Kansas Prepares to Drug Test Welfare Recipients  – Kansas City Week in Review

Kansas Prepares to Drug Test Welfare Recipients – Kansas City Week in Review


AS WE START A NEW YEAR,
KANSAS IS WORKING OUT THE
DETAILS ON HOW IT WILL GO ABOUT KANSAS IS WORKING OUT THE
DETAILS ON HOW IT WILL GO ABOUT
IMPLEMENTING A NEW LAW THAT DETAILS ON HOW IT WILL GO ABOUT
IMPLEMENTING A NEW LAW THAT
ALLOWS OFFICIALS TO RANDOMLY IMPLEMENTING A NEW LAW THAT
ALLOWS OFFICIALS TO RANDOMLY
DRUG TEST THOSE APPLYING FOR ALLOWS OFFICIALS TO RANDOMLY
DRUG TEST THOSE APPLYING FOR
WELFARE BENEFITS. DRUG TEST THOSE APPLYING FOR
WELFARE BENEFITS.
BUT THEY ONLY NEED TO LOOK AT WELFARE BENEFITS.
BUT THEY ONLY NEED TO LOOK AT
MISSOURI TO SEE HOW IT WILL BUT THEY ONLY NEED TO LOOK AT
MISSOURI TO SEE HOW IT WILL
WORK. MISSOURI TO SEE HOW IT WILL
WORK.
THE RESULTS ARE NOW IN ON WORK.
THE RESULTS ARE NOW IN ON
MISSOURI’S EXPERIMENT. THE RESULTS ARE NOW IN ON
MISSOURI’S EXPERIMENT.
THE SHOW-ME STATE ENACTED A MISSOURI’S EXPERIMENT.
THE SHOW-ME STATE ENACTED A
SIMILAR LAW LAST MARCH, AND THE SHOW-ME STATE ENACTED A
SIMILAR LAW LAST MARCH, AND
AFTER SPENDING NEARLY HALF A SIMILAR LAW LAST MARCH, AND
AFTER SPENDING NEARLY HALF A
MILLION DOLLARS ON THE PROGRAM, AFTER SPENDING NEARLY HALF A
MILLION DOLLARS ON THE PROGRAM,
20 PEOPLE TESTED POSITIVE FOR MILLION DOLLARS ON THE PROGRAM,
20 PEOPLE TESTED POSITIVE FOR
DRUG USE, AND NEARLY 200 REFUSED 20 PEOPLE TESTED POSITIVE FOR
DRUG USE, AND NEARLY 200 REFUSED
TO COMPLY AND WERE DENIED DRUG USE, AND NEARLY 200 REFUSED
TO COMPLY AND WERE DENIED
BENEFITS. TO COMPLY AND WERE DENIED
BENEFITS.
DOES REFUSING TO COMPLY MEAN BENEFITS.
DOES REFUSING TO COMPLY MEAN
THEY WERE USING DRUGS AND JUST DOES REFUSING TO COMPLY MEAN
THEY WERE USING DRUGS AND JUST
DIDN’T WANT TO GO THROUGH THE THEY WERE USING DRUGS AND JUST
DIDN’T WANT TO GO THROUGH THE
EMBARRASSMENT OF BEING TESTED, DIDN’T WANT TO GO THROUGH THE
EMBARRASSMENT OF BEING TESTED,
MARY? EMBARRASSMENT OF BEING TESTED,
MARY?
YOU DON’T KNOW. MARY?
YOU DON’T KNOW.
CERTAINLY YOU COULD PROBABLY YOU DON’T KNOW.
CERTAINLY YOU COULD PROBABLY
MAKE A VALID ARGUMENT THAT A CERTAINLY YOU COULD PROBABLY
MAKE A VALID ARGUMENT THAT A
PORTION WOULD BE THAT. MAKE A VALID ARGUMENT THAT A
PORTION WOULD BE THAT.
BUT THERE ALSO MIGHT BE A LOT OF PORTION WOULD BE THAT.
BUT THERE ALSO MIGHT BE A LOT OF
PEOPLE WHO JUST SAY, I’M NOT BUT THERE ALSO MIGHT BE A LOT OF
PEOPLE WHO JUST SAY, I’M NOT
GOING TO PUT UP WITH THAT. PEOPLE WHO JUST SAY, I’M NOT
GOING TO PUT UP WITH THAT.
I’M NOT GOING TO DO THAT. GOING TO PUT UP WITH THAT.
I’M NOT GOING TO DO THAT.
THEY SEE THE UNFAIRNESS IN IT. I’M NOT GOING TO DO THAT.
THEY SEE THE UNFAIRNESS IN IT.
THERE WAS A LOT OF REPORTING THEY SEE THE UNFAIRNESS IN IT.
THERE WAS A LOT OF REPORTING
AROUND THIS. THERE WAS A LOT OF REPORTING
AROUND THIS.
IT’S NOT HAPPENING JUST HERE. AROUND THIS.
IT’S NOT HAPPENING JUST HERE.
OTHER STATES HAVE STARTED TO IT’S NOT HAPPENING JUST HERE.
OTHER STATES HAVE STARTED TO
FIGURE OUT THAT IT COSTS MORE OTHER STATES HAVE STARTED TO
FIGURE OUT THAT IT COSTS MORE
MONEY THAN IT SAVES. FIGURE OUT THAT IT COSTS MORE
MONEY THAN IT SAVES.
THE ENTIRE THING IS BUILT UPON MONEY THAN IT SAVES.
THE ENTIRE THING IS BUILT UPON
THIS IDEA OF LEGISLATURES THINK THE ENTIRE THING IS BUILT UPON
THIS IDEA OF LEGISLATURES THINK
THINKING THEY UNDERSTAND THE THIS IDEA OF LEGISLATURES THINK
THINKING THEY UNDERSTAND THE
POVERTY AND THEY UNDERSTAND THE THINKING THEY UNDERSTAND THE
POVERTY AND THEY UNDERSTAND THE
POOR AND THAT BY GOD, IT’S POVERTY AND THEY UNDERSTAND THE
POOR AND THAT BY GOD, IT’S
BECAUSE YOU PEOPLE ARE DOING POOR AND THAT BY GOD, IT’S
BECAUSE YOU PEOPLE ARE DOING
DRUGS, AND JUST HAD TURNED OUT BECAUSE YOU PEOPLE ARE DOING
DRUGS, AND JUST HAD TURNED OUT
TO BE THE TRUTH. DRUGS, AND JUST HAD TURNED OUT
TO BE THE TRUTH.
MAYBE WHAT THESE LEGISLATORS TO BE THE TRUTH.
MAYBE WHAT THESE LEGISLATORS
NEED TO DO IS SIT BACK AND MAYBE WHAT THESE LEGISLATORS
NEED TO DO IS SIT BACK AND
REASSESS SOME OF THEIR NEED TO DO IS SIT BACK AND
REASSESS SOME OF THEIR
ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT POOR PEOPLE. REASSESS SOME OF THEIR
ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT POOR PEOPLE.
NOW THE LAW IN THE STATE OF ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT POOR PEOPLE.
NOW THE LAW IN THE STATE OF
MISSOURI SAYS IT IS ONLY — AND NOW THE LAW IN THE STATE OF
MISSOURI SAYS IT IS ONLY — AND
IN THE STATE OF KANSAS, AS IT MISSOURI SAYS IT IS ONLY — AND
IN THE STATE OF KANSAS, AS IT
WILL BE ENACTED THIS YEAR, SAYS IN THE STATE OF KANSAS, AS IT
WILL BE ENACTED THIS YEAR, SAYS
IT’S NOT MANDATORY FOR EVERYONE. WILL BE ENACTED THIS YEAR, SAYS
IT’S NOT MANDATORY FOR EVERYONE.
IT IS SUSPECTED DRUG USE. IT’S NOT MANDATORY FOR EVERYONE.
IT IS SUSPECTED DRUG USE.
HOW DOES THAT ACTUALLY WORK, IT IS SUSPECTED DRUG USE.
HOW DOES THAT ACTUALLY WORK,
THOUGH? HOW DOES THAT ACTUALLY WORK,
THOUGH?
THAT SEEMS TO BE SOMETHING –. THOUGH?
THAT SEEMS TO BE SOMETHING –.
ARBITRARY, NICK? THAT SEEMS TO BE SOMETHING –.
