by Sam Levin
Offered yesterday by State Senator Ryan McKenna, the handwritten amendment says: "Any person living in this state aged 8 and under may wear seersucker suits at their leisure. Any person over the age of 8 living in this state may not wear seersucker suits because adults look ridiculous in seersucker suits..."
McKenna elaborates to Daily RFT, "Children look adorable in seersuckers. My three-year-old looks cute in that.... Adults look ridiculous."
Here's the proposed amendment:
McKenna tells us that ultimately he decided to withdraw it from the higher-education funding bill.
"It probably wasn't germane to the bill," he says, adding, "It was all in jest, anyway."
Too bad. But there is a backstory!
Apparently lots of Missouri lawmakers wear seersucker suits...and some even coordinate to come out in full force on Wednesdays.
"I will not be bullied by the seersucker caucus," McKenna, a Democrat who represents parts of Jefferson County, says. "That's what this is about."
The trend might be unstoppable, he concedes. "It's grown to maybe half the Senate, but there's a group of us that refuse.
"They are getting stronger by the week with their bullying tactics," he adds.
Some good old-fashioned Twitter research proves that this is indeed an intensifying discussion in Jefferson City.
Continue for our Twitter research and photographic evidence of the seersucker controversy.
State Senator Eric Schmitt appears to be a leader in the pro-seersucker cause:
And reporters are noticing the trend:
The seersucker suits are out in force in the Senate today. #MOLeg— Jonathan Shorman (@jshormanNL) April 24, 2013
Confession: what really gets me about the seersucker situation are the shoes. #MOleg— Ashley Jost (@ajost) April 24, 2013
Sitting in the Missouri Senate listening to discussion on an amendment to only allow those under 8 yrs old to wear seersucker suits #moleg— Ryan Stauffer (@RyanCStauffer) April 24, 2013
After the jump, for posterity, the full document: