From the category archives:

Kansas state government

Last week’s release by the Kansas Department of Transportation of a study of the economic impact of Kansas airports caused quite a stir, with newspapers such as the Los Angeles Times (at least its online version) carrying the Associated Press coverage.

Perhaps the reason so many distant newspapers were interested in the story is the sensationally large economic impact figures reported. The number of jobs purported to airports is large, by any standard.

But there’s a problem with these numbers. They’re similar to sensational claims made a few years ago when the case for subsidizing airlines in Wichita was made. Those figures were bogus. So are these.

The staggeringly large figures come from two aspects of the study. First, the study counts the economic activity from businesses near the airport as attributable to the airport. In the case of the Wichita airport, this means that the employees of Cessna and Bombardier Learjet, and all the economic activity these companies produce, is credited as economic impact of the airport.

This economic sleight-of-hand allows the study to attribute 22,313 jobs to the Wichita airport. The total economic impact of the Wichita airport is reported as $4.7 billion.

All these employees don’t work for the airport. Almost all of them work at business firms located near the airport. But the study doesn’t really make that distinction. And when you do things like this, you can really pump up some inflated figures.

It is a convenient circumstance that these two manufacturers happen to be located near the airport. To credit the airport with the economic impact of these companies — as though the airport was involved in the actual manufacture of airplanes instead of providing an incidental (but important) service — is to grossly overstate the airport’s role and its economic importance.

A second problem is the study’s use of economic impact multipliers to pump up the figures. A multiplier reflects the fact that money spent at, say an airport, get spent again. Proponents of multipliers forget that money spent elsewhere get multiplied too. In fact, money that is saved and invested get multiplied, too.

These two factors inspired the Associated Press reporter to lead off a story with “Airports in Kansas support more than 47,000 jobs, generate $2.3 billion in payroll and have an annual economic impact of $10.4 billion …” With numbers so big, you can see why news editors in far-away cities might run the story.

There’s another problem: these studies usually assume that all the activity is the responsibility of the entity being promoted, that none of it would have happened without the celebrated entity, and that since (usually) the promoted entities are government-owned, all this is evidence of the goodness of government.

Another problem is that these economic impact figures get used several times to support various government subsidies to business. Here we have the airport claiming two aircraft manufacturing companies’ employees and their economic impact as the product of the airport.

But when these companies want corporate welfare from the Kansas state government, the economic impact of the companies and their employees will be cited as justification. Politicians, bureaucrats, and the public will believe their case.

Then, the same numbers might be cited again at Wichita city hall, and maybe before the Sedgwick County Commission as the company makes its case for industrial revenue bonds, tax abatements, forgivable loans, and other forms of local corporate welfare.

But this economic impact can’t be recycled like this. It exists only once. If the Wichita airport claims it, then it can’t be used again to justify some other program or request.

Another way the study leaps beyond credibility is its inclusion of the Beech Factory Airport in east Wichita. This is an airport without commercial air service. It exists solely for the convenience of Hawker Beechcraft, and is undoubtedly a necessary component of the capital plant needed to manufacture airplanes.

The study, however, mixes this airport in with all other Kansas airports, so this airport’s claimed $1.8 billion in economic impact is treated the same as any other Kansas airport. But regular people can’t catch a flight at this airport.

When government officials use stretched and inflated figures like these, they diminish their credibility. The Kansas Department of Transportation already snowed the Kansas public earlier this year with their claims of the need for huge spending on Kansas roads and highways.

Now they’re at it again, with claims that simply make no economic sense at all. The fact that news media laps up these figures without any skepticism or critical thought doesn’t help.

Does this mean that Kansas and its local government shouldn’t offer airports and businesses like aircraft manufacturers help from the public treasury? That’s a different question for a different day.

Today, however, we need to realize that accurate, reasonable, and believable information about Kansas airports and other transportation infrastructure isn’t available from the Kansas Department of Transportation.

{ 4 comments }

Last week near Emporia Sam Brownback, surrounded by Kansas educators and legislators, laid out the start of his plan for improving Kansas education if he is elected governor.

His opponents in the race for Kansas Governor are Reform Party candidate Ken Cannon, Libertarian Andrew Gray, and Democrat Tom Holland. Mark Parkinson, the incumbent, decided not to run.

In his remarks, Brownback said that education is “primary function of the state.” While Kansas has excellent schools, he said that more innovation is needed.

In the area of teachers, Brownback wants more mentoring opportunities available to young teachers. He supports a master teacher plan that offers higher salaries to teachers who “provide models of excellence within their schools.” He also called for alternative teacher certification programs that allow those who did not follow the traditional teacher education and certification path to become teachers.

On funding, Brownback said that Kansas school funding formula needs revision. He called for an end to school finance litigation, saying that school finance is the responsibility of the legislature, local school boards, and voters, but not the courts. A focus of a new funding formula will be on getting dollars into the classroom, he added.