ARBITRARY, NICK?
HOW DOES THAT ACTUALLY WORK? ARBITRARY, NICK?
HOW DOES THAT ACTUALLY WORK?
I THINK THAT THERE WILL BE — HOW DOES THAT ACTUALLY WORK?
I THINK THAT THERE WILL BE —
THERE HAVE BEEN IN OTHER STATES, I THINK THAT THERE WILL BE —
THERE HAVE BEEN IN OTHER STATES,
AS YOU KNOW, SOME CONSTITUTIONAL THERE HAVE BEEN IN OTHER STATES,
AS YOU KNOW, SOME CONSTITUTIONAL
CHALLENGES TO THIS KIND OF AS YOU KNOW, SOME CONSTITUTIONAL
CHALLENGES TO THIS KIND OF
LEGISLATION. CHALLENGES TO THIS KIND OF
LEGISLATION.
THERE ARE EQUAL PROTECTION LEGISLATION.
THERE ARE EQUAL PROTECTION
PROTECTIONS IN OUR CONSTITUTION. THERE ARE EQUAL PROTECTION
PROTECTIONS IN OUR CONSTITUTION.
FLORIDA, FOR EXAMPLE, I THINK PROTECTIONS IN OUR CONSTITUTION.
FLORIDA, FOR EXAMPLE, I THINK
THEY JUST SUFFERED A SETBACK, IN FLORIDA, FOR EXAMPLE, I THINK
THEY JUST SUFFERED A SETBACK, IN
THE COURTS IN TERMS OF THE THEY JUST SUFFERED A SETBACK, IN
THE COURTS IN TERMS OF THE
CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THIS. THE COURTS IN TERMS OF THE
CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THIS.
THE PRACTICAL APPLICATION ISN’T CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THIS.
THE PRACTICAL APPLICATION ISN’T
COMPLETELY CLEAR. THE PRACTICAL APPLICATION ISN’T
COMPLETELY CLEAR.
IT’S VERY SUBJECTIVE. COMPLETELY CLEAR.
IT’S VERY SUBJECTIVE.
YOU KNOW, I THINK IF THERE IS A IT’S VERY SUBJECTIVE.
YOU KNOW, I THINK IF THERE IS A
LEGITIMATE LOCAL CHALLENGE THAT YOU KNOW, I THINK IF THERE IS A
LEGITIMATE LOCAL CHALLENGE THAT
THE STATUTES MIGHT FACE SOME LEGITIMATE LOCAL CHALLENGE THAT
THE STATUTES MIGHT FACE SOME
PROBLEMS IN THE COURTS. THE STATUTES MIGHT FACE SOME
PROBLEMS IN THE COURTS.
IT IS ASKING FOR TROUBLE. PROBLEMS IN THE COURTS.
IT IS ASKING FOR TROUBLE.
HAVING SAID THAT, THERE ARE IT IS ASKING FOR TROUBLE.
HAVING SAID THAT, THERE ARE
QUESTIONS THAT WELFARE HAVING SAID THAT, THERE ARE
QUESTIONS THAT WELFARE
APPLICANTS HAVE TO FILL OUT THAT QUESTIONS THAT WELFARE
APPLICANTS HAVE TO FILL OUT THAT
BEGIN TO PERHAPS SUGGEST THEY APPLICANTS HAVE TO FILL OUT THAT
BEGIN TO PERHAPS SUGGEST THEY
MIGHT BE SUSCEPTIBLE FOLKS OF BEGIN TO PERHAPS SUGGEST THEY
MIGHT BE SUSCEPTIBLE FOLKS OF
PEOPLE WHO TAKE DRUGS. MIGHT BE SUSCEPTIBLE FOLKS OF
PEOPLE WHO TAKE DRUGS.
THEY ALSO DO SOME BACKGROUND PEOPLE WHO TAKE DRUGS.
THEY ALSO DO SOME BACKGROUND
CHECKS, USING MISSOURI HIGHWAY THEY ALSO DO SOME BACKGROUND
CHECKS, USING MISSOURI HIGHWAY
PATROL DATA TO SEE IF THEY HAVE CHECKS, USING MISSOURI HIGHWAY
PATROL DATA TO SEE IF THEY HAVE
PRIOR ARREST RECORDS FOR DRUG PATROL DATA TO SEE IF THEY HAVE
PRIOR ARREST RECORDS FOR DRUG
USE. PRIOR ARREST RECORDS FOR DRUG
USE.
IF THAT’S THE CASE, THEN THE USE.
IF THAT’S THE CASE, THEN THE
THING KICKS IN. IF THAT’S THE CASE, THEN THE
THING KICKS IN.
STACEY. THING KICKS IN.
STACEY.
LET’S DRAW THIS DISTINCTION STACEY.
LET’S DRAW THIS DISTINCTION
WITH THE KANSAS LAW. LET’S DRAW THIS DISTINCTION
WITH THE KANSAS LAW.
IT’S NOT LIKE THE FLORIDA LAW, WITH THE KANSAS LAW.
IT’S NOT LIKE THE FLORIDA LAW,
THE MICHIGAN LAW, THE ONE IN IT’S NOT LIKE THE FLORIDA LAW,
THE MICHIGAN LAW, THE ONE IN
NORTH CAROLINA THAT THE GOVERNOR THE MICHIGAN LAW, THE ONE IN
NORTH CAROLINA THAT THE GOVERNOR
IS FAILING TO IMPLEMENT. NORTH CAROLINA THAT THE GOVERNOR
IS FAILING TO IMPLEMENT.
THIS LAW ACTUALLY, IF YOUR IS FAILING TO IMPLEMENT.
THIS LAW ACTUALLY, IF YOUR
BENEFITS ARE DENIED OR IF YOU’RE THIS LAW ACTUALLY, IF YOUR
BENEFITS ARE DENIED OR IF YOU’RE
FOUND TO BE USING DRUGS, THEN BENEFITS ARE DENIED OR IF YOU’RE
FOUND TO BE USING DRUGS, THEN
YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO GET FOUND TO BE USING DRUGS, THEN
YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO GET
THOSE BENEFITS BACK BY SIMPLY, YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO GET
THOSE BENEFITS BACK BY SIMPLY,
A, GOING THROUGH DRUG REHAB, AND THOSE BENEFITS BACK BY SIMPLY,
A, GOING THROUGH DRUG REHAB, AND
B, GOING THROUGH JOB TRAINING A, GOING THROUGH DRUG REHAB, AND
B, GOING THROUGH JOB TRAINING
PROGRAMS. B, GOING THROUGH JOB TRAINING
PROGRAMS.
IF THERE ARE CHILDREN INVOLVED, PROGRAMS.
IF THERE ARE CHILDREN INVOLVED,
TOO, WHO WOULD ALSO BE DENIED IF THERE ARE CHILDREN INVOLVED,
TOO, WHO WOULD ALSO BE DENIED
BECAUSE OF THE PARENTS, A TOO, WHO WOULD ALSO BE DENIED
BECAUSE OF THE PARENTS, A
RELATIVE CAN STEP IN AND GET BECAUSE OF THE PARENTS, A
RELATIVE CAN STEP IN AND GET
THOSE FOR THE PARENTS. RELATIVE CAN STEP IN AND GET
THOSE FOR THE PARENTS.
REALLY, EVEN IF THIS MAY COST THOSE FOR THE PARENTS.
REALLY, EVEN IF THIS MAY COST
THE STATE MONEY, IT COMES TO A REALLY, EVEN IF THIS MAY COST
THE STATE MONEY, IT COMES TO A
BETTER POSITIVE GOOD, BECAUSE WE THE STATE MONEY, IT COMES TO A
BETTER POSITIVE GOOD, BECAUSE WE
GET PEOPLE THROUGH DRUG REHAB, BETTER POSITIVE GOOD, BECAUSE WE
GET PEOPLE THROUGH DRUG REHAB,
AND WE GET PEOPLE THROUGH JOB GET PEOPLE THROUGH DRUG REHAB,
AND WE GET PEOPLE THROUGH JOB
TRAINING PROGRAMS. AND WE GET PEOPLE THROUGH JOB
TRAINING PROGRAMS.
OTHER STATES AREN’T DOING THIS, TRAINING PROGRAMS.
