Five days.
That's all the time state lawmakers have left this year to pass - or kill - proposed changes to Missouri law.
The Missouri Constitution requires that "all bills in either house remaining on the calendar after 6 p.m. on the first Friday following the second Monday in May are tabled," so they can't be debated or voted on.
"We've got several issues that are out there," Sen. President Pro Tem Tom Dempsey acknowledged last week. "It's all policy-related."
The issues include:
• "Paycheck protection," which opponents have called "paycheck deception," which would require a public employee to notify the union each year that it's OK to have the employer withhold union fees from the employee's paycheck. Under current law, a public employee must tell the union when the employee does not approve of the withdrawal, or of the use of a portion of the dues for political activities.
• A 72-hour waiting period before a woman could undergo an abortion. Current law requires a 24-hour waiting period. Supporters say the longer period would give the pregnant woman more time to think if abortion is the choice she really wants to make, while opponents argue that choice has been made by the time the woman seeks to get an abortion, and that no other medical procedure has a government-mandated waiting time.
• "Early voting," a proposal to allow voters several days before an election to cast their ballots, without having the current absentee-voting requirements of providing a reason why the voter can't vote on election day. Opponents of the Legislature's bill argue it's got a much shorter time period than the six weeks' early voting proposed by an initiative petition turned in to the secretary of state's office last week.
• Photo Voter ID, a long-held Republican priority to make sure people's votes are counted and not diluted by fraud. Opponents say the bill really is aimed at keeping people from voting who would have trouble getting the required ID, and that there's no evidence of impersonation fraud at Missouri's polls.
Dempsey agreed those issues, and several others, have the potential to tie the Senate up in lengthy debates.
"The Criminal Code and the student transfer bill are two examples where the Senate members - Republican and Democrat, urban and rural - have worked very well together," he said. "And, I think, by and large we have done that (on many bills).
"Now we're down to some contentious issues which people feel very strongly about - on both sides."
The student transfers bill - how the state will implement and pay for a 1993, court-approved law will be used to let students leave an unaccredited school so they can attend classes in another school - and a proposed sales-tax increase for transportation improvements still await final votes, as well.
Dempsey was asked last week if Republicans - who hold a 23-9 margin in the Senate, when 18 votes are needed to pass a bill - would use the "previous question" motion to force a vote on some of the party's priority issues.
Dempsey said the caucus had not made that decision, yet - but would discuss it in a meeting likely to be held Monday.
Moving for the previous question - generally called the "PQ" - is a parliamentary procedure that, if it gets at least 18 votes, forces debate to end and a vote to be taken on the issue being debated.
It's used regularly in the House of Representatives but, historically, has been used sparingly in the Senate.
The Senate's tradition includes each lawmaker having the power to talk as long as he or she wishes about any topic.
And the tradition allows filibusters to occur, where one or more lawmakers (it works better with more) can slow down or prevent a vote from being taken on issues they don't agree with.
While mostly used by a minority party group to block the majority party from getting to a vote on a controversial issue, the filibuster also has been used within the majority party when there are differences among caucus members.
The closer the session gets to its end, and pressures mount to get bills passed before the clock runs out, the more effective a filibuster can be.
For instance, several GOP senators this year have said they're so opposed to the idea of any kind of Medicaid expansion that they're willing to filibuster it.
Last year, a proposed one-cent sales tax increase for transportation needs was killed on the last day of the session by a short filibuster.
"It wouldn't be the end of the world if we had to use the PQ," Dempsey said. "But, I think, members work together as best they can and, I think, when possible, if we can get through a session without using it, we'll try to do that.
"That goes back to members not only looking at their desire to get the legislation they care about on the governor's desk - but there's also that other consideration of how the PQ is being used, and how they might be on the other side of an issue, and how it might be used against them."