Opinion: Housing Discrimination Remains An Issue

Twenty years before the Fair Housing Act of 1968 was the 1948 Supreme Court decision involving deed restrictions  — a St. Louis property was at the center,

This modest, two-story masonry residence built in St. Louis, Missouri in 1906 is associated with an African American family’s struggle for justice that had a profound effect on American society. Because the J. D. Shelley family decided to fight for the right to live in the home of their choosing, the United States Supreme Court addressed the issue of restrictive racial covenants in housing in the landmark 1948 case of Shelley v. Kraemer.

In 1930, J. D. Shelley, his wife, and their six children migrated to St. Louis from Mississippi to escape the pervasive racial oppression of the South. For a number of years they lived with relatives and then in rental properties. In looking to buy a home, they found that many buildings in St. Louis were covered by racially restrictive covenants by which the building owners agreed not to sell to anyone other than a Caucasian. The Shelleys directly challenged this discriminatory practice by purchasing such a building at 4600 Labadie Avenue from an owner who agreed not to enforce the racial covenant. Louis D. Kraemer, owner of another property on Labadie covered by restrictive covenants, sued in the St. Louis Circuit (State) Court to enforce the restrictive covenant and prevent the Shelleys from acquiring title to the building. The trial court ruled in the Shelleys’ favor in November of 1945, but when Kraemer appealed, the Missouri Supreme Court, on December 9, 1946, reversed the trial court’s decision and ordered that the racial covenant be enforced. The Shelleys then appealed to the United States Supreme Court.

On May 3, 1948, the United States Supreme Court rendered its landmark decision in Shelley v. Kraemer, holding, by a vote of 6 to 0 (with three judges not sitting), that racially restrictive covenants cannot be enforced by courts since this would constitute state action denying due process of law in violation of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. Although the case did not outlaw covenants (only a state’s enforcement of the practice), in Shelley v. Kraemer the Supreme Court reinforced strongly the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection of the laws, which includes rights to acquire, enjoy, own, and dispose of property. The Shelley case was a heartening signal for African Americans that positive social change could be achieved through law and the courts.(National Park Service)

The home was 24 years old when they bought it, like buying a house built in 1994 today. .

Decades of deed restrictions, steering, blockbusting and federal redlining severally damaged St. Louis and other cities with non-white populations. Generations of families continue to be negatively impacted by housing discrimination.

Housing values in American cities still break sharply along racial lines, showing the lingering impact of federal “redlining” in the 1930s, which devalued homes in African-American neighborhoods. The practice was outlawed decades ago, but its effects are still evident. In fact, according to a study published last week by real estate website Zillow, the disparity has grown even worse over the past two decades.

More than 80 years ago, the government determined which neighborhoods it considered risky for federal mortgage loans, outlining the “riskiest” neighborhoods in red. The determining factor was largely race, regardless of the economic status of the residents.

By 1997, homes in formerly redlined areas were worth less than half the value of homes in neighborhoods that had been deemed the “best” for mortgage lending. Over the last two decades that gap has actually widened, according to analysis of home values across the nation. (Governing)

Enforcement of the Fair Housing Act has been weak under administrations of both major parties, though it has varied.

The Fair Housing Act received new life three years ago when the Supreme Court endorsed the doctrine known as disparate impact, ruling that housing discrimination did not have to be intentional to be illegal. The court reminded the country that the statute does indeed bar governments from spending federal money in a way that perpetuates segregation.

Soon after, the Obama administration issued a long-awaited rule that required state and local governments to affirmatively further fair housing goals by making efforts to address the cumulative results of the discrimination that historically shut African-Americans out of many communities.

The common-sense rule rightly breaks with the laissez-faire approach of the past, making it clear that compliance with civil rights and fair housing laws means abandoning the strategy of dumping affordable housing in ghettos — and giving poor residents access to areas that offer greater opportunity. To that end, communities that receive HUD money are being asked to consider data on segregation and concentrations of poverty when making affordable housing decisions. (NY Times)

The problems are getting worse under the Trump Administration:

As the Fair Housing Act turns 50, many experts say HUD’s recent actions, under the direction of Secretary Ben Carson, represent a new level of attempts to undo the legislation.

