Kirksville Daily Express - Kirksville, MO
  • Newsmaker Q&A: Wild ride for Walker

  • District 3's representative on tax reform, Medicaid, gun rights and more
    • email print
  • Rep. Nate Walker has had an interesting couple of years in local politics. Thrust into a run for a Missouri House seat last year after former Rep. Zach Wyatt's unexpected announcement that he would not be seeking re-election, Walker became the Republican nominee, won election by a wide margin that November and was sworn in to serve the third district in early January.
    It was a fairly quiet first session for Walker, but that changed when House Bill 253, which would have implemented a series of tax reforms, was vetoed by Gov. Jay Nixon. Walker was one of 15 Republicans who stood against their party in a veto override attempt, and their efforts prevented a GOP supermajority from getting the bill passed.
    Earlier this week, Walker sat down with the Kirksville Daily Express to reflect on House Bill 253, the veto session, Medicaid, the Second Amendment and more.
    It's been an interesting summer and an interesting year for you. How are you doing right now?
    Oh, I'm fine. I've enjoyed the dialogue and everything that's taken place. I didn't realize that the legislative process had changed a little bit in the course of the 30 years since I was in the legislature before, but I've accepted that and I'm doing the best I can. My main goal is to listen to the constituents that elected me.
    You did serve back in the 1980s. How has the legislature and maybe even more specifically to you, the Republican Party, changed?
    I think it's not just the Republican Party, but the political process has changed a little bit. This year, we talked about the super majority I served in, the 109 or 110 Republican members, veto proof. When I was in the legislature in the 1980s, in 1981 I was sworn in, I was in the super minority. There were 53 Republicans, unlike today there's 53 Democrats.
    That's changed a little bit.
    In the days past and in the sessions past we had a difference in philosophy, perhaps, a little bit, but most of the issues were based upon rural versus urban and back in the '80s when I was in the legislature I probably voted 90, 95 percent of the time with the rural Democrats and I was kind of in the minority because I was the only rural Republican in northeast Missouri. So, it was not an issue so much of party lines, but somewhat of what is best for your area or your region, your district.
    Do you feel today it's based on party rather than the region?
    Well, I think everybody should try to do the best they can to represent their district, and every district is different. I never questioned how another representative votes because they were elected to that particular district.
    Page 2 of 9 - From my district, the third district, it's basically the city of Kirksville, the western parts of Adair County, all of Putnam County, all of Mercer County, and all of Sullivan County. I have a rural blend and a little bit of what you would call a small metropolitan blend with the city of Kirksville.
    Looking back on House Bill 253, when it came up during the regular session you voted for it. Why did you say yes at that time? What sold you on the bill?
    When the first House Bill 253 was presented to us it was like a baked potato. It was a small, concise bill talking about certain things. Once it moved through the process with the Senate, lots of toppings were added to it. A baked potato is a pretty healthy thing sometimes, but when you add all these toppings to it, it makes it not quite what you want it to be.
    After having the chance to look at it closer, talk to constituents and see exactly what this bill was going to do, I felt it was in the best interest to not override the veto, look to coming back this upcoming session, which I'm working on now, to come up with a better bill, a bill that's not flawed, and a bill that might be able to create some jobs and also have meaningful tax reform.
    What were some of those toppings that got added to the bill during the process that made it unappetizing for you?
    I think a couple of them were the tax increases. Prescription drug increases and also the taxes on textbooks. This bill has been thoroughly analyzed and talked about, but I just thought it was going to be damaging to the core of my district, which is elementary, secondary education higher education, the mental health community, developmentally disabled community, and our senior citizens. This bill was just flawed. It was not the correct vehicle to go ahead with tax reform on, and I think now that we understand it, my decision was a good decision. Fourteen other rural Republican legislators joined me and now we're working on a possible solution.
    Had the original bill you voted on in the House, that you supported, had that gone through without changes and the governor would have vetoed that bill, how would you have voted on an override?
    It's hard to determine on hypothetical questions. All I did was react to what was the fact at the time. We'll just have to see how the new bill comes out. I think we've learned our lesson that sometimes simple, understandable legislation is better than complex legislation that has a lot of extra add-ons to it.
    Do you think this whole issue and the way it came about highlights any kind of problem with the process of how laws are made today?
