, the bill would go to the governor.
CONTACT US
The bill was co-sponsored by state Reps. Chris Brown, a Republican from Kansas City, and Ben Keathley, a Republican from Chesterfield. In the Senate, it was carried by state Sen. Nick Schroer, a Republican from Defiance.
Schroer on Tuesday called the bill 'a common sense piece of legislation that prioritizes property rights over radical government overreach.'
Brown in a March Senate committee hearing called it a 'property rights bill.'
'Basically what has happened is [cities] are forcing people to take Section 8 housing,' Brown said. '…I would submit this kind of amounts to an illegal appropriation of private property. But there's a very practical reason why a landlord may not want to do Section 8 housing.'
Kansas City passed a source of income discrimination ban last year, though it was in large part paused by the courts in February.
Columbia, St. Louis, Webster Groves and Clayton have similar protections on the books. The laws make it illegal for landlords to discriminate based solely on the fact of renters' lawful sources of income, including Section 8, veterans' benefits and Social Security.
State Sen. Maggie Nurrenbern, a Kansas City Democrat, said Tuesday that the legislation would not only undo those local ordinances but exacerbate homelessness.
'But really the fear for those who are the most vulnerable is that this would lead to further problems, expanding the homeless population,' she said
The bill to override these local policies passed the Senate after Democratic Sen. Patty Lewis of Kansas City successfully added an amendment to carve out the portions of Kansas City that are in Jackson and Clay counties. Democratic state Sen. Stephen Webber of Columbia also successfully added an amendment to allow those who receive veterans' benefits to continue being protected from source-of-income based housing discrimination.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Proponents have characterized localities' protections as overreach, forcing property owners' hands. The bill has the support of landlords groups, apartment associations, the realtors' association and the conservative think tank Show Me Institute.
During a hearing in January, Brown said proponents are 'not unsympathetic to tenants that have some housing insecurities.
'It's not about the Section 8 tenant,' he said, 'it's about the program that we do not want to be forced into.'
Not every property owner, he said, wants to undergo the bureaucratic hurdles to accept Section 8.
David Stokes, director of municipal policy at the Show Me Institute, said source of income discrimination bans are simply a 'violation of the property rights of landlords.'
Landlords, he said, shouldn't be required to participate in a voluntary federal program.
'Just as the State of Missouri has long forbidden cities from imposing rent control,' he said, 'this is just a very similar next step, and I think it will really benefit housing options and housing availability throughout Missouri.'
In January's hearing, Kansas City Councilman Johnathan Duncan emphasized that landlords under the ordinance can still screen tenants and deny individuals based on other reasons, just not for the sole basis of the source of their income. He said landlords could still deny applicants with violent criminal histories or low credit scores for instance.
'I hope that representatives understand that we're here to govern ourselves and definitely can pass our own laws,' Duncan said. 'And I think it is an affront to the city of Kansas City and the other municipalities in the state of Missouri — that the state would know better than how we know and how to govern ourselves.'
Opponents also said the bill could hurt affordable housing availability. The city of Kansas City has been opposed along with the anti-poverty nonprofit Empower Missouri and an association of public housing authorities in Missouri.
Mallory Rusch, executive director of Empower, said in the January hearing that the discrimination bans help vulnerable Missourians secure housing.
'Discrimination bans like the one passed in Kansas City and other places in the state are really a key tool for local governments to prevent homelessness and ensure that those with the least among us can put a roof over their heads,' she said, 'and we really believe that the state should not be preventing local governments from enacting these provisions when they know their communities best.'
Gavriel Schreiber, general counsel to Kansas City's mayor, testified in March that the bill 'targets some of our most respected citizens, veterans, seniors,' because those individuals who get most of their income from benefits often don't have their benefits counted toward their rent-to-income ratio mandated by landlords.
'The ordinance says at its base that if you have a lawful source of income, a landlord cannot refuse to rent to you simply because they don't like where you get your lawful money from,' Schreiber said.
Dozens of states and localities nationally have these protections, which cover around 60% of families with Section 8 vouchers, according to the federal government.
Enforcement in states and cities where the protections have been passed has been somewhat mixed, but studies have found that overall the protections modestly improve outcomes for voucher holders.
This story was updated at 10:20 a.m. to include an amendment that carves out most of Kansas City from the legislation, except for the portions in Platte and Cass counties.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
NIH scientists speak out over estimated $12 billion in Trump funding cuts
By Chad Terhune (Reuters) -Dozens of scientists, researchers and other employees at the U.S. National Institutes of Health issued a rare public rebuke Monday criticizing the Trump administration for major spending cuts that 'harm the health of Americans and people across the globe,' politicize research and 'waste public resources.' More than 60 current employees sent their letter to NIH director Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and members of Congress who oversee NIH. Bhattacharya is scheduled to testify Tuesday at the U.S. Senate appropriations committee about his agency's budget. Overall, more than 340 current and recently terminated NIH employees signed the letter, about 250 of them anonymously. In their letter, NIH staff members said the agency had terminated 2,100 research grants totaling about $9.5 billion and an additional $2.6 billion in contracts since President Donald Trump took office Jan. 20. The contracts often support research, from covering equipment to nursing staff working on clinical trials. These terminations "throw away years of hard work and millions of dollars" and put patient health at risk, the letter said. NIH clinical trials "are being halted without regard to participant safety, abruptly stopping medications or leaving participants with unmonitored device implants." Officials at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees NIH, didn't immediately respond to a request for comment. In prior remarks, Bhattacharya has pledged support for Kennedy's Make America Healthy Again agenda, and he has said that means focusing the federal government's "limited resources" directly on combating chronic diseases. At his Senate confirmation hearings in March, Bhattacharya said he would ensure scientists working at NIH and funded by the agency have the necessary resources to meet its mission. NIH is the world's largest public funder of biomedical research and has long enjoyed bipartisan support from U.S. lawmakers. The Trump administration has proposed cutting $18 billion, or 40%, from NIH's budget next year, which would leave the agency with $27 billion. Nearly 5,000 NIH employees and contractors have been laid off under Kennedy's restructuring of U.S. health agencies, according to NIH staff. Dr. Jenna Norton, a program director within NIH's division of kidney, urologic and hematologic diseases, was one of 69 current employees who signed the letter as of early Monday. She said speaking out publicly was worth the risk to her career and family. "I am much more worried about the risks of not speaking up," Norton said. "There are very real concerns that we're being asked to do likely illegal activities, and certainly unethical activities that breach our rules." About 20 NIH employees who were recently terminated as probationary workers or "subject to reductions in force" added their names to the letter. In the letter, Norton and other NIH employees asked Bhattacharya to restore grants that were delayed or terminated for political reasons, where officials ignored peer review to "cater to political whims." They wrote that Bhattacharya had failed to uphold his legal duty to spend congressionally appropriated funds. One program director at the NIH's National Cancer Institute, who asked not to be identified for fear of retaliation, said she has repeatedly been asked to cancel research grants for no valid reason and in violation of agency rules. She said she fears she could become the target of lawsuits from grantees challenging those decisions. Dr. Benjamin Feldman, a staff scientist and core director at NIH's Institute of Child Health and Human Development, said he and other researchers want to work with Bhattacharya on reversing the cuts and restoring the NIH as a "beacon for science around the world." "This is really a hit to the whole enterprise of biomedical research in the United States," Feldman said. Dr. Ian Morgan, a postdoctoral fellow at the NIH, signed the letter and said he has heard from university researchers about patients losing access to novel cancer treatments in clinical trials due to the uncertainty over NIH funding. He also worries about the long-term effect from gutting NIH's investment in basic science research that can lead to lifesaving treatments years later. The NIH employees, based in Bethesda, Maryland, named their dissent the "Bethesda Declaration," modeled after Bhattacharya's Great Barrington Declaration in 2020 that called on public health officials to roll back lockdowns during the COVID-19 pandemic. "Our hope is that by modeling ourselves after the Great Barrington Declaration that maybe he'll see himself in our dissent," Norton said.
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Laura Loomer faces internet backlash after ‘body shaming' AOC during NYC's Puerto Rico day
The Internet has come out in full force against far-right activist Laura Loomer after she 'body shamed' New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez — with Internet sleuths digging up a photo of the Trump ally in a similar-looking outfit. 'Yikes AOC has gained at least 50 pounds since getting into Congress,' Loomer wrote on X while sharing a clip of Ocasio-Cortez wearing a red dress as she spoke at New York City's Puerto Rican Day Parade on Sunday. 'She's getting massive,' Loomer added before tagging the congresswoman. However, social media users did not take kindly to Loomer's bizarre criticism. Her post drew in over 13,000 largely negative comments by Monday morning. 'Body shaming isn't the way,' one person commented under the post. Another chimed in: 'I am no Democrat but you attacking another woman's look is very disgusting.' Countless Internet users took the attack on AOC as a moment to dunk on Loomer's appearance. 'If I looked in the mirror and saw what you see staring back at me, I would never speak about another person's appearance,' one person wrote. 'You look like you're wearing a purge mask, no offense,' another chimed in. 'You are the last person who should comment on someone's appearance, Looner. You're a walking plastic surgery nightmare,' a commenter added. 'She could gain another 100 and still be more attractive than you,' another person wrote. Some users even dug up photos of Loomer donning a similar red tank top dress – which they claim looked even worse on the MAGA activist. 'Here's you in an almost identical dress. What's with the belly? Pregnant?' one person wrote. 'Haha good one, is this you?' another person wrote alongside the same photo of Loomer. Other took pity on Loomer's apparent cry for help, with one commentator writing,' You are not being a very nice person. Have you considered going to therapy? @betterhelp can help.'
