Mary L. Gant was born on July 14, 1936. She was the first female state senator of Missouri, elected in 1972. Prior to her senate term she had served for three terms in the Missouri House, 1967-1973. She served all her terms as a Democrat. (Reference note: Gant was her married name during her political career. Newquist was her married name at the time of the interview). For her most recent biographic entry, see the Official Manual of the State of Missouri, 1975-1976.After her own interview, Representative Peg Miller was helpfully responsible for informing Mrs. Newquist about the Politics oral history project. Mrs. Newquist responded quite eagerly to participating as well. I met Mrs. Newquist at her Jefferson City residence, where we enjoyed a very long visit that more than doubled the actual recording time.
Oral History ProgramThe State Historical Society of Missouri 1997Collection C3929 Politics in Missouri a.c. 168, 169An Interview withMary L. Gant Newquistat her home inJefferson City, Missouri17 July 1997interviewed by Will SarvisNOTICE1) This material is protected by copyright law (Title 17, U.S. Code). It may not be cited without acknowledgment to The Oral History Program of the State Historical Society of Missouri and the Western Historical Manuscript Collection, a Joint Collection of the University of Missouri and the State Historical Society of Missouri.Citations should include: [name of interviewee], [name of the interviewer], [date and place of interview], [audio recording or transcript], and [where it can be found, for example, The Oral History Program of the State Historical Society of Missouri, Politics in Missouri Oral History Project].2) Reproductions of this transcript are available for reference use only and cannot be reproduced or published in any form (including digital formats) without written permission from the Western Historical Manuscript Collection.3) Use of information or quotations from any Politics in Missouri Oral History Project transcript indicates agreement to indemnify and hold harmless the University of Missouri, the State Historical Society of Missouri, their officers, employees, and agents, and the interviewee from and against all claims and actions arising out of the use of this material.For further information, contact:Western Historical Manuscript Collection23 Ellis LibraryUniversity of MissouriColumbia, MO 65201-5149 PREFACEMary L. Gant was born on July 14, 1936. She was the first female state senator of Missouri, elected in 1972. Prior to her senate term she had served for three terms in the Missouri House, 1967-1973. She served all her terms as a Democrat. (Reference note: Gant was her married name during her political career. Newquist was her married name at the time of the interview). For her most recent biographic entry, see the Official Manual of the State of Missouri, 1975-1976.After her own interview, Representative Peg Miller was helpfully responsible for informing Mrs. Newquist about the Politics oral history project. Mrs. Newquist responded quite eagerly to participating as well. I met Mrs. Newquist at her Jefferson City residence, where we enjoyed a very long visit that more than doubled the actual recording time.The interview was recorded on 3M AVX60 / Sony type I (normal bias) audio cassettes, using a Marantz PMD-222 manual recorder (set on automatic recording level) and a Shure VP64 omnidirectional microphone attached to a floor stand. The audio quality is good.The following transcript represents a faithful rendering of the entire oral history interview. Minor stylistic alterations--none of factual consequence--have been made as part of a general transcription policy. Any use of brackets [ ] indicates editorial insertions not found on the original audio recordings. Parentheses () are used to indicate laughter or a spoken aside evident from the speaker's intonation. Quotation marks [ ] indicate speech depicting dialogue, words highlighted for the usual special purposes (such as indicating irony). Double dashes [--] and ellipses [ . . . ] are also used as a stylistic method in an attempt to capture nuances of dialogue or speech patterns. Words are italicized when emphasized in speech. In an effort to avoid cluttering the transcript with brackets, details surrounding complete proper names are not always found in the transcript itself, though the index contains, when possible, their fullest spelling. And although substantial care has been taken to render this transcript as accurately as possible, any remaining errors are the responsibility of the editor, Will Sarvis. MG = Mary Gant Newquist; WS = Will Sarvis 1WS: Im in Jefferson City, where Im with the Honorable Mary L. Gant Newquist, who served in the Missouri House and in the Missouri. In fact, you were the first woman to ever serve in the Missouri Senate. Thats a historical fact in itself. I thought before we talked about politics, maybe you could just give us a biographical sketch about where you were born and grew up and that kind of thing.MG: Okay. I was born in 1936. We were just coming out of the Depression. My father had been a father. His father was a banker and schoolteacher, and his mother stayed home. They were, as everyone was in that time, pretty poor. They came from Mound City, Kansas, and settled in Kansas City and went to work for the Kansas City Power and Light Company. He was a union organizer during the 40s, to organize the workers for IBEW [International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers] for power plants. Jobs were hard to come by. He made $25 a week. There was a court case pending before the national labor relations board, when they had an election. So Daddy was very, very involved in union politics, which of course at my young age, I wasnt aware of.So in 36, my dad supported my mother, who had two children by a previous marriage, his mother and father, and a brother and sister, all on $25 a week. They all lived with his folks, up the street on Denver, from where my mother lived. Thats where they met and married. My mother had two children when my father married. I was the first of his children. Times were hard, so my younger sister that was born about a year later lived with two matron aunts in Independence, because they couldnt afford to care for her. I grew up with a lot of hand-me-downs. There was not much talk of college education. MG 2 = Mary Gant Newquist; WS = Will SarvisThe community that I was raised in was the area which I represented. My mother had lived there from the time she was a small child. I was raised in the same house that my mother was raised in, and my children were raised, third generation, in the same, modest, three-bedroom house in the same blue collar neighborhood. So it was a very union-oriented, very blue collar district. Mother didnt work outside the home very much. My father was a devout church-goer. My mother was not. In fact, my mother was somewhat of a . . . (laughs) . . . my mother got around. But there was no drinking in our family.I liked to read. I made reasonably good grades in high school. I was reasonably popular. I worked from the time I was fourteen, even though they caught me and found I wasnt sixteen. So I was fired (laughs) from my first job. So I pretty much worked from the time I was fourteen. As you approached the 50s, Father Knows Best era, women were pretty much expected--at least in my neighborhood--to get married and settle down and have a family. Thats a pretty conservative background; pretty conservative neighborhood--solid Democrat, although that would change as time went on. They certainly were not liberal or forward thinking people.The community that I represented was the east-northeast part of Kansas City, which was an old part of Kansas City. A lot of Italian-Americans in the northeast. We were on the fringe of what would be called, in St. Louis, the Hill. Only in Kansas City it was called the northeast area, where you had a lot of first-generation immigrants from Italy. The east of the district that I represented had what they called Sugar Creek, a little community called Sugar Creek, that really was a group of Polish-Croatian-Americans, MG = Mary Gant Newquist; WS = Will Sarvis 3Slovaks, that were there to work in Standard Oil Company, and then Armco Steel, and United Auto Workers.[tape meter, 50]We had Leeds assembly plant. So there was plenty of work.We were east of Jackson. The black community was actually west and south. But it was a fringe area, because at that time it was prior to integration and busing. So we were not an integrated community as far as Afro-Americans are concerned, or blacks. Thats just about it.WS: Do you remember how old you were when you first got interested in politics?MG: I was interested in government when I was in high school. We had--they called it--civics. I dont know what they call it now, in school, but it was called civics. I had a civic teacher named Mr. Shepherd. And its real interesting, because later on in my career, after I was already in elective office, I ran into Mr. Shepherd, who was running on the Republican ticket for the House of Representatives. It was quite an experience to see a school teacher, who had taught me civics in high school, running for office after Id already been there, done that. (Chuckles)But I liked it in high school. I made very good grades. I can remember cutting out editorials in the Kansas City Star and putting them in a notebook to turn in for a grade. I made straight As in civics. I really think my dads interest in union politics and--I dont know where it came from, because there was no one else in our family. I dont know of anyone in my family that had a college degree, and I cant remember having any examples of government service. But I always have been interested in people. I was MG 4 = Mary Gant Newquist; WS = Will Sarvisalways a social person who liked people--but, at the same time, very private and very much a loner.WS: When you were growing up and especially when you started to think about getting into politics yourself, I wonder if there were any people that you looked up to as a role model, maybe on the state government level or national government level?MG: You know, its great to think that the reasons people get into politics is because they have some great desire to serve, or that they have a role model that theyre wanting to emulate.I can remember the first time I voted in a presidential election--and was outraged. Because my husband had just left me with three little children. We were living in Independence. It was my first opportunity to vote, for John Kennedy. I went up to vote, but I had already moved in with my parents in Kansas City. Of course in a small community--Independence was just sort of a suburb of Kansas City (and its grown considerably since then)--but, at any rate, I was not allowed a ballot. So I was denied the