From the Topeka Capital-Journal
Speaker lauds Senate's call for budget cuts
Merrick: Senate moving closer to House budget philosophy
Posted: March 1, 2013 - 1:35pm
By Andy Marso
THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL
House Speaker Ray Merrick, R-Stilwell, said Friday that Senate President Susan Wagle's call for cuts to Gov.
Sam Brownback's proposed budget could make it easier to reconcile House and Senate plans that have yet to
coalesce.
House and Senate leaders continue to disagree on tax philosophies — with senators tracking closer to
Brownback's recommendation to keep an elevated sales tax and end some income tax deductions in order to
cut future income tax rates.
But Merrick said Wagle's comments on budget-cutting Thursday night are welcome.
"All of a sudden they are looking for cuts," Merrick said. "That’s intriguing because that’s a different
direction than they’ve been talking. Maybe they’re coming more toward our way of thinking and conference
committee’s going to be easier.”
Brownback's proposed budget uses revenue from the sales tax and eliminating the home mortgage interest
and property tax deductions to pay for last year's income tax cuts and avoid deep budget reductions.
Senate leaders said Thursday night they foresee going lower on state spending.
"We’re going to have to cut the budget from the governor’s recommendations,” Wagle, R-Wichita, said.
"We’ve got our Ways and Means (Committee) chairman turning over every rock.”
Still, Senate Majority Leader Terry Bruce, R-Hutchinson, said there is widespread agreement on the Senate
for keeping the state sales tax at 6.3 percent rather than letting it drop to 5.7, and scuttling the home mortgage
interest deduction.
“Otherwise what are you going to use to buy down the income tax rate?" Bruce said. "We’re looking at doing
some significant tax relief for personal income tax in the near future.”
Senate Vice President Jeff King, R-Independence, said both Democrats and Republicans in the past have
agreed on the principle of broadening the income tax base and lowering rates. Bruce said that by doing away
with the mortgage deduction, the state would move significantly closer to ending the usefulness of itemized
deductions for all Kansans, thus greatly simplifying tax filings.
But Senate Minority Leader Anthony Hensley, D-Topeka, distributed an email from the Kansas Chamber
urging recipients to vote against keeping the elevated sales tax. Hensley said a stance like that from the
Chamber — a major campaign contributor — "boxes in a number of Republican senators."
Bruce said a tax bill wouldn’t likely come to the Senate floor next week, which is a short one for the
Legislature, but could come the week after.
If passed by the full Senate it would go to the House. If House members have different ideas, each chamber
would pick three members to sit down and hash out a single conference committee compromise.
The chambers are taking fundamentally different approaches to the process, with the Senate looking to pass a
tax bill first and then make a budget to match it and the House looking to cut the budget first and then write a
tax bill to match it.
Wagle said that was arranged pre-session, but House Majority Leader Jene Vickrey, R-Louisburg, said Friday
that it is "fundamentally sound to do the budget first."
"That, I think is just common sense," Vickrey said. "We’re tightening the belt a little bit.”
Merrick said proposals to keep the sales tax at 6.3 percent would probably not be well-received in his
chamber, which soundly defeated Friday a bill to increase fees for delinquent vehicle registration fees that
represented a far smaller cost hike to the citizenry.
“I think you’ve got a body out here that, again, raising fees and raising taxes, there’s not really an appetite for
it," Merrick said. "If the Senate wants to keep the six-tenths (of a cent) that’s their prerogative, but that’s a
different direction than we’re probably going to go.”
Rep. Paul Davis, D-Lawrence, said House Democrats are also unlikely to support keeping the sales tax hike
that passed in 2010 and sunsets in July because of its "regressivity."
"What you’re seeing here is a tax shift whereby we’re going to increase the burden on middle-class and
lower-income Kansans for a tax cut that primarily benefits the wealthy and corporate entities,” Davis said.
Wagle refuted the idea that assertion, saying the tax plan is it was all part of a jobs plan that would help raise
every Kansans' standard of living.
"Our goal is the march to zero (income tax),” Wagle said.
Wagle: Governor's budget will have to be cut
Senate inclination to retain sales tax, remove mortgage deduction
Posted: February 28, 2013 - 7:17pm
By Andy Marso
THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL
Senate leaders said Thursday night they will have to cut into Gov. Sam Brownback's budget proposal, but
believe they are close to having a tax bill done that will track closely with Gov. Sam Brownback's.
"We’re going to have to cut the budget from the governor’s recommendations,” Senate President Susan
Wagle, R-Wichita, said. "We’ve got our Ways and Means (Committee) chairman turning over every rock.”
Senate Majority Leader Terry Bruce, R-Hutchinson, said there is widespread agreement on the tax committee
for keeping the state sales tax at 6.3 percent rather than letting it drop to 5.7, and scuttling the home mortgage
interest deduction as Brownback has suggested to help balance the budget after last year's income tax cuts
and afford more.
“Otherwise what are you going to use to buy down the income tax rate?" Bruce said. "We’re looking at doing
some significant tax relief for personal income tax in the near future.”
Bruce said a tax bill would not likely come to the Senate next week, which is a short one for the Legislature,
but could come the week after.
Senate Vice President Jeff King, R-Independence, said both Democrats and Republicans in the past have
agreed on the principle of broadening the income tax base and lowering rates. Bruce said that by doing away
with the mortgage deduction, the state would move significantly closer to ending the usefulness of itemized
deductions for all Kansans, thus greatly simplifying tax filings.
Wagle refuted the idea that a further shift from relying on income tax revenue to sales tax revenue would
disproportionately burden the state's low-income citizens, saying that it was all part of a jobs plan that would
help raise every Kansans' standard of living.
"Our goal is the march to zero (income tax),” Wagle said.
Kansas Senate delaying tax bill debate
Winter storms leading to bottleneck of legislation
Posted: February 26, 2013 - 1:17pm
By The Associated Press
Debate on Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback’s proposal to further cut income taxes will be delayed a few weeks
so lawmakers can clear other legislation by a key deadline.
Senate Majority Leader Terry Bruce said the income tax bill would probably be debated during the week of
March 11 because of a backlog of other issues. The backlog happened after two snow storms prompted
legislators to adjust their schedules, including missing one full day and starting late on another.
“The weather’s postponing everything,” said Bruce, a Hutchinson Republican.
Legislators must clear most bills that started in their chamber by this weekend. However, there are some
committees that are exempt, including budget and tax. Legislators are scheduled to be off March 4 and 5, so
significant issues are being pushed to the following week, Bruce said.
“What I’d really like to see is one tax day in the Senate,” he said. “We may get more bang for our buck if we
put it off.”
Brownback wants to phase in a second round of cuts in individual income tax rates over the next four years.
His plan also would trigger further rate reductions in the future if economic growth is robust.
To offset those cuts, Brownback wants to eliminate income tax deductions for the property taxes Kansans’
pay on their homes and the interest on their home mortgages. Also, he would keep the sales tax at 6.3 percent,
rather than letting it drop to 5.7 percent in July, as promised under legislation three years ago.
The Senate committee’s version preserves the deduction for property taxes but scraps the mortgage interest
and sales tax breaks. The bill would net the state $918 million in new revenues over the next three years,
before taxpayers saw most of the benefit from cutting individual income tax rates further.
The Kansas Department of Revenue contends that the increases are still offset for taxpayers through the
reductions in overall income tax rates over the next several years.
Bruce said he expects to see proposals to amend the bill to restore the elimination of deductions Brownback
is seeking, but he didn’t know specifics or wager a guess on their likelihood of passing.
“I want to give (senators) some options and keep the governor’s tax bill as clean as possible,” Bruce said.
Senate Minority Leader Anthony Hensley said the delay in the debate suggested to him that Republicans
were “trying to get their act together” and reflects a division among the 32 members of the GOP caucus over
the impact of the bill.
“I think there’s going to be an amendment to phase out the deductions as the income rates decline,” said
Hensley, a Topeka Democrat.
Hensley said the income tax cuts would result in a shift in the tax burden to property and sales taxes, hurting
the poor and middle class in the process. He said Democrats would vote against keeping the sales tax increase
in place.
“That will force a lot of those who voted for the sales tax increase to renege on the promise to make it
temporary,” Hensley said. “I won’t be responsible for that.”
Brownback riding Medicaid fence as GOP
peers jump right, left
Fourteen Republican governors reject expanding Medicaid eligibility,
eight GOP chief executives take opposite path
Posted: March 3, 2013 - 4:22pm
By Tim Carpenter
THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL
Moves by eight Republican governors to accept federally inspired expansion of Medicaid and action by 14
GOP chief executives to reject broadening of eligibility rules have yet to evoke a final decision by Kansas
Gov. Sam Brownback.
Brownback has made no unequivocal statement about whether Kansas would embrace Patient Protection and
Affordable Care Act provisions extending Medicaid benefits to about 225,000 Kansans in January 2014.
While the U.S. government is on the hook for 100 percent of cost hikes resulting from more generous
eligibility rules for three years and no less than 90 percent of those costs thereafter, Kansas' Republican
governor has limited himself to expressions of skepticism about the overall insurance overhaul.
Brownback said future policy on the state-federal Medicaid partnership would reflect collaboration with
Kansas legislators, but he signaled through a surrogate an affinity for GOP peers turning their back on
expansion.
"Expanding Medicaid as structured under Obamacare would cost Kansas hundreds of millions of dollars —
funding that would have to come from other core responsibilities like schools, prisons and roads," said
Brownback spokeswoman Sherriene Jones-Sontag. "Kansas needs to identify the most effective and
sustainable solutions for our state's unique public health care system."
GOP expansion enthusiasts include Florida's Rick Rick Scott, Ohio's John Kasich, Arizona's Jan Brewer,
Michigan's Rick Snyder and New Jersey's Chris Christie. Republicans denouncing expansion include Texas'
Rick Perry, Oklahoma's Mary Fallin, Iowa's Terry Branstad, Wisconsin's Scott Walker and Louisiana's
Bobby Jindal.
Medicaid covers 380,000 Kansans, including 230,000 children, at a cost of $2.8 billion annually to the state
and federal government. Kansas has among the most restrictive programs but covers the elderly, pregnant
women, children and the disabled who are poor.
Nondisabled adults without children aren’t eligible in Kansas, but such a person with kids can enroll if
income is no more than 32 percent of the federal poverty level — $5,900 a year in a family of four.
The law signed in 2010 by Democratic President Barack Obama extends eligibility to people with higher
incomes, but the U.S. Supreme Court declared states had the right to opt in or out.
If Kansas were to expand eligibility in accordance with federal law, Medicaid would be available to Kansans
earning up to 138 percent of the federal poverty plateau — $31,809 for a family of four.
The cost of Medicaid to Kansas taxpayers is expected to rise independent of the new federal approach to the
program.
A precise cost of eligibility expansion in Kansas remains in dispute, but administrators at community
hospitals are offering free advice to Brownback and legislators on the issue.
"A decision to forego Medicaid expansion is more than just a decision to refuse the federal funding
associated with Medicaid expansion," said Tom Bell, president and chief executive officer of the Kansas
Hospital Association. "It amounts to real cuts to hospitals that are currently serving as the primary safety net
for many uninsured individuals, and it comes at a time when the uncompensated care burden on those
hospitals continues to grow at an alarming rate."
Bell released a survey of Kansans by the ETC Institute of Olathe indicating 62 percent embraced Medicaid
expansion based on an assumption it would infuse $800 million in federal aid into Kansas over three years.
Seventy-two percent were supportive if it mean preventing Kansas tax dollars from going to other states.
House Speaker Ray Merrick, who leads a Republican contingent agitated by the Affordable Care Act, was
unshaken by the poll. He endorsed the resolution passed by the House Appropriations Committee calling for
rejection of Medicaid expansion, in part, because the federal government might not keep budget promises to
states.
"There's a group of my legislators who want to vote and want a public vote on how they stand," the Stilwell
Republican said. "We can weigh in and give some guidance."
House Minority Leader Paul Davis, D-Lawrence, said he assumed the resolution would pass in the House,
but debate would register "a good deal of opposition."
The Kansas Department of Health and Environment released a study estimating the state government would
spend $513 million more during the next 10 years on Medicaid without expansion of eligibility. The firm
Aon Hewitt, of Illinois, estimated the state's share for expansion under Obamacare would be $616 million
from 2014 to 2023.
Independent organizations with competing policy interests have offered estimates of the state's financial
responsibility under wider eligibility standards ranging from $171 million to $2.1 billion.
All quiet on the ObamaCare front in the
Kansas Legislature
Major campaign issue falls by wayside during session
Posted: March 3, 2013 - 2:16pm
By Andy Marso
THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL
A Kansas Chamber PAC mailer sent out during last fall's legislative campaigns sets out in large red letters
then-candidate Joshua Powell's commitment to "Stop ObamaCare" — the federal health care reform
spearheaded by President Barack Obama.
"Joshua Powell will go to work on day one to stop implementation of ObamaCare at the Kansas border," the
mailer says. "Joshua Powell will make health care freedom his top priority."
Day One of the legislative session has come and gone, as has every day through 33. With the deadline to
introduce bills in most committees and the "turnaround" deadline passed, now-Rep. Joshua Powell, RTopeka, has yet to address ObamaCare.
"I'm going to be talking to some other people about it," Powell said when asked last week about the Kansas
Chamber PAC's campaign promise. "I think we're still looking at what we can do."
Powell was far from the only legislator who took office this year on a platform that included fighting the
federal health care reforms that were signed into law March 2010 and upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court last
year.
The Kansas Chamber PAC, Americans for Prosperity and the Kansas Republican Party flooded the
Republican primary and, to a lesser extent, the general election, with ads touting candidates who would stop
the law at the state border, repeal it or allow Kansans to "opt-out" of it.
So far, House members have passed several bills related to unions, and the Senate has managed two-thirds
votes to pass constitutional amendments on judicial selection and school funding, but both chambers have
hardly mentioned the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, which is commonly called ObamaCare.
“I’m not surprised," former Senate President Steve Morris, R-Hugoton, said. "The whole thing was bogus to
start with."
Morris was one of many moderate Republican senators targeted with attack ads seeking to tie them to Obama
who expressed puzzlement at what they saw as a federal law playing an absurdly outsized role in state races
last year.
Clayton Barker, executive director of the Kansas Republican Party, said ObamaCare became a big campaign
issue because it was strategically effective.
"Candidates polled voters, and if ObamaCare elicited the greatest emotional response from the voters, then
that was the issue the candidate ran with," Barker said. "Emotional voters turn out and vote — and in an
election, votes are what matters."
Emotions aside, there was never much the state legislators could do about the controversial health care
reforms.
Former Senate Vice President John Vratil, who retired last year, said repeatedly that the Legislature had no
authority under the U.S. Constitution to allow Kansans to "opt-out" of a federal law. But unwavering support
for the Kansas Health Care Freedom Amendment — an amendment to the state constitution considered
entirely symbolic by legal scholars like University of Kansas professor Stephen McAllister — became a
litmus test for candidates' commitment to conservatism.
Yet now that the Senate has what appears to be a solid majority to pass the amendment, it has disappeared.
Still, Eric Stafford, a lobbyist for the Kansas Chamber, said he believes legislators are doing the best they can
to fight the federal law that his organization has identified for years as one of the top threats to Kansas'
economic recovery.
"I expect folks we supported will avail themselves of any opportunity that arises to voice their opposition to
government mandates and competition of public sector with private sector on health care issues at least as far
as states have a role," Stafford said.
A spokeswoman for Americans for Prosperity said she is similarly satisfied, based largely on a resolution
against expanding Medicaid that passed a House committee last week.
"The session is far from over, but we're pleased that there appears to be some effort in the Legislature to take
action against components of ObamaCare in Kansas," AFP's Jen Rezac said.