OTHER STATES AREN’T DOING THIS,
SO I APPLAUD KANSAS. OTHER STATES AREN’T DOING THIS,
SO I APPLAUD KANSAS.
AT THE END, IF WE ARE GETTING SO I APPLAUD KANSAS.
AT THE END, IF WE ARE GETTING
PEOPLE BETTER, WE’RE GETTING AT THE END, IF WE ARE GETTING
PEOPLE BETTER, WE’RE GETTING
THEM HEALTHY AND GETTING THEM A PEOPLE BETTER, WE’RE GETTING
THEM HEALTHY AND GETTING THEM A
JOB TRAINING PROGRAM. THEM HEALTHY AND GETTING THEM A
JOB TRAINING PROGRAM.
MAYBE WE SHOULD LOOK BACK AND JOB TRAINING PROGRAM.
MAYBE WE SHOULD LOOK BACK AND
SAY THIS ACTUALLY IS WELFARE. MAYBE WE SHOULD LOOK BACK AND
SAY THIS ACTUALLY IS WELFARE.
WE’RE SEEING PEOPLE WELL AND SAY THIS ACTUALLY IS WELFARE.
WE’RE SEEING PEOPLE WELL AND
GETTING THEM BACK INTO THE WE’RE SEEING PEOPLE WELL AND
GETTING THEM BACK INTO THE
WORKFORCE. GETTING THEM BACK INTO THE
WORKFORCE.
I DON’T HAVE AS BIG OF A PROBLEM WORKFORCE.
I DON’T HAVE AS BIG OF A PROBLEM
WITH KANSAS LAW AS THE OTHER I DON’T HAVE AS BIG OF A PROBLEM
WITH KANSAS LAW AS THE OTHER
STATES. WITH KANSAS LAW AS THE OTHER
STATES.
SOME REPUBLICAN LAWMAKERS STATES.
SOME REPUBLICAN LAWMAKERS
VOTED FOR THE KANSAS LAW BECAUSE SOME REPUBLICAN LAWMAKERS
VOTED FOR THE KANSAS LAW BECAUSE
IT ALSO REQUIRED THAT LAWMAKERS VOTED FOR THE KANSAS LAW BECAUSE
IT ALSO REQUIRED THAT LAWMAKERS
BE SUBJECT TO DRUG TESTING, TOO. IT ALSO REQUIRED THAT LAWMAKERS
BE SUBJECT TO DRUG TESTING, TOO.
NOW, IT’S COME CLEAR THAT BE SUBJECT TO DRUG TESTING, TOO.
NOW, IT’S COME CLEAR THAT
LAWMAKERS, WHEN THEY ARE DRUG NOW, IT’S COME CLEAR THAT
LAWMAKERS, WHEN THEY ARE DRUG
TESTED, THERE ARE NO PENALTIES LAWMAKERS, WHEN THEY ARE DRUG
TESTED, THERE ARE NO PENALTIES
AGAINST THEM. TESTED, THERE ARE NO PENALTIES
AGAINST THEM.
YOU DON’T GET BENEFITS IF YOU’RE AGAINST THEM.
YOU DON’T GET BENEFITS IF YOU’RE
ON — YOU WON’T GET WELFARE YOU DON’T GET BENEFITS IF YOU’RE
ON — YOU WON’T GET WELFARE
BENEFITS IF YOU ARE DRUG TESTED, ON — YOU WON’T GET WELFARE
BENEFITS IF YOU ARE DRUG TESTED,
BUT LAWMAKERS, THERE ARE NO BENEFITS IF YOU ARE DRUG TESTED,
BUT LAWMAKERS, THERE ARE NO
PUNISHMENTS. BUT LAWMAKERS, THERE ARE NO
PUNISHMENTS.
WHY IS THAT? PUNISHMENTS.
WHY IS THAT?
NOT ONLY THAT, FOLKS LIKE ME WHY IS THAT?
NOT ONLY THAT, FOLKS LIKE ME
WHO REPORT ON THIS STUFF AND NOT ONLY THAT, FOLKS LIKE ME
WHO REPORT ON THIS STUFF AND
FIND OUT THE IDENTITIES OF WHO REPORT ON THIS STUFF AND
FIND OUT THE IDENTITIES OF
LAWMAKERS WHO DO TEST POSITIVE, FIND OUT THE IDENTITIES OF
LAWMAKERS WHO DO TEST POSITIVE,
NICK, WE — THOSE SAFEGUARDS LAWMAKERS WHO DO TEST POSITIVE,
NICK, WE — THOSE SAFEGUARDS
WEREN’T BUILT IN TO BEGIN IT. NICK, WE — THOSE SAFEGUARDS
WEREN’T BUILT IN TO BEGIN IT.
THAT ASPECT IS A BIG JOKE. WEREN’T BUILT IN TO BEGIN IT.
THAT ASPECT IS A BIG JOKE.
AND PRAISE FOR STEPHANIE THAT ASPECT IS A BIG JOKE.
AND PRAISE FOR STEPHANIE
CLAYTON OF OVERLAND PARK HAS AND PRAISE FOR STEPHANIE
CLAYTON OF OVERLAND PARK HAS
SPOKEN OUT ABOUT THAT AND SAID CLAYTON OF OVERLAND PARK HAS
SPOKEN OUT ABOUT THAT AND SAID
THAT THE ONLY REASON SHE VOTED SPOKEN OUT ABOUT THAT AND SAID
THAT THE ONLY REASON SHE VOTED
FOR THIS WAS THAT SHE THOUGHT THAT THE ONLY REASON SHE VOTED
FOR THIS WAS THAT SHE THOUGHT
THERE WOULD BE MORE OF THAT FOR THIS WAS THAT SHE THOUGHT
THERE WOULD BE MORE OF THAT
PENALTY FOR THE LAWMAKERS. THERE WOULD BE MORE OF THAT
PENALTY FOR THE LAWMAKERS.
SO PRAISES TO HER. PENALTY FOR THE LAWMAKERS.
SO PRAISES TO HER.
THAT’S FAIRNESS. SO PRAISES TO HER.
THAT’S FAIRNESS.
IT’S A HIGH ACT OF HYPOCRISY. THAT’S FAIRNESS.
IT’S A HIGH ACT OF HYPOCRISY.
TREER TRYING TO DO THIS PROGRAM IT’S A HIGH ACT OF HYPOCRISY.
TREER TRYING TO DO THIS PROGRAM
THAT I THINK WOULD DO WELL FOR TREER TRYING TO DO THIS PROGRAM
THAT I THINK WOULD DO WELL FOR
PEOPLE, BUT THEY’RE NOT GOING TO THAT I THINK WOULD DO WELL FOR
PEOPLE, BUT THEY’RE NOT GOING TO
WALK THE SAME LINES. PEOPLE, BUT THEY’RE NOT GOING TO
WALK THE SAME LINES.
SO THAT IS WHAT ILLUSTRATES WALK THE SAME LINES.
SO THAT IS WHAT ILLUSTRATES
TO US AND SHOULD ILLUSTRATE TO SO THAT IS WHAT ILLUSTRATES
TO US AND SHOULD ILLUSTRATE TO
US THAT THIS ENTIRE EXERCISE IS TO US AND SHOULD ILLUSTRATE TO
US THAT THIS ENTIRE EXERCISE IS
MORE POLITICAL THAN IT IS ON US THAT THIS ENTIRE EXERCISE IS
MORE POLITICAL THAN IT IS ON
POLICY. MORE POLITICAL THAN IT IS ON
POLICY.
NOT JUST FOR THE LEGISLATORS BUT POLICY.
NOT JUST FOR THE LEGISLATORS BUT
FOR THE WELFARE RECIPIENTS AND NOT JUST FOR THE LEGISLATORS BUT
FOR THE WELFARE RECIPIENTS AND
BENEFITS RECIPIENTS AS WELL. FOR THE WELFARE RECIPIENTS AND
BENEFITS RECIPIENTS AS WELL.
AGAIN, IT’S ANOTHER EXAMPLE, BENEFITS RECIPIENTS AS WELL.