One of the five key benchmarks in Brownback’s administration will be fourth grade reading achievement. He cited National Assessment of Educational Progress scores that indicate 28 percent of fourth-graders fail to achieve a “basic” score. “If you can’t read, your world starts closing in around you. But if you can read your world starts opening up,” he said. Fourth grade is a key time to measure reading, he added.

He also called for a refocused emphasis on career and technical education, citing a wind turbine program at Cloud County Community College. With innovative programs like this, he said it is unacceptable that any child would drop out of school.

Brownback said that it is crucial that we find ways to support our higher education system. He said he would highlight and support the work of community and technical colleges, stabilize funding for public universities, support the national cancer institute designation at KU, building the national bio and agri-defense facility at KSU, the Kansas Polymer Research Center at Pittsburg State University, and the National Center for Aviation Research at Wichita State University.

In response to a question, Brownback said he is not looking to redefine the state’s responsibility for funding education as mandated by the Kansas Constitution. He said he wants to get more money into the classroom. The disputes we’ve had should not be resolved by the courts, he added. The percentage has not been as high as he thinks it could be.

He added that if local taxpayers vote to spend more on local schools, he would support that and allow them to do that. Currently the local option budget formula places a limit on how much local districts can add to what the state allocates.

Continuing, Brownback said the problem with school funding is the Kansas formula. The money is not getting in the classroom, as there are too many “nooks and crannies” in the formula. He would focus on renovating the formula, he added.

Another question mentioned two reforms that some states are using and the Obama administration supports — charter schools and teacher merit pay — and noted that these reforms are absent from the plan presented today. Brownback replied that the master teacher program is a form of increased pay for highly qualified and gifted teachers. On charter schools, Brownback said that additional proposals may be rolled out, and that he didn’t want to lay out everything in one day.

The complete press release announcing the plan may be read at the Brownback campaign website.

Commentary

If we wonder why conservatives are not fully gung-ho for Sam Brownback, the education plan provides a few reasons why. The two missing reforms asked about (the questioner was me) — charter schools and teacher merit pay — are popular with conservatives, but vigorously opposed by the existing Kansas education establishment, especially the teachers union.

The master teacher pay plan proposed by Brownback is a long away from merit pay. Under a master teacher plan, it seems like a relatively small number of teachers would be rewarded. Merit pay usually means that all teachers are paid according to their effectiveness, as is the case with most workers, especially professionals.

I didn’t get a chance to ask another question about another reform battle that is being waged: teacher tenure reform. But it seems like the relatively meek reforms proposed by Brownback indicate a candidate who would not be willing to take on the teachers unions over the issue of tenure.

Brownback’s reliance on the NAEP scores as a measure of student achievement is refreshing, as the Kansas school establishment would like to ignore this test. The NAEP is a more rigorous test than the Kansas-administered tests. According to figures at the Kansas State Department of Education, in 2009 87.2 percent of Kansas fourth graders were reading at a level the department considers “at or above standard.” This number has been increasing at the same time the NAEP score are mostly flat. Brownback didn’t talk about this discrepancy, but if he is willing to advocate for an honest measurement of Kansas schoolchildren, that would be a big step.

Brownback’s advocacy for allowing local school districts to vote for more school spending is sure to be vigorously opposed unless the money is “equalized.” In the Kansas House this year, there was a proposal to let counties charge an additional sales tax to be given to the school districts in the county. A Johnson County — a large, wealthy county — legislator proposed the measure, which was vigorously opposed by counties without Johnson county’s wealth. If some of the money raised by a Johnson county sales tax was shipped to poorer counties through the equalization formula, the opposition would disappear, almost certainly.

An interesting commentary on the coverage of Brownback and Holland and their education proposals is at the Kansas Republican Assembly blog: Analyze this: Opinion masquerading as news.

More about Brownbacks plan from the Kansas Education: Public Policy in Kansas and Beyond blog is at Sen. Brownback offers weak tea of reforms.

{ 2 comments }

While Kansas ranks in the middle of the states in total tax burden, the state’s take is getting larger, compared to other states.

This finding is important as Kansas and its largest city are increasingly using favorable tax treatment to centrally plan and manage economic development. When the state allows a company’s employee withholding taxes to be used for its own exclusive benefit — as outgoing Governor Mark Parkinson recently granted to Wichita’s Bombardier Learjet — it increases the cost of government for everyone else.

The Kansas PEAK bill that the legislature passed this year allows this practice to be extended to more and smaller companies.

In cities like Wichita, the city council routinely grants tax abatements and other favorable tax treatment to companies that it believes are deserving.

The result of all this intervention is that the tax base is narrowed, and the high cost of government is born by a smaller group of taxpayers.