Barker said Gov. Sam Brownback's continued refusal to allow the state to participate in ObamaCare health
care exchanges has also helped mollify fears. Barker also highlighted Senate Bill 163 by Sen. Jim Denning,
R-Leawood, which is meant to ease insurance cost increases for young adults under the new law.
"I do not think people are disappointed," Barker said. "There has been progress on opposing ObamaCare and
other issues have become the most pressing for the people who previously had ObamaCare as their No. 1
issue."
Barker said gun rights is the prime example of the new federal threat to which legislators have turned their
attention.
Senate Majority Leader Terry Bruce, R-Hutchinson, said the health care freedom amendment may not be
dead yet for this session and could be combined with gun rights protections in a kind of catch-all resolution
asserting state sovereignty.
"There’s been talk about bringing that amendment back and having it during election cycle next year and also
discussion at one point about expanding the scope of it so it doesn’t just focus on the health care aspect,”
Bruce said.
But another former senator, Jean Schodorf, said the silence on ObamaCare thus far suggests it was a "kneejerk" campaign issue that has outlived its usefulness now that the moderates have been swept away.
“Last year every other week we were talking about ObamaCare and having it put on the ballot and the
constitutional amendment and all of that," said Schodorf, who switched her party affiliation after losing in the
Republican primary. "And nothing this year. Maybe they’ve finally decided it’s been upheld and it’s the law
of the land. Usually that doesn’t bother them.”
Is it time for a charter school revolution in
Kansas?
Some lawmakers are pushing for a new charter law to potentially bring
the national 'school choice' movement to Kansas
Posted: March 3, 2013 - 3:44pm
By Celia Llopis-Jepsen
THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL
Seventeen-year-old Zach Purvis was a sophomore at Mission Valley High School when he transferred to a
charter school.
Though it was his second year, Purvis said he hadn’t accrued many credits.
“I failed almost everything,” Purvis said. “I wouldn’t have graduated on time.”
Then he switched to Hope Street Academy, a school in Topeka that serves students who have fallen behind
and are at risk of dropping out.
He credits the change with helping him turn his situation around.
Hope Street, with about 150 students and 20 teachers, offers small classes with plenty of hands-on learning.
“It’s more personal,” said Purvis, who is on track to graduate in May. “They don’t make things easier, they
make understanding easier.”
Hope Street, part of Topeka Unified School District 501, is Shawnee County’s only charter school.
Enrollment isn’t based on address — the students come from around the city and nearby districts. Counselors
at other schools refer students who they feel would benefit from Hope Street’s approach.
“We teach the same things here,” said Dale Noll, principal, “but it’s a different culture.”
CHARTER SCHOOLS
IN KANSAS
In recent years, charter schools have become one of the hottest and most contentious topics in public
education.
Nationwide, there are around 6,000 of the schools, which are publicly funded but usually operated
independently, sometimes by nonprofit groups or businesses.
In some places, charter schools now serve significant numbers of students. They educate about 40 percent of
students in Washington, D.C., and more than two-thirds in New Orleans.
But in Kansas, charter schools are barely on the radar. Hope Street is one of just 15 statewide.
Three years ago, there were 37. Dozens have closed through the years, mostly for financial reasons.
Now, some lawmakers are pushing for a new charter law to supplant the one in place since 1994 and
potentially bring the national “school choice” movement to Kansas.
Two bills in the House and Senate — HB 2320 and SB 196 — seek to do just that.
The legislation includes recommendations from the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools. Parts are
lifted word for word from its model legislation — everything from exempting the schools from wage laws to
waiving teacher certification requirements.
FOR AND AGAINST
Proponents of school choice say charter schools are key to reforming education. Charter schools offer
innovation and options, they say. Many offer special themes. Others serve specific groups, such as
economically disadvantaged students.
By offering choice, some proponents say, charter schools also introduce competition into education. When
families can choose among a number of schools for their children, this forces charter and regular public
schools alike to maintain high quality in order to compete.
Proponents also cite studies that indicate charter schools are having greater success than regular schools, with
their students making stronger academic gains.
But on the other side of the debate, opponents cite studies that point to just the opposite: charter schools
perform no better and may in fact perform worse than their traditional counterparts.
Charter schools don’t play by the same rules, they say. Some are accused of screening students through their
admissions process and turning away those who are less likely to succeed. Others are accused of kicking
difficult students out, who then enroll in regular schools.
Early this year, the Washington Post revealed that D.C.’s charter schools had expelled 676 students in three
years. The city’s traditional schools, where expulsion is allowed only for serious offenses such as bringing
drugs to school, had expelled just 24.
And last month, a special report by Reuters found widespread evidence that charter schools nationwide
cherry-pick the students they want — a luxury that regular schools don’t have.
The report found that schools were screening students through interviews, essays and other methods, even
though laws prohibit discrimination and often require enrollment through lotteries.
LAW IN KANSAS
The Kansas legislation would bar charter schools from discriminating and set up lottery admissions. Yet it
would allow them to turn away special-education students if they don’t offer the services those students need.
Responsibility for those students would fall upon the local school district.
Here are some features of the legislation:
■ Independence. Independence from local school boards is a hallmark of the school choice movement, but in
Kansas, charter schools are run by school districts
The legislation would allow independent authorizers — for example, a county government or a university —
to approve the creation of charter schools. The authorizer would monitor the schools, which could be run by a
variety of entities, including businesses and nonprofits.
■ Deregulation. The legislation would grant sweeping exemptions from state law and regulations, including
graduation requirements and curriculum standards.
Currently, charter schools can apply for many exemptions but must identify which rules they want waived
and why. The Kansas State Board of Education has the final say. Only two schools have indicated interest in
waivers in the past five years.
■ Funding. Charter schools would no longer need school boards to receive funds. Under the bill, they would
receive a portion of state aid that would otherwise have gone to the local board. But they wouldn’t receive
local funding, meaning that charter schools would have lower budgets. They could, however, accept grants
and donations.
■ The legislation exempts schools from professional negotiations laws. The vast majority of charter schools
nationwide aren’t unionized, and teachers unions tend to be vocal opponents.
■ A variety of themes and specializations would be allowed, including single-sex schools, but not religious
schools.
■ Admissions priority for up to 10 percent of a school’s enrollment could go to the children of persons
involved in founding or running the school.
The free-market group Kansas Policy Institute supports the legislation. Lobbyist Dave Trabert said it would
be better for charter schools to have access to more education dollars, but added that they can operate more
efficiently than other schools because of deregulation.
On the other side, the Kansas Association of School Boards calls the legislation unconstitutional.
Under the Kansas Constitution, the State Board of Education oversees public schools and elected school
boards operate them.
As for USD 501, the district stands by Hope Street but opposes independent charter schools, which it says
can discriminate in admissions while spending taxpayer money and sidestepping accountability and
standards.
"We want to free them up to do what they need to do,” superintendent Julie Ford said, “but we need to keep
them accountable.”
Committee rejects plan to hold back thirdgraders
Schmidt, Hensley voice concerns about Brownback plan
Posted: February 26, 2013 - 4:27pm
By Andy Marso
THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL
Two Topeka legislators joined four colleagues on the Senate Education Committee in rejecting Gov. Sam
Brownback's plan to hold back third-graders who struggle with reading.
Senate Minority Leader Anthony Hensley, D-Topeka, and Sen. Vicki Schmidt, R-Topeka, voiced concerns
about the plan outlined in Senate Bill 169 and were among the committee members who voted 6-5 against it
Tuesday.
“I think retaining children at third grade is terrible public policy," Hensley said. “I think we’re making a very
serious mistake if we’re going to pass this bill.”
Sen. Dan Kerschen, R-Garden Plain; Sen. Pat Pettey, D-Kansas City; Sen. Ralph Ostmeyer, R-Grinnell; and
Sen. Kay Wolf, R-Prairie Village, joined Hensley and Schmidt in voting no.
Brownback's plan, the Kansas Reads to Succeed Act, aims to ensure that third-graders can read fluently
before they move on to grades that require reading comprehension for nearly every subject.
Jon Hummell, Brownback’s policy adviser, presented data that showed 88 percent of dropouts nationwide
couldn’t read proficiently in the third grade.
"The objective is not to not pass students out," said Sen. Steve Abrams, R-Arkansas City. "The objective is to
get them to read before the third grade.”
Abrams; Sen. Tom Arpke, R-Salina; Sen. Jeff Melcher, R-Leawood; Sen. Dennis Pyle, R-Hiawatha; and Sen.
Caryn Tyson, R-Parker, voted for the measure.
Abrams tried to allay Schmidt's concerns that the third-grade retention would be based solely on one state
assessment test by attaching an amendment that allowed school districts discretion to allow one retest.
Schmidt supported the amendment but said she still had concerns about the state mandating a decision better
left to teachers, administrators and parents — and not giving districts the money they would need to comply.
“I know I’ve become the unfunded mandate girl, but we’ve talked a lot about unfunded mandates,” Schmidt
said.
Kerschen voiced similar concerns, saying the school district he represents already uses its retention option
properly, with input from parents.
Topeka Unified School District 501 superintendent Julie Ford testified a day earlier against the bill, saying
summer school and extended school years would be better solutions to catching up struggling readers than
making them repeat a grade.
Several senators also said they believed reading interventions should begin before third grade to be most
effective.
In other action Tuesday, the committee passed 7-4 a bill requiring all school districts to post an itemized
budget on their websites.
An amendment was tacked on that removed extracurricular expenses from the bill amid concerns that
districts compile that data differently. Another amendment specified that the itemized budgets should include
breakdowns of local, state and federal funding.
Schmidt spoke against that bill as well, saying it could represent another unfunded mandate.
"Do we know for sure that all school districts have a website?" Schmidt asked.
"I don’t know if they all do, but certainly most of them do, by far," Abrams said.
“If they don’t have one they probably should have one," Melcher said. "Any cost associated with that would
be more than offset by the amount of labor needed to produce these paper documents for anyone who asked
for them.”
Melcher said the Legislature owed it to the citizens of Kansas to pass the bill, SB 171.
“I don’t believe this puts undue burden on the districts," Melcher said. "This is totally for transparency
purposes.”
The committee also passed a bill to create a coalition of 10 "innovative districts" for which certain mandates
will be waived in an effort to foster creativity. Abrams described it as a pilot program to switch the public
school focus from funding inputs to educational outcomes.
USD 501: Bill would lead to greater inequity
House Bill 2248 would allow school boards to raise property taxes to
pay for extracurricular activities
Posted: February 25, 2013 - 5:48pm
By Celia Llopis-Jepsen
THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL
Topeka Unified School District 501 is among the opponents of a bill that would allow districts to boost their
budgets by raising property taxes.
House Bill 2248 would allow school boards to raise the mill levy — with the approval of local taxpayers —
to bring in dollars for extracurricular activities, such as sports or forensics.
But the bill has met with opposition from USD 501, Kansas City USD 500, Wichita USD 259 and the Kansas
Association of School Boards, which warns that the legislation would result in disparity because some
districts have much higher property valuations. Also, the bill wouldn’t include equalization funding —
funding from the state to address discrepancies among districts in locally raised funds.
The Education Budget Committee held a hearing on the bill Monday.
Proponents included Shawnee Mission USD 512 and Blue Valley USD 229, who argue that it would help
them weather budget cuts.
“While the state appears to be on a road to some degree of economic recovery,” Blue Valley Superintendent
Tom Trigg said in written testimony, “the road back to normal will likely be a long one.”
But that argument doesn’t sit well with opponents.
“We believe that an increase in local property taxes is the worst possible approach to addressing the very real
shortfall in school funding,” Bill Reardon, a lobbyist for USD 500, said in his testimony.
Patrick Woods, president of the USD 501 school board, urged lawmakers not to increase inequity among
schools.
Though extracurricular activities aren’t a mandatory part of school, Woods said, research showed that such
activities are especially beneficial in higher-poverty districts.
“Our board believes strongly that all students should be afforded access to extracurricular programs and
activities,” Woods said in his testimony.
Under the bill, the extra budget for school activities would be capped at up to 2 percent of the previous school
year’s statewide, per-pupil average of general and local option budgets. Voters in a given district would have
to approve the tax increase in order for it to take effect.
USD 501 superintendent Ford speaks against
holding back third-graders
Brownback grade retention plan hinges on reading scores
Posted: February 25, 2013 - 1:42pm
By Andy Marso
THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL
Julie Ford, superintendent of Topeka Unified School District 501, was one of several education
representatives to testify Monday against Gov. Sam Brownback's plan to hold back third-graders who can’t
read proficiently.
Ford and others expressed concerns that the state-level mandate would fall disproportionately on poor
children, giving a blow to their self-esteem based on a single test score and leading to more high school dropouts in direct contrast to the proposal's goals.
“Retention is not a good use of time for these students,” Ford said.
Instead of holding back third-graders, Ford recommended investing in more early education programs,
mandating summer school for students behind on reading and extending the school year "like many of our
international friends."
“We don’t work in an agrarian society any more,” Ford said, in arguing that summer school and extended
school years would be a better way to catch up students struggling with English.
Brownback's policy director, Jon Hummell, told the Senate Education Committee that Senate Bill 169 isn’t
meant to hold students back but rather to "end social promotion for third-graders who are not able to read."
Hummell noted that the governor's proposed budget provides $10 million for targeted interventions to help
struggling readers get to grade level and said school districts will have flexibility in what test they use to
determine literacy. He also pointed to data that shows 88 percent of drop-outs nationwide couldn’t read
proficiently in the third grade — data that doesn’t even reflect the number who graduated from high school
without reading skills.
"If a single child graduates from high school without being able to read, we have all failed," Hummell said.
Hummell said last year 4.9 percent of Kansas third-graders scored in the lowest achievement category on the
state assessments, but noted that many of them would fall under exemptions in SB 169 for special education
students and those for whom English is their second language.
Marcus Winters, an education professor at the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, provided written
testimony in favor of the bill. Winters is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, which
says its mission is to "develop and disseminate new ideas that foster greater economic choice and individual
responsibility."
Winters said he studied a similar retention program that Florida put in place in 2002.
"Our research has found strong evidence that the remediation treatment offered under Florida's policy has led
to substantial improvement in student proficiency that have been sustained for a meaningful period of time,"
Winters said.
But Kansas Association of School Boards spokesman Mark Tallman said Florida's program hasn’t been in
effect long enough to know its long-term effect and that Florida's short-term improvements still hadn’t
brought it on par with Kansas' public education performance.
“Florida with this policy has not demonstrated greater improvement than Kansas has without this policy,"
Tallman said.
Tallman suggested imposing the third-grade retention plan only on districts that aren’t showing improvement
in their reading proficiency scores.
Marcy Clay, assistant superintendent of Kansas City, Kan., schools, said there is also data that shows strong
correlations between children who are held back and those who drop out. She surmised that the self-esteem
hit young children absorb when they are held back affects them throughout their academic careers.
“When we retain a child, it’s almost like we’re saying to a child, ‘You’re the one to blame for this,’ ” Clay
said.
The education committee took no action on the bill, but chairman Steve Abrams, R-Arkansas City, said it
would reappear on Tuesday's agenda.
The committee unanimously passed SB 128, a technical education initiative, on Monday. But it punted on a
dyslexia bill (SB 44) and a bill to expand how school districts can use their capital outlay money (SB 131).
The committee ran out of time while debating a bill to require school districts to post itemized budgets on
their websites, including mill rates and average salaries. It will take up the measure again Tuesday.
Sen. Vicki Schmidt, R-Topeka, voiced concerns that the bill could be an unfunded mandate.
“They’re already doing this," Abrams said of the school districts budgets. "What this bill does is make it
accessible to public.”