AGAIN, IT’S ANOTHER EXAMPLE,
NICK, AND WE’VE TALKED SO MUCH AGAIN, IT’S ANOTHER EXAMPLE,
NICK, AND WE’VE TALKED SO MUCH
ON THIS SHOW ABOUT THIS, OF NICK, AND WE’VE TALKED SO MUCH
ON THIS SHOW ABOUT THIS, OF
LEGISLATION DESIGNED TO SAY ON THIS SHOW ABOUT THIS, OF
LEGISLATION DESIGNED TO SAY
SOMETHING, NOT NECESSARILY TO DO LEGISLATION DESIGNED TO SAY
SOMETHING, NOT NECESSARILY TO DO
SOMETHING, AND THIS IS ANOTHER SOMETHING, NOT NECESSARILY TO DO
SOMETHING, AND THIS IS ANOTHER
EXAMPLE OF THAT. SOMETHING, AND THIS IS ANOTHER
EXAMPLE OF THAT.
I THINK SOME JUDGES ARE LOOKING EXAMPLE OF THAT.
I THINK SOME JUDGES ARE LOOKING
AT THIS AND SAYING, IN ESSENCE, I THINK SOME JUDGES ARE LOOKING
AT THIS AND SAYING, IN ESSENCE,
WE DON’T THINK THIS COMPLIES AT THIS AND SAYING, IN ESSENCE,
WE DON’T THINK THIS COMPLIES
WITH THE CONSTITUTION, WE’LL SEE WE DON’T THINK THIS COMPLIES
WITH THE CONSTITUTION, WE’LL SEE
WHAT HAPPENED IN THESE TWO WITH THE CONSTITUTION, WE’LL SEE
WHAT HAPPENED IN THESE TWO
STATES. WHAT HAPPENED IN THESE TWO
STATES.
IN OTHER NEWS THIS WEEK, THE STATES.
IN OTHER NEWS THIS WEEK, THE
MOTHER OF JOVAN BELCHER SUES THE IN OTHER NEWS THIS WEEK, THE
MOTHER OF JOVAN BELCHER SUES THE
KANSAS CITY CHIEFS. MOTHER OF JOVAN BELCHER SUES THE
KANSAS CITY CHIEFS.
THE LAWSUIT ALLEGED HE KANSAS CITY CHIEFS.
THE LAWSUIT ALLEGED HE
UNKNOWINGLY SACRIFICED HIS BRAIN THE LAWSUIT ALLEGED HE
UNKNOWINGLY SACRIFICED HIS BRAIN
DURING HIS FOUR YEARS WITH THE UNKNOWINGLY SACRIFICED HIS BRAIN
DURING HIS FOUR YEARS WITH THE
TEAM. DURING HIS FOUR YEARS WITH THE
TEAM.
BELCHER’S BODY WAS EXHUMED AT TEAM.
BELCHER’S BODY WAS EXHUMED AT
THE REQUEST OF HIS FAMILY TWO BELCHER’S BODY WAS EXHUMED AT
THE REQUEST OF HIS FAMILY TWO
WEEKS AGO. THE REQUEST OF HIS FAMILY TWO
WEEKS AGO.
DID DOCTORS FIND ANY EVIDENCE OF WEEKS AGO.
DID DOCTORS FIND ANY EVIDENCE OF
BRAIN INJURY, STACEY CAMERON? DID DOCTORS FIND ANY EVIDENCE OF
BRAIN INJURY, STACEY CAMERON?
WELL, WE’LL SEE. BRAIN INJURY, STACEY CAMERON?
WELL, WE’LL SEE.
THE BODY WAS EXHUMED IN LONG WELL, WE’LL SEE.
THE BODY WAS EXHUMED IN LONG
ISLAND IN LATE DECEMBER LOOKING THE BODY WAS EXHUMED IN LONG
ISLAND IN LATE DECEMBER LOOKING
FOR EVIDENCE OF TRAUMATIC ISLAND IN LATE DECEMBER LOOKING
FOR EVIDENCE OF TRAUMATIC
ENCEPHALOPATHY AS WE AS OTHER FOR EVIDENCE OF TRAUMATIC
ENCEPHALOPATHY AS WE AS OTHER
CONCUSSIVE INJURIES. ENCEPHALOPATHY AS WE AS OTHER
CONCUSSIVE INJURIES.
IT’S GOING TO BE A DIFFICULT CONCUSSIVE INJURIES.
IT’S GOING TO BE A DIFFICULT
ROAD FOR THE FAMILY TO HOE, IT’S GOING TO BE A DIFFICULT
ROAD FOR THE FAMILY TO HOE,
OBVIOUSLY BECAUSE OF THIS ROAD FOR THE FAMILY TO HOE,
OBVIOUSLY BECAUSE OF THIS
SUICIDE AND THE FACT THAT HE OBVIOUSLY BECAUSE OF THIS
SUICIDE AND THE FACT THAT HE
SHOT HIMSELF IN THE HEAD. SUICIDE AND THE FACT THAT HE
SHOT HIMSELF IN THE HEAD.
THE EVIDENCE COULD HAVE BEEN SHOT HIMSELF IN THE HEAD.
THE EVIDENCE COULD HAVE BEEN
DESTROYED. THE EVIDENCE COULD HAVE BEEN
DESTROYED.
FOR THE CHIEFS GOING FORWARD AND DESTROYED.
FOR THE CHIEFS GOING FORWARD AND
THE NFL, I THINK WHAT’S MOST FOR THE CHIEFS GOING FORWARD AND
THE NFL, I THINK WHAT’S MOST
CONCERNING ARE SOME OF THE THE NFL, I THINK WHAT’S MOST
CONCERNING ARE SOME OF THE
ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE CHIEFS CONCERNING ARE SOME OF THE
ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE CHIEFS
WERE USING PARTICULAR TYPES OF ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE CHIEFS
WERE USING PARTICULAR TYPES OF
CAFFEINE COCKTAILS AND WERE USING PARTICULAR TYPES OF
CAFFEINE COCKTAILS AND
INHALANTS, SNIFFING SALTS AND CAFFEINE COCKTAILS AND
INHALANTS, SNIFFING SALTS AND
OTHER TYPES OF INHALANTS, SNIFFING SALTS AND
OTHER TYPES OF
ANTI-INFLAMMATORIES TO KEEP OTHER TYPES OF
ANTI-INFLAMMATORIES TO KEEP
JOVAN BELCHER AND OTHER PLAYERS ANTI-INFLAMMATORIES TO KEEP
JOVAN BELCHER AND OTHER PLAYERS
PRACTICING AND PLAYING WHEN THEY JOVAN BELCHER AND OTHER PLAYERS
PRACTICING AND PLAYING WHEN THEY
SHOULD HAVE BEEN OFF THE FIELD PRACTICING AND PLAYING WHEN THEY
SHOULD HAVE BEEN OFF THE FIELD
WITH THESE TYPES OF INJURIES. SHOULD HAVE BEEN OFF THE FIELD
WITH THESE TYPES OF INJURIES.
IF THIS COMES OUT AS BEING TRUE, WITH THESE TYPES OF INJURIES.
IF THIS COMES OUT AS BEING TRUE,
THEN IT’S GOING TO BE DAMAGING IF THIS COMES OUT AS BEING TRUE,
THEN IT’S GOING TO BE DAMAGING
FOR THE CHIEFS AND THE SPORTS, THEN IT’S GOING TO BE DAMAGING
FOR THE CHIEFS AND THE SPORTS,
BUT THIS IS A WRONGFUL DEATH FOR THE CHIEFS AND THE SPORTS,
BUT THIS IS A WRONGFUL DEATH
LAWSUIT, AND IT’S A HARD ROAD TO BUT THIS IS A WRONGFUL DEATH
LAWSUIT, AND IT’S A HARD ROAD TO
HOE HERE TO SAY THAT THE LAWSUIT, AND IT’S A HARD ROAD TO
HOE HERE TO SAY THAT THE
INJURIES ON THE FIELD IS WHAT HOE HERE TO SAY THAT THE
INJURIES ON THE FIELD IS WHAT
CAUSED JAVON BELCHER TO TAKE HIS INJURIES ON THE FIELD IS WHAT
CAUSED JAVON BELCHER TO TAKE HIS
OWN LIFE. CAUSED JAVON BELCHER TO TAKE HIS
OWN LIFE.
MARY. OWN LIFE.
MARY.
ABSOLUTELY. MARY.
ABSOLUTELY.
I THINK, BOTTOM LINE, YOU STILL ABSOLUTELY.
