Pilot program will test Missouri school wastewater for fentanyl, drugs
The Department of Health and Senior Services is soliciting bids from contractors to test wastewater for opioids at select high schools.
As of Feb. 23, vendors in Springfield and Kansas City, Missouri, have solicited bids, as well as a company based in Leesburg, Virginia. The deadline for vendors to submit a bid is Friday, Feb. 28.
At present, the state has allocated $2 million to DHSS for the program for the 2025 fiscal year. Governor Mike Kehoe has proposed doubling that amount to $4 million.
Once a contractor has been chosen, they will recruit between six and 12 high schools to participate in the program for the remainder of the 2024-25 school year. At least one school must represent each urban, suburban, and rural areas.
ISP trooper dodges two crashes in seconds
Samples will be collected once per week at each school for at least four consecutive weeks and with minimal disruption to the school's daily schedule.
The samples will be delivered to the University of Missouri's School of Agroforestry in Columbia for testing.
The tests won't reveal the quantity of opioids used nor confirm the number of individuals who used drugs. This sampling is being conducted to see if more schools should be included or the program expanded. 'Identifying patterns in opioid use can be helpful for developing educational materials, outreach strategies, and targeted programs and policies, and monitoring opioid trends can assist in planning and evaluating opioid response efforts,' DHSS stated.
According to DHSS, 24,500 Missourians have died of an overdose over the last two decades. And in 2023, 72.1% of the 1,948 fatal overdoses in the state were the result of non-heroin opioids.
St. Louis City leads the state in drug overdose mortality rates, with 108.25 such deaths per 100,000 people. Four counties in southeast Missouri round out the top five: Crawford, Phelps, Iron, and St. Francois.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
16-07-2025
- Yahoo
After Missouri repealed paid sick leave law, it could go back on the ballot
Reality Check is a Star series holding those with power to account and shining a light on their decisions. Have a suggestion for a future story? Email our journalists at RealityCheck@ Have the latest Reality Checks delivered to your inbox with our free newsletter. When Missouri Gov. Mike Kehoe last week signed a bill repealing paid sick leave protections, his signature overhauled a voter-approved law that enjoyed widespread support in November. But the Republican governor's decision may not be the final say on the matter. Supporters of paid sick leave have laid the groundwork for a potential campaign that would put another measure on voters' 2026 ballots. 'This measure would restore the paid sick leave that legislators just took from Missouri voters,' said Richard Von Glahn, who filed a new measure on behalf of Missouri Jobs with Justice, one of the groups that successfully campaigned for the previous initiative, called Proposition A. The decision by Kehoe and Republican lawmakers to strike down portions of Proposition A was met with fierce backlash from paid sick leave supporters. Workers who began receiving paid sick leave earlier this year are now poised to lose those benefits on Aug. 28, when the law signed by Kehoe takes effect. The move also illustrated a continuation of Republican attempts to undermine voter-approved policies seen as more progressive, such as legal abortion, which lawmakers are seeking to overturn through a new ballot measure in 2026. Unlike Proposition A, which changed state law, the initiative filed by Von Glahn would amend the state constitution. Some supporters feel that constitutional protections might be the only way to prevent lawmakers from overturning measures passed by voters. 'It's about the only response that's left to proponents of these particular proposals,' said Peverill Squire, a professor of political science at the University of Missouri-Columbia. 'When you leave it as a statute, then it invites the legislature to make changes.' Von Glahn cautioned that the paid sick leave initiative was still in its early stages and supporters could eventually decide on a different path. After settling on a measure, campaigners must also clear an expensive and time-consuming signature process to get initiatives on statewide ballots. But if supporters decide to collect signatures to put his measure on a ballot in 2026, it would serve as a major response to the legislature's overhaul of Proposition A. 'The initiative is basically about restoring rights to Missourians that the legislature has, you know, in the previous decade taken from them,' Von Glahn said. The language of Von Glahn's initiative is similar to Proposition A. It would require most employers with 15 or more employees to offer an hour of paid sick leave for every 30 hours worked. The measure would also enshrine the state's $15 minimum wage in the constitution and guarantee future increases based on inflation. In addition, the initiative would also allow cities and counties with populations of more than 10,000 people to enact their own minimum wage and sick leave requirements. A spokesperson for Kehoe did not immediately respond to a request for comment. GOP opposition likely While nearly 58% of voters approved Proposition A, the measure faced intense pushback from Republican lawmakers and business advocacy groups who argued it would hurt local businesses. They also argued that the new law did not repeal all of Proposition A, including a section that raised the state's minimum wage to $15 an hour. If Von Glahn's initiative reaches the ballot, it's certain to run into similar opposition. Some of the resistance will come from the Missouri Chamber of Commerce and Industry, which last month submitted a letter to Republican Secretary of State Denny Hoskins opposing the proposed initiative. Kara Corches, the chamber's president and CEO, said in a statement to The Star that the measure would have 'dire effects on Missouri's economy.' 'The ability for businesses to decide the policies that best fit their unique needs is the bedrock on which our free enterprise system is built,' Corches said. 'This proposal is a clear break from our system of free enterprise.' Senate President Pro Tem Cindy O'Laughlin, a Shelbina Republican, sent The Star a lengthy statement that also lambasted the proposed initiative as a 'job killer.' O'Laughlin specifically criticized the paid sick leave requirement, claiming it 'basically allows anyone to claim illness even if they are not ill.' 