But Schmidt said a section that requires itemization of extracurricular spending would create new work for a
lot of districts.
“I think it shouldn’t even be in there," Schmidt said. "I think the extracurriculars provide a whole other layer
of complications. If schools don’t report it out the same, then the ability for comparison is lost.”
House moves to tweak unemployment
insurance
Bill says some applicants must reflect a 'non-supersensitive' person's
approach
Posted: February 28, 2013 - 4:57pm
By Tim Carpenter
THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL
The House advanced legislation on Thursday escalating penalties for unemployment insurance fraud,
restricting eligibility for jobless claims and reducing by $4.9 million overall company contributions to the
state's trust fund.
The bill would authorize the Kansas Department of Labor to assess a 25 percent penalty to individuals who
unlawfully secure unemployment benefits. Making false statements when receiving jobless payments would
result in a five-year disqualification, up from the current one-year ban.
The labor secretary would be authorized to hire and deploy special law enforcement officers to investigate
fraud, tax evasion and identity theft.
Under House Bill 2124, approved on a voice vote, state law would be altered to trim a jobless person's
benefits by the amount of severance pay allocated.
An individual voluntarily leaving employment for "good cause," such as harassment or violation of work
agreements by the employer, would be subject to new eligibility terminology. For example,
harassment prompting a resignation would need to be "consistent" and breaking of a work agreement must be
"substantial."
Rep. Gene Suellentrop, R-Wichita, said the bill would require the labor department to adopt a new method of
analyzing voluntary departure claims. The legislation stipulates an applicant's reasoning for leaving work
must reflect thinking of a "non-supersensitive" person exercising ordinary common sense.
"This is not an entitlement program," Suellentrop said. "Better to work than seek unemployment."
Rep. Tom Burroughs, D-Kansas City, said the measure represented an assault on people who had fallen on
hard times.
"This is pretty heavy-handed, anti-worker legislation coming out of the Department of Labor," Burroughs
said. "This is wrong-headed legislation."
Suellentrop estimated Kansas made $20 million in payments to fraudulent recipients in 2011 and 2012. He
said employers contributed $450 million to $500 million annually to the state's unemployment trust fund.
The House bill also would reduce the contribution rate of most new employers from the current 4 percent to
2.7 percent of wages paid, while the rate for new construction employers would remain at 6 percent. Rates for
nearly two dozen categories of employers with a record of heavy reliance on the trust fund would pay a
higher surcharge.
On a separate bill, the House rejected 39-82 a proposal to link adjustment in the state's current $7.25
minimum wage to the consumer price index. Rep. Valdenia Winn, D-Wichita, offered the amendment to give
low-wage Kansans an opportunity to keep pace with increases in the cost of living.
"This is a job-killing idea," said Rep. Marvin Kleeb, R-Overland Park. "It realize it's well-intentioned."
State striking it rich with problem gambling
fund
Less than 10 percent of casino-financed treatment money reaching
gamblers in crisis
Posted: March 2, 2013 - 9:26pm
By Tim Carpenter
THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL
Opposition in the 2007 Legislature to passage of a law allowing construction of state-owned casinos was
softened by a provision earmarking 2 percent of net revenues to treatment of gambling addiction.
Lawmakers spoke convincingly that Kansans unable to resist the rush of casino life could still hit the jackpot
through counseling. The casinos in Ford, Wyandotte and Sumner counties are in full operation and
collectively forward $8 million annually to the state's Problem Gambling and Addictions Grant Fund.
Joyce Markham, president of the Kansas Coalition on Problem Gambling, said the state had allowed less than
10 percent of that money to reach troubled gamblers. She said Gov. Sam Brownback doubled down by
offering to the 2013 Legislature a budget with no dedicated funding for the treatment initiative fashioned six
years ago.
Markham, who has more than 15 years of counseling experience with gamblers in Topeka, said the need for
life-saving intervention outstripped meager funding released by the state.
"I haven't talked to a problem gambler who hasn't considered suicide," she said. "They think they're worth
more dead than alive if they can make it look like an accident."
Instead of targeting resources earmarked for treatment of Kansans intoxicated by the glitz of Boot Hill Casino
in Dodge City, Hollywood Casino in Kansas City, Kan., and Kansas Star Casino in Mulvane, or tribal and
out-of-state venues, the state has consistently diverted the money to other government priorities.
"That violates the intent of the Legislature," said Rep. Kathy Moore, D-Kansas City. "I absolutely think there
is a need. It ought to go to treatment for gambling addictions."
Angela de Rocha, spokeswoman for the Kansas Department of Aging and Disability Services, said
Brownback didn't eliminate all funding for problem gambling services in his January budget blueprint, but
did recommend a 50 percent reduction.
The Brownback administration is receptive, she said, to restoration of $740,000 currently appropriated for
problem gambling staff salaries, marketing, counseling and a hot line.
Under the scenario emerging in the House and Senate, the governor also would remove $1 million from the
problem gambling fund to cover non-Medicaid substance abuse grants and deliver $500,000 to the Kansas
Department of Corrections. He would again take $6.5 million from the 2 percent fee paid by casinos to
underwrite Medicaid-funded drug and alcohol abuse programs.
"I don't think we're spending the money where it needs to be," said Sen. Carolyn McGinn, a Sedgwick
Republican. "The money is being used to back fill Medicaid programs."
However, Senate President Susan Wagle, R-Wichita, said she never heard from a constituent who thought
there was a lack of state-financed counseling for people fearful gambling was driving them closer to divorce,
unemployment, bankruptcy or worse.
The budget presented by Brownback to legislators conflicted with the recommendation Gary Haulmark,
commissioner of community services and programs at the Kansas Department of Aging and Disability
Services, offered a House-Senate budget panel in October. He suggested $4.2 million from casino payments
— an increase of $3.5 million — be secured to help gambling addicts.
"We want to build a problem gambling infrastructure that is responsible and judicious," he said.
Haulmark produced records indicating no Kansan received treatment for problem gambling under the state
program in the fiscal year running from July 2009 to June 2010. The number served in the fiscal year ending
in June 2011 was 41, he said. That figure climbed to 140 for the fiscal year ending June 2012.
A separate state report showed 368 people voluntarily added their names to the self-exclusion list maintained
for Kansas-owned casinos from January 2010 to January 2013.
The governor's budget proposal ignored the five-year problem gambling plan adopted by the Department of
Aging and Disability Services, which manages the special fund. One plan goal dedicated "no less than onethird" of this revenue, approximately $2.9 million, to reducing gambling-related harm in Kansas.
The plan's authors estimated, based on national statistics, there were 59,000 problem gamblers in Kansas and
that 24,000 could be categorized as pathological gamblers.
The document concluded Kansas' gambling service infrastructure remained in its infancy because of few
problem gambling prevention efforts, little research specific to gambling in Kansas and poor problem
gambling community awareness.
In an effort to address the research deficit, the Department of Aging and Disability Services authorized a
statewide survey of 1,600 Kansans that revealed one in 12 adults admitted betting more than they could
afford to lose.
Political Runoff
Tim Carpenter reflects on government
BY TIM CARPENTER
Fri, 03/01/2013 - 8:53pm
Peck not bullish on key element of 'homosexual'
agenda
Rep. Virgil Peck was singled out Friday while at work.
If the venue had been a rough-and-tumble school playground, perhaps his lonely position would have
generated heckling by peers. Maybe a taunt.
In the Statehouse, however, his rejection of a bill designed to compel Kansas public schools to forbid
bullying of students by teachers or parents evoked no reaction. The House sent the measure over to the
Senate on a vote of 119-1.
In a meeting Thursday with Republican colleagues, the Tyro lawmaker offered a glimpse of his singleminded reasoning.
"The bullying legislation has always been a top priority of the homosexual group," he said. "I've never been a
fan."
Tom Witt said he assumed Peck was referring, at least in part, to the Kansas Equality Coalition. Witt is
executive director of the advocacy group, which strives to secure equal rights for lesbian, gay, bisexual and
transgender Kansans.
In terms of bullying, Witt said Peck was correct to conclude the coalition had been supportive of bills for the
past six years intended to make schools a haven for learning rather than a venue for harassment.
"This is about all kids," Witt said. "We want schools that are safe for all kids."
More to Peck's point, he said, students perceived to be homosexuals had often been targeted for
condemnation at Kansas schools.
"There are teachers who hassle kids for being gay," Witt said. "Or they look the other way while others do the
same."
Rep. Amanda Grosserode, R-Lenexa, led discussion of the bill in the full House and during the earlier GOP
caucus. She said evidence emerged during committee work that Kansas statute guiding K-12 public schools
should be expanded to move beyond a prohibition on student-to-student bullying. That prompted drafting of
language directed at teachers and parents who might instigate bullying, she said.
In the Republican caucus meeting, but not on the floor, Peck questioned Grosserode about her definition of
bullying.
"If I flip you the bird am I bullying?" Peck asked.
Grosserode said the hand gesture alone would unlikely rise to the category of bullying.
Peck inquired if a second or third offense would cross the line.
She said circumstances surrounding repetitive use of the globally recognized sign of anger would have to be
evaluated by school officials before making a determination. Her answer preceded Peck's analysis suggesting
anti-bullying bills were the work of gay and lesbian activists.
Despite Peck's admonition, two Democrats and a Republican joined Grosserode in delivering speeches on the
House floor in favor of the reform.
"I think this is a strong update to our law," said Rep. Rob Bruchman, R-Overland Park.
Rep. Tom Burroughs, D-Kansas City, said he was a fervent advocate for legislative intervention on school
bullying.
"Children and parents need to know it will not be tolerated," he said.
Rep. Ed Trimmer, D-Winfield, said the goal was a statewide ban on teacher or parent bullying of students
that granted local school districts authority to determine standards for punishment.
"No one in a public school, on the public grounds or using public equipment should be involved in bullying,"
Trimmer said. "We leave the remedies to school districts, but those need to be in policy."
This bipartisan show of faith in the bill by Grosserode and Bruchman as well as Burroughs and Trimmer fell
short, in Peck's estimation.
When it came time to be counted, he pushed the "no" button. To his credit, Peck is regarded as a legislator
who unflinchingly stands tall for what he believes. He doesn't like the anti-bullying bill, and he said so.
Two years ago, he was frustrated illegal immigrants were living in Kansas. He let people know about that,
too.
Peck became an international sensation in March 2011 by declaring at a House Appropriations Committee
meeting the state might consider deploying sharpshooters in helicopters to track down illegal immigrants in
the same way marksmen had been hired to kill wild hogs damaging crops and property.
He justified the helicopter statement as reflection of "a southeast Kansas person" in regards to the issue of
illegal immigration.
Few of his colleagues rushed to echo that sentiment. Following a public rebuke from Republican Gov. Sam
Brownback, Peck clenched his teeth and issued what might, in the most liberal terms, be called an apology.
Don't expect comparable backtracking on his assessment of the homosexual agenda. Peck is unlikely to be
shaken by criticism of Friday's vote by the governor or anyone else. On this political playground in Topeka,
he is content to stand alone.
Teachers union says longtime allies abandoned
it
KNEA cut out of legislative talks on collective bargaining
Posted: February 28, 2013 - 11:19am
By Andy Marso
THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL
Leaders of the state's teachers union said Thursday they have been cut out of legislative discussions about
their collective bargaining rights and abandoned by longtime allies.
Kansas National Education Association president Karen Godfrey and lobbyist Mark Desetti said lobbyists for
Kansas school boards and superintendents collaborated with Rep. Marvin Kleeb, R-Overland Park, on House
Bill 2027. Desetti likened the "secret talks" to backroom deals made decades ago in "smoke-filled rooms."
“This is about silencing us, and we have no intention of being silenced,” Desetti said during a Thursday news
conference.
Mark Tallman, spokesman for the Kansas Association of School Boards, said Kleeb asked him to provide
language on the bill that his organization could support and Tallman did so. But he said that is no different
than talks he has with other legislators, and KASB's position on collective bargaining is well known.
“There’s nothing new or secret about what our position is,” Tallman said.
Tallman also noted that the bill has been referred to Kleeb's House Committee on Commerce, Labor and
Economic Development for a hearing at which all parties, including KNEA, will be able to weigh in.
That didn’t mollify Godfrey, who expressed displeasure that KNEA wasn’t allowed to participate in the
initial talks. She said the organization contacted Kleeb multiple times to try and provide input but got the cold
shoulder.
“This was a sudden move in the commerce committee," Godfrey said. "We have a long history of
collaborating with the other education groups in the state.”
Kleeb took umbrage with the "smoke-filled rooms" analogy.
"That's a distortion," Kleeb said. "The plain fact is due to the weather and everything else, we did not get the
bill until Tuesday."
Godfrey questioned whether Tallman's group and the Kansas School Superintendents Association are really
reflecting the wishes of the majority of their members by working with Kleeb on HB 2027.
She pointed to officials from various school boards and districts who accompanied her at Thursday's news
conference and a Lawrence USD 497 resolution in support of collective bargaining as evidence that not
everyone is on board with the bill.
Topeka USD 501 board member Patrick Woods said the bill would be largely unnecessary for districts that
work effectively with KNEA at the bargaining table.
"We’ve already in my district been pretty successful at doing many of the things this bill purports to do,”
Woods said.
Woods said the bill could do more harm than good by leading to negotiations with several different groups
representing different kinds of teachers in "a logistical nightmare for districts."
But Kleeb said the bill is all about local control and that each district would be able to negotiate with as many
or as few groups as it chose.
"If local boards want to keep going the way they are, this allows them to do that," Kleeb said.
Kleeb also said that a survey of superintendents showed widespread support for the bill, which he said could
help them hire more highly-qualified teachers in difficult-to-fill areas like math, science and special
education.
Godfrey and others at the news conference said Kansas already has weak labor protections and the
Legislature is intent on weakening them further until they are like those in southern states that generally score
poorly on education metrics.
But Kleeb said HB 2027 and legislation on other issues like paycheck deductions are an effort to protect the
rights of those who choose not to join unions, as well as those who do.
"Our emphasis this year has obviously been on the rights of the individual," Kleeb said.
House embraces reform of Court of Appeals
selection process
Bill grants governor power to appoint pending Senate confirmation
Posted: February 28, 2013 - 2:41pm
By Caitlin Doornbos
SPECIAL TO THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL
By a vote of 68-54, the House offered first-round approval Thursday to a bill modifying the selection
of Kansas Court of Appeals judges by handing the state's governor power to choose members of that
appellate bench.
The bill has one more House vote but likely will move to the Senate. If signed into law, the selection of
appellate court judges will switch hands from the Supreme Court Nominating Commission to Governor
Brownback.
Brownback, a Republican, has consistently supported removal of the nominating commission from the
process of filling vacancies on both the Court of Appeals and Supreme Court.
Currently, the governor must select appellate judges from a list of candidates provided by a commission of
four lawyers from each congressional district and four individuals selected by the governor. HB 2019 skips
the nomination process and allows the governor to fill an appellate court vacancy with whomever he chooses,
with consent of the Senate.
Rep. Steven Becker, R-Buhler, questioned the motives of the bill.
“I don’t understand why we are launching such an attack on (the) judiciary,” Becker said. “What I have come
to is that the political climate in this state has changed significantly, and the court has not. We don’t want the
court to change with the political shift.”
Rep. Lance Kinzer, R-Olathe, countered that it is the current nomination process that is political.
“Our current selection process is not based on merit, rather on ideology. Issues like pro-life were discussed
behind closed doors,” Kinzer said. “Our current system is fixed — it’s fixed to favor a very small group, and
that’s not right.”
Because voters elect the governor, proponents say the executive’s nomination of appellate judges would be
an extension of the democratic process.