    Page 3 of 9 - I think this is a good learning thing for us, because there were several bills the governor vetoed. Some of the bills were overridden, some of them weren't. There were several bills we passed that the governor signed. I think as a general assembly, as a whole, we need to make sure we're actually putting together good bills that aren't flawed, that don't have problems. The super majority that I am a member of, we need to do better probably of making sure that what we put out as a legislative piece is a good piece of legislation that we really believe in.
    When you came out against the veto override, what type of reaction did you get from the constituents at home?
    Very positive. I can only tell you that if you look at my mail, my emails, phone calls, I'm very out in the public, very accessible to the public, I had very positive feedback, and what was really important was the feedback came from people I know did support me before and people who didn't support me before. I think it was something that was maybe a defining moment in my term to let people know that I do listen to them, and I do care what they think. I may not be able to agree with them always, but I am open-minded and I will try to do what is best for the third district and the constituents I represent.
    And how about from the GOP statewide and your fellow Republicans in the legislature?
    A lot of things have been overblown. Last week, [House] Speaker Tim Jones and I had a little tiff, we had a little disagreement I suppose. We worked it out. We met last Thursday. We posed for a picture. We shook hands. We both agreed that we're going to work together to make sure that if we get a new bill that's similar to House Bill 253 that we can work together with it.
    Sometimes things just get blown out of proportion, but I feel very good. I've got a lot of respect from my House members and sometimes we have to do things that may appear to be not in the majority opinion of your own party, but actually is what helps your party develop better policy and better legislation.
    What was the veto session like for you?
    It was something like I'd never quite experienced. I think the intensity of House Bill 253 overshadowed everything else and before the session, during the session and after the session it seemed like House Bill 253, the emotions tied to that bill were just enormous. That emotion caused some people to have a little bit of heartburn, I suppose, but in the end the legislative process worked well. The majority party in the legislature overrode a historic amount of vetoes, but they also sustained a couple bills that may have been very difficult to defend once they became law.
    Page 4 of 9 - Were you subjected to any unusual treatment, or did you receive any backlash? Were people trying to change your mind?
    Oh, yes, people try to change your mind. They don't give up. If you've followed me on Facebook you'd know there are people from outside the district who are trying to persuade me to do different things, but besides the waterboarding everything was pretty normal. And I'm just joking, being sarcastic about the waterboarding.
    But it's intense, and we're not there to be simple minded. We're not there to be weak. We're there to stand up for what we believe. I stood up for what I believe and the other legislators did so also.
    Any outside groups, like Grow Missouri, with a presence there, trying to change your mind?
    Well, they had a presence there. They all had green shirts on and if you didn't have a green shirt on you were hardly allowed to be in the side galleries, it seemed like. But Grow Missouri, the coalition, is a good group of individuals. There are two or three members of the coalition that got pretty feisty and did some threatening and that sort of thing. That's just part of politics. I'm big enough to handle that. It is what it is.
    Last Friday, part of the group of the Fantastic 15 or the Hall of Shame 15 [the group of GOP lawmakers who voted against the HB253 override] met in Ozark, Mo., and we met with the executive director of Grow Missouri and we all agreed to work together. I don't think any of the members are against tax reform or substantial tax cuts that are meaningful, but as I said before, House Bill 253 was not the vehicle. It was flawed, and we can do better.
    You mentioned some threats. Anything specifically that stood out to you?
    Well, one threat was they would spend a million dollars against me in my next election process. I kind of thought that might be a good thing, because irregardless of the outcome of the election I would have probably done my part for economic stimulus for the third district if a million dollars comes back into the district.
    Those are just threats that happened. The emotions were high, we'll see what happens, but I stand on what I did and I'm confident that the constituents of the third district will make the right decision during the next election process. If they feel I need to retire, then I'll retire, but there's a long time before the next election and right now I'm set on working as hard as I can to represent the people of the third district the best I can.
    But as you sit here today, you plan to seek re-election?
    Page 5 of 9 - Yes. I don't see any reason for me not to. I've enjoyed the first year of my first term and I haven't been deterred by anything that anyone has told me along the way. In good time I will announce my plans for re-election and will have a nice campaign and see what happens.
    A few moments ago you referred to a "tiff" that you and Rep. Tim Jones had last week. Are you referencing your email message that was leaked?