I THINK, BOTTOM LINE, YOU STILL
HAVE TO GET BACK TO WHAT THIS I THINK, BOTTOM LINE, YOU STILL
HAVE TO GET BACK TO WHAT THIS
WAS. HAVE TO GET BACK TO WHAT THIS
WAS.
THE RELATIONSHIP WAS A VOLATILE WAS.
THE RELATIONSHIP WAS A VOLATILE
RELATIONSHIP THAT JAVON BELCHER THE RELATIONSHIP WAS A VOLATILE
RELATIONSHIP THAT JAVON BELCHER
HAD WITH KASSANDRA PERKINS. RELATIONSHIP THAT JAVON BELCHER
HAD WITH KASSANDRA PERKINS.
HE PUT 9 BULLETS INTO HER. HAD WITH KASSANDRA PERKINS.
HE PUT 9 BULLETS INTO HER.
TO SAY THAT WAS BECAUSE HE HAD HE PUT 9 BULLETS INTO HER.
TO SAY THAT WAS BECAUSE HE HAD
BEEN SNIPPING THINGS ON THE TO SAY THAT WAS BECAUSE HE HAD
BEEN SNIPPING THINGS ON THE
FIELD A COUPLE TIMES, I DON’T BEEN SNIPPING THINGS ON THE
FIELD A COUPLE TIMES, I DON’T
KNOW. FIELD A COUPLE TIMES, I DON’T
KNOW.
THE CAUSE AND EFFECT TO PROVE IT KNOW.
THE CAUSE AND EFFECT TO PROVE IT
LEGALLY IS JUST GOING TO BE THE CAUSE AND EFFECT TO PROVE IT
LEGALLY IS JUST GOING TO BE
HORRENDOUS, AND I GET IT THAT LEGALLY IS JUST GOING TO BE
HORRENDOUS, AND I GET IT THAT
JOVAN BELCHER’S MOTHER IS IN A HORRENDOUS, AND I GET IT THAT
JOVAN BELCHER’S MOTHER IS IN A
HORRIBLE PLACE. JOVAN BELCHER’S MOTHER IS IN A
HORRIBLE PLACE.
EVERYONE WHO LOVED THOSE TWO IS. HORRIBLE PLACE.
EVERYONE WHO LOVED THOSE TWO IS.
YOU HAVE TO SOMEHOW RECONCILE EVERYONE WHO LOVED THOSE TWO IS.
YOU HAVE TO SOMEHOW RECONCILE
WHAT HAPPENED WITH THE PERSON YOU HAVE TO SOMEHOW RECONCILE
WHAT HAPPENED WITH THE PERSON
THAT YOU LOVED. WHAT HAPPENED WITH THE PERSON
THAT YOU LOVED.
BUT I DON’T KNOW THAT A WRONGFUL THAT YOU LOVED.
BUT I DON’T KNOW THAT A WRONGFUL
DEATH LAWSUIT IS THE WAY TO DO BUT I DON’T KNOW THAT A WRONGFUL
DEATH LAWSUIT IS THE WAY TO DO
THAT. DEATH LAWSUIT IS THE WAY TO DO
THAT.
I THINK IT ISN’T WITH THE THAT.
I THINK IT ISN’T WITH THE
INHALANT SALTS. I THINK IT ISN’T WITH THE
INHALANT SALTS.
IT WAS THE FACT THAT THESE INHALANT SALTS.
IT WAS THE FACT THAT THESE
INJURIES HAD CAUSED MAJOR IT WAS THE FACT THAT THESE
INJURIES HAD CAUSED MAJOR
DEPRESSION AND OTHER MENTAL INJURIES HAD CAUSED MAJOR
DEPRESSION AND OTHER MENTAL
PROBLEMS. DEPRESSION AND OTHER MENTAL
PROBLEMS.
OFTEN WE DON’T STEP BACK TO SAY, PROBLEMS.
OFTEN WE DON’T STEP BACK TO SAY,
WHY DID THIS HAPPEN? OFTEN WE DON’T STEP BACK TO SAY,
WHY DID THIS HAPPEN?
WHY DID THIS MAN SHOOT HER NINE WHY DID THIS HAPPEN?
WHY DID THIS MAN SHOOT HER NINE
TIMES, THE MOTHER OF HIS CHILD WHY DID THIS MAN SHOOT HER NINE
TIMES, THE MOTHER OF HIS CHILD
IN FRONT OF HIS OWN MOTHER AND TIMES, THE MOTHER OF HIS CHILD
IN FRONT OF HIS OWN MOTHER AND
THE KID AND TAKE HIS OWN LIFE? IN FRONT OF HIS OWN MOTHER AND
THE KID AND TAKE HIS OWN LIFE?
SOMETHING WAS SERIOUSLY WRONG, THE KID AND TAKE HIS OWN LIFE?
SOMETHING WAS SERIOUSLY WRONG,
AND THE FAMILY BELIEVES IT WAS SOMETHING WAS SERIOUSLY WRONG,
AND THE FAMILY BELIEVES IT WAS
PROBLEMS WITH HIS BEHAVIOR AND THE FAMILY BELIEVES IT WAS
PROBLEMS WITH HIS BEHAVIOR
RESULTING FROM FOOTBALL. PROBLEMS WITH HIS BEHAVIOR
RESULTING FROM FOOTBALL.
BUT THEY HAVEN’T DISCOVERED RESULTING FROM FOOTBALL.
BUT THEY HAVEN’T DISCOVERED
ANY BRAIN INJURY BECAUSE THEY BUT THEY HAVEN’T DISCOVERED
ANY BRAIN INJURY BECAUSE THEY
HAVEN’T ACTUALLY DONE THE FULL ANY BRAIN INJURY BECAUSE THEY
HAVEN’T ACTUALLY DONE THE FULL
TESTS SO THIS LAWSUIT MAY HE BE HAVEN’T ACTUALLY DONE THE FULL
TESTS SO THIS LAWSUIT MAY HE BE
PREMATURE AT THIS POINT. TESTS SO THIS LAWSUIT MAY HE BE
PREMATURE AT THIS POINT.
THIS IS ALSO THE WEEK THAT KNEEL PREMATURE AT THIS POINT.
THIS IS ALSO THE WEEK THAT KNEEL
KNEEL — NEIL SMITH JOINS FIVE THIS IS ALSO THE WEEK THAT KNEEL
KNEEL — NEIL SMITH JOINS FIVE
FORMER CHIEFS PLAYERS IN SUING KNEEL — NEIL SMITH JOINS FIVE
FORMER CHIEFS PLAYERS IN SUING
THE CHIEFS OVER CONCUSSION FORMER CHIEFS PLAYERS IN SUING
THE CHIEFS OVER CONCUSSION
RELATED INJURIES. THE CHIEFS OVER CONCUSSION
RELATED INJURIES.
AFTER LEAVING THE CHIEFS, SMITH RELATED INJURIES.
AFTER LEAVING THE CHIEFS, SMITH
SPENT THREE SEASONS WITH THE AFTER LEAVING THE CHIEFS, SMITH
SPENT THREE SEASONS WITH THE
DENVER BRONCOS AND THEN ANOTHER SPENT THREE SEASONS WITH THE
DENVER BRONCOS AND THEN ANOTHER
SEASON WITH THE CHARGERS BEFORE DENVER BRONCOS AND THEN ANOTHER
SEASON WITH THE CHARGERS BEFORE
RETIRING. SEASON WITH THE CHARGERS BEFORE
RETIRING.
WHY ISN’T HE SUING THOSE TEAMS? RETIRING.
WHY ISN’T HE SUING THOSE TEAMS?
IT COMES BACK TO THE LAW. WHY ISN’T HE SUING THOSE TEAMS?
IT COMES BACK TO THE LAW.
THERE IS A QUIRK IN MISSOURI’S IT COMES BACK TO THE LAW.
THERE IS A QUIRK IN MISSOURI’S
WORKERS’ COMP LAW THAT ALLOWS THERE IS A QUIRK IN MISSOURI’S
WORKERS’ COMP LAW THAT ALLOWS
PLAYERS OF THE CHIEFS TO SUE IF WORKERS’ COMP LAW THAT ALLOWS
PLAYERS OF THE CHIEFS TO SUE IF
THEY HAVE NEVER SOUGHT PLAYERS OF THE CHIEFS TO SUE IF
THEY HAVE NEVER SOUGHT
COMPENSATION. THEY HAVE NEVER SOUGHT
COMPENSATION.