“It’s important to have an independent judiciary,” Kinzer said. “It enhances respect for rule of law by
injecting some democratic practice.”
Under HB 2019, the nominating process would look similar to the federal selection of members of the U.S.
Supreme Court, in which the president appoints justices with Senate approval. Opponents of the bill said
Washington-style political power shouldn’t come to Kansas.
“As you’ve seen at the federal level, that’s a very political process,” said Rep. Jan Pauls, D-Hutchinson. “I
don’t think we’d believe that’s been very fair.”
Becker agreed, comparing Kansas politics to a tornado.
“We cannot have the law change with the political wind. Instead we need to insulate and protect the judiciary
from the winds of political change,” Becker said. “We need a solid foundation, a bedrock — and that would
be the rule of law.”
Kinzer said political gain wasn’t in mind when he introduced this bill.
“I was strongly supportive of moving to this system under a Democratic governor, just as I am with a
Republican governor,” Kinzer said.
House votes to retain state worker bonuses
Bill targeted reward for employees on job 10 years or more
Posted: February 28, 2013 - 12:43pm
By Caitlin Doornbos
SPECIAL TO THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL
The House overwhelmingly voted Thursday to reject a bill preventing state government agencies from selffinancing longevity bonuses for thousands of veteran employees.
The bipartisan 42-78 vote against House Bill 2178 revealed little appetite in the House for undercutting the
ability of agencies to reward workers with at least 10 years of service with a bonus of $40 for each year on
the job. State law caps the awards at $1,000, and only workers hired before 2008 are eligible.
Rep. Jim Howell, R-Derby, said during House debate on the bill that the reform wouldn’t ban bonuses
altogether but would permit payments only when directly approved by the Legislature and governor.
“This does not stop longevity payments in any way,” Howell said. “This simply says that the longevity
payments would come from the Legislature, not the agencies."
For several years, the Legislature declined to appropriate money for the bonuses. Individual agencies
could award long-term employees with a bonus if the money came through internal reallocation. In the
upcoming fiscal year, if the law isn't changed, bonuses would total an estimated $8.5 million.
Rep. Bob Grant, D-Frontenac, opposed the bill, saying it would unfairly punish Kansas government workers
who have gone about eight years without a general salary increase.
“I think this is a travesty against our state employees,” Grant said. “We try to retain our state employees.
They haven’t gotten a raise in many years and now we stand to take away their longevity?”
Ray Roberts, secretary of the Kansas Department of Corrections, had urged the House General Government
Committee to adopt the bill.
He said the agency was forced to leave vacant staff positions in prisons to generate resources to afford
bonuses.
However, Rep. Tom Bourroughs, D-Kansas City, said a low-level corrections officer made $19,500 after
taxes, and prison employees were reliant on longevity bonuses.
“If you’re a corrections officer, you’re in a hostile environment, you’re overworked and underpayed,”
Burroughs said. “This is a slap in the face of the hard workers of Kansas.”
Still, proponents of the bill said the measure wasn't intented to be punitive.
“I don’t think this has anything to do with whether we value our employees,” Howell said. “This is not salary,
this is just longevity pay.”
Senate roundup: Bill inspired by Mah race
approved
Measure would shroud provisional voter information
Posted: February 28, 2013 - 3:55pm
By Andy Marso
THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL
Senate discussion Thursday briefly turned to the ultra-close race between Topeka Republican Ken Corbet and
Democrat Ann Mah last fall and a bill to prevent efforts to find provisional voters like Mah did.
Mah trailed Corbet by about 40 votes out of almost 11,000 cast after election day and asked county elections
offices for the names of voters forced to cast provisional ballots so she could contact them and encourage
them to take steps to ensure their votes would be counted in the county canvass. Some counties released the
names, but others didn’t on the advice of Secretary of State Kris Kobach, who believed the information
should be confidential under law.
A federal judge eventually ruled against Kobach on that point, but senators Thursday gave initial approval to
Senate Bill 177, which would codify in law that provisional voter information can’t be released until after the
canvass. The vote was 29-10.
"This bill was brought to us by the secretary of state, and testimony we heard in committee indicated there’s a
lack of continuity in how this law is interpreted by courts,” said Sen. Greg Smith, R-Overland Park, who
received advice during the floor debate from high-ranking members of Kobach's office including top
elections assistant Brad Bryant.
Sen. Anthony Hensley, D-Topeka, said Mah had done nothing to try and induce people into telling her how
they voted, which is already prohibited by law and merely "went out and knocked on doors" to help
provisional voters make sure their votes counted.
“Quite frankly I don’t see what the harm is in that," Hensley said, calling the bill "a solution in search of a
problem."
Mah, one of Kobach's most persistent critics, ultimately lost her race against Corbet by 21 votes.
Senate Democrats also blasted Kobach on Thursday for his political action committee, the Prairie Fire PAC.
With a bill on the floor, SB 63, to give Kobach authority to prosecute voter fraud, Sen. Tom Holland, DBaldwin City, introduced an amendment prohibiting Kobach and future secretaries of state from establishing
a PAC to raise and spend money on races other than their own.
“I think we send a very, very conflicting message to our citizens when we have our top elections officer
actively campaigning against others on the ballot,” Holland said.
He wasn’t the only one who had objections to Kobach's campaign activity. Hensley said none of the six other
secretaries of state had a PAC during his time in the Legislature. Sen. Vicki Schmidt, R-Topeka, noted that
Kobach, a Republican, doled out money to defeat her in the most recent Republican primary.
"I’m not sure I think it should be a Class C misdemeanor, but I do support the basis of this amendment,"
Schmidt said. "I think the secretary of state is charged with making sure we have fair and balanced elections,
and I don’t think that should includes being involved in elections.”
Holland's amendment initially failed 16-20. But he altered it, and upon re-introduction it passed 23-17. The
underlying bill also passed 31-9.
The Senate also passed Thursday:
■ SB 149, a bill to institute drug testing for some recipients of welfare and unemployment benefits. A
Hensley amendment added drug testing for legislators. The vote was 31-8.
■ SB 199, a bill to establish an adult stem cell research facility at the University of Kansas Medical Center.
Opponents, including Sen. Laura Kelly, D-Topeka, said the facility was being created outside of traditional
research channels and seven of the 13 members of the advisory board proposed to oversee the facility are
political appointees. The vote was 33-7.
■ SB 142, a bill to prohibit lawsuits based on “wrongful birth” claims by parents asserting their child should
have been aborted. Opponents said they feared the bill would protect doctors who intentionally withhold
information about pregnancy complications or fetal abnormalities, but King said those actions would still be
subject to medical negligence claims. The bill passed 34-5, with five Democrats opposed.
■ SB 167, a bill to remove the statute of limitations on rape and aggravated criminal sodomy and extend the
statute of limitations on all other sexually violent crimes from five years to 10. The bill passed 40-0.
■ SB 81, a bill clarifying that changes made to KORA last year to mandate local governments withhold the
addresses of law enforcement officers at their request doesn’t mean those governments must destroy property
records. The bill also states that concealed-carry handgun permit information isn’t subject to KORA. It
passed 40-0.
■ SB 64, a bill to extend the period of time before an election in which switching parties is prohibited from
14 days to 21.
■ SB 168, a bill to provide further protections from "nuisance" lawsuits to farmers who expand or change
their agricultural operations.
■ SB 124, a bill to alter the Kansas Restraint of Trade Act to conform to U.S. Supreme Court precedents
regarding anti-trust laws.
■ SB 171, a bill to require school districts to post itemized budgets on their websites.
Kansas Senate approves election fraud
measure
But Kobach-sought bill says SOS must abandon his PAC
Posted: February 28, 2013 - 9:20pm
By The Associated Press
The Kansas Senate is willing to give Secretary of State Kris Kobach the power to prosecute election fraud,
but it also wants him to abolish his political action committee.
The Senate passed a bill Thursday that includes both policies. The 31-9 vote sent the measure to the House.
The Republican secretary of state has sought the authority to prosecute election fraud cases since he took
office in January 2011. Kobach argues that county prosecutors are often too busy to pursue such cases.
But senators voted 23-17 to add an amendment barring the secretary of state from having a PAC that gets
involved in partisan campaigns. The secretary of state is Kansas’ top elections official.
Kobach formed his own PAC last year.
Mike Hall: Legislators, we're partied out
Posted: February 26, 2013 - 3:48pm
By Mike Hall
THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL
I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever in religion, in
philosophy, in politics, or in anything else where I was capable of thinking for myself.
— Thomas Jefferson
Some people are beginning to think our political parties are doing more harm than good. Better late than
never. Others have been saying that for more than 200 years.
Now some Kansas legislators are considering a bill that would give more power to the parties.
The bill's authors want candidates for school boards and other local races in Kansas to run by political party.
Up to now, school board and city candidates have simply run as individuals, not as members of a political
party.
The bill also would move local elections from April to coincide with the state and national elections in
November.
In questioning the wisdom of partisan local elections, I have some heavy-hitters on my side.
The concern goes back at least as far as George Washington. In his farewell address as president, Washington
referred to political parties as "the worst enemy" of democratic governments, "potent engines by which
cunning, ambitious and unprincipled men will ... subvert the power of the people."
Some thoughts on the subject by other people you may have heard of:
■ “There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged
under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other.” (John Adams)
■ "If I could go to heaven but with a party, I would not go there at all." (Thomas Jefferson)
The political parties actually began coalescing soon after the framing of the Constitution. Those who favored
a strong federal government and weak state governments became known as Federalists, led by Alexander
Hamilton.
When that group got around to organizing into a political party, they called themselves The Federalist Party.
Ironically, Hamilton didn’t like the idea of political parties, either, but decided it was the best way to move
his monetary policies forward.
Those who disagreed with Hamilton took up the clever name of Anti-Federalists, led by James Madison and
Thomas Jefferson. Soon, though, they must have thought the Anti-Federalist name wasn’t sexy enough and
organized themselves into the Democratic-Republican Party, thus establishing the tradition of election of
candidates by sex appeal.
Like most institutions, political parties do some good. They get people interested in their governments. They
give power to individuals that they wouldn’t have separately.
Still, would Washington, Jefferson and Hamilton approve of today’s political parties?
I don’t think so, either.
Democrats' jobs bill earns GOP criticism
Bill ties state contracts, tax breaks to firms with 70% Kansas workers
Posted: February 26, 2013 - 1:40pm
By Tim Carpenter
THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL
A bill championed by Topeka Sen. Anthony Hensley received an icy reception Tuesday from Republican
lawmakers and big-business lobbyists skeptical of confining large state contracts and major corporate tax
breaks to firms with 70 percent of employees residing in Kansas.
"It makes little sense to continue to allow state dollars to pay the wages of out-of-state workers when we have
Kansas workers available to do the same work," Hensley said.
Under the bill recommended by a coalition of House and Senate Democrats, contractors and subcontractors
involved in state contracts valued in excess of $100,000 would abide by the 70 percent rule starting in 2014.
The same requirement would be extended next year to companies seeking benefits from a trio of popular state
tax incentive programs for businesses.
Cities, counties and other local units of government would be exempted from the bill, and projects requiring
employees with expertise not readily available in Kansas wouldn’t have to comply.
Sen. Julia Lynn, an Olathe Republican and chairwoman of the Senate Commerce Committee, said she was
uncertain whether the bill would be discussed again by the committee because it lacked sufficient GOP votes
to pass.
Several Senate Republicans expressed frustration with Democrats' bid to clog the market economy with
government micromanagement.
"This would imply to me Kansas workers on their own can't compete in a free marketplace," said Sen. Jeff
Melcher, R-Leawood.
Andy Sanchez, executive secretary-treasurer of the AFL-CIO of Kansas, said skilled tradesmen who lived in
Kansas were capable of securing out-of-state employment but preferred to land jobs in Kansas. Enacting the
bill would help more Kansans to be involved in state tax-financed projects, he said.
"Where does it end?" said Sen. Rob Olson, R-Olathe. "It might cost jobs for Kansas."
Olson said a better way of creating union construction jobs would be to break the legal deadlock over plans to
build a controversial coal-fired power plant in southwest Kansas.
While Republicans outlined objections to Senate Bill 179 during the committee hearing, the Kansas Chamber
and leaders of architecture, engineering, and builder associations shared parallel criticisms.
Trudy Aron, executive director of the Kansas chapter of the American Institute of Architects, said hiring
preferences were bad policy because neighboring states could engage in retribution if blocked from another
state's work sites.
"A Kansas firm seeking work in Oklahoma would meet the same obstacles in Oklahoma as an Oklahoma
firm who seeks work in Kansas," she said. "Architects pursue work in many states, not just Kansas."
Dan Morgan, president of the Builders' Association of Kansas City, Mo., said contractors and subcontractors
operating in the state's interior likely would be able to comply.
Border-state companies would struggle to rearrange work forces to attain the employment benchmark,
Morgan said.
Eric Stafford, a lobbyist with the Kansas Chamber, said eligibility for the state's economic development
incentives shouldn't be limited by a requirement that "simply makes no sense and will not lead to job growth
in Kansas."
Under the bill, the 70 percent requirement would be applied in 2014 to companies seeking Star Tax Revenue
bonds. STAR bonds are used to finance commercial, entertainment and tourism areas with debt paid by the
project's sales tax revenue.
The mandate would extend to Promoting Employment Across Kansas, or PEAK, which allows expanding
companies to keep 95 percent of payroll withholding taxes.
The High Performance Incentive Program also would be part of the law. HPIP is intended to bolster the
economy with income tax credits and sales tax exemptions.
Senate panel passes stem cell legislation
Bill creates unit for advancing life-saving treatment
Posted: February 26, 2013 - 5:14pm
By Tim Carpenter
THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL
A Senate committee endorsed legislation Tuesday creating at The University of Kansas Medical Center what
advocates believe could be a regional hub for advancement of adult stem cell research, treatment and
education.
The bill passed by the Senate Public Health and Welfare Committee was developed by Sen. Mary PilcherCook, R-Shawnee, and hailed by Kansans for Life and several researchers interested in stem-cell research.
"I envision Kansas becoming a focal point for adult stem cell treatments," Pilcher-Cook said. "It will be the
go-to place to get stem cell research therapies."
The facility, Midwest Stem Cell Therapy Center, would produce clinical-grade stem cells from adult tissues,
cord blood, and related materials for research and treatment. Adult stem cells have been used to treat
leukemia and blood cancers. Scientists are striving for therapeutic repair of organs, including diseased hearts.
If the bill survives the political process and is signed into law, the center will be forbidden from working with
embryonic stem cells or cells harvested from aborted fetal tissue.
The bill sent to the full Senate didn't contain authorization for the estimated $1.1 million needed for building
renovations, equipment and staff to start the center in Kansas City, Kan. The unit would cost $750,000
annually to operate, but that funding has yet to be secured.
"These are not funds we currently have for this program at the medical center. Funding through the
appropriations process of the state or development work in the private sector would be needed to implement
this initiative," said Douglas Girod, executive vice chancellor for the KU medical center.
Under the bill, a 13-member advisory board would be established. A majority of members would be
appointed by the governor, the Senate president or the House speaker.
Sen. Laura Kelly, D-Topeka, was the lone committee vote against Senate Bill 199. She objected to creation
of a university center by the Legislature rather than through normal channels starting with KUMC and ending
with the Kansas Board of Regents. Composition of the center's board raises red flags, she said.
"It starts to mix politics with academic research," Kelly said.
Kathy Ostrowski, legislative director of Kansans for Life, said the slow process of moving adult stem cell
trials into a bedside intervention had led some people in the United States to search overseas for unproven
applications by unqualified physicians.
"The answer is a Midwest Stem Cell Therapy Center at KU," she said. "Such a unique endeavor will focus on
patient needs and, secondarily, on research and education."
