Missouri sure has changed since I left my home area of Cape Girardeau 25 years ago. When I was growing up, we were a swing state and proud of our bellwether history, having elected the presidential candidate who went on to win the election 25 out of 26 times from 1904 to 2004. Political parties didn’t define us and weren’t what we identified with the most. We cared about the issues, and party affiliation was only exactly that – just affiliation with a party or candidate, whichever or whoever aligned with those issues. While we didn’t always agree on the issues, disagreements – for the most part – were no reason to threaten our identity or relationships with each other.
In a sense, the tail is wagging the dog these days. Party positions, messaging, and marching orders come first, boxing out the possibility of discourse on the issues and turning neighbors into one label against the other. Party issues are increasingly selected as focal points for their potential to cause division, not bring us together to accomplish more.
Having moved back to Southeast Missouri a few years ago, it is an honor to now join Empower Missouri as our new Associate Director of Development. Empower Missouri is an issues-first non-partisan organization that is a leader in bringing people across our state together to take off our party hats, look at the issues affecting us and our neighbors, and figure out solutions together. And these solutions are needed more than ever – over 1 in 10 Missourians live below the poverty line, and nearly 1 in 5 of our children face hunger and don’t know where they will get their next meal.
My own journey to Empower Missouri began 25 years ago. After degrees in philosophy and religious studies from Mizzou, I set out to serve with the Peace Corps with the conviction that doing whatever I can to help alleviate the worst forms of poverty and suffering is the greatest contribution I can make to the world we live in. For two years I lived in a remote, rural village of subsistence farmers in Tanzania, one of the poorest countries in the world. The everyday realities of extreme poverty were heartbreaking – the regular pace of death of friends and community members from preventable illness and health complications, the visceralness of what a 1 in 10 child mortality statistic actually looks like, and lunch at school being only the boiled kernels of corn kids keep in their pockets from home, if one was lucky enough to have that and be attending school at all. But there was also the beauty of how communities band together in the face of these adversities – deep levels of social cohesion, collective support to what a family may be going through, and pride in hospitality that defines Tanzanian patriotism.
Afterwards I returned to the U.S. where I further explored our own country’s social and poverty issues – from at-risk youth counseling in Utah to homeless outreach in New York City – before pursuing a Masters in Sustainable Development from the School for International Training in Vermont. I went back to Tanzania for another three years, this time to the bustling urban center of Dar es Salaam working with a national civil society organization HakiElimu advocating transparency and anti-corruption, monitoring government expenditures, and supporting campaigns to improve public education across a network of 40,000 “Friends of Education” citizen advocates.
With a commitment to citizen advocacy, I eventually made my way back to the U.S., landing in Washington D.C. to lead the global education campaign of RESULTS, pivoting my focus to donor governments in the Global North and agencies like the World Bank and USAID. This led me into unimaginable roles, such as serving alongside former heads of state on the Board of Directors of the Global Partnership for Education (the world’s largest education global fund and multi-stakeholder partnership) and the Global Campaign for Education (the world’s network of national education advocacy coalitions across nearly 100 countries), and directly influencing policies of global institutions that have worldwide impact. I then went on to World Vision International where I supported education programs across 66 countries that reach over 4 million children.
Now back in my Missouri homeland, it’s time to help build the positive change we need here. We have more in common than we don’t. When we fall into the trap of political divisiveness designed to benefit those in power rather than our neighbors in need, we fail to live true to our own state motto: “The welfare of the people shall be the supreme law.” When we come together to focus not on our differences but what we can collectively achieve together, lives improve. It is an honor to join Empower Missouri to help our communities build the future they want to see.
Spanish 
English
Excellent points, Tony! Southeast MO and Empower are lucky to have you back here helping Missourians!
Thank you, Elizabeth! So kind! Honored by the new role, and excited to help build our shared efforts here in MO!!