HE CAME IN WITH SOME OTHER COMPENSATION.
HE CAME IN WITH SOME OTHER
PLAFS. HE CAME IN WITH SOME OTHER
PLAFS.
I THINK WE HAVE 22 — PLAFS.
I THINK WE HAVE 22 —
PLAINTIFFS. I THINK WE HAVE 22 —
PLAINTIFFS.
WE HAVE 22 HERE NOW, SAYING THAT PLAINTIFFS.
WE HAVE 22 HERE NOW, SAYING THAT
THE TEAM HAD HELD BACK THE WE HAVE 22 HERE NOW, SAYING THAT
THE TEAM HAD HELD BACK THE
DANGERS OF CONCUSSIONS, DIDN’T THE TEAM HAD HELD BACK THE
DANGERS OF CONCUSSIONS, DIDN’T
INFORM THEM, AND NOW THEY HAVE DANGERS OF CONCUSSIONS, DIDN’T
INFORM THEM, AND NOW THEY HAVE
MENTAL ISSUES AND HEALTH ISSUES INFORM THEM, AND NOW THEY HAVE
MENTAL ISSUES AND HEALTH ISSUES
AS A RESULT. MENTAL ISSUES AND HEALTH ISSUES
AS A RESULT.
I’VE JUST GOT TO SAY AGAIN AS A RESULT.
I’VE JUST GOT TO SAY AGAIN
THAT BOY, THIS IS TOUGH STUFF I’VE JUST GOT TO SAY AGAIN
THAT BOY, THIS IS TOUGH STUFF
FOR THE NFL, THIS CONTINUED THAT BOY, THIS IS TOUGH STUFF
FOR THE NFL, THIS CONTINUED
FOCUS ON CONCUSSIONS AND THE FOR THE NFL, THIS CONTINUED
FOCUS ON CONCUSSIONS AND THE
ISSUES. FOCUS ON CONCUSSIONS AND THE
ISSUES.
LOTS OF EVIDENCE IN THIS CASE ISSUES.
LOTS OF EVIDENCE IN THIS CASE
THAT BELCHER’S MOODS AND LOTS OF EVIDENCE IN THIS CASE
THAT BELCHER’S MOODS AND
BEHAVIOR OFF THE FIELD WERE THAT BELCHER’S MOODS AND
BEHAVIOR OFF THE FIELD WERE
AFFECTED, APPARENTLY, COULD HAVE BEHAVIOR OFF THE FIELD WERE
AFFECTED, APPARENTLY, COULD HAVE
BEEN BY WHAT WAS HAPPENING TO AFFECTED, APPARENTLY, COULD HAVE
BEEN BY WHAT WAS HAPPENING TO
HIM ON THE FIELD THROUGH HEAD BEEN BY WHAT WAS HAPPENING TO
HIM ON THE FIELD THROUGH HEAD
INJURIES, NICK. HIM ON THE FIELD THROUGH HEAD
INJURIES, NICK.
THE NFL IS GOING TO CONTINUE TO INJURIES, NICK.
THE NFL IS GOING TO CONTINUE TO
GRAPPLE WITH THIS. THE NFL IS GOING TO CONTINUE TO
GRAPPLE WITH THIS.
IT’S GOING TO TAINT THE GAME AND GRAPPLE WITH THIS.
IT’S GOING TO TAINT THE GAME AND
WHO KNOWS WHAT THIS MEANS FOR IT’S GOING TO TAINT THE GAME AND
WHO KNOWS WHAT THIS MEANS FOR
THE FUTURE OF PROFESSIONAL WHO KNOWS WHAT THIS MEANS FOR
THE FUTURE OF PROFESSIONAL
FOOTBALL. THE FUTURE OF PROFESSIONAL
FOOTBALL.
BUT BECAUSE OF A CROOK IN THE FOOTBALL.
BUT BECAUSE OF A CROOK IN THE
LAW, IT SEEMS TO BE HURTING BUT BECAUSE OF A CROOK IN THE
LAW, IT SEEMS TO BE HURTING
MISSOURI MORE. LAW, IT SEEMS TO BE HURTING
MISSOURI MORE.
RIGHT. MISSOURI MORE.
RIGHT.
BECAUSE THE PLAINTIFF’S RIGHT.
BECAUSE THE PLAINTIFF’S
ATTORNEYS ARE GOING TO BECAUSE THE PLAINTIFF’S
ATTORNEYS ARE GOING TO
ESSENTIALLY GOING TO BE ABLE TO ATTORNEYS ARE GOING TO
ESSENTIALLY GOING TO BE ABLE TO
GO ON FISHING EXPEDITIONS TO ESSENTIALLY GOING TO BE ABLE TO
GO ON FISHING EXPEDITIONS TO
LEARN ABOUT WHAT THE CHIEFS AND GO ON FISHING EXPEDITIONS TO
LEARN ABOUT WHAT THE CHIEFS AND
THE NFL KNEW ABOUT CONCUSSIONS, LEARN ABOUT WHAT THE CHIEFS AND
THE NFL KNEW ABOUT CONCUSSIONS,
SO IT’S GOING TO PUT A LOT OF THE NFL KNEW ABOUT CONCUSSIONS,
SO IT’S GOING TO PUT A LOT OF
THE DIRTY LAUNDRY OUT THERE. SO IT’S GOING TO PUT A LOT OF
THE DIRTY LAUNDRY OUT THERE.
I THINK JAVON BELCHER IS THE DIRTY LAUNDRY OUT THERE.
I THINK JAVON BELCHER IS
PARTICULARLY AN UNSYMPATHETIC I THINK JAVON BELCHER IS
PARTICULARLY AN UNSYMPATHETIC
WRONGFUL DEATH PLAINTIFF OR HIS PARTICULARLY AN UNSYMPATHETIC
WRONGFUL DEATH PLAINTIFF OR HIS
MOTHER, IN PART BECAUSE HE WRONGFUL DEATH PLAINTIFF OR HIS
MOTHER, IN PART BECAUSE HE
DIDN’T JUST PLAY FOR THE CHIEFS. MOTHER, IN PART BECAUSE HE
DIDN’T JUST PLAY FOR THE CHIEFS.
HE PLAYED COLLEGE FOOTBALL, DIDN’T JUST PLAY FOR THE CHIEFS.
HE PLAYED COLLEGE FOOTBALL,
PLAYED AS A YOUNG PERSON. HE PLAYED COLLEGE FOOTBALL,
PLAYED AS A YOUNG PERSON.
PRESUMABLY HIS MOTHER HAD SOME PLAYED AS A YOUNG PERSON.
PRESUMABLY HIS MOTHER HAD SOME
ROLE IN WHETHER HE WAS A PRESUMABLY HIS MOTHER HAD SOME
ROLE IN WHETHER HE WAS A
FOOTBALL PLAYER OR NOT, AND IN ROLE IN WHETHER HE WAS A
FOOTBALL PLAYER OR NOT, AND IN
ESSENCE FOR HER TO CLAIM THAT FOOTBALL PLAYER OR NOT, AND IN
ESSENCE FOR HER TO CLAIM THAT
THE FOOTBALL INJURIES LED TO HIS ESSENCE FOR HER TO CLAIM THAT
THE FOOTBALL INJURIES LED TO HIS
DEATH, THAT’S A DIFFICULT THE FOOTBALL INJURIES LED TO HIS
DEATH, THAT’S A DIFFICULT
UNSYMPATHETIC PLAINTIFF IN THIS DEATH, THAT’S A DIFFICULT
UNSYMPATHETIC PLAINTIFF IN THIS
CASE. UNSYMPATHETIC PLAINTIFF IN THIS
CASE.
AND THE OFFICIAL REPORT IN CASE.
AND THE OFFICIAL REPORT IN
JJ’S RESTAURANT EXPLOSION HAS BE AND THE OFFICIAL REPORT IN
JJ’S RESTAURANT EXPLOSION HAS BE
DELAYED YET AGAIN. JJ’S RESTAURANT EXPLOSION HAS BE
DELAYED YET AGAIN.
WE ARE NOW HEADING TO THE DELAYED YET AGAIN.
