Removes references to House and Senate bills in the Revised Statutes of Missouri
Summary
HB 3057 is a technical cleanup bill that repeals and reenacts several Missouri statutes to remove outdated references to specific House and Senate bills. In the affected sections, the bill replaces language that tied statutory provisions to prior legislation with standalone statutory text, or deletes obsolete bill citations entirely. The bill touches a wide range of subject areas, including the Office of Administration, county salary commissions, retirement benefits, unemployment financing, alcohol and drug abuse advisory councils, and a few other cross-referenced provisions.
Substantively, the bill does not appear to create a new policy program so much as to modernize and consolidate existing law. It rewrites sections such as 37.005, 50.333, 100.445, 104.610, 288.330, and 631.020 so they can operate without depending on references to earlier session laws. It also repeals sections 348.280 and 476.015 as they are presented in the bill text, which are shown as obsolete citation-style provisions. The overall effect is to make the Revised Statutes more self-contained and easier to administer and interpret.
Impact
The bill would amend Missouri statutes across multiple chapters by removing references to prior bills and replacing them with current statutory language. This affects administrative law, county government compensation procedures, state retirement and unemployment financing provisions, and advisory council governance in the substance abuse area. Because the measure is largely technical, its legal impact is mainly to preserve existing authority while eliminating obsolete session-law citations and clarifying how the affected statutes should read going forward.
Sentiment
The available context suggests little to no controversy around the bill. There are no committee transcript snippets and no recorded votes in the provided materials, and the bill’s caption describes it as a housekeeping measure. That generally indicates a neutral or routine legislative posture, with the bill likely viewed as a statutory cleanup rather than a policy change. The absence of recorded opposition or debate also suggests limited public or legislative attention in the materials provided.
Contention
No specific points of contention are documented in the provided context. Because the bill is framed as removing references to House and Senate bills in the Revised Statutes, any disagreement would most likely have centered on whether the underlying substantive provisions should be retained, repealed, or updated rather than on the technical cleanup itself. However, the materials do not show any committee debate, amendments, or votes identifying such concerns.