    You used some unflattering words in talking about Rep. Jones and your relationship with him in that email. It was leaked to the press and became something of a story. In hindsight, is there anything you would have done differently in regards to that email?
    Well, I think it was harsh, but the Speaker and I had had harsh words throughout. I didn't leak any information and if you really know the truth, I don't know who leaked that but possibly it was leaked by allies of the Speaker.
    It was overblown, but I think the good part about it was it did bring out the opportunity for me to express myself and the Speaker to express himself. The Speaker is very compassionate, he's a good leader, he's my Speaker and I support him, but there are going to be times when we have differing opinions. Throughout the legislative process last spring, he honored me as the Outstanding Educator of the freshmen class, and there were parts of the legislation that he supported that I didn't support because it was not good for rural Missouri. We have differences between rural and urban Missouri, and my job is to represent and to do the best I can to make sure our needs are taken care of in the legislative process.
    So, you've had a conversation with Rep. Jones since the email story?
    Last Thursday he was in Macon at the Macon-Atlanta State Bank. He texted me the night before and wanted to know if I'd come down to meet with him. I said, 'sure,' so I went down, we met, we talked, we shook hands, we posed for a picture.
    My battle is not against the Speaker or anybody else. My battle is to make sure I do the right thing for the third district and that's what the people of the third district elected me to do. That's what I'm going to continue to do.
    You felt you had a good meeting with him in Macon?
    Oh, yes. Definitely. When you have disagreements, I think it's fine to fight for your cause and then afterwards you get together and you try to come up with the solution. Just because you vote 'no' for something, that doesn't take you off the hook. You have to come up with a better solution and that's why the group of us rural legislators who thought House Bill 253 was not a good bill have been meeting and we're going to try to come up with some tax reform that is meaningful and will not hurt rural Missouri.
    Page 6 of 9 - What are some of the things you think can be done in regards to tax reform that won't hurt rural Missouri?
    Well, we're going to look at lots of different things, but I think first of all we need to identify aspects of the tax code we can address maybe in four or five bills rather than in one major bill. There are some things we need to try to do and that is to make sure we get out in front of things that might damage education funding and the other sources we're concerned with, and maybe have better triggers in it to make sure if we do have some tax legislation that these triggers protect higher education, elementary and secondary education, mental health reform and that sort of thing.
    We're going to look at lots of sorts of things. We're going to work with both sides of the aisle. And I think legislation of this proportion, it needs to be bipartisan based. At least start out bipartisan. Last week I also spoke with the governor's office and he has assured me that he wants to do some things to help the economy and he felt that bill was a bad bill and he will have some input in the process. We'll see where it all goes, but right now I think we all need to pull together and work together and make sure we do the right things for Missouri and also for the third district.
    When you look at your vote and the failed override and the email, when you look ahead to the next session are you concerned about being able to work with your fellow Republicans to get things done?
    No. Absolutely not. I think I have a higher status now than I did before, just because they know I stand up for what I believe in. I have no qualms about that and I've gotten lots of support from my fellow legislators on both sides of the aisle.
    Reflecting on your first session, what would you identify as your signature accomplishment?
    Well, I would say that probably a defining moment in this past session has been House Bill 253. It was not my intention, necessarily, but that's just the way it played out.
    One of the things I am proud of is one of the first bills I introduced on my own, which was the public records bill [HB 305], it was signed into law by the governor. It was a combination of three other legislators' bills, and so that made me feel good that a piece of legislation that I'd introduced on my own was part of law.
    But I think House Bill 253 probably has to be a defining moment of this session for me, just because that's the way it worked out.
    Page 7 of 9 - What are some of the things you're looking to pursue in the next session in 2014?
    I think we have to continue to look at tax reform and then look at things to spur the economy. Our economy is still somewhat weak. Not as bad as it was maybe a few years ago, but we need to continue to work for ways to promote north Missouri, make sure that north Missouri is part of good programs so that we can have good employment opportunities, and I'll continue to pursue those interests that are good for north Missouri.
    The topic of Medicaid expansion is still being discussed. You served on the Medicaid commission. From that experience, what are your takeaways and thoughts on Medicaid?
