Phelps, Plummer go side-by-side in Chamber Candidate Forum

Published 6:38 am Thursday, October 22, 2026

WARRENSBURG — Missouri House District 54 candidates Brandon Phelps, R-Warrensburg, and Taigan Plummer, D-Warrensburg, went toe-to-toe during the Warrensburg Chamber of Commerce Candidate Forum on Wednesday, Oct. 21, at the Matthews-Crawford Post No. 131 American Legion.

The race was one of three covered during the forum, and is the only one where numerous candidates for a race were on hand.

District 54 includes Warrensburg, Centerview and Holden, along with rural areas of northern Johnson County.

Moderator Marion “Woody” Woods presented both candidates with a series of eight questions, established by the Governmental Relations Committee following input from Chamber members and the public.

Five of the eight questions related to statewide amendments voters will decide on in the Nov. 3 election.

The candidates first explained their positions on Amendment 3, which would prohibit abortion and gender transition procedures for minors.

If approved, it would repeal the 2024 voter-approved amendments providing reproductive health care rights, including abortion through fetal viability. Approval would also allow legislation regulating abortion, ensure parental consent for minors’ abortions and prohibit gender transition procedures. The amendment’s language would allow abortions for rape and incest under 12 weeks of gestation, and in the situation of emergencies and fetal anomalies.

Plummer fielded the question first.

“Amendment 3, the way it was written, would repeal the voter-approved 2024 provision for women’s healthcare, including abortion,” Plummer said. “The government shouldn’t be legislating your body; they shouldn’t be legislating mine. The other thing is Amendment 3, as it stands, talks about transgender surgery for minors. That’s already illegal. It’s a talking point to try to get you to repeal the rights you voted for back in 2024.”

Phelps considered his position unique in the fact that he voted to put Amendment 3 on the ballot. For that reason, he is for the approval of the amendment.

“The legislature is not regulating anything here, but what is here is the legislature is listening to all the people who called in, emailed, got us and spoke to us in public and said, ‘you know what, Missouri once was one extreme where there could be no abortions,’” Phelps said. “Now Missouri is at the other extreme where anybody can have an abortion at any point … We listened to those concerns. Who would the legislature be to tell you what the new law is going to be.”

Candidates were next pressed on Amendment 6, relating to initiative and referendum powers and legislative change requirements.

An approval supports prohibiting the legislature from repealing or amending a citizen initiative unless at least 80% of both the House and Senate vote to refer a proposed change to the ballot, and voters then approve the change; provides courts can revise ballot summaries through lawsuits; provides the initiative and referendum process is a fundamental right; preserves the signature requirements and simple majority vote requirements for initiatives and referendums and prohibits the legislature from weakening the citizen initiative and referendum process.

Phelps opposes the amendment, stating the power should belong to the legislature making decisions based on input received from the people.

“When you read just the talking points, it sounds great,” Phelps said. “The talking points to prevent a legislature from overturning the will of the people, I like that concept. And if that was only the end result, I would love it. What are we going to do in rural Missouri when it’s put on the ballot that some portion of Missouri should have our funds redirected to the large metro areas? They already say they want to do it … this may never happen, but what if it does because they say that’s what they want to do?”

Plummer is for the amendment, stating it would keep the power with the people.

“I believe the voice of the people is the final say,” Plummer said. “I have said time and time again that that should be the case. At Burg Fest two weekends ago, I told people that if the majority of the people in this room voted to paint the courthouse pink, I would highly disagree with it, but at the end of the vote, I would roll up my sleeve, grab a paint roller and help you. Our vote should have integrity. Any politician that says otherwise thinks you voted for them, because they think they’re smarter than you.”

The next question asked for the candidates’ position on Amendment 7, which would create a permanent public endowment fund managed by the state to generate revenue, and use the earnings to eliminate state-imposed taxes when sufficient to replace them.

The amendment is one both Plummer and Phelps agreed on voting no for.

“I think it’s bad policy for Missouri,” Plummer said. “I want to be clear, both red states and blue states have policies similar to Amendment 7. What Missouri lacks is the windfall of funding for one of these funds Missouri is trying to accomplish through the Show-Me Prosperity Fund. Other states such as Alaska and Texas have oil. Nevada has Las Vegas and casino revenue. Missouri doesn’t have those types of tax revenues to fund things. So then you have to ask, where is the money coming from?”

Phelps said he would love for Missouri to live off investments rather than taxation, but drew concerns.

“I have a significant concern about how that is going to be funded, where those appropriations are going to come from, what the consistency in those appropriations would be from one legislature to the next,” Phelps said. “I worry that our generation and the next several generations would have money diverted from the things we need – from healthcare to education to roads. And we’re going to divert that money to a hope that someday there will be enough funds to generate enough interest to sustain ourselves off that interest.”

The next question pressed was Amendment 8, which would require the election of county sheriffs in most counties and establish sheriffs as the chief law enforcement officers in those counties, and limit the removal of sheriffs from office to the Attorney General.

The election of sheriffs is already outlined in state statute, with exceptions of St. Louis County, St. Charles County and the City of St. Louis.