'It is an effort to destroy the capitalist society that has made America a place of endless opportunity for anyone willing to work and be responsible for their own future,' O'Laughlin said. Direct democracy attacks The prospect of another paid sick leave initiative could also bolster Republican attempts to curtail direct democracy in Missouri by raising the threshold for initiative petitions to pass. Abortion rights, Proposition A, Medicaid expansion and marijuana legalization were all placed on statewide ballots through initiative petitions, a more-than-a-century-old process that allows voters to bypass lawmakers and approve policy measures. Missouri is one of more than 20 states where voters have this ability. Missouri Republicans, who control every statewide office and both chambers of the legislature, have targeted this mechanism for direct democracy in recent years. They argue that amending the state constitution has become too easy, while some insist that the U.S. is a republic, not a democracy. Historically, however, most initiative petitions fail to qualify for the ballot before they're even put to voters. Missourians also shot down nearly 60% of the initiatives on the ballot between 1910 and 2022, according to previous reporting. But Missouri Republicans have made raising the threshold for amending the state constitution a top priority during recent legislative sessions. At least one Republican senator told The Star he'd like to pursue changes to the process during the upcoming legislative session. 'This whole initiative petition thing is a mess,' said Sen. Mike Cierpiot, a Lee's Summit Republican, who later added, 'my primary focus this year is trying to do something to fix this initiative petition thing.' But Cierpiot said his plan would not focus on changing the approval threshold. Instead, he said he wants to amend the process so that the summaries on voters' ballots are more concise and that the state properly enforces a rule that ballot measures only deal with one subject. While Republican lawmakers argue against the initiative petition process by saying the state constitution has been amended too easily, supporters like Von Glahn point to the recent decision to overhaul Proposition A. He had hoped that a constitutional change wouldn't be necessary, he said. 'But for the legislature to attack provisions that were so overwhelmingly passed by voters, for the legislature to repeal provisions on the minimum wage that have been in place for nearly two decades,' Von Glahn said, 'well, it certainly seems like greater protections for Missouri families might be needed.'
Miami Herald
04-07-2025
- Miami Herald
Abortions can resume in Kansas City after Missouri ruling, Planned Parenthood says
Abortion services are poised to resume in Kansas City and across Missouri after a Jackson County judge on Thursday blocked a series of restrictions that temporarily banned access. Jackson County Circuit Court Judge Jerri Zhang, in an order issued late Thursday afternoon, halted requirements that abortion providers must obtain state licenses, among other restrictions. The licenses included rules that providers called unethical, including mandatory pelvic exams for women. The order marks a key moment for abortion rights supporters, effectively restoring access after a procedural ruling from the Missouri Supreme Court temporarily banned the procedure in late May. Planned Parenthood's clinic in Kansas City immediately planned to restore access on Monday, the organization confirmed to The Star. 'Abortion is legal again in Missouri because voters demanded it and we fought for it,' Emily Wales, the president and CEO of Comprehensive Health of Planned Parenthood Great Plains, said in a statement. 'Care starts again on Monday in Kansas City. We're not stopping until every Missourian can get the care they need, close to home.' Thursday's ruling came roughly a month after the state Supreme Court ordered Zhang to vacate two preliminary injunctions that had allowed abortions to resume in the state. The Supreme Court order temporarily halted all abortions in what providers called a 'de facto ban.' The court had ordered Zhang to reevaluate her rulings based on a different legal standard. After a series of legal fights between abortion providers and attorneys for the state of Missouri, Zhang's order on Thursday blocked the same restrictions and effectively restored access. Zhang's order on Thursday was mixed and did not block all restrictions sought by abortion providers, including a ban on medication abortions. But the ruling halted enough of the regulations for Planned Parenthood to begin offering procedural abortions again. The order states the regulations should be blocked after voters in November approved an abortion rights amendment, called Amendment 3, that enshrined reproductive rights in the state constitution. The restrictions, often called TRAP laws or Targeted Restrictions on Abortion Providers, included a 72-hour waiting period before receiving an abortion and clinic licensing rules. The regulations effectively caused the number of abortions in Missouri to drop from 6,163 in 2010 to 150 in 2021 before the state's former ban was enacted in 2022. Abortion rights supporters quickly celebrated the ruling as a victory in the fight for restored access. 'Missourians voted to end the abortion ban and establish the right to reproductive freedom in the constitution, and today, a Missouri court once again ruled to uphold the will of the people,' said Mallory Schwarz, the executive director of Abortion Action Missouri. Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey, a Republican who fought against restored access, said in a statement that would he would immediately appeal the decision. 'I will always fight to make Missouri the safest state in the nation for women and children,' Bailey said. While Thursday's ruling marked a win for abortion rights supporters, it also comes as a new fight at the ballot box looms. Republican lawmakers in May voted to put a new abortion ban on the 2026 statewide ballot. If approved by voters, the proposed constitutional amendment, which will also be called Amendment 3, would strike down the November vote that legalized access and ban nearly all abortions in the state. Schwarz nodded at the upcoming ballot fight in a statement on Thursday, saying, 'attacking Missourians' freedom will always be a losing strategy.' 'We will defeat abortion bans as many times as we have to, and we know that the majority of Missourians are with us,' Schwarz said.