    I traveled over 3,000 miles and sat in on about 70-80 hours of public testimony as a member of the Special Interim Committee on Medicaid Transformation. We went all over the area to listen to testimony and I think you'll see a bill come out with Republican sponsorship from Rep. Jay Barnes that will address the subject.
    Now, I think the governor and the Chamber of Commerce and several groups wanted Medicaid expansion without any reform. Medicaid expansion will probably be tied to certain reform of Medicaid and we'll just have to see how that bill goes. I can support Medicaid expansion and Medicaid expansion with reform.
    One thing we did find out a lot about during these testimonies throughout the state is there is a real need in rural communities of north Missouri, and all over Missouri, for some additional expansion of the Medicaid to get more people on it. Now, we do need to make sure we have triggers and safeguards there to make sure able-bodied people, people who can work, don't get on it, but certainly the young population for who their parents may not have health insurance, and then also the developmentally disabled community and the citizens that need this kind of thing, then I think we need to address that.
    There's a whole lot of other things going on in health care with the Obamacare things and we'd need time in another interview for that down the road.
    Certainly, but obviously the Medicaid expansion piece is tied to Obamacare.
    In a way it is, and we need to look at doing what is a good approach to make sure those people who need health care get it through Medicaid or get it through another source. But health care is a very serious problem in rural Missouri and throughout our whole state.
    You voted in favor of the failed override on House Bill 463. Why did you support that bill and what are your thoughts on gun control issues?
    Page 8 of 9 - When we go back, up until House Bill 253 the most emails, the most correspondence, letters, calls, were about protecting our Second Amendment rights. This area believes in the rights of the Second Amendment for hunting, for protection, and just for the basic fundamental rights for the Second Amendment and our constitution. As you recall, earlier on, there was a lot of talk on the federal level to maybe weaken the Second Amendment, so I reacted to the wishes of my constituents. I believe strongly in the Second Amendment, therefore I supported that override. It didn't pass in the Senate and so we need to probably come back.
    That bill had some flaws to it, too, just like House Bill 253, but we need to come back and address the Second Amendment rights, also.
    Do you think there is any room between protecting the Second Amendment and establishing any type of new regulations, be it expanding background checks, to do anything to curb gun violence in the United States?
    Well, certainly gun violence is a problem, but the problem is not the gun, it's the person that's using the gun. And in most cases, lots of the people who are using guns for violent things have obtained them illegally.
    It's a complicated thing, but just taking guns out of the system will not help the problem. I think part of it is mental health. We've maybe lacked in addressing mental health issues and making sure those people who have mental health issues are identified and kept from getting permits. But in most cases, it's like everything else, if you want a gun and even if they were totally illegal to have, the bad guy would have a gun and the good guy wouldn't.
    The Second Amendment is very important, as is the First Amendment and the other Amendments and our Constitution. I support the Second Amendment and will do everything I can to make sure it's not weakened.
    Is there anything else you'd like to address?
    I feel that people have treated me very fair in this thing. The threats, let it be, you know? Because Rebecca [McClanahan] and I spent a lot of money each in the last election, and at the end I had a little bit more money than she did. I'd won the election about three or four weeks out, in my opinion. I think I knew. Then when I won the election, all these other people wanted to jump on the bandwagon.
    The way I won the election is I went out and really worked hard. I'm not saying she didn't work hard, but I had a presence out in the rural areas where I really did well, that I don't think she had. I think she spent most of her time other places.
    Page 9 of 9 - I campaign all the time. I go places. I was at seven or eight events over the weekend and I've had three or four parades in one day. I just keep going. This is an interesting district to represent because it is so large, 1,850 or so square miles, but it's a district I feel comfortable with.
    Anything else?
    No. I appreciate your opinions and columns, that's been helpful. I had never felt intimidated by the citizens of the third district on this issue or any issues. They need to be tough with me. As far as political fallout, there's only about two people and they'll have to figure out what they want to do. If they want to mount a charge against me, it is probably not going to be in their best interest. It's not a threat, it's just, come after me and I'll deal with it.
    Rebecca McClanahan is a sharp, smart person, and to be able to run against her and to be successful was, in its own right, a positive thing for my ability to campaign. Rebecca and I are friends. We were friends before. We had our differences during the campaign, but we still speak and we get along and that's the way I am. I try to get along with everybody. I'm friends with everybody, just some are better friends than others.
Terms of Service

    Events Calendar