right to vote, and I was indignant. I do remember that.But the reason, if youre asking me how I got into politics, I did admire John F. Kennedy and wanted to vote for him very much. But the way I got into politics was that, as I said, my husband deserted me with three small children. I moved in with my parents, back to the old homestead (so to say). My sister went to work for the prosecutors office, for Joe Teasdale. She asked me if I would be interested in running for Democrat committee woman. I said, Well, I dont know. What is Democrat committee woman? She said, Gosh, I dont know, Mary. Theres a guy here thats associated with a political organization, that is looking for someone whose family has lived for a long time MG = Mary Gant Newquist; WS = Will Sarvis 5in the east-northeast area, and someone that knows the community, that would be interested in representing the community on the county committee.[tape meter, 100]Well, it sounded interesting. I said, Sure. Have him come out and talk to me.So he called me about a year later (chuckles), and asked if he could take me to lunch. Bear in mind, some time has elapsed here. I graduated in 54. So this is just ten years after Ive graduated from high school. Ive had three children. Im divorced. Im remarried. No individual source of income, except Im a home mom. Im not used to being taken out to lunch by gentlemen. So that was a real risqu thing for me to do, in the 50s. (Chuckles) I mean, I just almost felt like I was cheating on my husband, just having lunch with someone to discuss politics.Anyway, he explained to me what the Democrat county committee did, what our function was. I was active in PTA. I was room mother. I did those kind of things, as mothers did for their children in those days. He said he was going to have a ward meeting, and would I come and attend and discuss issues of concern to other parents and people in community. And it all sounded very idealistic at that time. The people that I visited with were interested in getting a member on the Kansas City school board. The Kansas City school board, in those days, and most--well, I cant speak for most school boards. I cant remember that far back. I better stick to what I know is accurate.The method of selecting members for this Kansas City school board was that both the Republican and the Democrat county committees would come up with a slate of business people in the community. And the Democrats and Republicans would cross-MG 6 = Mary Gant Newquist; WS = Will Sarvisendorse a slate. They would select leaders in the community, people who had business expertise, who had a background in knowing how to run a business; or academic credentials, or qualifications, at least, of some sort that would qualify them to serve on a professional board of that type.Then, that slate of candidates that was agreed to by Democrats and Republicans--and it was really not a partisan thing, so much as aimed toward qualifications of the individuals--then that slate would be presented to the voters, much like we select judges now. We would either vote the slate up or down. I was very young at the time; it sounded very idealistic and honorable to me. [We did this] in order for us (this Democrat organization) to elect enough people to serve on the board of education so that we could get our person on the board of education that represented our community. Because it tended to be more affluent people who had money, and who had education (of course). And, because they had those kind of qualifications, there were very few people with those kind of qualifications that would choose to live in a blue collar, moderate-income area.So this was the trial balloon (if you will) that was sold to me. (Laughs) And I thought it sounded good, too. However, I will say in retrospect--after working very diligently to change that system to an elective form (which was my first duty when I was elected, to develop legislation that would allow members to run from districts), which is primarily the law all over the land today--[it] should be repealed.[tape meter, 150]It should go back to the method of selecting qualified people, in my opinion. This would be (chuckling) very controversial today. But had I been reelected, I would have MG = Mary Gant Newquist; WS = Will Sarvis 7introduced legislation not to have board of education members elected from districts. Because I think you lose some of the expertise--well, you lose a lot of the expertise--plus, you put it right into the political process and the political system.In retrospect, I think it should be removed from the political system, and get back to running it as a business. If you look at the articles in the newspapers today, to see how many superintendents weve had in the Kansas City district, where they buy their contracts out. I mean, theyve got this neatest little network for superintendents of schools. They have not vested interests in the communities whatsoever. Its all about money. Thats really the way I got into politics. I thought I was doing an honorable thing, and I believe, at the time, people thought--the press certainly thought--it was a good idea to elect members from districts. Youd have districts-at-large, and then your smaller districts, to give representation from communities. In retrospect, I think it might have served well for a while. But I think its a method thats proven, over the years, that it has been too much embroiled in