Business Journals
18-06-2025
- Business Journals
The real cost of the Big Beautiful Bill: Hunger and health
The Big Beautiful Bill, currently being considered by the United States Senate, is anything but beautiful. The proposed harms to people are many — jeopardizing millions of Americans' access to Medicaid, food assistance, higher education grants and infringing on the rights of lawful immigrants to pursue the American dream — all to make permanent tax cuts benefiting only the top 1% of earners. But what about the rest of us? The widespread harms of the bill have garnered bipartisan opposition at a time when polarization is the norm. Kansas Senator Jerry Moran spoke about the negative impacts of the bill on the Senate floor. Missouri Senator Josh Hawley has long been outspoken in opposition to the bill, calling it 'morally wrong.' Other legislators across the political spectrum have also raised grave concerns about this massive bill that will, even after cuts to essential programs, add $3.3 trillion to our national deficit. The fallacies of this bill show in how the legislature has moved to adopt it. Middle of the night debates and votes, and accelerated processes to move the bill through the House, are contrary to the transparency and sound decision necessary in a true representative democracy. Only through such tactics could legislation that would cut $700 billion from Medicaid and cause an estimated 15 million people to lose their health insurance coverage make it this far in the process. We as Americans must stand up for ourselves and say no. Impact of work requirements The addition of work requirements on top of federal spending cuts compound and confuse the issues of Medicaid program efficacy and efficiency. The vast majority of Kansans and Missourians covered through Medicaid are already working. Where states have enforced work requirements, it has resulted in many working Americans losing their coverage, not because they do not qualify, but because of administrative burden and error. For example, Arkansas removed 18,000 working people from Medicaid shortly after implementing work requirements a few years ago due to overly complicated online filing requirements, lack of awareness and lack of internet access. In Missouri, where Medicaid was expanded in 2020 by constitutional amendment, it is estimated that work requirements would cut off nearly 80,000 people from health insurance for similar reasons. This is an unjust consequence for people working in our communities and positively contributing to our economy. Cuts to food assistance and job losses Another cruel element of the bill is its sweeping, unprecedented cuts to food assistance (known as SNAP), totaling nearly $300 billion and projected to cut nutritional support for 28 million children, older adults, and people living with disabilities, impacting Congressional districts across Kansas and Missouri. In the bi-state Kansas City region, well over 30,000 working Missourians with children in school and 15,000 in Kansas would lose life-saving access to food. Research and history show that reducing or losing SNAP benefits altogether increases hunger and makes for worse health outcomes in working families with children. There is no discernible economic gain to these moves that would justify leaving families sick and hungry. Economists project that the 550,000 in job losses from the Medicaid cuts alone will put us at the brink of a recession. Cuts to SNAP are no better, leading to a loss of 143,000 jobs directly and indirectly associated with our food systems and reduced economic activity of $30 billion. Many of these workers who face lost opportunities and jobs would simultaneously be unable to access safety net benefits like SNAP because of the cuts. Harming our rural communities This bill is disastrous for rural communities — where good paying jobs, access to health care and healthy food are extraordinarily hard to come by. Cuts to Medicaid are projected to result in rural hospital closures, as they rely on Medicaid for revenue. Rural health care jobs would be cut by direct extension. An analysis by the National Rural Health Association shows that each rural hospital employee is associated with roughly $200,000 per year in economic activity. While many rural residents are reliant on the Medicaid program for coverage and SNAP for food assistance, even those who are not on Medicaid and Medicare will suffer when the hospital nearest to them closes or other services are cut because of lack of funding. Impact on workforce development The bill also changes the eligibility for Pell grants for students in households earning low incomes. Given the physician workforce shortage (and shortages in other health science professions) and that at least 5 percent of students in medical schools would have qualified for these grants, reduced access to funding for higher education will exacerbate work force shortages in rural and other parts of our country. Infringements on immigration Legal immigrants, refugees, and asylum seekers are also impacted. People who arrived legally in America would be denied access to Medicaid and Medicare even if they qualify or have satisfied the requirements to utilize these programs. There is too much at stake for too many people, as this budget bill sacrifices the quality of life for most Americans for the benefit of a small few. We cannot afford to gamble on hypothetical trickle-down economics when the economic benefits of these programs and the positive impact on people's life circumstances are proven. Senators must heed what is best for the American people with whom they are responsible for representing and vote this bill down. Health Forward Foundation is supporting and building inclusive, powerful, and healthy communities by prioritizing people who experience the greatest injustices in health outcomes. Through leadership, advocacy, and resources, we are championing an equitable future that will serve us all. Since we began grantmaking in 2005, Health Forward has awarded approximately $364 million to nonprofit organizations addressing community health needs.