Kansas Senate committee endorses drug test
bill
Bill requires state assistance beneficiaries to submit to tests
Posted: February 25, 2013 - 6:06pm
By John Milburn
ASSOCIATED PRESS
A Kansas Senate committee endorsed a bill on Monday requiring drug tests for recipients of state certain
benefits despite questions about the cost of requiring those who fail the tests to undergo evaluations and
treatment.
Republican Sen. Jay Emler abstained from voting on the measure — which passed on voice vote — over
concerns about whether the state or the benefit recipient would pay for the cost of treatment. Emler also
wondered what was meant by substance abuse, which wasn’t defined in the bill.
“There are some things that need to be cleared up so we don’t have those issues,” said Emler, of Lindsborg.
“I don’t’ think the bill is ready to be passed.”
The requirement would apply to applicants for and participants in the Temporary Assistance to Needy
Families program. Prospective employers would be required to tell the state when a job seeker who’s
receiving unemployment benefits fails a company drug test or refuses to take one. That would allow the state
to cut off the benefits.
If a TANF recipient is found to be using drugs, the proposal would allow for benefits to be shifted to a spouse
to continue the flow of aid to children, providing the spouse also passes a drug test. If that person fails, the
state would attempt to continue benefits through third party, such as grandparent or other relative.
The TANF program provided about $42 million in cash benefits for about 32,000 Kansas residents, including
children, during the fiscal year ending June 2012.
Senate Vice President Jeff King, the bill’s primary sponsor, said he sought the measure to be proactive to
help Kansas residents improve their lives and ultimately find employment.
King, an Independence Republican, said Monday that the cost of providing testing and treatment would be
less than the $2 million fiscal note attached to the bill.
“This is not punitive,” King said. “We want to identify people with drug addiction problems, give them the
help they need and give them the job skills they need to kick the habit, get a good paying job and provide for
their families.”
Some critics of the plan said that the Department for Children and Families already had the authority to test
and treat under federal “Welfare to Work” guidelines and said the measure was unnecessary.
Sen. Oletha Foust-Goudeau, a Wichita Democrat, said requiring more expansive testing and treatment with
the use of federal TANF funds could reduce the state’s ability to provide adequate assistance.
Senate committee concurs on KNI
consolidation
Move will save $753K by closing one residential building
Posted: February 25, 2013 - 12:07pm
By Andy Marso
THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL
The Legislature moved one step closer to shrinking the Kansas Neurological Institute on Monday, with a
Senate budget committee agreeing with a recommendation to close one of the campus' 21 residential cottages.
The Topeka-based state institution for Kansans with severe developmental and physical disabilities currently
has 163 beds and, as of last year, had 153 residents. Each cottage holds about eight residents. The Senate
Ways and Means Committee members concurred with their House budget counterparts on a plan to close the
least full one and redistribute its residents.
"There was some savings there," said Sen. Jim Denning, R-Overland Park.
The closure is expected to save $753,000, of which $301,000 will return to the state general fund. The House
Appropriations Committee has recommended using the savings to provide home-and-community-based
services to 15 disabled Kansans on a Medicaid waiver waiting list that currently numbers in the thousands.
The closure would result in the elimination of 12 full-time jobs at KNI over the course of several months,
through redistribution and attrition. No lay-offs are planned.
Aside from the $753,000 in funding, the Senate committee members agreed with their House counterparts
and Gov. Sam Brownback's budget recommendation that leaves KNI's funding at about $28 million for Fiscal
Year 2014 and 2015.
KNI was targeted for closure in 2009 by a commission formed by Gov. Mark Parkinson that recommended
transferring its residents to community-based care.
That recommendation has never been implemented, in large part due to outcry from legislators who say many
communities wouldn’t be able to provide the services needed for KNI residents to thrive.
But admissions to the institution have become rare in recent years, and two other cottages have been closed
since 2009.
House Appropriations Committee chairman Marc Rhoades, R-Newton, said his committee has asked Shawn
Sullivan, secretary of the Kansas Department for Aging and Disability Services, to continue looking for
efficiencies at KNI.
Sullivan said Monday that is a statewide initiative.
"We’re in process of looking at all our hospitals operations and how we can do things better," Sullivan said.
"It’s not just KNI."
Sullivan said his department is looking for private contractors to handle food service at facilities in Larned
and Osawatomie, a move he believes could save "a couple million." He said moving toward generic
equivalent prescription drugs at some facilities is estimated to save another $500,000.
Sullivan said his department is seeking ways to "do things better without compromising the number of staff
members or the services and care we provide." He said he couldn't provide specifics of where he will seek
efficiencies at KNI until he had talked more to the institution's leadership.
The recommendation from the House budget committee requests that Sullivan "look for savings to reduce
operating costs at KNI and shorten the waiting list for the Home and Community Based Services for
individuals with a Developmental Disability Waiver."
"As part of this cost savings effort, the Secretary should review privatization options through a competitive
bidding process," the recommendation adds.
House panel weighing conceal-carry expansion
Local governments, courts oppose opening doors to permit holders
Posted: February 25, 2013 - 12:56pm
By Tim Carpenter
THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL
City, county, court and community health agency officials pushed back Monday against a bill compelling
public buildings to be fitted with airport-style security screening or allow concealed weapon permit holders to
enter with a firearm.
Chris Mechler, court services officer with the Kansas Office of Judicial Administration in Topeka, told a
House committee only 12 of the state's 110 courthouses and none of the 25 court-related office buildings had
"adequate security measures," classified as metal detectors or wand-toting security staff, to continue a ban on
weapons other than those held by law enforcement officers.
If security upgrades weren't made in accordance with House Bill 2055, operators of public buildings would
be required to open doors to conceal-weapon carriers.
"In court facilities, where we bring people in conflict together, introducing the possibility of a concealed
weapon, substantially raises the risk to everyone in the building," Mechler said.
Officials with Lenexa, Kansas City, Kan., Wichita, Johnson County and the Kansas Association of Counties
testified against the bill. The Association of Community Mental Health Centers of Kansas, the umbrella
group for the state's 27 health centers, as well as the association serving 35 local community corrections
offices, requested an exemption from the proposal.
Under the measure, state or municipally owned medical care facilities, state or municipally owned adult care
homes, as well as universities and colleges, would be exempt for a period of four years.
Advocates of reforming the public-access gun law presented testimony that Kansas inappropriately
authorized government and university administrators to block license holders and create an environment
more likely to be exploited by criminals.
Kevin Murray, a probation officer in Manhattan, said he would welcome more interaction, as a private citizen
and public servant, with people carrying a legal, concealed weapon.
"I have no problem with that," he said, "as I have contact with those individuals in a variety of public settings
now, whether that's at the shopping mall, restaurants, the movie theater, the dog park or any other public or
private place not currently prohibited by existing law."
The House Federal and State Affairs Committee is expected to pass out the bulk of HB 2055, which also
would override local ordinances, including those enacted in Leawood, Prairie Village and Kansas City, Kan.,
to outlaw open carry of firearms.
Al Terwelp, state chairman of the Kansas Libertarian Party, said the organization filed lawsuits against each
of the cities to end defiance of the state's open-carry statute.
"This bill is desperately needed to help protect law enforcement and law-abiding citizens who choose to
exercise their Second Amendment rights," he said.
Leslee Rivarola, assistant city administrator in Lenexa, said the city opposed legislation to pre-empt local
standards for open carry of firearms. If the bill advances, she said, the measure ought to be amended to
require the same licensing standards for open carry that exist in Kansas for conceal carry.
The attempt by the House to control policy for cities and counties mirrored the federal government's
imposition of its will on states, said Mike Taylor, who represents the Unified Government of Wyandotte
County and Kansas City, Kan.
Taylor said the proposed Family and Personal Protection Act was an example of "big government forcing its
views and mandates onto local citizens and communities."
"It is a state version of 'command and control' government," he said. "It is certainly not limited government."
Some Kansas farmers support crop insurance
changes
Bill would reduce subsidies for newly converted land
Posted: February 26, 2013 - 4:29pm
By Megan Hart
THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL
Legislation to limit crop subsidies would seem about as welcome to farmers as a roast pig at a meeting of
vegetarians, but some farmers think it would protect their long-term interests.
The Protect our Prairies Act, introduced by a South Dakota Republican and a Minnesota Democrat in the
U.S. House of Representatives earlier this month, would cut crop insurance subsidies for grasslands that
weren’t previously used for agriculture. Supporters, including the American Farmland Trust, estimated it
would save about $200 million by not allowing farmers to use the yields from their existing fields for newly
converted ones, because subsidies are based on a piece of land’s historical or expected yield.
The American Academy of Sciences reported earlier this month that 1.3 million acres of grassland in the
Dakotas, Minnesota, Iowa and Nebraska were converted into cropland between 2006 and 2011 — mostly to
grow corn and soybeans. The report was based on satellite images, which didn’t include Kansas and southern
areas of the Great Plains.
Kansas Farmers Union president Donn Teske said he thinks the proposal to limit some crop insurance
subsidies is worth discussing. Land prices are so high now that farmers have begun converting unused land or
grazing pastures into fields, he said.
“The thing probably has some merit to it,” he said. “When that price bubble collapses, we’re going to have to
deal with overproduction again.”
In his own area, some land that wasn’t used for crops since the 1930s, having been converted into pastures, is
now being used to grow soybeans, Teske said. He said he believes assisting farmers with crop insurance is a
good investment in general, because it helps farmers produce a steady food supply, but if the land has a lower
productivity, it doesn’t make sense to subsidize its insurance.
“A lot of this land is marginal land, and there’s a reason it’s been back to grass,” he said.
Rep. Lynn Jenkins, R-Kan., said she preferred to look at crop subsidies as part of a comprehensive farm bill.
“I learned growing up on my family’s farm in Jackson County that farmers and ranchers are our nation’s best
conservationists,” she said. “And the fact that Kansas is second in the nation, behind only Texas, in total
acreage enrolled in the Conservation Reserve Program shows that our farmers and ranchers make
conservation an essential part of their land management.”
The Conservation Reserve Program, run by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, pays farmers to plant longterm cover crops, such as grasses, on environmentally sensitive land to reduce erosion, improve water quality
and provide wildlife habitat.
From the Wichita Eagle
Kansas’ strength is workforce, schools,
roads
It was striking that Graham Toft, president of the Florida-based consultant group
GrowthEconomists Inc., told Gov. Sam Brownback’s council of economic advisers last week that Kansas
should rebrand itself by focusing on its high-ranking educated workforce, quality K-12 schools, robust
roads and railways, and “roll up your sleeves” Midwest culture. In other words, some of the state services
that have been jeopardized by Brownback’s reckless push to eliminate state income taxes.
Read more here: http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2013/03/kansas-strength-is-workforce-schoolsroads/#storylink=cpy
Local doctors backing Medicaid
expansion
Officers of the Medical Society of Sedgwick County are hoping that Gov. Sam Brownback
allows the federal expansion of Medicaid. Society president Bart Grelinger told The Eagle editorial board
that the Medicaid program in Kansas is currently “one of the worst in the nation” in terms of eligibility
criteria, and that “there is not really a downside” to the expansion. Donna Sweet, society president-elect,
said that Medicaid should be expanded for compassion reasons, but that it also makes economic sense.
A study released last week by the Kansas Hospital Association estimated that the expansion would inject
more than $3 billion into the state’s economy, would create 4,000 jobs over the next seven years, and
could save the state more money than it costs.
Read more here: http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2013/02/local-doctors-backing-medicaidexpansion/#storylink=cpy
Brownback should follow Scott’s lead
on Medicaid
There likely was no governor who opposed federal health care reform more than
Florida Gov. Rick Scott (in photo). But when it came to deciding whether toallow a federal expansion of
Medicaid, Scott put the interests of citizens before his own ideology and preferences – as Gov. Sam
Brownback also should do. Scott said last week: “Quality health care services must be accessible and
affordable for all – not just those in certain ZIP codes or tax brackets.… While the federal government is
committed to paying 100 percent of the cost of new people in Medicaid, I cannot, in good conscience,
deny the uninsured access to care.”
Read more here: http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2013/02/brownback-should-follow-scotts-lead-onmedicaid/#storylink=cpy
Kansas Supreme Court orders mediation in school
funding lawsuit



By Suzanne Perez Tobias
The Wichita Eagle
Published Friday, March 1, 2013, at 5:16 p.m.
The Kansas Supreme Court on Friday ordered mediation of the dispute over school finance and a
stay of a decision issued earlier this year, in which a three-judge panel said state funding for public
schools is unconstitutionally low.
The requests for mediation and a stay were filed last month by Kansas Attorney General Derek
Schmidt, at the request of Gov. Sam Brownback.
A lead attorney for the school districts suing the state said neither order surprised him, and that his
team isn’t opposed to mediation.
“Anything that would move this issue toward resolution has got to be good for the kids of Kansas,”
said John Robb, lead attorney for Schools For Fair Funding, a coalition of 52 Kansas districts
including Wichita.
“If this has the potential of setting Kansas on the right course for its kids, then full speed ahead and
we’ll see where it goes.”
The ruling issued in January calls for lawmakers to raise the base per-pupil state aid from $3,838 to
$4,492, at a cost of about $437 million statewide. Wichita’s share of the court-ordered increases
would be about $59 million.
According to the court order issued Friday, parties in the lawsuit will have seven days to agree to a
mediator; if they fail to agree, the court will appoint one.
The state Supreme Court also stayed the order and judgment of the three-judge panel until the
appeal is heard.
“It does not come as a surprise,” Robb said of the stay. “I am encouraged that the court has
indicated that this won’t slow the appeal down, because … we have said we feel that the kids of
Kansas have waited long enough.”
Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2013/03/01/2697812/kansas-supreme-court-ordersmediation.html#storylink=cpy
Senate committee rejects governor’s plan to
improve fourth-grade reading in Kansas



By BRENT D. WISTROM
Eagle Topeka bureau
Published Tuesday, Feb. 26, 2013, at 4:41 p.m.
TOPEKA — A split Senate panel defeated Gov. Sam Brownback’s proposal to improve fourth-grade
reading by holding back third-graders who can’t read at grade level.
The Senate Education Committee opposed the Kansas Reads to Succeed Act on a 6-5 vote
Tuesday.
Brownback made improving fourth-grade reading proficiency one of his top priorities when he ran for
governor.
In addition to holding third-graders with insufficient reading skills back, the bill would have required
schools to test students in pre-kindergarten, kindergarten and first and second grade to identify
reading problems. It would have provided grant money for districts and would have rewarded
schools in the top 100 for reading scores with $10,000.
An addition to the bill, created by Arkansas City Republican Sen. Steve Abrams, would have allowed
third-graders to re-take the reading test if they failed on the first attempt.
But the plan still failed to get enough traction.
Republican Sens. Dan Kerschen of Garden Plain, Vicki Schmidt of Topeka, Kay Wolf of Prairie
Village and Ralph Ostmeyer of Grinnell opposed the bill along with Democratic Sens. Anthony
Hensley of Topeka and Pat Pettey of Kansas City.
School officials from Topeka and Kansas City, Kan., opposed Brownback’s reading plan and said
the money could be better spent on other reading improvement strategies.
Wichita’s school district suggested remodeling the bill entirely.
Schmidt said the state should focus more on reading programs for younger kids.
“I think the train has to be backed up much, much further than third grade to make a difference,” she
said.
Schmidt questioned how much retaining third-graders might cost local school districts, but no
estimate was available.
Hensley, the Senate minority leader, said the state is dealing with scarce education resources and
state money would be better spent on early childhood reading programs.
“It makes absolutely no sense, in my estimation, to retain children at third grade,” he said.
But Sen. Jeff Melcher, R-Leawood, said it’s important to deal with students’ reading troubles, and the
governor’s plan would improve reading by giving students the motivation of a consequence.
“There’s nothing more motivating than having a dead certain consequence,” he said.
Abrams, who is chair of the education committee, said it’s possible the plan could reemerge later in
the session.
Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2013/02/26/2692801/senate-committee-rejectsgovernors.html#storylink=cpy
School officials oppose Kansas governor’s plan to
hold back students who can’t read



By BRENT D. WISTROM
Eagle Topeka bureau
Published Monday, Feb. 25, 2013, at 2:25 p.m.
TOPEKA — Gov. Sam Brownback’s proposal to improve fourth-grade reading by holding back thirdgraders who can’t read at grade-level met opposition from school district officials from Kansas City,
Kan., and Topeka on Monday.
Wichita officials, meanwhile, say the money Brownback has proposed spending to improve fourthgrade reading levels would be better spent on a statewide training program that better equips
teachers.
“Retention is quite an expensive strategy,” said Diane Gjerstad, a lobbyist for the Wichita school
district.
Jon Hummell, Brownback’s policy director, said retention isn’t the goal of the governor’s plan. He
said the governor wants to stop the social promotion of third-graders who can’t read. Brownback’s
budget includes $10 million in targeted intervention programs to help students and improve
kindergarten and preschool programs, he said.
“It is our sincere hope that over time the combination of these efforts will render social promotion
obsolete because every Kansas child will know how to read,” Hummell wrote in testimony to the
Senate Education Committee.
Julie Ford, superintendent of Topeka Public Schools, said a student from a poor family may enter
kindergarten with a 400-word vocabulary, limited access to books and libraries, no preschool
experience and virtually no encouragement in reading. Meanwhile, a more privileged student may
enter with preschool education, loads of encouragement, books and an iPad and a 1,100-word
vocabulary.
She suggested that the state consider funding full-time kindergarten and add more school days to
the school year since fewer students now need summers off for farm work.
“Retention is not a good use of time,” she said.
Senate Bill 169, known as the Kansas Reads to Succeed Act, is a cornerstone of Brownback’s
“roadmap” for the state. In addition to holding back third-graders who can’t read at grade level
starting in 2016, the bill would identify the top 100 elementary schools for fourth-grade reading
proficiency and award districts with at least one school in the top 100 with $10,000.
It’s unclear whether the Senate panel that heard testimony on the bill will vote to advance it to the
Senate.
Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2013/02/25/2691084/school-officials-opposekansas.html#storylink=cpy
Brownback should listen to Christie, not
House panel
As Gov. Sam Brownback decides whether to allow an expansion of Medicaid in
Kansas, he should listen to New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (in photo), who this week became the eighth
GOP governor to approve the expansion. Christie, who has been a fierce critic of the federal health care
law, carefully reviewed the issue and concluded that the expansion is “the smart thing to do for our fiscal
and public health.” He noted that it would provide insurance to tens of thousands of low-income residents,
help keep hospitals financially healthy and actually save his state money. A study by the Kansas Hospital
Association found the same would be true in Kansas –and that the expansion would inject more than $3
billion into the Kansas economy over the next seven years. However, none of that appeared to matter to
a Kansas House panel, which approved a resolution Tuesday opposing the expansion.
Read more here: http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2013/03/brownback-should-listen-to-christie-not-housepanel/#storylink=cpy
Brownback warns that Washington
budget cuts could shutter meat plants
Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback warned that Kansas meat processing plants may shut down if automatic
federal budget cuts lead the Obama Administration to temporarily layoff meat inspectors.
In a letter sent Thursday to U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, Brownback and Kansas Secretary of
Agriculture Dale Rodman said that Vilsack’s recent comments about sequestration cuts leading to
furloughs for meat inspectors is a major concern for Kansas because lack of inspections would cause an
excess of market-ready animals that can’t be shipped out of state or sold.
“In addition, consumers will face limited meat supplies and potentially higher prices,” Brownback and
Rodman warned in the letter.
That’s because meat that is not inspected can’t be sold.
At least one federal official has said the potential furloughs could be staggered to avoid such meat
production shutdowns, according to CNBC.
Vilsack said it could take months before the furloughs would happen.
Kansas is home to several major meat packing plants, and Brownback said lagging inspections could cost
the state industry hundreds of millions.
To learn more about the beef industry in Kansas and elsewhere, see arecent project by the Kansas City
Star.
Read more here: http://blogs.kansas.com/gov/2013/02/28/brownback-warns-that-washington-budgetcuts-could-shutter-meat-plants/#storylink=cpy
Eagle editorial: Arts still at risk

Published Wednesday, Feb. 27, 2013, at 12 a.m. In 2011 Kansans loudly objected when Gov. Sam
Brownback said the arts were not a core service deserving of public dollars, prompting the
Legislature to intervene. Now, Kansas lawmakers must do better than the $200,000 that the
governor proposes for the arts for each of the next two years – a $500,000 cut from the current year.
Not that the state’s new approach to supporting the arts is working as intended. As the advocacy
group Kansas Citizens for the Arts noted earlier this month: “The new Kansas Creative Arts
Industries Commission is not doing enough to support the arts in Kansas. No funds have been
granted yet, with the funding year almost half over, and the proposed programs are not what artists
and arts organizations have said they need.”
The new commission is taking applications for two new programs, the Creative Economy Project
Support and Creative Arts Industry Incentives, and its focus on creating jobs and building publicprivate partnerships may be well-intended. But it isn’t what Kansans could count on from the nowdefunct Kansas Arts Commission, which had 45 years of experience in seeding and strengthening
local arts and cultural activities.
The new commission, which is housed in the Kansas Department of Commerce, only held its first
meeting in January, and there has been confusion about who answers to whom. With the
commission so slow to get its act together, the state still seems far from being able to restore the
$1.2 million in annual funding Kansas once received from the National Endowment for the Arts and
the Mid-America Arts Alliance.
Meanwhile, the private organization that Brownback touted as the successor to a state arts agency,
the Kansas Arts Foundation, hasn’t had much of an impact. Last week it announced its first three
grants totaling just $6,500, which included a welcome $2,500 for Wichita Children’s Theatre and
Dance Center.
But as bad as things are, they will be worse if the governor succeeds in cutting funding for the new
commission from $700,000 to $200,000, given that $150,000 in the current budget year reportedly is
going for administrative costs.
Lawmakers can hear from advocates and other arts-loving Kansans during Arts Day at the Capitol
on Thursday, and should heed their reports about what the loss of state support has meant for arts
organizations and communities.
Those who contacted their legislators two years ago to voice their support for the arts need to do so
again, especially because the 2013 Legislature contains so many new members who may not have
heard the message yet.
The damage of the governor’s assault on the arts is far from undone, and would only worsen under
his budget proposal.
For the editorial board, Rhonda Holman
Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2013/02/27/2691043/eagle-editorial-arts-stillat.html#storylink=cpy
R.D. Fogo: Turnpike ‘ain’t broke’




By R.D. Fogo
Published Friday, March 1, 2013, at 5:24 p.m.
Updated Friday, March 1, 2013, at 5:25 p.m.
“If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” was the advice the late L.W. Newcomer, the Kansas Turnpike CEO,
gave to his staff and his newly hired assistant in January 1966. It was his way of saying that when
managing a state agency, “don’t overspend.” It is still good advice today.
But after 10 years of being open to traffic, the turnpike was, in fact, perilously close to being “broke.”
Few employees had been given pay increases during those 10 years; no bonds had been redeemed
from revenues; the under-designed 4-inch-thick asphalt pavement over a rock base had wheel ruts
nearly that deep. The road was rough. There were no guard rails around the piers, and the fatality
rate was astronomical for a major highway. Traffic and revenues were far below projections, and
what maintenance reserve funds had been accumulated over 10 years had been diverted to build
two new interchanges in Kansas City, leaving a pittance for day-to-day maintenance of a 236.5-mile,
four-lane highway.
When the Kansas Turnpike Authority was created in 1953, the only way the legislation stood a
snowball’s chance to be enacted was to include language that guaranteed the state would never be
responsible for the proposed debt should the turnpike go “belly-up.” It was clear from the start that
the Kansas Turnpike Authority and the Kansas Highway Commission (later renamed the Kansas
Department of Transportation) were two separate state agencies with different rules and regulations.
Unlike KDOT, the KTA was purposefully allowed to establish many of its own rules and regulations.
The KTA employees were not to be civil service employees. There was even language that asserted
the KTA was not subject to the control or supervision of any other state agency, and language
precluded the direct supervision of the governor.
After the initial euphoria of building such a large multilane project in only 22 months, the reality
began to sink in that it was very possible the turnpike, in addition to ending in an Oklahoma wheat
field, would end at the edge of a bondholder “fiscal cliff.”
But fortunately, expenses were minimized, traffic and revenues increased and, over time,
maintenance improved and guard rails and median barriers were put in place. It was a needed route,
and 60 years after its birth it is a well-maintained and -managed highway, arguably equal or better in
quality than many, if not most, of its younger peers anywhere in the country.
What hasn’t been widely recognized is this: States that had substantial toll-road mileage, which was
incorporated into the interstate system of highways in 1956, have a significant financial advantage
over states that do not have toll roads. If one thinks of all the interstate roads in Kansas as a system,
KDOT and the federal Highway Trust Fund were spared the cost of building 236.5 miles of four-lane
highway.
With or without the turnpike, the state of Kansas receives exactly the same federal fuel tax allotment.
With the turnpike, KDOT got to spend 100 percent of its federal distribution on roughly 80 percent of
its interstate mileage, a real advantage for the state. With the turnpike, KDOT also was saved from
spending the 10 percent matching funds from state fuel taxes.
But there is more. Everyone knows the tolls pay for the turnpike operations. But turnpike customers’
vehicles also burn fuel, and those fuel taxes go to supplement KDOT funds for use on its roads.
The original cost savings, maintenance savings, reconstruction cost savings, fuel taxes from turnpike
customers over 56 years – all have accrued to KDOT and state taxpayers. Fifty-six years of toll
funding in Kansas has made a multibillion-dollar funding advantage for Kansas interstates over
those states without turnpikes.
Toll-road customers already pay twice – the toll and their fuel taxes that go to the state. Combining
KTA and KDOT, as Gov. Sam Brownback proposes, will only dilute the turnpike revenues, and any
managerial savings soon will dissipate into thin air as turnpike revenues are spent on roads far away
from the turnpike. Raising tolls to support other projects is in a sense making turnpike customers pay
three times.
“Fixing the road when it ain’t broke” seems to me to be a bad deal all the way around.
Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2013/03/03/2697849/rd-fogo-turnpike-aintbroke.html#storylink=cpy
Kansas House passes ‘Celebrate Freedom Week’
measure



By John Milburn
Associated Press
Published Friday, March 1, 2013, at 5:41 p.m.
TOPEKA — – A bill hat would require schools to devote a week in mid-September each year to
focus on teaching students about the country's founding won backing from the state House on
Friday.
The “Celebrate Freedom Week” measure, one of several bills sponsored by conservative
Republicans that would affect school curriculums, passed on a 95-25 vote. It would require the State
Board of Education to develop rules and regulations for public schools in collaboration with other
state agencies and private entities who volunteer to participate. A handful of states, including Texas
in 2001, have adopted similar weeks dedicated to civics instruction.
The measure also states that religious references in the writings shall not be censored from the
teaching of the materials.
Supporters didn't mention religion or specific constitutional rights during their debate, instead
focusing on the desire to increase patriotism and general knowledge they see as lacking in the state.
“I see it as an engaging time. It should be a fun time,” said Rep. Kelly Meigs, lead sponsor of the bill
and a Lenexa Republican.
Rep. John Bradford said students weren't being taught U.S. history and government in depth, often
glossing through major events in a few paragraphs or pages. He said freedom week would be a
chance to go beyond textbooks on subjects.
Bradford, a sponsor of the bill who spent more than 20 years in the military, said he wants to instill a
greater sense of patriotism in Kansas' children.
“I have pride and I want to instill that pride in all the kids in the neighborhood,” the Lansing
Republican said.
Opponents said schools don't need more regulations on what goes on in the classroom.
“How ironic that we have a bill with freedom in the name that is one more mandate on local
government,” said Rep. Don Hineman, a Dighton Republican.
Although he didn't disagree with the concept of more focus on history, Rep. Ed Trimmer said
requiring a full week in September to teach the subject could be out of synch with the rest of the
civics curriculum. He also said the bill was advanced to debate without discussion in committee
about what the State Board of Education already requires schools to teach students about history
and government in existing academic standards.
“We're making assumptions about something that we know nothing about,” said Trimmer, of
Winfield, who is the ranking Democrat on the House Education Committee.
House Minority Leader Paul Davis, a Lawrence Democrat, said it's not the fault of schools and
teachers that most Kansas residents lack sufficient knowledge of history, adding that the
responsibility falls to parents and others to talk about the subject with students.
“We probably should all just look in the mirror,” Davis said.
Rep. Ward Cassidy, a St. Francis Republican, said he supported the concept but would prefer it be a
nonbinding resolution instead of a mandate requiring schools to teach something legislators feel is
important. He said he thinks students should learn how to give a good handshake to others, but that
legislators shouldn't be requiring schools to teach that.
“I don't think that every time we have a great idea that we should mandate schools to do that great
idea,” Cassidy said.
The bill is one of several conservatives have sponsored that would affect school curriculums,
including one that would require teachers to give equal treatment to viewpoints on global warming
and other topics that contradict the prevailing scientific views. They also are seeking to block
implementation of the federal Common Core Standards for reading and math, calling it an unfunded
mandate on states and forcing them to give up control of what is taught in the classroom to a
national consortium.
Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2013/03/01/2697888/kansas-house-passescelebrate.html#storylink=cpy
Standing-room-only crowd at legislative forum
includes many teachers




By Molly McMillin
The Wichita Eagle
Published Saturday, March 2, 2013, at 3:44 p.m.
Updated Sunday, March 3, 2013, at 12:38 a.m.
More than 300 people, many of them teachers, attended a South-Central Kansas Legislative
Delegation forum Saturday to share concerns about a variety of issues and pending bills in the
Kansas Legislature, including collective bargaining, school funding, Medicaid and a proposal for the
state to take over the Kansas Turnpike.
The forum, which was standing room only, was held at the National Center for Aviation Training. It is
the first of three forums to be held in the next two months.
Members of the Kansas House of Representatives and the Senate from south-central Kansas
participated in the event, which was moderated by Sen. Oletha Faust-Goudeau, D-Wichita, chair of
the delegation.
Many attendees voiced concern over a variety of proposals that they say would ultimately hurt
teachers and students.
Teachers raised concerns about one proposal that, if passed, would overhaul collective bargaining
for public employees, such as teachers, police and firefighters.
Under the legislation, teachers could negotiate contracts individually with local school districts,
although some issues would be deemed non-negotiable.
The change is an attack on collective bargaining, Randy Mousley, president of United Teachers of
Wichita, said after the forum. The union represents about 4,000 Wichita teachers.
“Collective bargaining has been effective in this state for 40 years,” Mousley said.
Rep. Nile Dillmore, D-Wichita, said he is committed to ensuring that collective bargaining rights won’t
be interfered with by legislators.
The current statutes are working well, he said.
Rep. Gene Suellentrop, R-Wichita, vice chairman of the House Commerce, Labor and Economic
Development Committee, said the issue has been distorted.
“There are no smoke-filled rooms, no closed-door meetings,” Suellentrop said.
Suellentrop said after the forum that the change, however, would benefit teachers.
School boards need more flexibility and local control to adjust to changes, Suellentrop said.