politics. They should take another look at it. So thats how I got in politics.WS: On the telephone you were describing to me the Kansas City political arena, this sort of machine politics that had existed during the Pendergast time, and then following that with Alex Presta and some other people. Maybe you could describe that.MG: I was going to say, I ran for committee woman in . . . lets see; 64. There was a man by the name of Bill Royster. I doubt that it comes up very much unless you talk to Kansas City people. He was a city councilman. He came from a very, very wealthy, affluent family; one of the few affluent families that still lived in the old part of the northeast area MG 8 = Mary Gant Newquist; WS = Will Sarvisup on Cliff Drive and Gladstone Boulevard; all these large, beautiful mansions. He came from a very prestigious family. In order to have an organization; even a ward organization, you have to have two elements: you have to have access to money, someone that can help finance it, that has the time to make the contacts in the political arena, to get patronage jobs. So, jobs and money are what drives a political organization, and of course the desire for influence and power. (Chuckles) It kind of runs right in there, hand in glove.And, in order to do that, in the old time politics the philosophy, if you go back to the Pendergast days, is that you can give the people something that they dont have. You can do things for people. You can perform services. Youre part of the community. When that precinct captain knocks on your door, you know who the precinct captain is. That precinct captain knows everything thats going on in the community. They know if your kids are in trouble. They know what school they go to. If theyve gone on strike and your husband needs a job for a while.[tape meter, 200]If one of your kids has gotten in trouble with the courts, they know what the process is. Everyday people dont know those kinds of ways of solving everyday problems. And theyre not getting in schools today. Theyre not learning how government really works at the grassroots level. Its all media and money. At least in those days, with patronage, you had a feel for the people.So, this Democrat organization was headed up by Bill Royster who was, quote (we didnt call him) the boss. But he was head of the deal. There were underlings. MG = Mary Gant Newquist; WS = Will Sarvis 9We didnt call them captains, or any such romantic things. They were ward leaders. And the ward leader was the person who was responsible for getting the committee people to run from the wards. If you more or less could deliver the vote in a given community, you had value on a statewide basis. First, at the local level--city, the county, and the state, and ultimately the national. We were part of the process.So this Democratic organization, Bill Royster controlled (as you will), could deliver the vote. The press would use the word control. It meant that we could deliver. And you could guarantee on election day we could deliver so many votes in so many wards. So Alex Presta and Bill Royster originally were part of the clean up team, with their little brooms, to sweep the Pendergast machine out of the Jackson County courthouse. And they were very successful in sweeping out the old Pendergast machine, but they swept in their own new machine (chuckles), which was the Democratic Good Government Association. Alex Presta had his own club, which was further down towards the market area, which was pretty much solid, old, first-generation Italians, like the Hill. Then, the further northeast you got, you moved further to the east, it was second generation. But it was a very close-knit community. Strongly Italian, Irish-Catholic in the northeast. Then youd move over, as I said, into the other parts of the community where it was a very diverse community.Our job, our goal, was, number one (especially from my perspective), was to provide good government and to have an input. Because people with money and privilege had more influence than people who were not privileged. So, we ran a tight ship. You were rewarded with patronage positions, jobs. And you were expected to do MG 10 = Mary Gant Newquist; WS = Will Sarvisyour jobs and to do a good job, both in your precinct and in your position. My first job was, I worked at the Kansas City Board of Trade. It was a patronage position. It was a minimum wage job writing grain certificates. It was not a big job. It was not a pad job. I was expected to show up. I was expected to do a good job. I was expected to work my precinct. And if I didnt carry my precinct I didnt get to keep my job.[tape meter, 250]Bill Royster, his rise to power came from and was later picked up by Warren Hearnes or--I dont know which, the chicken or egg--but the big issue with the old statewide machine was the state workers had to pay what they called a lug to the Democrat organization that gave them their jobs. By this time, patronage was getting a very dirty name with the press. And I dont know, maybe the evils of the patronage had gotten to the point where too many people didnt want to show up for the jobs. They resented having to pay their lug. They didnt want to work their precinct--that was called party discipline.I was young when I came into it. I assumed that that was part of my responsibility. For being able to participate in the political process you had to pay your dues. And I didnt see anything wrong with it. Of course, I was only twenty-eight years old and probably couldnt see the evils.