Under Carson and President Donald Trump, HUD has decisively pared back its role as the primary legal advocate for the Fair Housing Act. Carson instructed HUD officials to delete the words “inclusive” and “free from discrimination” from the agency’s website. HUD recently settled a case in Houston under terms that at least one former official says does nothing to end residential discrimination in the city. And the agency terminated an investigation into Facebook for alleged discriminatory housing advertising practices. Carson has also delayed a requirement, established under the Obama administration, that local governments must create detailed plans to integrate racially divided neighborhoods. And HUD has put an indefinite hold on secretary-initiated housing cases, which historically have been seen as a critical tool in fighting systemic housing discrimination. (Governing)

Results from the recent non-scientific Sunday Poll:

Q: Agree or disagree: 50 years after the Fair Housing Act discrimination in housing has largely been eradicated.

• Strongly agree 2 [9.09%]
• Agree 2 [9.09%]
• Somewhat agree 2 [9.09%]
• Neither agree or disagree 3 [13.64%]
• Somewhat disagree 4 [18.18%]
• Disagree 3 [13.64%]
• Strongly disagree 6 [27.27%]
• Unsure/No Answer 0 [0%]

Thankfully a majority of those who voted understand discrimination hasn’t been eradicated.

— Steve Patterson

A Look At Bike Sharing Now That It Has (Finally) Arrived In St. Louis

After many years of trying to get bike sharing in St. Louis — the first of two companies has started service:

A docking system could have cost the city more than $5 million a year, Venker said. With the dockless model, companies instead pay the city $500 a year for a permit and $10 per bike per year to maintain services.

Typically, bike share users must first download a smartphone app that is connected to a credit card. To gain a permit in St. Louis, companies must provide smartphone- and credit card-free options. Some companies allow riders to pay in cash or use a prepaid card, then unlock the bike by phone call instead of app. (St. Louis Public Radio)

Docked & dockless? Let’s start in chronological order with docked bike share.

When we visit Chicago a few times each year we see the bike stations everywhere — not just in the tourist hot spots. We also see the bikes getting used all over the city. Chicago has a large biking community so it’s natural to see lots of use.

What about other, smaller cities? I’ve photographed docked bike stare stations in Cincinnati & Oklahoma City.

Bike sharing has happened largely after my stroke, so I’ve not been a user personally. When I was in Cincinnati in 2015 for a Streetsblog event many in our group of bloggers would use Red bikes when we switched locations. Interestingly, I would often arrive ahead of them or about the same time — using my power wheelchair. This is because only one person can use a station at a time.

These docked bike share systems have largely been a success. Seattle, however, was an exception:

Perhaps the biggest issue, though, is how far apart Seattle’s bike stations are from each other. The National Association of City Transportation Officials found that station density is one of the biggest factors in the success of bike-sharing programs. The group has recommended that stations be no more than a five-minute walk apart. Seattle’s bike-share stations are located in two clusters: 42 stations downtown and eight in the University District roughly three miles away. (Governing)

So a station might be near your bus stop, office, or hotel but if there’s no station near your destination then it isn’t of any good to you. With the blogger group in Cincinnati a lot of their time was spent walking to/from stations to destination — in addition to waiting for others at the station.

The solution was to ditch the docks — dockless:

The new “dockless” bike shares have arrived in places like Seattle, Dallas and Washington, D.C., since the summer. They’re run by private companies like LimeBike, MoBike and Spin. Riders locate and unlock the bikes using their mobile phones and they can leave them, well, almost anywhere. The bikes have kickstands and lock themselves, so most don’t even have to be next to a pole, rack or fence to attach them to.

That means hundreds of new bicycles have hit the streets in these cities in recent weeks. With no set parking spaces or docking stations, many residents worry that the bicycles are further cluttering already crowded sidewalks. But others are excited for a new transportation option, especially because the new services tend to be cheaper and more flexible than the dock-based systems that have proliferated throughout the country over the last seven years. (Governing)

Dockless bike sharing has also frustrated many as bikes are left anywhere and everywhere.

San Diego’s dockless bike experience has been more of a free-for-all than in most cities, because San Diego couldn’t make an exclusive deal with one operator without violating a previous exclusive deal with a rental company that requires bikes to be returned to docking stations.
 
Supporters of the dockless bikes say regardless of how the battle over potential regulations turns out, the bikes have been a tremendous success with the potential to reduce traffic congestion and greenhouse gas emissions. (San Diego Union-Tribune)

Even bike-friendly Amsterdam temporarily banned them — due to high demand for bike parking!