WE ARE NOW HEADING TO THE
ANNIVERSARY OF THE NIGHT KANSAS WE ARE NOW HEADING TO THE
ANNIVERSARY OF THE NIGHT KANSAS
CITY’S LANDMARK RESTAURANT ANNIVERSARY OF THE NIGHT KANSAS
CITY’S LANDMARK RESTAURANT
EXPLODED AND ROCKED THE COUNTRY CITY’S LANDMARK RESTAURANT
EXPLODED AND ROCKED THE COUNTRY
CLUB PLAZA WHY HAS IT TAKEN THIS EXPLODED AND ROCKED THE COUNTRY
CLUB PLAZA WHY HAS IT TAKEN THIS
LONG FOR THE REPORT TO BE CLUB PLAZA WHY HAS IT TAKEN THIS
LONG FOR THE REPORT TO BE
RELEASED? LONG FOR THE REPORT TO BE
RELEASED?
THE MISSOURI PUBLIC SERVICE RELEASED?
THE MISSOURI PUBLIC SERVICE
COMMISSION IS GETTING LOTS OF THE MISSOURI PUBLIC SERVICE
COMMISSION IS GETTING LOTS OF
DOCUMENTS AND LOTS OF AFFIDAVITS COMMISSION IS GETTING LOTS OF
DOCUMENTS AND LOTS OF AFFIDAVITS
AND OTHER STATEMENTS THAT THEY DOCUMENTS AND LOTS OF AFFIDAVITS
AND OTHER STATEMENTS THAT THEY
HAVE TO SORT THROUGH TO TRY TO AND OTHER STATEMENTS THAT THEY
HAVE TO SORT THROUGH TO TRY TO
COME UP WITH A CAUSE, AND I HAVE TO SORT THROUGH TO TRY TO
COME UP WITH A CAUSE, AND I
THINK, NICK, AGAIN, YOU DON’T COME UP WITH A CAUSE, AND I
THINK, NICK, AGAIN, YOU DON’T
WANT TO PREJUDGE WHAT THEY’RE THINK, NICK, AGAIN, YOU DON’T
WANT TO PREJUDGE WHAT THEY’RE
GOING TO SAY, BUT MY GUESS IS WANT TO PREJUDGE WHAT THEY’RE
GOING TO SAY, BUT MY GUESS IS
EVERYONE IS GOING TO HAVE A GOING TO SAY, BUT MY GUESS IS
EVERYONE IS GOING TO HAVE A
LITTLE PIECE OF BLAME, AND SO EVERYONE IS GOING TO HAVE A
LITTLE PIECE OF BLAME, AND SO
APPORTIONING IT TO ALL OF THE LITTLE PIECE OF BLAME, AND SO
APPORTIONING IT TO ALL OF THE
RELEVANT ACTORS IN THIS TRAGEDY APPORTIONING IT TO ALL OF THE
RELEVANT ACTORS IN THIS TRAGEDY
PROBABLY IS GOING TO TAKE A RELEVANT ACTORS IN THIS TRAGEDY
PROBABLY IS GOING TO TAKE A
WHILE, AND IS A GOOD EXPLANATION PROBABLY IS GOING TO TAKE A
WHILE, AND IS A GOOD EXPLANATION
FOR WHY IT’S TAKEN SO LONG TO WHILE, AND IS A GOOD EXPLANATION
FOR WHY IT’S TAKEN SO LONG TO
GET THIS REPORT OUT. FOR WHY IT’S TAKEN SO LONG TO
GET THIS REPORT OUT.
AND FINALLY, WHAT HAPPENED GET THIS REPORT OUT.
AND FINALLY, WHAT HAPPENED
TO KANSAS AND MISSOURI’S BILLION AND FINALLY, WHAT HAPPENED
TO KANSAS AND MISSOURI’S BILLION
DOLLAR BID FOR BO? TO KANSAS AND MISSOURI’S BILLION
DOLLAR BID FOR BO?
FOR BOEING? DOLLAR BID FOR BO?
FOR BOEING?
YOU MAY REMEMBER BOTH STATES IN FOR BOEING?
YOU MAY REMEMBER BOTH STATES IN
EARLY DECEMBER WERE BENDING OVER YOU MAY REMEMBER BOTH STATES IN
EARLY DECEMBER WERE BENDING OVER
BACKWARDS FOR THE RIGHT TO BUILD EARLY DECEMBER WERE BENDING OVER
BACKWARDS FOR THE RIGHT TO BUILD
BO’S — BOEING’S 777 X BACKWARDS FOR THE RIGHT TO BUILD
BO’S — BOEING’S 777 X
SUPER-PLANE. BO’S — BOEING’S 777 X
SUPER-PLANE.
THE STATE OF MISSOURI APPROVED SUPER-PLANE.
THE STATE OF MISSOURI APPROVED
$1.7 BILLION IN TAX INCENTIVES THE STATE OF MISSOURI APPROVED
$1.7 BILLION IN TAX INCENTIVES
IN A SPECIAL SESSION. $1.7 BILLION IN TAX INCENTIVES
IN A SPECIAL SESSION.
ARE KANSAS AND MISSOURI STILL IN IN A SPECIAL SESSION.
ARE KANSAS AND MISSOURI STILL IN
THE RUNNING? ARE KANSAS AND MISSOURI STILL IN
THE RUNNING?
THEY ARE, AND WE’RE GOING TO THE RUNNING?
THEY ARE, AND WE’RE GOING TO
FIND OUT SHORTLY WHAT KIND OF THEY ARE, AND WE’RE GOING TO
FIND OUT SHORTLY WHAT KIND OF
STATUS THOSE STATES HAVE. FIND OUT SHORTLY WHAT KIND OF
STATUS THOSE STATES HAVE.
THE UNION IS VOTING TODAY OUT IN STATUS THOSE STATES HAVE.
THE UNION IS VOTING TODAY OUT IN
WASHINGTON ON WHETHER TO ACCEPT THE UNION IS VOTING TODAY OUT IN
WASHINGTON ON WHETHER TO ACCEPT
A NEW PACKAGE OR NOT. WASHINGTON ON WHETHER TO ACCEPT
A NEW PACKAGE OR NOT.
IF THEY REJECT THIS PACKAGE, A NEW PACKAGE OR NOT.
IF THEY REJECT THIS PACKAGE,
BOEING HAS SAID OVER AND OVER IF THEY REJECT THIS PACKAGE,
BOEING HAS SAID OVER AND OVER
AGAIN THAT THEY’RE GOING TO TAKE BOEING HAS SAID OVER AND OVER
AGAIN THAT THEY’RE GOING TO TAKE
THEIR BUSINESS ELSEWHERE, AND AGAIN THAT THEY’RE GOING TO TAKE
THEIR BUSINESS ELSEWHERE, AND
THAT COULD MEAN STATES LIKE THEIR BUSINESS ELSEWHERE, AND
THAT COULD MEAN STATES LIKE
MISSOURI AND KANSAS, WHO ARE THAT COULD MEAN STATES LIKE
MISSOURI AND KANSAS, WHO ARE
STILL IN THE RUNNING. MISSOURI AND KANSAS, WHO ARE
STILL IN THE RUNNING.
SEVERAL STATES HAVE BEEN KNOCKED STILL IN THE RUNNING.
SEVERAL STATES HAVE BEEN KNOCKED
OUT ALREADY. SEVERAL STATES HAVE BEEN KNOCKED
OUT ALREADY.
BUT BOTH OF OUR STATES ARE STILL OUT ALREADY.
BUT BOTH OF OUR STATES ARE STILL
IN IT. BUT BOTH OF OUR STATES ARE STILL
IN IT.
WHAT IF MISSOURI OR KANSAS DO IN IT.
WHAT IF MISSOURI OR KANSAS DO
NOT GET THIS. WHAT IF MISSOURI OR KANSAS DO
NOT GET THIS.
DO THEY LOSE ANYTHING AT ALL? NOT GET THIS.
DO THEY LOSE ANYTHING AT ALL?
WELL, NO. DO THEY LOSE ANYTHING AT ALL?
WELL, NO.
I MEAN, NOT OTHER THAN THE WELL, NO.