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's cuts to National Park Service rankle Republicans
President Trump's proposed cuts to the National Park Service (NPS) are troubling some Republicans. The Trump administration has proposed a 30 percent cut to the park service's operations and staffing budgets. In addition, the administration's budget calls for transferring some park service sites to the states — a provision that is sparking particular ire from the GOP. Rep. Mike Simpson (R-Idaho) told The Hill the administration's proposed cuts were 'concerning.' 'We want to have some discussions on it and exactly how it's going to affect the Park Service and exactly what units the states are going to take over management … we need more information,' added Simpson, who chairs the House appropriations subcommittee in charge of funding NPS. Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.), who described himself as a 'strong supporter' of national parks, said he wants 'to make sure they're adequately funded.' The lawmaker, who faces reelection next year, hails from a state with two major national parks in Glacier and Yellowstone, as well as a number of other NPS sites. He said the congressional appropriations process will 'sort all this out.' During a recent Senate hearing — Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) also expressed concerns about the administration's 'skinny budget' where some of the NPS cuts and the plan to move some parks to the states were floated. 'It's hard to square it with the claims that DOI is focused on fostering the American economy,' said Murkowski, referencing the Interior Department. The National Park Service is part of Interior. Murkowski chairs the Senate appropriations subcommittee that funds the agency. During the same Senate hearing, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum said he doesn't want to get rid of park rangers or wildland firefighters. At the same time, Burgum said he does think the NPS budget can be reduced by eliminating office workers, including those working in human relations and information technology. 'I want more people in the parks, whether they're driving a snowplow in the wintertime or whether they're working with [an] interpreter in the summertime or they're doing trail work … I want more of that. I want less overhead,' he said. A former NPS employee who spoke with The Hill, however, noted such cuts can have negative implications. 'Park support personnel in those back of the house functions deal with things like employees displaced from wildfires,' the former employee said. 'When wildfires are happening right now and parks are being burned over, and you have to find other accommodations for those people to move. If you don't have that HR staff, where is that support coming from?' Burgum has also stressed that none of the nation's 'crown jewel' national parks would be transferred to states. 'The National Parks, with a capital N capital P — the 63 national parks, none of those are under consideration for transfer that would include all the national parks in Alaska,' he told Murkowski during the hearing. He said the sites that are under consideration for transfer are mostly 'historic sites, cultural sites that … have got low visitation … that might better fit into a state, historic society site or some other designation.' The proposed cuts include a 19 percent reduction for park visitor services, a 39 percent reduction for facility operation and maintenance and a 51 percent cut for resource stewardship, which includes 'the protection of unique natural and historical features of units of the National Park System.' The former NPS employee who spoke with The Hill said that the cuts to these park operations, particularly the resource stewardship cut, could impact experiences at the park. 'That's making sure that air and water are clean,' the person said. 'That has a direct effect on the ability to swim in parks and make sure that water is clean in our rivers.' The ex-employee noted it could also have impacts on fishing and whether fish are safe to eat as well as 'planning for the future, for climate change and understanding those impacts and how we would manage through those.' The proposed cuts come as the Trump administration seeks to cut federal spending across the board — seeking to make federal agencies leaner and more 'efficient.' But such cuts have come at a price. At Yosemite National Park in California, a seasonal hiring delay has reportedly resulted in scientists, IT workers and rangers having to clean the bathrooms. Other parks have reportedly had to close bathrooms and visitor centers. The National Parks Conservation Association estimates that 13 percent of the agency's staff is already gone because of buyouts, early retirement and deferred resignation programs pushed by the Trump administration. Parks advocates say that these cuts have already caused issues and that even more cuts would exacerbate the problems. 'There won't be as many Rangers, won't be as many maintenance people … there will be some closures in picnic areas … it's a widespread issue that's going to affect every park I think in the country,' said Phil Francis, chair of the Coalition to Protect America's Parks. 'I don't think it will be popular,' added Francis, whose 41-year career at the National Park Service included working as superintendent of the Blue Ridge Parkway. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