“We have invested to create more bicycle parking spaces, and we do not want these to be taken by the many commercial bike-sharing systems.”

The posting added: “Of course, you are allowed to park a bike in the public space, even a rented or shared bike. What is not allowed however, is using the public space as a place of issuance, which is exactly what a number of shared bike companies is doing now, while occupying scarce parking places badly needed by Amsterdam residents and visitors.”

The municipality has stated that all dockless share bikes will be temporarily banned. Talks have been initiated with the dockless companies, including oBike from Singapore, Donkey Republic from Denmark, Dropbyke and FlickBike from Lithuania and Urbee and Hello-Bike from the Netherlands. (Bike Biz)

Which brings us back to St. Louis and the introduction of dockless bike sharing from Lime Bike — one of the two private companies to get a permit from the city.

LimeBike aims to provide a sustainable solution to the first and last mile transportation problem by helping people move around their cities in an affordable and convenient way while eliminating their carbon footprint. We are here to empower future generations to change their behavior so we can save this planet together.

With that vision, we launched LimeBike in June 2017.

LimeBike is not just a tech mobility company. We are a people and relationships company first and foremost. And we?re committed to building with you. (LimeBike)

Here’s a video from LimeBike:

I’ve downloaded their app to see where bikes are located, they’ve been all over the city since day one. I’ve seen & photographed many:

Docked vs dockless, is that it? No, there are now hybrid business models:

Zagster’s hybrid Pace system, which it’s rolling out in places like Rochester, N.Y., and Tallahassee, Fla., lets riders use docks or park elsewhere. (Depending on the city, users may get charged more for parking without a dock.) But the bikes can’t be left free-standing; they have to be locked to something in order to end a trip.

“We believe that bikes should be locked to things,” Ericson says. “That whole dockless evolution of dumping your bike anywhere in the street is not good for cities and not good for riders in the long term.” (Governing)

I’ve seen lots of people riding these new LimeBikes. those I spoke to were all quite pleased. The true test will come once the initial newness (and $3 credit) have worn off. I don’t doubt someone will leave a bike in my way, but I’ve been dealing with business signs, cafe tables, and dog poop as a wheelchair user for a decade now — it was 10 years ago today that I came home from 3 months of hospital/therapy following my stroke.

While I can’t ride one of these bikes, I love seeing others riding them! It’ll be interesting to see how both do once the 2nd permitted company begins offering bikes in St. Louis.

— Steve Patterson

Sunday Poll: Half a Century After the Fair Housing Act, Has Housing Discrimination Been Eliminated?

Half a century ago the Civil Rights Act of 1968 was signed into law by President Johnson. Included in the landmark legislation was a section known as the Fair Housing Act:

The Fair Housing Act (Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968) introduced meaningful federal enforcement mechanisms. It outlaws:

• Refusal to sell or rent a dwelling to any person because of race, color, disability, religion, sex, familial status, or national origin.
• Discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, disability, familial status, or national origin in the terms, conditions or privileges of sale or rental of a dwelling.
• Advertising the sale or rental of a dwelling indicating preference, limitation, or discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, disability or national origin.
• Coercing, threatening, intimidating, or interfering with a person’s enjoyment or exercise of housing rights based on discriminatory reasons or retaliating against a person or organization that aids or encourages the exercise or enjoyment of fair housing rights.

When the Fair Housing Act was first enacted, it prohibited discrimination only on the basis of race, color, religion, and national origin. Sex was added as a protected characteristic in 1974. In 1988, disability and familial status (the presence or anticipated presence of children under 18 in a household) were added (further codified in the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990). In certain circumstances, the law allows limited exceptions for discrimination based on sex, religion, or familial status. (Wikipedia)

Today’s poll is about housing discrimination.

As always. this poll will close automatically at 8pm tonight. My thoughts and the non-scientific results on Wednesday.

— Steve Patterson

St. Louis Board of Aldermen, New Board Bills Week 2 of 2018-2019 Session

The St. Louis Board of Aldermen will meet at 10am today, their 2nd week of the 2018-2019 session.

Today’s agenda includes new bills on: redevelopment projects, updates to building codes, a new whistleblower law, a couple of bills  that would require a vote of citizens — one would allow appointed department heads to live outside the city, the other would keep the Board of Aldermen at 28 rather than drop to 14 as approved a few years ago.