I MEAN, NOT OTHER THAN THE
EFFORT THAT WAS MADE TO TRY AND I MEAN, NOT OTHER THAN THE
EFFORT THAT WAS MADE TO TRY AND
PUT TOGETHER THIS PACKAGE IN THE EFFORT THAT WAS MADE TO TRY AND
PUT TOGETHER THIS PACKAGE IN THE
TIME AND –. PUT TOGETHER THIS PACKAGE IN THE
TIME AND –.
BECAUSE WE DO HEAR MAYOR SLY TIME AND –.
BECAUSE WE DO HEAR MAYOR SLY
JAMES COMPLAINING ABOUT THE LOW BECAUSE WE DO HEAR MAYOR SLY
JAMES COMPLAINING ABOUT THE LOW
HOUSING CREDITS. JAMES COMPLAINING ABOUT THE LOW
HOUSING CREDITS.
THEY DON’T KICK IN –. HOUSING CREDITS.
THEY DON’T KICK IN –.
SO WE HAVEN’T LOST ANYTHING? THEY DON’T KICK IN –.
SO WE HAVEN’T LOST ANYTHING?
LET’S BE CLEAR, THE DEBATE SO WE HAVEN’T LOST ANYTHING?
LET’S BE CLEAR, THE DEBATE
OVER TAX CREDITS IN MISSOURI LET’S BE CLEAR, THE DEBATE
OVER TAX CREDITS IN MISSOURI
WILL LAST FAR BEYOND WHAT BOEING OVER TAX CREDITS IN MISSOURI
WILL LAST FAR BEYOND WHAT BOEING
DOES ONE WAY OR ANOTHER AND WILL WILL LAST FAR BEYOND WHAT BOEING
DOES ONE WAY OR ANOTHER AND WILL
BE A CENTRAL ISSUE IN THE 2014 DOES ONE WAY OR ANOTHER AND WILL
BE A CENTRAL ISSUE IN THE 2014
SESSION. BE A CENTRAL ISSUE IN THE 2014
SESSION.
THAT WILL HAPPEN EITHER WAY. SESSION.
THAT WILL HAPPEN EITHER WAY.
THERE SEEMS TO ALSO BE A PUSH THAT WILL HAPPEN EITHER WAY.
THERE SEEMS TO ALSO BE A PUSH
IF THIS DOES NOT HAPPEN TO GO THERE SEEMS TO ALSO BE A PUSH
IF THIS DOES NOT HAPPEN TO GO
AFTER LABOR UNIONS. IF THIS DOES NOT HAPPEN TO GO
AFTER LABOR UNIONS.
RIGHT, PARTICULARLY IF THE AFTER LABOR UNIONS.
RIGHT, PARTICULARLY IF THE
WASHINGTON UNION DIDN’T APPROVE RIGHT, PARTICULARLY IF THE
WASHINGTON UNION DIDN’T APPROVE
THIS PACKAGE AND IT MOVES TO A WASHINGTON UNION DIDN’T APPROVE
THIS PACKAGE AND IT MOVES TO A
STATE THAT IS FAR MORE THIS PACKAGE AND IT MOVES TO A
STATE THAT IS FAR MORE
AGGRESSIVE AGAINST UNIONS, THEN STATE THAT IS FAR MORE
AGGRESSIVE AGAINST UNIONS, THEN
I THINK THIS CONSERVATIVE AGGRESSIVE AGAINST UNIONS, THEN
I THINK THIS CONSERVATIVE
LEGISLATURE IN MISSOURI WILL TRY I THINK THIS CONSERVATIVE
LEGISLATURE IN MISSOURI WILL TRY
TO POINT TO A STATE LIKE TEXAS LEGISLATURE IN MISSOURI WILL TRY
TO POINT TO A STATE LIKE TEXAS
OR SOMEWHERE ELSE THAT’S A RIGHT TO POINT TO A STATE LIKE TEXAS
OR SOMEWHERE ELSE THAT’S A RIGHT
TO WORK, AND SAY, WE LOST THIS, OR SOMEWHERE ELSE THAT’S A RIGHT
TO WORK, AND SAY, WE LOST THIS,
BECAUSE THEY’RE TOUGH ON UNIONS. TO WORK, AND SAY, WE LOST THIS,
BECAUSE THEY’RE TOUGH ON UNIONS.
THEY GIVE PEOPLE THE RIGHT TO BECAUSE THEY’RE TOUGH ON UNIONS.
THEY GIVE PEOPLE THE RIGHT TO
WORK. THEY GIVE PEOPLE THE RIGHT TO
WORK.
MISSOURI NEEDS TO GO BACK AND WORK.
MISSOURI NEEDS TO GO BACK AND
LOOK AT THIS. MISSOURI NEEDS TO GO BACK AND
LOOK AT THIS.
WE JUST LOST BOEING AS A RESULT. LOOK AT THIS.
WE JUST LOST BOEING AS A RESULT.
THE SPEAKER TALKING ABOUT HE WE JUST LOST BOEING AS A RESULT.
THE SPEAKER TALKING ABOUT HE
WANTS TO MAKE RIGHT TO WORK AN THE SPEAKER TALKING ABOUT HE
WANTS TO MAKE RIGHT TO WORK AN
ISSUE IN MISSOURI THIS WANTS TO MAKE RIGHT TO WORK AN
ISSUE IN MISSOURI THIS
LEGISLATIVE SESSION. ISSUE IN MISSOURI THIS
LEGISLATIVE SESSION.
IT’S GOING TO BE AN ISSUE I LEGISLATIVE SESSION.
IT’S GOING TO BE AN ISSUE I
THINK EITHER WAY. IT’S GOING TO BE AN ISSUE I
THINK EITHER WAY.
THAT IS OUR WEEK IN REVIEW. THINK EITHER WAY.
THAT IS OUR WEEK IN REVIEW.
OUR THANKS TO OUR NEWS THAT IS OUR WEEK IN REVIEW.
OUR THANKS TO OUR NEWS
REVIEWERS. OUR THANKS TO OUR NEWS
REVIEWERS.
FROM THE KANSAS CITY STAR, DAVE REVIEWERS.
FROM THE KANSAS CITY STAR, DAVE
HELLING, AND NATIONALLY FROM THE KANSAS CITY STAR, DAVE
HELLING, AND NATIONALLY
SYNDICATED COLUMNIST FOR THE HELLING, AND NATIONALLY
SYNDICATED COLUMNIST FOR THE
STAR, MARY SANCHEZ. SYNDICATED COLUMNIST FOR THE
STAR, MARY SANCHEZ.
LISTEN TOM WEEKDAYS AT 11 ON — STAR, MARY SANCHEZ.
LISTEN TOM WEEKDAYS AT 11 ON —
LISTEN TO HIM WEEKDAYS AT 11 ON LISTEN TOM WEEKDAYS AT 11 ON —
LISTEN TO HIM WEEKDAYS AT 11 ON
KCUR F.M. STEVE KRASKE, AND FROM LISTEN TO HIM WEEKDAYS AT 11 ON
KCUR F.M. STEVE KRASKE, AND FROM
THE INVESTIGATIVE UNIT AT KCTV, KCUR F.M. STEVE KRASKE, AND FROM
THE INVESTIGATIVE UNIT AT KCTV,
STACEY CAMERON. THE INVESTIGATIVE UNIT AT KCTV,
STACEY CAMERON.
I’M NICK HAINES BRIGHT EYED AND STACEY CAMERON.
I’M NICK HAINES BRIGHT EYED AND
BUSHY TAILED THIS 2014. I’M NICK HAINES BRIGHT EYED AND
BUSHY TAILED THIS 2014.
FROM ALL OF US HERE AT KCPT, BUSHY TAILED THIS 2014.
FROM ALL OF US HERE AT KCPT,
THANKS FOR SPENDING PART OF YOUR   Captioning provided by
Caption Associates, LLC
www.captionassociates.com  

One thought on “Kansas Prepares to Drug Test Welfare Recipients – Kansas City Week in Review

  1. Are steps still lacking though I like this direction of focus.
    If/When someone is applying for or receiving benefits it seems logical the focus would simply be success/job. If Not, then this is the next steps Not JUST WORK but why Can't they? What are the Barriers? Remove them. Reward those who are being as successful as Realistically Possible.
    If the #'s are based on some Pie in the Sky formulas people cannot survive on, or, an ability to achieve steps, it will Not Work. Isn't That Complicated.
    **And, Get the ILLEGALS with their multiplying offspring being Removed from Citizen/Supported Funding.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *