MO GOP governor candidates rip Chiefs funding, embrace Christian nationalism in debate

Two of the top Republican candidates for Missouri governor during a debate that aired Thursday rejected the idea of public funding to keep the Kansas City Chiefs in the state and entertained freeing the first Kansas City police officer convicted for killing a Black man.

They also embraced Christian nationalism.

Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft and Sen. Bill Eigel squared off in an hour-long TV debate taped on Wednesday that aired Thursday night on St. Louis station KSDK. Next to Ashcroft and Eigel was an empty podium for Lt. Gov. Mike Kehoe, who did not attend, citing a scheduling conflict.

The two Republicans, who are each attempting to court right-wing voters, traded barbs over a broad swath of topics from the Chiefs to abortion rights to immigration ahead of the Aug. 6 primary election.

As Kansas attempts an aggressive plan to lure the Chiefs and Royals across state lines, both Ashcroft and Eigel staunchly pushed back on the idea of using any public funds to respond.

Their answers could prove pivotal to the state’s goal of keeping the teams as Gov. Mike Parson — who terms out of office in January — has vowed to develop a plan to keep the teams over the coming months.

Ashcroft, who has served as secretary of state since 2017, suggested that taxpayer subsidies do not work for businesses and sports teams. He pointed to a slew of professional sports teams that have left St. Louis over the past several years.

“I don’t believe that the government should be sticking its hand into your pocket to take money to give to billionaire team owners,” Ashcroft said. “Taking your money…is not the role of government and it won’t happen under my watch.”

Eigel, a hard-right senator from Weldon Spring who has developed a confrontational reputation in the General Assembly, expressed confidence that the Chiefs and the Royals would stay in Missouri without public funding.

“They’re going to make the right decision, but they’re not going to make that decision as a result of a taxpayer bailout for billionaires,” he said. “Is $18 for a hot dog not enough money for these billionaire owners? I think it is.”

Kansas’ push to attract the teams comes after Jackson County voters in April rejected a stadium tax in April that would have effectively guaranteed the teams would stay in Missouri after their 25-year leases expire in January 2031.

Top Missouri lawmakers recently held a string of meetings with representatives from both teams and Parson has met with local leaders in the Kansas City-area. While Parson and lawmakers have cited the importance of keeping the teams, no concrete plan has emerged.

Freeing DeValkenaere

Both candidates expressed a willingness to pardon Eric DeValkenaere, the first white Kansas City Police Department officer ever convicted for killing a Black man. Eigel went the furthest of the two, openly promising to free him.

The case of DeValkenaere, who is serving a six-year sentence for fatally shooting 26-year-old Cameron Lamb in 2019, has long simmered in the public eye, particularly in the Kansas City region.

“I want the family, who I’m sure is listening here tonight, to know that in my first week in office, I’m going to back the blue by actually pardoning Eric DeValkenaere and we’re going to get him back home with his family,” Eigel said.

DeValkenaere’s supporters have mounted a public campaign for his pardon. Parson has also openly entertained the possibility of clemency but has not yet announced a decision on whether he will commute his sentence.

The former police detective’s case has been a cause célèbre of sorts for Republicans who have attempted to frame his conviction as political. However, numerous courts have upheld his 2021 conviction and any commutation of his sentence is almost certain to provoke an explosive backlash in Kansas City.

Eigel initially sidestepped a question about what message a pardon would send to the Black community by attempting to shift the topic to illegal immigration. When pressed, he said he wasn’t “aware of any part of the state of Missouri that doesn’t want to back police officers to do their job.”

Ashcroft wasn’t asked directly about DeValkenaere during the debate but referenced the case in response to another question. He appeared to attempt to frame the case as political.

“We will work to make sure that if there is a prosecutor with a vendetta, officers get a fair shake and they can have a change of venue — maybe to Cole County — so we never see what happened in Kansas City earlier with an individual, as far as I can tell, all he did was followed his training, and now he’s in jail for six years.”

Ashcroft previously told The Star he was “committed to a close review of Eric DeValkenaere’s conviction and consideration of a pardon.”

Christian nationalism

Both Ashcroft and Eigel said they would label themselves as Christian nationalists, echoing Sen. Josh Hawley’s embrace of the idea that American politics and culture are, and should be, rooted in the Christian faith.

When asked initially during a yes-no portion of the debate whether they would describe themselves as Christian nationalists, neither candidate raised his hand.

Ashcroft demanded that the moderators provide a definition of the phrase, saying, “I’m a Christian and I believe in this country.”

Later on in the debate, a moderator provided a definition of the phrase and asked whether the two candidates would label themselves as such. The definition, from Christianity Today, stated that Christian nationalism “is the belief that the American nation is defined by Christianity and that the government should take active steps to keep it that way.”

“Yes,” said Eigel.

“We were founded as a Christian nation, and we want to keep those guiding principles. Yes,” said Ashcroft.

The stark answers came after Hawley openly embraced the idea while speaking at the National Conservatism Conference earlier this month, saying: “Some will say that I’m advocating Christian nationalism. So I do. My question is: Is there any other kind worth having?”

Republicans nationally have attempted to recast Christian nationalism, a typically fringe idea, as more mainstream.

However, researchers have found that people who are open to Christian nationalism often have anti-democratic instincts, are open to efforts to limit access to voting and consider certain people as more authentically American, according to previous reporting.

This story includes reporting from The Star’s Daniel Desrochers and Jonathan Shorman.