• B.B.#2 – Martin – An Ordinance recommended by the Planning Commission on February 7, 2018, to change the zoning of property in City Block 3084, from “J” Industrial District and “K” Unrestricted District to the “K” Unrestricted District only, at 7500-18 S. Broadway and containing an emergency clause.
• B.B.#3 – Vollmer – An Ordinance recommended by the Planning Commission on February 7, 2018, to change the zoning of property in City Block 4741, from “A” Single-Family Dwelling District and “F” Neighborhood Commercial District to the “A” Single-Family Dwelling District only, at 5201 Fyler; and containing an emergency clause.
• B.B.#4 – Coatar – An ordinance recommended by the Board of Public Service to conditionally vacate travel in 10 foot wide “L” shaped alley in City Block 798 as bounded by Shenandoah, 10th St., Lami and Menard in the City.
• B.B.#5 – Vaccaro – An Ordinance establishing a Detention Facility Advisory Commission that shall receive public complaints regarding the City of St. Louis Justice Center and Medium Security Institution detention facilities and shall, at its discretion, review and investigate such complaints as well as patterns of issues and systemic concerns the City’s detention facilities and their operation it has identified and where the Commission deems appropriate, make recommendations to the Department of Public Safety, the Board of Aldermen, and Mayor with respect to Corrections.
• B.B.#6 – Howard – An ordinance repealing Ord. 70475 and in lieu Thereof enacting a new Ordinance to be known as the City Whistleblower Law, pertaining to reporting improper governmental action and providing protection from retaliatory action for reporting and cooperating in the investigation and/or prosecution of improper governmental action; containing definitions, procedures for reporting improper governmental action and retaliation, and penalties; and containing severability and emergency clauses.
• B.B.#7 – Davis – An Ordinance recommended and approved by the Airport Commission, the Board of Public Service, and the Board of Estimate and Apportionment, establishing and authorizing a public works and improvement program at St. Louis Lambert International Airport, at a total estimated cost of Fifteen Million Dollars ($15,000,000); authorizing an initial appropriation in the total amount of Five Million Three Hundred Eighty Two Thousand Five Hundred Forty Three Dollars ($5,382,543) from the Airport Development Fund; and containing a severability and an emergency clause.
• B.B.#8 – Davis – An Ordinance recommended and approved by the Airport Commission and the Board of Estimate and Apportionment authorizing a First Supplemental Appropriation in the total amount of Four Hundred Eighty One Thousand Three Hundred Two Dollars  from the Airport Development Fund, into the Airfield, Building & Environs Ordinance 70570 approved July 10, 2017, for the payment of costs authorized therein; and containing an emergency clause.
• B.B.#9 – Ingrassia – An ordinance to revise Ordinance 70736, approved March 2, 2018, pertaining to the collection of administrative citation fines assessed by the Building Commissioner; containing a severability clause and an emergency clause.
• B.B.#10 – Coatar – An Ordinance pertaining to the Zoning Code requiring that certain uses that are regulated by a plat and petition process under the License Code and Building Code be made a conditional use, prohibited use, or use by right under the Zoning Code.
• B.B.# 11 – Kennedy – An Ordinance adopting the 2018 International Building Code with amendments, including Appendices E, F, G, H, I and J; repealing Ordinance 68610, Ordinance 68788, and Ordinance 69271; and containing a penalty clause, severability clause, savings clause, and emergency clause.
• B.B.#12 – Kennedy – An Ordinance adopting the 2018 International Energy Conservation Code with amendments; repealing Ordinance 68792; and containing a penalty clause, severability clause, savings clause, and emergency clause.
• B.B.#13 – Kennedy – An Ordinance pertaining to the Mechanical Code of the City; repealing Ordinance 68639 and Ordinance 68847; adopting the 2018 International Mechanical Code with amendments, including Appendix A; and containing a penalty clause, severability clause, savings clause, and an emergency clause.
• B.B.#14 – Kennedy – An Ordinance adopting the 2018 International Residential Code for One- and Two-family Dwellings with amendments,including Appendices E, F, G, H, J, K, M, R, S, and T; repealing Ordinance 68789; and containing a penalty clause, severability clause, savings clause, and emergency clause.
• B.B.#15 – Kennedy – An Ordinance adopting the 2018 International Existing Building Code with amendments, including Appendices A, B, and C; repealing Ordinance 68790; and containing a penalty clause, severability clause, savings clause, and emergency clause.
• B.B.#16 – Kennedy – An ordinance adopting the 2017 National Electrical Code with amendments; repealing Ordinance 68831; and containing a penalty clause, severability clause, savings clause, and emergency clause.
• B.B.#17 – Kennedy – An Ordinance adopting the 2018 International Property Maintenance Code with amendments; repealing Ordinance 68791; and containing a penalty clause, severability clause, savings clause, and emergency clause.
• B.B.#18 – Kennedy – An Ordinance adopting the 2018 International Fire Code with amendments, including Appendices B and C; repealing Ordinance 69600; and containing a penalty clause, severability clause, savings clause, and emergency clause.