[initial telephone call interruption; but tape recorder left off for about an hour for interviewee and interviewer to discuss the nature of the session, questions and answers, et cetera]MG = Mary Gant Newquist; WS = Will Sarvis 11WS: . . . talk about the Jackson Days in Springfield, and over the telephone you were telling me about the groups, the Democratic Party groups from Kansas City and, I guess, the rest of the state.MG: The state. Yes, there was a time when, I think, politics was a lot simpler. You could win elections with a lot less money. And the way they did it--you know, I talked previously about patronage and about the old ward organizations and patronage jobs and discipline in the party, and blah blah blah. Well, actually, during Jackson Days, when all of the Democrats would congregate in Springfield, Missouri--in those days, there were organizations that had the ability to deliver large numbers of votes in your August primaries. The powers that be, at that time, were, pretty much--you had Freedom, Incorporated, in Kansas City that could deliver the black votes. You had the northeast area, out to eastern Jackson County, which was Bill Royster and the Democratic Good Government Association. In eastern Jackson County you had Harvey Jones, who was the county highway engineer, and he pretty much controlled or could deliver (as we would say) the votes in eastern Jackson County. Then you had J.V. Conran down in the Bootheel, who could deliver a large number of votes. In St. Louis youd have various factions. Youd have the Syrians or Sorkis Webbe. Im sure Im forgetting some of the big organizations that Im not as familiar with in St. Louis. But nevertheless, there were the same type of machine organizations in St. Louis. A few that could speak for many. (Chuckles) Or, one or two that would speak for many.[tape meter, 300]Then there would be some other rural leaders that Im not aware of. MG 12 = Mary Gant Newquist; WS = Will SarvisBut nevertheless, it would be a reasonably small number of people that could congregate and guarantee that they could deliver so many votes. And in a primary, they would try to agree to at least on the statewide slate. For instance, when Warren Hearnes was running for governor against Hilary Bush, the powers that be in the old Establishment were going to go for Hilary Bush. The Democratic organization that I belonged to went for Hilary Bush. But, Warren Hearnes was extremely successful in courting and acquiring the support of many other organizations, and the anti- (or theyd call them) rump organizations, and was very successful in putting together a statewide campaign. He was successful in getting money. And he managed to appeal to the weaknesses in the old organized way of doing business. In other words, the patronage. People had to pay a lug, in those days, to support the organization to keep their jobs. That became a source of conflict. A lot of people that didnt have particularly high paying jobs resented having to pay a percentage of their check to support the Democratic organization. So that was one of the big issues, I believe, in Warren Hearnes campaign, at least from my perspective, as I recall it in the Kansas City area at that time.But they would meet and literally get into their smoke-filled back rooms. (Chuckles) Im sure. I was never that important in politics in the 60s to ever be included in any of those high-power meetings. But they did meet, and they discussed [the statewide slate]. You were free to go for whoever you wanted to at the local level, but on the statewide slate--governor, lieutenant governor, and whoever was running in that particular year; treasurers, secretary of state, et cetera--they would cut their deals. And, of course, the candidates would be there. You would have hospitality rooms. An MG = Mary Gant Newquist; WS = Will Sarvis 13awful lot of lobbying and partying would go on, and of course, promises of high jobs were made here and there.Traditionally, as I remember it, the rural boys would have access to the patronage jobs in the department of agriculture, the department of revenue.[tape meter, 350]And by the way, these agencies today are subject to some of the merit [system] provisions, but theyre not, in a strict sense of the word, under the merit law. At least the department of revenue isnt. The department of revenue, and agriculture, and various agencies were literally given to specific political organizations for their selection of people that they wanted to place in the high-powered positions. Directors, division directors, department heads, et cetera. And the governor would honor those. If you notice nowadays, the governor, half the time, doesnt make all of his appointments. He must not have cut too many good deals. (Laughs)[end of side 1, tape I; tape meter, 364]MG: . . . that is the way it used to be. Over the years that process changed considerably. As I said, the evils of patronage were pointed out by the press and actually became a crusade of the press. Little by little the media became much more dominant in influencing the outcome of elections. I dont want to say it was a big conspiracy, but I think the press considers themselves a watch dog. They determined, collectively, that patronage was bad, that something sinister was going on in campaigns, in terms of the money. So campaign finance reform