To top it off, the result of this centralized planning and management of economic development is: pretty much zero.

In 2008 the Kansas Legislative Division of Post Audit looked at the use of economic development incentives in Kansas, examining some $1.3 billion in spending over five years. In examining the literature, the auditors found: “Most studies of traditional economic development incentives suggest these incentives don’t have a significant impact on economic growth.”

It also found: “The majority of research concludes there is a lack of demonstrated impact from the typical types of economic development assistance, and that incentives aren’t cost-effective.” The audit can be read at Economic Development: Determining the Amounts the State Has Spent on Economic Development Programs and the Economic Impacts on Kansas Counties. The document has an executive summary.

The concentrating of the cost of government on a shrinking tax base spells trouble. One solution that I proposed to the Wichita city council is that when tax incentives are given, the city reduce its spending by the cost of the incentive: “The harmful effect of this tax abatement is this: When someone escapes paying taxes, someone else has to make up the difference. … As long as this body is willing to grant tax abatements and other special tax favors, I propose this simple pledge: that when the City of Wichita allows a company to escape paying taxes, that it reduce city spending by the same amount. By following this simple rule, the City can be reminded of the cost of granting special tax favors, and the rest of us won’t have to pay for them.”

Kansas tax burdens getting heavier, studies show

By Gene Meyer, Kansas Reporter

(KansasReporter) TOPEKA, Kan. – Kansans’ state and local sales taxes are now 12th highest in the nation, though their total tax burden is nearer the middle of the pack in 24th place, say two new reports released Thursday.

But, as investment companies always remind us when pitching their new products, your actual results may vary.

“Even within a state, it can be difficult to know what the average tax rate is when there can be hundreds of different jurisdictions charging different rates,” said Kail Padgitt, an economist at the Washington, D.C. based Tax Foundation, which calculates Kansas’ 7.95 percent average state and local sales taxes are 12th highest in the nation.

Within that average, though, actual local rates in some 790 different county, local and special tax districts across Kansas vary from 6.3 percent where only the basic state rate is charged to more than 10.5 percent in a few special taxing districts.

The ranking, one of the first nationally to include Kansas’ recently raised 6.3 percent statewide sales tax that became effective July 1, puts the 12th ranked Sunflower state higher than its neighbors in 15th ranked Missouri, 25th ranked Colorado and 29th ranked Nebraska. Only Oklahoma, where an average 8.33 percent sales tax burden clocks in at seventh highest in the nation, comes in higher.

Continue reading at Kansas Reporter

{ 0 comments }

In measures of economic and personal freedom, Kansas ranks relatively well among the states, but lags behind some neighboring states. Recent actions by the Kansas legislature might drive its ranking down.

Last year the Mercatus Center at George Mason University published a paper that ranks the states in several areas regarding freedom. According to the authors, “This paper presents the first-ever comprehensive ranking of the American states on their public policies affecting individual freedoms in the economic, social, and personal spheres.”

What is the philosophical basis for measuring or determining freedom? Here’s an explanation from the introduction:

We explicitly ground our conception of freedom on an individual rights framework. In our view, individuals should be allowed to dispose of their lives, liberties, and property as they see fit, so long as they do not infringe on the rights of others. This understanding of freedom follows from the natural-rights liberal thought of John Locke, Immanuel Kant, and Robert Nozick, but it is also consistent with the rights-generating rule-utilitarianism of Herbert Spencer and others.

According to the authors, “No current studies exist that measure both economic and personal freedom in the fifty states.” So this is a ground-breaking work.

How does Kansas do? Surprisingly, not too badly. Not outstanding, but not as bad as I might have thought.

For the four areas measured, here’s how we did: In fiscal policy, Kansas is 28. In regulatory policy, 4. In economic freedom, 18. In personal freedom, 15. (In all cases, a ranking of 1 means the most freedom.)

Our overall ranking is 12.

Some of the remarks the authors made about Kansas include noting our large public employee payroll, even though state employees are not paid as well as private sector workers. Also: “The area of spending that could most stand to be cut is education, while the taxes that should have priority for cutting are individual income and property taxes.”

Some of our neighbors do pretty well in the overall ranking. Colorado is 2, Texas is 5, Missouri is 6, and Oklahoma is 18. Nebraska is not as good at 28.

Colorado undoubtedly benefited from its taxpayer bill of rights (TABOR) law, which places limits on the rate of growth of government spending, although it had been suspended for several years. Those in Kansas who favor government spending over private sector spending use Colorado as an example of a state that TABOR has destroyed, but in terms of economic freedom, it does very well.

In case you’re wondering, for overall ranking, New Hampshire is best. The worst? It’s no surprise that it’s New York by a wide margin, with New Jersey, Rhode Island, California, and Maryland rounding out the bottom five.