“I love the idea of a constitutional sheriff,” Phelps said. “I believe the sheriff, no different than any office holder, should be elected by the people. It’s that simple. I don’t like the idea of any elected official that is going to be non-elected and be appointed – specifically one that is going to have the power of law enforcement. The idea that anyone would not answer to the people when they have the ability to arrest us, put us in jail, I don’t like the idea.”

Plummer opposed it.

“I don’t want to see only one person in the State of Missouri only being enabled to intervene when there is a bad actor,” Plummer said. “Especially our attorney general, who quite frankly has a hundred different job descriptions already. Two, I think if we trust local people to hold our sheriff accountable, we are going to get a much better result compared to shuffling that duty off to somebody who is in Jefferson City. I trust our local officials. I believe we should vote no on Amendment 8.”

Plummer also opposed Proposition A, which has to do with redistricting. If approved, Johnson County would be placed in District 5 – one of three to also cover the Kansas City area.

“We need a congressional representative that is focused on rural areas, on Johnson County, that aren’t having to split their time between here and Kansas City,” Plummer said. “I believe that voting on Proposition A would make it so we have three Kansas City representatives. That’s what we’re basically setting ourselves up for if we’re being truthful about it.”

Phelps said the three representatives in Kansas City would be similar to St. Louis. He was in a special session where the new map was approved. Johnson County was impacted by the new map during the August election. The court has since prevented it from going into effect.

“What the constituents right here in Johnson County had to say, the vast majority of them, it wasn’t even close, wanted to go to a new map,” Phelps said. “I can tell you this – it may seem like the job up here is to represent what we think, what we believe. It may be part of it, but we do have to listen to constituents.”

Phelps and Plummer were also pressed on policies to support, recruit, train and retain workers in Missouri, ways to improve healthcare and mental health services in the region and safeguard school funding.

Missouri House of Representatives District 57

Democratic candidate Michael D. Walbom, of Knob Noster, appeared at the forum for the District 57 race.

He is running against Republican Matthew Sergent, also of Knob Noster. Sergent was not present.

The district covers Knob Noster, Whiteman Air Force Base, Leeton, Chilhowee, Kingsville, Windsor, Lincoln, Cole Camp and Warsaw.

The seat is currently held by Windsor’s Roger Reedy, who is term-limited.

“I’m running because I feel like the legislature is failing Missourians,” Walbom said. “We’ve got rural hospitals closing. Rural citizens need healthcare just as much as everyone else. They’re gerrymandering our congressional district. Voters are supposed to choose candidates. They’re not supposed to choose voters. Women’s reproduction rights, that is not the government’s business. The government’s business is to make sure medical care is given adequately, as in all medical cases.”

Walbom fielded questions on each amendment, opposing Amendments 3, 7 and 8 while supporting Amendment 6. He also opposed Proposition A.

He also spoke on growing and keeping workers in Missouri, improving funding for healthcare and measures to support rural education.

“Right now, I see there is nothing conservative about the current grand old party,” Walbom said. “It seems like the Missouri constitution doesn’t bother them; they’ve tried to change things. They’ve overturned citizens’ initiative; they tried to illegally change congressional districts … You’ll see my sign up front says Walbom for Women’s Rights. It’s because I couldn’t fit Walbom for LGBTQ rights, human rights, minority rights and any disenfranchised person.”

Fourth Congressional District Race

Fourth Congressional District Democratic candidate Jordan Herrera, of Kansas City, took part in the forum.

He is running against incumbent Mark Alford, Lake Winnebago, and Libertarian Thomas Holbrook, Knob Noster.

Herrera, an Air Force Veteran, boasted his support for the armed forces and veterans.

“Although we lost 10,000 in Iraq and Afghanistan, we lost 30,000 once they came home,” Herrera said. “The war doesn’t stop when you step off the battlefield. I can speak to that personally. I’m a three-time survivor of self-harm and suicide brought on by combat trauma. Sometimes that war goes on and rages behind your eyes late at night, when no one else is around.”

Herrera was pressed on what he would do to strengthen the economy while managing the cost of living and supporting small businesses, farmers and working families.

“There are simple ways that we can reduce the cost of goods across the board,” Herrera said. “Number one, it’s getting out of this war with Iran. Doing so will help us to drop the kaizen, costs of diesel and fuel. But, we’ll also help us to regulate the fertilizer industry better.”

Herrera’s six questions also included discussion on how to achieve results in a political divide.

“How does this Democrat work with conservatives in one of our most conservative states,” Herrera said. “Because you meet them where they’re at. I don’t offer a word of judgment or combat mention and simply talk to them about the problems they are facing in their own life. How this is unaffordable, whether you’re a Republican or Democrat, healthcare access is hard to achieve. It doesn’t matter what your political party is. Food care, food reliability systems. Finding ways to buy groceries. That’s not partisan, that’s America right there.”

Local ballot issue

Along with the state amendments, voters will decide on the continuation of an existing countywide sales tax of one-eighth (1/8) of one percent (1%) for the purpose of providing funding to the general revenue of the county for purposes to include, but not be limited to, operations and maintenance of an animal shelter.

If approved, the measure, first brought forth in 2021, would last through 2031.

Joe Andrews can be reached at 660-747-8223.