The issue will be discussed at 1:30 p.m. Wednesday by the Commerce and Labor committee. The
public is invited.
Another issue facing teachers is whether public employees can have money deducted from their
paychecks for union dues and political action.
Some teachers said they oppose a proposal that would bar the automatic, voluntary deductions from
teachers’ and government workers’ paychecks.
Natalie Aramburu, a teacher at Truesdell Middle School, received a standing ovation after telling
legislators that she is concerned about that potential ban.
“I did not give up my private citizen rights when I became a teacher,” Aramburu said. “It’s my money.
I earned it.”
She, not the state, should be the one to decide what can be deducted from her paycheck, she said.
Supporters of the legislation say that it’s not the state’s role to deduct that money, and that public
employees can still donate money to the groups.
One speaker, who said she works for the Kansas Department for Children and Families, said she
has not had a pay raise in eight years.
Case loads have doubled, and the Wichita office has not been fully staffed for the last two years, she
said.
She is concerned about an effort to privatize the department.
“What have state employees done that we deserve this type of treatment?” she asked legislators.
One legislator said it was the first time he’d heard about the effort to privatize, but that he would
check into it.
Attendee Bonita Gooch raised concerns about payday loans, which she called “devastating” to the
community, sales taxes on food and the “overincarceration of the jail system.”
A second public forum is scheduled for 9 to 11 a.m. March 23 at Wichita State University’s Hughes
Metropolitan Complex at 29th Street North and Oliver. The third forum is scheduled for 6:30 to 8:30
p.m. May 6 at Derby City Hall, 611 Mulberry Road in Derby.
Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2013/03/02/2698757/standing-room-only-crowd-atlegislative.html#storylink=cpy
Lawmakers love telling locals what to do
Local officials across the state are frustrated by all the legislation in Topeka that would
impose new mandates and restrictions on local governments. Wichita City Council member Peter
Meitzner told the Topeka Capital-Journal that there were six or seven bills in Topeka that would have a
direct impact on how a city operates – such as restriction on how cities and counties raise property-tax
revenue, where they can ban guns, and whether they can spend their tax dollars on sustainable
development. There also are a number of bills that would place new mandates on local school boards.
What’s ironic is that these bills are being proposed by limited-government conservatives (some of them
from Sedgwick County). “The Legislature and individual legislators hate it when the feds mandate for
them – unfunded or not – things they have to do,” said Rich Eckert, Shawnee County’s attorney.
“However, they have very little compunction about turning around and doing the same thing to local units
of government in Kansas. And I don’t understand that.”
Read more here: http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2013/03/lawmakers-love-telling-locals-what-todo/#storylink=cpy
Kansas legislators’ decisions so far in the session




By BRENT D. WISTROM
The Wichita Eagle
Published Sunday, March 3, 2013, at 12:28 a.m.
Updated Sunday, March 3, 2013, at 12:38 a.m.
Lawmakers, including a historically large batch of freshmen, are working to put their mark on Kansas
in a wide variety of ways. Here’s a quick look at some of their decisions halfway through the session.
Drug testing
Senators have agreed to require drug tests of welfare and unemployment recipients suspected of
using illegal substances, sending those who fail to treatment and job training. Democrats forced a
successful vote to include lawmakers in such tests. The bill now goes to the House.
Guns
A House committee has endorsed a plan to shield Kansas-made guns and ammunition from federal
gun-control measures. Federal officers who tried to intervene could be arrested. A proposal to let
licensed Kansans carry concealed guns into more public buildings is also still alive.
Education
The Senate has approved a proposal to let voters decide on a constitutional amendment preventing
courts from ordering lawmakers to spend more on schools; it still must go to the House. Gov. Sam
Brownback’s plan to hold back third-graders who can’t pass reading tests failed in committee. Here’s
where other key issues stand at the midway point in the legislative session. Bills that have been
approved in one chamber still must gain approval in the other.
Judges
The Senate approved a constitutional amendment to let the governor select Supreme and Appeals
court judges, subject to Senate confirmation. But the proposal seems unlikely to pass in the House.
The House, meanwhile, approved a bill that lets the governor select only appeals judges, a change
that doesn’t require a public vote.
Labor
The House voted to prevent public employees from volunteering to have a portion of their paycheck
docked to fund political advocacy. A bill to change how judges who rule on workers compensation
claims are selected has also advanced. And a bill to limit teacher union collective bargaining is also
still alive. But it’s unclear whether they’ll garner enough support.
Abortion
The Senate approved a bill intended to keep a doctor from performing an abortion based on gender.
A doctor could face criminal charges and lawsuits from a woman or family member.
Alcohol
A proposal to allow grocery stores and other retailers to sell stronger beer, wine and spirits didn’t get
much discussion in the first half of the session, but is poised for debate starting next week.
Immigration
Despite a pile of ideas aimed at stricter enforcement of immigration laws and attempts to generate
discussion about requiring employers to use E-Verify to check residency status, it’s unlikely the
House or Senate will take up any major changes.
Medicaid expansion
No decision has been made about whether to expand Medicaid to more Kansans under new federal
health care laws. But a House panel voted against expanding it, a move that, if affirmed in
subsequent votes, would likely send a message to Brownback that lawmakers oppose the
expansion.
Rape
Both chambers have passed bills that eliminate the statute of limitations for the prosecution of rape
cases. Under current law, prosecution has to start within five years from when the rape occurred.
The bill also allows prosecution of sexually violent crimes anytime within 10 years of when the victim
turns age 18 — or within one year of when authorities establish a conclusive DNA link between the
crime and the suspect.
Turnpike
A proposal to merge the Kansas Turnpike Authority into the Kansas Department of Transportation
remains alive in theory, but a bill proposing that did not get a full vote in the House.
Voting
The Senate approved a plan that increases penalties for voting crimes and gives the secretary of
state the power to prosecute those crimes.
Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2013/03/03/2699403/legislators-decisions-sofar.html#storylink=cpy
Kansas House approves bill eliminating statute of
limitations in rape cases




By BRENT D. WISTROM
Eagle Topeka bureau
Published Friday, March 1, 2013, at 10:12 a.m.
Updated Saturday, March 2, 2013, at 7:48 a.m.
TOPEKA — The Kansas House unanimously voted Friday to eliminate the statute of limitations for
the prosecution of rape cases.
The Senate on Thursday unanimously approved a similar bill.
Under House Bill 2252, rape or aggravated criminal sodomy could be prosecuted any time after the
crime occurs. Under current law, prosecution has to start within five years from when the rape
occurred.
The bill also allows prosecution of sexually violent crimes anytime within 10 years of when the victim
turns age 18 — or within one year of when authorities establish a conclusive DNA link between the
crime and the suspect.
Several rape and molestation survivors testified to House and Senate committees in recent weeks,
pleading with them to extend the state’s statute of limitations so that rapists — including those who
have confessed — could be prosecuted. State officials say the new laws can’t be applied
retroactively, so it won’t benefit victims who testified. But, if approved and signed into law,
lawmakers say it could help future victims get justice.
At least 20 states have no time limit for prosecuting rape, according to the Rape Abuse and Incest
National Network. Ten states, including Kansas, have statutes of limitation of five years or less.
Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2013/03/01/2697286/kansas-house-approves-billeliminating.html#storylink=cpy
Kansas Senate passes bill to require drug tests for
welfare, unemployment recipients




By BRENT D. WISTROM
Eagle Topeka bureau
Published Thursday, Feb. 28, 2013, at 10:59 a.m.
Updated Friday, March 1, 2013, at 6:39 a.m.
TOPEKA — The Senate approved a bill Thursday requiring drug testing for welfare and
unemployment benefits recipients – as well as lawmakers – suspected of drug use.
The 31-8 vote, mostly along party lines, advances Senate Bill 149 to the House.
Gov. Sam Brownback has been noncommittal about his support for the concept of testing welfare
recipients.
The proposal calls for drug tests whenever state officials have reasonable suspicion that someone
receiving or applying for welfare or unemployment benefits is using drugs. Suspicion could be raised
during addiction screening by the Department for Children and Families or by missed meetings or
criminal records.
A proposal pushed by Democrats to also test any lawmaker suspected of drug use was added to the
bill. Suspicion of drug use by lawmakers could be identified by the Department of Administration
based on criminal records or other complaints. The governor, lieutenant governor and their staffs
already have to take drug tests, administration officials say.
Benefits recipients who fail the test would lose state assistance until they complete drug treatment
and job skills programs. Lawmakers who fail would also have to enter treatment and job skills
training.
Republicans say the proposal will provide people with drug addictions help in kicking their bad habits
and prevent state tax dollars from being spent on illegal substances.
Senate Vice President Jeff King, R-Independence, who crafted the bill, said it is not intended to be
punitive, and he has stressed that the children of people who fail tests will still be able to get state
assistance via a third-party surrogate who can pass a drug test.
Democratic Sens. Oletha Faust-Goudeau of Wichita, David Haley of Kansas City, Tom Hawk of
Manhattan, Laura Kelly of Topeka, Anthony Hensley of Topeka and Pat Pettey of Kansas City
opposed the bill. Lindsborg Republican Sen. Jay Emler and Topeka Republican Sen. Vicki Schmidt
also opposed it, saying too many questions about cost and treatment remain unanswered.
Hawk said an addiction specialist he talked to said drug testing welfare recipients probably has more
to do with political posturing than anything else. He said the specialist also said drug testing is
largely ineffective in detecting drug use, except for marijuana, which remains detectable for a few
weeks. Many narcotics can be detected by standard tests only within a few days of use, according to
several testing labs and detection schedules.
Faust-Goudeau said that poor Kansans are already embarrassed to seek state assistance and that
testing them for drug use makes it worse.
“That’s just outrageous,” she said.
Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2013/02/28/2695596/kansas-senate-passes-bill-torequire.html#storylink=cpy
Follow legislative intent on problem
gambling
When the 2007 Legislature made the controversial decision to allow stateowned destination casinos, it built in a social safeguard that even gambling opponents should have been
able to support: a requirement that 2 percent of the gambling revenue from those casinos go to the
Problem Gambling and Addictions Grant Fund. So it’s inexplicable that the state has allocated only 9
percent of that 2 percent to help problem gamblers so far, according to testimony heard recently by the
Kansas Racing and Gaming Commission, and that Gov. Sam Brownback’s fiscal 2014 budget proposal
appears to entirely eliminate funds to treat problem gambling. It’s a further concern that $6.5 million of the
$9 million generated for the fund so far went to Medicaid for services for other addictions. Legislative
intent was clear, and a recent poll showed strong public support for using public funds to make problemgambling treatment available and affordable. The Brownback administration needs to keep that promise.

By Rhonda Holman
Read more here: http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2013/02/follow-legislative-intent-on-problemgambling/#storylink=cpy
Area health clinics could get fewer funds if budget
cuts go into effect



By Kelsey Ryan
The Wichita Eagle
Published Tuesday, Feb. 26, 2013, at 11:26 p.m.
Some local health clinics could lose up to 5 percent of the funds they receive through federal grants
if budget cuts take effect Friday as planned.
“We’re all going to share the pain,” said Dave Sanford, GraceMed CEO. “We hope to make that
funding up from other sources, but we’re not sure where that would be.”
The funding cuts are part of what is known as sequestration, which is a package of federal budget
cuts that go into effect because President Obama and Congress could not agree on a spending-andrevenue plan more than 18 months ago. The cuts had been set to go into effect at the start of 2013,
but Congress and the president agreed to push off the date to the end of February.
Sanford says the cuts would equal a loss of about $60,000 in federal funds for GraceMed. He said
the cut could affect staffing and the number of patients the clinics could see next year.
“It could mean about 1,400 unduplicated patients we would not be able to serve,” he said.
The reimbursement rates for providing care to people on Medicare and Medicaid would not change
as part of the cuts, Sanford said.
Last year, GraceMed clinics served more than 29,000 unduplicated patients.
“Cuts to domestic programs, like to Federally Qualified Health Centers, has always been on the
table,” Sanford said. “Some in Congress want to take more of a scalpel instead of hatchet approach,
but the whole idea of the automatic cuts was to force Congress to develop a budget.”
According to the National Association of Community Health Centers, up to 900,000 patients could be
affected by the budget cuts nationwide. In total, health care centers around the country could face up
to $120 million in funding cuts, the NACHC says.
Teresa Lovelady, CEO and president of the Center for Health and Wellness in Wichita, said the cuts
could mean about $125,000 less, or 750 fewer patient visits, for her clinic.
The center serves about 4,000 people each year, Lovelady said. About 40 percent of patients are
uninsured and about 54 percent of those patients are employed, she said.
Hunter Health Clinic is also a Federally Qualified Health Center. No representatives from the clinic
were available for comment.
Pompeo OK with sequestration
Though he would rather they be distributed differently, U.S. Rep. Mike Pompeo, R-Wichita, is OK with the
automatic spending cuts scheduled to go into effect Friday, he told The Eagle recently. He thinks the
federal government, including the military, can withstand the cuts. In fact, he wishes that sequestration,
which he called a “home run,” would mandate deeper cuts, the Lawrence Journal-World reported. “That’s
why it’s only a home run and not a grand slam,” he said. Responding Tuesday to White House criticism of
his comments, Pompeo said that “the sequester is a home run not because it is good politics, but
because it begins to put America back on the right fiscal track.”
From the Kansas City Star
A study in public distrust
February 26
BY DAVE HELLING
The Kansas City Star
Gov. Sam Brownback and the Kansas Club for Growth are flummoxed.
Both want to push the state’s income tax rate to zero. They understand, though, that
government needs some cash to operate — you know, schools, prisons, that kind of stuff.
So they’re offering you a deal: Give up the
deductions you now get for real estate taxes
and mortgage interest in exchange for that
zero income tax rate. Do the tax cipherin,’
they say, and you’ll see you still come out
ahead — the Club for Growth is even running
radio ads making that argument.
Why, they wonder, don’t voters get this?
Well, here’s a possibility: They don’t trust
government to keep its side of the bargain.
Sure, the trade is a good deal if state income
taxes are dramatically lowered or eliminated.
But Kansans are terrified that once they lose
their home deductions, the Legislature will
simply wait a few years before jacking their
income tax rates back up again.
Where would they get that idea?
Well, here’s a possibility: That’s precisely
what Brownback proposes for a statewide
sales tax.
You’ll remember the Legislature promised
three years ago to drop the state’s sales tax to
5.7 cents on the dollar at the end of June this
year. Now, though, Brownback wants to keep
the rate at 6.3 cents per dollar.
If the government can easily break its sales
tax promise, it’s perfectly reasonable to
believe any income tax promise is eventually
breakable, too.
Millions of words have been written about the
dysfunction of our government and the
growing disconnect between legislators and
the public. The biggest casualty of the
stalemate may be voters’ utter lack of trust
that lawmakers will keep their promises.
And surely, politicians like Brownback and
lobbying groups like the Club for Growth
share at least some of the blame for that
mistrust. It’s virtually a staple of conservative
arguments that government isn’t to be
believed, particularly its elected officials.
The biennial blizzard of negative TV ads
hasn’t helped either. Most voters are now
conditioned to believe that anything they hear
from a politician is misleading at best and a
flat-out falsehood at worst.
That leaves most taxpayers at least
comfortable with the devil they know and
deeply suspicious of the devil they don’t.
And taxes, as we all know, are
Mephistopheles.
It’s a problem beyond Kansas. The nation’s
biggest financial challenges — its tax
structure, spending habits, deficits and debts
— are horrific, threatening growth for decades
to come.
But they won’t be fixed until the public once
again trusts government to at least choose
options that don’t make the problems worse.
Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2013/02/26/4088461/helling-we-prefer-the-devilwe.html#storylink=cpy
Brownback’s popularity is low, but he would
still beat Democrats
February 26
BY BRAD COOPER
The Kansas City Star
A new poll Tuesday shows Gov. Sam Brownback struggling with his popularity one year
before he might seek re-election in Kansas.
Public Policy Polling released a survey showing the Republican with an approval rating
of 37 percent as he begins his third year as governor. Fifty-two percent disapproved of
the job Brownback is doing.
“Sam Brownback’s really unpopular,” said
Dean Debnam, president of the Raleigh, N.C.based polling group.
The poll surveyed 1,229 registered Kansas
voters from Feb. 21 to 24. The poll had a
margin of error of plus or minus 2.8
percentage points.
But matched in hypothetical head-to-head
contests in a gubernatorial race, Brownback
still appears to have an edge over some of the
state’s best-known Democrats. The poll pitted
him against Mayor Carl Brewer of Wichita,
former governors Kathleen Sebelius and Mark
Parkinson, outgoing Unified Government
mayor Joe Reardon, Kansas Sen. Tom
Holland and Shawnee County District
Attorney Chad Taylor, who conducted an
investigation into open meetings violations
last year at the governor’s mansion.
Brownback polled better than any of them,
with only Brewer coming within four points of
him.The latest poll echoes others last year by
SurveyUSA, which showed the governor with
a similar rating.
A poll by SurveyUSA last July showed
Brownback with an approval rating of 36
percent, which at that time was even lower
than what President Barack Obama was
polling in Kansas.
But Brownback’s allies have been critical of
the SurveyUSA polls, saying they
undersampled Republicans and tea party
backers.
They took comfort in another poll done last
year by Neil Newhouse’s firm, Public Opinion
Strategies, showing Brownback with a 51
percent job approval rating. Only 43 percent
in that poll disapproved of how Brownback
was doing as governor.
Newhouse did public opinion research for
presidential candidate Mitt Romney that
showed him winning key states that he
ultimately lost.
Brownback’s top political strategist is still
comfortable with where the governor is
positioned politically despite the new poll.
“That doesn’t match up with the internal data
we’re seeing or with media exit polls or with
actual election results,” David Kensinger said.
Brownback is now in the middle of a
legislative session that is getting tougher with
each passing day, including Tuesday when a
Senate committee scrapped a key component
of his plan to improve fourth-grade reading
skills.
The governor is proposing even deeper
income tax cuts and paying for that by
keeping part of a controversial sales tax
increase and eliminating the home mortgage
deduction. That approach has run into
opposition.
Kansas House members are increasingly
reluctant to keep a penny sales tax that they
opposed and used to beat their opponents to
get elected in 2010.
The governor, meanwhile, is still trying to dig
out of a looming $700 million revenue hole
that was created by income tax cuts enacted
last year.
Brownback also is struggling to pass a
constitutional amendment that would give
him the ability to appoint appellate judges
with Senate confirmation.
The Senate passed the amendment early in
this year’s session, but the proposal has been
languishing in the House for weeks with no
sign of action in the near future.
Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2013/02/26/4088318/brownback-approval-low-butwould.html#storylink=cpy
Climate is a hot topic in the Kansas
Legislature
March 2
BY BRAD COOPER
The Kansas City Star
TOPEKA — Almost a decade after Kansas wrestled with the merits of evolution, the
Legislature now grapples with the politics of environmental science.
As they move to ease often expensive renewable-energy mandates, lawmakers also
debate the climate-change worries that help motivate such regulations.
Bills look not just to set aside the concerns
about greenhouse gases spewed to generate
energy. Some would also require schools to
teach challenges to mainstream climate
science. Others aim to prevent public money
from being used to promote development
policies intended to ease strains on the
environment.
“There’s an effort to just try to cast doubt on
any scientific research that’s out there,” said
Rep. Ed Trimmer, a Democrat from Winfield.
Recent setbacks on some bills suggest the
Legislature won’t immediately toss aside
environmental science or earlier steps taken
partly with global warming in mind. Still,
while the idea of climate change is widely
accepted among most scientists, it remains a
point of contention in Topeka.
The debate over renewable-energy standards
for utilities focuses on balancing the
environmental effect of generating kilowatts
against easing financial pain for power
companies and their ratepayers.
Kansas and Missouri are among 38 states
with renewable-energy requirements on the
books, although more than a dozen are now
working to peel them back.
Some of the measures geared to softening
environmental regulations are fueled by
skepticism about the scientific consensus that
increasing greenhouse gases in the Earth’s
atmosphere warm the planet and critically
alter climate patterns.
Rep. Dennis Hedke, a Republican from
Wichita, is a geophysicist who counts at least
18 energy companies as clients. He also leads
the House Energy and Environment
Committee. As chairman, he can control what
bills are heard and which ones get a vote.
Hedke is a decided nonbeliever of man-made
global warming. He thinks those claims have
been used to impose strict environmental
regulations, such as renewable-energy
standards, that ultimately dig into consumers’
wallets.
“This is costly,” Hedke said. “It’s already hurt
people around the world.”
The notion that carbon dioxide should be
regulated as a dangerous gas that’s wreaking
havoc on the environment, he said, is a “flatout lie.”
Experts on both sides of the issue have
testified before Hedke’s committee in recent
weeks as a prelude to considering a bill that
would ease the renewable-energy standards.
One of the experts, Willie Soon of the
Harvard-Smithsonian Center for
Astrophysics, wrote a controversial report
about 10 years ago that cast doubt on global
warming. It concluded that the Earth’s
temperature during the 20th century wasn’t
unusually high.
Hedke, referred to by critics as Kansas’
“premier climate skeptic,” has publicly fought
what has been generally accepted
scientifically about global warming.
“If we can take some steps at a minimum to
reconsider what the real data show and get
the real debate out there … then we’ll maybe
have a chance to come to some senses here
and not go overboard with policies, which are
very expensive,” Hedke said.
“The people who get hurt the most are the
people in the middle and lower class.”
The notion that global warming is even a
debate in Kansas defies what is generally
accepted in the scientific community, said one
climatologist.
“We’ve known for over a century about the
greenhouse effect and how humans might
change it. This is nothing new from a science
perspective,” said Johannes J. Feddema of the
University of Kansas, who also testified before
the House energy committee.
“If you were to contact 100 climate scientists
… how many would say there was global
warming and it’s caused by humans? Ninetyeight percent.”
The Union of Concerned Scientists has posted
more than a half-dozen letters from scientific
groups on its website to demonstrate
agreement on global warming.
“There is now an overwhelming scientific
consensus that global warming is indeed
happening,” the organization said, “and
humans are contributing to it.”
In the Kansas Senate, the debate over
loosening renewable-energy standards has
not been draped in the debate over global
warming.
“We are 100 percent focused on the
ratepayers of the state of Kansas,” said
Utilities Committee Chairman Sen. Pat Apple
of Louisburg, a Republican. “We’re not going
to settle the debate of global warming in the
Kansas Legislature.”
The argument over renewable resources is not
unique to Kansas. In the last year, at least 13
states tried to delay or reduce their
renewable-energy laws, according to the
National Conference of State Legislatures. So
far, none of the bills has passed.
States have been moving to renewable-energy
standards for utilities in response to adverse
implications of fossil fuels — including air and
water pollution.
The Kansas standards grew from a deal to
build a new coal-fired power plant in
southwest Kansas. Enacted in 2009, the law
required utilities to generate a certain amount
of their power from renewable resources like
wind.
That law required utilities to generate 10
percent of their power from renewable
resources by 2011, eventually increasing to 20
percent by 2020. The bills pending in the
Legislature would push back those deadlines,
but they ran into trouble Thursday.
The Senate voted down one bill 23-17 while
the House agreed to send another one back to
committee, leaving a lot of doubt about
whether the Legislature will agree to ease the
standards this year.
In Missouri, lawmakers have been trying to
chip away at a 2008 ballot measure in which
voters ordered the state’s four investor-owned
electric utilities to draw 15 percent of their
electric generation from renewable sources by
2021.
The Kansas environmental bills don’t stop
with renewable energy, however.
They also reach into education and into
sustainable development, which is broadly
designed to protect the environment by
conserving resources with parks, bike trails
and energy-efficient buildings.
One bill awaiting action in the House energy
committee blocks public money from being
spent on “sustainability.”
Hedke said the measure was motivated by
complaints from constituents who think there
is an insidious attempt to create new layers of
government through groups like the Regional
Economic Area Partnership in Wichita.
Two years ago, the group received a $1.5
million federal grant for planning sustainable
communities. The grant became a sore spot
for critics who believed it would open the door
for the federal government to impose its will
on local officials.
Opponents of the grant compared it to United
Nations Agenda 21 — a nonbinding measure
encouraging the protection of natural
resources that’s seen in some quarters as a
threat to state and federal sovereignty. The
Kansas House, in a resolution it passed last
year, denounced the U.N. initiative.
Another bill, backed by Rep. Ron Highland, a
Republican from Wamego, would require
schools to teach scientific controversies in an
“objective” manner so that both sides of an
issue are covered. His bill specifically
mentions the teaching of “climate science” as
a topic that might be controversial.
Highland, who sits on the House energy and
education committees, said the bill is
intended to help students “learn how to ask
scientific questions and go after those
answers.
“It has nothing to do with pushing one theory
or another theory,” said Highland, who like
Hedke does not believe there is evidence to
back up claims that carbon emissions lead to
climate change.
Some environmentalists see the climate
measures as an example of the influence of
outside conservative think tanks trying to
affect state environmental policy.
“It’s a focused effort by a small group of
people,” said Rabbi Moti Rieber, director of
Kansas Interfaith Power and Light, a faithbased environmental group in Lawrence.
“(They) not only don’t believe in climate
change but want to prevent the state, or even
the country, to deal with its causes and
effects.”
Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2013/03/02/4096474/climate-is-a-hot-topic-inthe.html#storylink=cpy
Kansas liquor laws need to catch up with
times
March 3
BY MARY SANCHEZ
The Kansas City Star
In 1881, Kansas put into play the first statewide constitutional prohibition of alcohol.
In 1948, Kansas was the last state to end prohibition.
The state still hasn’t caught up to the modern
era.
Current Kansas liquor laws amount to a 60year legislative hijacking of the business of
booze.
A person can buy 3.2 beer but nothing
stronger in a grocery or convenience store.
Liquor stores can sell beer, wine and spirits
with more alcohol. But you can’t buy mixers,
limes or snacks to accompany the booze in the
liquor stores.
The limitations make no sense for consumers.
They are hangovers from Kansas’ crazy liquor
history. Carrie Nation would be proud.
Problem is, this system has gone on so long
that changing it would upend many small
liquor stores. The market was never allowed
to evolve. Legislation to do just that has been
introduced.
On Thursday, hearings with a David vs.
Goliath edge will be held before the House
Commerce, Labor and Economic
Development Committee. Expect a packed
room.
It’s the small retailers versus chain
convenience and big box stores — Wal-Mart,
Kroger, Dillons, Hy-Vee, Hen House Market,
Price Chopper, QuikTrip and Casey’s General
Store.
In fairness to consumers, the status quo needs
to go.
If the bill passes, there is no doubt that many
independent liquor stores will close. Even if
they can reconfigure their inventory and
service to compete, many are located too close
to the groceries that could begin swiping their
clientele.
Under current law, placing a small liquor
store near a grocery was a smart real estate
move. Get the steak, the hamburger at the
grocery. Then step into the liquor store next
door for the wine and beer.
But that proximity will be the death of many
liquor stores if deregulation occurs. The flip
argument is that losses would be offset by
employment and wage increases at grocery
and convenience stores.
Easing in any change — some kind of
compromise — would be more fair than
overturning the market. Small stores could
have a chance to run out leases and alter
business models.
Proponents argue that changing the law will
save rural groceries. But towns withering
away by population loss aren’t likely to be
turned around by selling more beer alone.
This has been a long festering debate. A
February poll found 66 percent of voters
opposed to making a change, so there isn’t a
massive public outcry.
It’s likely many people have just grown
accustomed to the backward state of affairs.
Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2013/03/03/4097548/kansas-liquor-laws-need-tocatch.html#storylink=cpy
Kansas lawmakers shift plan to change
judge selections
February 28
BY BRAD COOPER
The Kansas City Star
TOPEKA — Lawmakers are trying out an easier way than a constitutional amendment to
change how judges are picked in Kansas.
The Kansas House on Thursday tentatively agreed to a bill giving the governor the
ability to select judges for the state Court of Appeals with Senate confirmation.
It’s a much narrower approach than what
Republican Gov. Sam Brownback called for at
the beginning of the legislative session.
Brownback asked lawmakers to give him the
power to pick judges for the Kansas Supreme
Court with Senate confirmation, which
requires a constitutional amendment.
The Kansas Senate already has passed a
constitutional amendment giving the
governor the power to pick judges. A similar
bill has been sitting in the House for weeks
with no sign of action because it requires
support from two-thirds of the chamber. It
also would need to be approved by voters.
Key House members acknowledged that they
had work to do to get support for a
constitutional amendment that would give
Kansas a system for picking judges in a way
similar to the federal level.
The new approach, they said, just offers
another option for addressing a system that
they see as fundamentally undemocratic.
Currently, state appeals court judges are
screened by a nine-member nominating
commission that includes five attorneys plus
four non-attorneys named by the governor.
The governor chooses someone from a list of
three nominees selected by the commission.
Nominees for the Kansas Supreme Court are
chosen the same way, but that procedure is
harder to change because it’s set by the state
constitution.
Critics say the current system is controlled by
a majority of lawyers who are not accountable
to the general public. Supporters say the
current system insulates judicial selection
from politics.
Rep. Lance Kinzer, an Olathe Republican, said
that if the bill affecting just the Court of
Appeals passes, it could provide a good test
case for how a federal model for picking
judges would work in Kansas.
“That would increase the possibility that we
could get reform at the Supreme Court level,”
Kinzer said.
Rep. John Rubin, a Shawnee Republican, has
his own plan for reforming judicial selection
in Kansas. He favors a nominating
commission picked by the governor, the
House speaker and the Senate president.
Ultimately, the governor would pick a
candidate who would need to be confirmed by
the Senate. Under Rubin’s plan, a majority of
the commission could not be lawyers.
Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2013/02/28/4092905/kansas-lawmakers-shift-planto.html#storylink=cpy
Missouri and Kansas schools would be hit
by sequester
February 26
BY DAVE HELLING
The Kansas City Star
Missouri will lose almost $12 million in funding for its schools if Friday’s scheduled
federal spending sequester takes place, the White House said Sunday.
Those cuts will put 160 teacher and teacher’s aide jobs at risk, it said. Kansas will lose
$5.5 million and face the loss of 80 education positions.
The figures were part of a state-by-state
breakdown of the potential costs of the
sequester, a mandatory reduction in some
federal spending that is scheduled to begin
March 1 unless action by Congress averts it.
Obama administration officials say the
sequester cuts — roughly $85 billion through
the end of September — will cause serious
disruption in services such as commercial
aviation and military preparedness.
Republicans have pushed back, saying the
cuts amount to a small percentage of overall
federal spending. They’ve also proposed an
alternative that would give the executive
branch more leeway in deciding what
programs to cut if the sequester hits.
The White House said roughly 8,000 civilian
defense workers will face unpaid furloughs in
Missouri, with a similar number in Kansas.
Other cuts will come in Head Start, children’s
vaccines and nutrition programs for seniors.
“These large and arbitrary cuts will have
severe impacts across the government,” the
White House statement said.
Food stamps, Social Security payments and
veterans’ programs will not be affected by the
sequester.
Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2013/02/25/4085815/missouri-and-kansas-schoolswould.html#storylink=cpy