was pushed. Not that some accountability or more accountability wasnt needed, because Im sure there were some abuses, although I will MG 14 = Mary Gant Newquist; WS = Will Sarvissay that there are plenty of laws on the books. If people are crooks--you know, Dick Rabbitt was indicted and convicted, and I dont believe under the new campaign finance reform laws.Now we have term limits. I personally was not in support of term limits. We have term limits. You vote them out, every two years. But, on the other end of that coin, money has become extremely important in elections. Given the two, the patronage system or the media government, I think that government was a lot closer to the people when you still had (if you will) a reward system. People who served in office who had a vested interest in serving the public, who cared about their community, knew the people they were servicing. It wasnt an eight to five job where they went home. They were involved in their job, and not removed from it emotionally, or financially, for that matter.WS: Once you got into the Legislature, Im wondering about some of the other Kansas City area people. You mentioned Freedom Incorporated, so Leon Jordan comes to mind.MG: Yes.WS: Harold Holliday and just some of the other people. I wonder what the dynamics of that group of people were, and if you could maybe describe some of the consensus or conflict over certain issues, and that sort of thing.MG: Leon Jordan was a gifted civil rights leader. He and Bruce Watkins were responsible, literally, in the 50s, actually, when blacks were not even allowed to use the rest rooms in downtown Kansas City, were not allowed to eat at the lunch counter in Kresges. They filed litigation and won a great civil rights battle on behalf of blacks in Kansas City, and MG = Mary Gant Newquist; WS = Will Sarvis 15sort of set a precedent on a statewide level. So they were correctly motivated, but what is that statement? Power corrupts, ultimate power corrupts ultimately?WS: Absolute power corrupts absolutely.MG: Thats it, Will. Sooner--well, usually, later on--then it becomes more involved in greed. I cant think of any particular issue off the top of my head. I think if an issue was involved, I think the black and white community usually worked pretty much hand in glove--as long as it was an issue. I think racism entered into the picture a great deal, and infringement on who was going to have the power to wield was at issue a lot. The black community was growing in numbers. The white community--you know, white flight--they were moving out of the city, moving to the suburbs. That was a dynamic that was occurring. The white members of the community felt that if blacks moved into the community that their property values would drop. It was, in a way, racial. But really it was economic.But on political issues, I think we were on the same side--no, I take it back. Freedom, Incorporated, did go for Warren Hearnes, and we stayed with the old Establishment and stayed with Hilary Bush (not Clinton [laughs]).[tape meter, 50]So, thats kind of the way it was.WS: What was your perspective on the interaction of Kansas City legislators with St. Louis legislators?MG: I perceived a big rivalry between Kansas City and St. Louis. The city of St. Louis, in sheer numbers--because St. Louis city is not a city within a county, the way Kansas City MG 16 = Mary Gant Newquist; WS = Will Sarvisis--they had all the legislative votes in St. Louis County. So you had the city of St. Louis and St. Louis County, which outnumbered us and outvoted us consistently. Because eastern Jackson County had their people, but Kansas City was a city within a county. So, they received a lot of consideration because they had a lot of development going on in the county. We had in Jackson County, the Little Blue Valley sewer district. I was very instrumental in getting funding for the Little sewer district in eastern Jackson County. But St. Louis was pretty dominant in terms of the leadership. If you look at the leadership, Pat Hickey was [speaker pro tem] for pretty much as long as he wanted it. Your Speakers were always from the St. Louis area. Dick Rabbitt. Lets see; Im trying to think of the one who was Speaker under Warren Hearnes. He was in an automobile accident.WS: Jim Godfrey?MG: Jim Godfrey, yes. He was from St. Louis. Actually, the first time we had any great amount of power in the Legislature was under Bob Griffin. I was already out of office during a large part of Griffins reign. He didnt come to the Legislature until 72, I think. So he was Speaker. I left in 80.WS: One thing weve been talking about a little bit is organized labor. I wonder if there was a breakdown in the organized labor situation, also based in Kansas City and St. Louis, or if there was a unity between the two cities within organized labor?MG: Im not sure what youre asking me about.WS: Well, like the inner workings of organized labor. For instance, when I talked to Pat Hickey about, say, the right to work referendum that Vic Downing was promoting. MG = Mary Gant Newquist; WS = Will Sarvis 17(Thats something else we can talk about). But he would single out the auto workers as opposed to maybe all the other unions as causing trouble or not, maybe, going along with the other unions. So, the kind of inner dynamics Im curious about. And I think the organized labor situation in Kansas City is bound to be different from the organized labor