• B.B.#19 – Kennedy – An Ordinance adopting the 2018 International Fuel Gas Code with amendments; repealing Ordinance 68638; and containing a penalty clause, severability clause, savings clause, and emergency clause.
• B.B.#20 – Spencer – An ordinance approving a Redevelopment Plan for 3452 Oregon.
• B.B.#21 – Howard – An ordinance submitting to the qualified voters of the City, a proposal to revise Section 2 of Article VIII of the City Charter which requires City employees to reside within the boundaries of the City and thus allow said employees, except for City Agency and Department Directors appointed by the Mayor, to reside outside of the boundaries of the City, and; providing for an election to be held for voting on the proposed revision and the manner of voting thereat and; for the publication, certification, deposit, and recording of this ordinance; and containing an emergency clause.
• B.B.#22 – Spencer – An ordinance approving a Redevelopment Plan for 3429-3431 Ohio.
• B.B.#23 – Guenther – An ordinance approving a Redevelopment Plan for 3520 Wisconsin.
• B.B.#24 – Coatar – An ordinance promoting the use of energy efficient heating through the connection to the Downtown Steam Distribution system; requiring the continual use of the Downtown Steam Distribution System for any development project occurring in Downtown St. Louis seeking Municipal Financial Incentives; prohibiting the Clean Energy Development Board of the City from approving financing for any project that would result in a commercial building disconnecting from or no longer using the Downtown Steam Distribution System for heat; a portion of the net profits be remitted to the SWMDC and containing a severability clause.
• B.B.#25 – Muhammad – An ordinance submitting to the qualified voters of the City a proposed amendment to the Charter of the City to maintain the Board of Aldermen as body of twenty-eight Aldermen representing twenty-eight wards, and preventing its reduction beginning December 31, 2021, to a body of fourteen Aldermen representing fourteen wards as called for under Article I, Section 3 of the City Charter; providing for an election to be held for voting on the proposed amendment and the manner for the voting; and for the publication, certification, deposit, and recording of this ordinance; and containing an emergency clause.
• B.B.#26 – Ingrassia – An ordinance to revise Ordinance 70737, approved March 2, 2018, pertaining to enforcement of code violations related to buildings, structures and premises in the City; by amending Ordinance 70737, Section Once Sub-section C, related to the procedures for the collection of administrative citation; containing a severability clause and an emergency clause.
• B.B.#27 – Moore – An ordinance repealing Ordinance 70087 and in lieu thereof enacting a new ordinance prohibiting the issuance of any package or drink liquor licenses for any currently non-licensed premises within the boundaries of the Fourth Ward Liquor Control District and containing an emergency clause.
• B.B.#28 – Davis – An ordinance approving a Redevelopment Plan for the 2647-2651 Washington
• B.B.#29 – Davis – An ordinance approving a Redevelopment Plan for the Tiffany Neighborhood Scattered Sites Area.
• B.B.#30 – Muhammad – An Ordinance directing the Director of Streets to temporarily close, barricade, or otherwise impede the flow of traffic on Anderson at the north curb line of Dryden, and containing an emergency clause.
• B.B.#31 – Vaccaro – An Ordinance establishing a four way stop site site at the intersection of Mardel and Sulfur regulating all traffic traveling eastbound and westbound on Mardel at Sulfur and regulating all traffic traveling northbound and southbound on Sulfur at Mardel, and containing an emergency clause.
• B.B.#32 – Boyd – An Ordinance concerning certain business license regulations set forth in Title 8, which require the completion of a plat
  and neighborhood consent petition prior to obtaining an occupancy permit; repealing Ordinances 56788, 57294, and 58645, pertaining to Arcades containing a severability clause; and an effective date clause.
• B.B.#33 – Martin – An ordinance approving a Redevelopment Plan for the 532 Bates.
• B.B.#34 – Murphy – An ordinance approving a Redevelopment Plan for the 5019, 5032 & 5034 Ulena.
• B.B.#35 – Spencer/Ogilvie/Navarro/Muhammad/Green/Martin – An Ordinance pertaining to campaign contribution limits; amending Ordinance 70357 Sections 1 and 3, and repealing Section 4 of said ordinance, to acknowledge newly passed State of Missouri maximum limits on campaign contributions and to decrease maximum limits on campaign contributions for local elections as provided herein.
• B.B.#36 – Davis – An ordinance approving a Redevelopment Plan for the 2647-2651 Washington.
• B.B.#37 – Kennedy – An ordinance pertaining to the authorization of a mutual aid agreement between the City of St. Louis and St. Clair County, Illinois, for St. Clair County, Illinois, law enforcement officer employees to provide law enforcement services and activities on MetroLink property within the city limits; containing definitions; a severability clause; and an emergency clause.
• B.B.#38 – Williamson – An ordinance approving a Redevelopment Plan for 5780 McPherson.
• B.B.#39 – Martin – An ordinance approving a Redevelopment Plan for 7401 Vermont.
• B.B.#40 – Ogilvie – An ordinance approving a Redevelopment Plan for 6452 Nashville Ave. & 6453 Wade.