Welcome Tony,
My name is Elizabeth Peterson, I represent the Public of MO on the Energy Advisory Board for my Senator in SWMO. The Energy Consumers have felt some repor with non profit organization Consumers Council of Missouri, but that organization has failed the people miserably in regard to “safety issues” revolving around Utility Vendor equipment that is health relative matter that by association is through fraud and swindle of “faulty regulatory” clauses resulting in an illusory of falsely presumed “opt out program from said equipment”. This regulatory has statutory that is literally ambiguous and scientifically inappropriate. The false language as fraud is creating a non opt out dilemma which is actively purporting as an opt out program. The result at the core issue with the faulty regulatory basically is false dichotomy of requiring an opt out program as concealed mandatory framework that via “substituting Consumer Free choice” is through a clever illegal clause statute that is scientifically in accurate to purport a false definition of the word Traditional. The false conclusion purports further that by “substituting the illusory opt out program” as somehow legally to utilize compulsory style mandate that foothold of false presumption’s can perpetuate to obliterate effectively through a process of elimination that there is any right available to the Consumer thereby eliminating the requirement for Consumer consent. By the illusory that somehow a Consumer opted not to sign up for their faulty regulatory propaganda as a compulsory I.E. no opt out choice via no consent equates to eliminates Consumer consent via ignoring Consumer due process which allows Utility Vendor to proceed with dangerous environmental equipment that is causing harm impact injury.
This is E.J.; Environmental Justice. Second this is a violation of Fair Competition as a right of Consumer Free Choice of safe equipment as tge option to get safe equipment is contingent upon a false supply clause as well which by process of elimination outcome remains that the Consumer had no right to Free choice but was provided regulatory that appears to offer a choice to opt out.
The false dichotomy is fraud it begs the query how can one opt out if one never opted in, and even if one opts out tge statute regulatory is a based on a false definition terminology so tge regulatory is framed as compulsory mandate and that suppresses due process which is foremost the requirement of fair regulatory Fair Competition must be provided in the regulatory and since it does not the regulatory framework as deceptive circumvents Consumer free choice and Consumer consent both of which is illegal. This is grounded in Federal Law (PURPA,EPAct,EISA) and in Pennsylvania example supported by Pennsylvania’s Electricity Generation Customer Choice and Competition Act, a.k.a. Act 129 SLS 2801 and s 2807 (f)(1),(2)(i) and (3).
The laws under federal guidelines clearly state that ALL Advanced meters; as smart meters, and EMF;ELF hardwire communicating Advanced non wireless meters are to be installed upon Consumer request, not by Corporate assumption. Yet state regulators have created a deaf to framework that undermines these protections resulting in unequal treatment across state lines.
The harm injury impact causes disease that is recognized and claimable with SSA. The regulators faulty regulatory is penetrating fair housing Act via harm injury impact in housing quarters by changing the I.Q. Indoor quality environmentally per this compulsory mandatory style regulatory.
I can provide those who have been injured technical reports of how this violates Fair Housing Act specifically.
These equipments are being force placed by Vendors who hire private armed security guards to install these dangerous equipment upon the MO Consumers via fraud as perpetrators utilizing faulty regulatory and invalid statutes the Regulator’s turn a blind eye while the Utility Monopolies invade Consumers via an easement on their dwelling wall as the point of referenced location this invades the home interior wiring as a Fire hazard as the dangerous equipment has no internal surge protection. This overheats the Consumers actually interior wiring as an immediate fire threat safety issue.
My Senator is supportive of getting rid of these Advsnced Meters and restoring Consumer Analogs which is the right of Consumer Free Choice under Fair Competition.
But, this struggle is systemic in MO. As I explained I represent the Public at large in MO. I do not have any non profit nor am I a non profit. However we do as Consumers have 2 large FB groups one in STL and one here in SWMO so there are roughly a thousand members.
Can you help us? We don’t need a Bill we need either regulatory oversight Committee or any advocacy available. I also took this to STL Eastern Legal Aide Joel Ferber he or any attorney can get support co-counsel from National HealthLAW they are a non profit. Their program Director is Jane Perkins and she could be available to assist on this case matter for MO.
I currently have an active case with PSC Tribunal Pro Se’ but the scope of the ALJ Judge in my case has extreme limitations per lack of Federal Jurisdiction for this Agencies parameters. Myself as the Consumer as in my current case as the private party Consumer case is the epitomizes the worst case scenario of how the triangle between Consumer and Regulator and Corporate Monopoly is lop sided the administrative recourse of due process with MO PSC Tribunal is an absolute example that the process framework of Consumer complaint due process leads to a Administrative process that permits that the Regulator itself is internally handling their own role objectively? There really needs to be a 3rd party Administrative Tribunal due process hearing required for these type of Consumer complaints. The current MO PSC Consumer Complaint process is askew in that the ALJ Judge has to be arbitrary and objective both qualities seem unlikely under the appointment clause of this type of ALJ Judge is in conflict with the U.S. Constitution and in essence in this triangle as the Commission Judge and also the Regulator both it is capricious to assume the Judge can remain arbitrary.
Gracias,
Elizabeth Peterson,