Whew…long list.

The meeting begins at 10am, past meetings and a live broadcast can be watched online here. See list of all board bills for the 2017-2018 session — the new bills listed above may not be online right away.

— Steve Patterson

Opinion: Eric Greitens’ Political Future Is Dead

Some of you were unhappy with the recent non-scientific Sunday Poll. The poll, like most weeks, took an extreme view and readers could agree or disagree. Without question the idea that just because his hair stylist went to the Greitens house and didn’t leave as soon as she got uncomfortable meant she consented to whatever took place is absurd.

He blindfolded and bound a woman to exercise equipment, spanked her, and tried to kiss her without her consent.

Those are among the scandalous allegations against Gov. Eric Greitens of Missouri that were released in a legislative report on Wednesday that has put the first-term Republican governor’s political future in deep trouble. (New York Times)

I don’t know what did and did not take place in the Greitens home — a jury will need to figure that out. I do know that men can misinterpret someone being infatuated with them as consent to anything they might want to do. When this happens the men think what’s taking place is consensual — even though it isn’t if verbal consent has not been given.

A survey of 185 people published in The Journal of Sex Research found that people who practice BDSM (that’s bondage, domination, sadism, and masochism) are less likely to believe myths about sexual assault, blame sexual assault victims, and exhibit benevolent sexism—the patronizing attitude that puts women on pedestals.

The Northern Illinois University researchers believe they found these results because people within the BDSM community are more likely to embrace affirmative consent—the standard by which only a clear, enthusiastic, verbal “yes” constitutes consent. Since enacting a scenario that involves restraint and potentially physical pain requires discussion, those who practice BDSM typically aren’t going to just assume consent because someone hasn’t said “no.” (Glamour)

In any dominant/submissive roll playing situation consent to each activity must be clearly asked and answered prior to the start — this is to prevent the submissive person from feeling coerced into an activity they’d rather not. All participants must agree to a safe word prior to the start.  This question of consent will likely be a big part of the criminal case against the governor next month.

I was disappointed so many agreed with the Sunday Poll statement:

Q: Agree or disagree: By voluntarily going to Eric Greitens’ house — not leaving sooner — his mistress gave her consent.

• Strongly agree 6 [14.63%]
• Agree 1 [2.44%]
• Somewhat agree 1 [2.44%]
• Neither agree or disagree 0 [0%]
• Somewhat disagree 3 [7.32%]
• Disagree 6 [14.63%]
• Strongly disagree 23 [56.1%]
• Unsure/No Answer 1 [2.44%]

Governor Greitens should’ve resigned in January, but he’s decided to fight. In my mind he now has zero political future — the only question is will he finish the term? Even if impeached by the Missouri house, the senate may not have the votes to convict and remove him from office.

— Steve Patterson