If this index were to be recomputed this year, Kansas might fall in rankings due to outgoing Governor Mark Parkinson‘s two landmark achievements — the increase in the statewide sales tax and the statewide smoking ban. Some of the other enacted laws detailed in the article In Kansas Legislature, a bad year for freedom and liberty would push Kansas’ ranking down, too.

But since rankings are relative and consider what happened in other states, Kansas might not have changed much, as many states have passed tax increases and other freedom-killing legislation and regulations.

The full study contains discussion of the politics surrounding these rankings, and a narrative discussion of the factors present in each state.

You may read the entire study by clicking on Freedom in the 50 States: An Index of Personal and Economic Freedom.

{ 2 comments }

Kansas Senate could see shift

by Bob Weeks on August 9, 2010

in Kansas state government

The recent primary election in Kansas, combined with the results of the November general election, could alter the composition of the Kansas Senate, even though no members are standing for election. (Correction: one member faces an opponent in November after winning the primary election.)

Several members of the senate advanced through last week’s primary election in their efforts in seeking higher — or other — offices. Some are likely to win their elections in November and be required to resign their senate positions.

These include Senator Tim Huelskamp of Fowler, who is running for U.S. Congress from the first district, and Senator Jeff Colyer, who is nominee for lieutenant governor on a ticket with U.S. Senator Sam Brownback. Both are odds-on favorites in the November election.

Senator Derek Schmidt is running for Kansas Attorney General. Should he win, not only would there be a new member of the senate, there would also be a new majority leader, which is a powerful and important position in the senate’s leadership structure.

In Sedgwick County, Senator Oletha Faust-Goudeau has won the Democratic Party nomination for a position on the Sedgwick County Commission. (Provisional ballots are being counted in this primary election contest, but the outcome is not expected to change.) Should she win in November there would be a new senator from her district in northeast Wichita.

Rumors are afloat that Senator Jim Barnett, recently a candidate for the Republican party nomination for U.S. Congress for the first district, may retire. Earlier this year he retired from his Emporia medical practice, and his wife works for a school district in Johnson County, some 100 miles away from Emporia.

Then — assuming a Brownback win in the race for governor — there will likely be a shake-up in many cabinet positions. Several senators may be interested in these. A win by Tom Holland might produce some changeover in the cabinet, and a Holland win would require that he and his running mate Senator Kelly Kultala resign from the senate.

It’s too early to tell whether these possible resignations and incoming new members would produce a shift in the political makeup of the senate. New senators will be selected by the precinct committeemen and women in the retiring senators’ districts. They would serve the remainder of the terms, which would be two years.

While the Kansas Senate is overwhelmingly in the hands of Republicans — the present composition is 31 Republicans and nine Democrats — many Senate Republicans routinely vote with Democrats on issues of spending and taxation. An example is the bill that increased the statewide sales tax by one cent per dollar this year. That legislation passed with a vote of 23 to 17, with 15 Republican senators joining eight Democrats voting in favor of passage.

An interesting situation is the replacement for Huelskamp, assuming he wins his general election in November. It was thought that longtime Representative and former Speaker of the House Melvin Neufeld would be the favorite to succeed Huelskamp. But Neufeld lost his re-election bid to upstart Garrett Love by a large margin. Whether the precinct committee people would elevate someone who just lost an election to a higher office is unknown. Could Love be appointed to the Senate, and then Neufeld appointed to the position to which he just lost a re-election bid? That would seem to nullify the sentiment of the voters expressed just a week ago. Others will undoubtedly be interested in the senate position, too.

{ 5 comments }

Selecting lawmakers is important, says Kansas University Law Professor Stephen J. Ware, and that’s why Kansans should care about the method of judicial selection in Kansas.

Ware spoke to a meeting of the Wichita Pachyderm Club on Friday about the method of judicial selection in Kansas. His paper on this topic is Selection to the Kansas Supreme Court, which is published by the Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies.

“Judges are lawmakers too. Judges make law,” Ware told the audience. While the legislature passes laws and judges apply those laws in the cases that come before them, it’s more complicated than that because of the common law, Ware explained. While there has been a growth of legislation, statutes, and administrative agencies, many important areas are still governed by common law, and it’s judges that make this common law.

While the common law is generally noncontroversial, Ware said that much of the lawmaking that judges do is “predictably political in its dividing lines.” Conservative judges and liberal judges predictably decide differently on similar cases. So it is important to our body of law, Ware said, whether the judges who make that law are conservative or liberal. Importantly, most lawmaking by judges takes place in state courts, not federal courts.

In a democracy, lawmakers should be selected democratically, Ware said, and judges are part of the lawmaking process. But democratic selection of judges is a controversial topic with many Kansas lawyers. The members of the Kansas Supreme Court — the final word on law in Kansas — are selected in a very undemocratic way, Ware told the audience.

In Kansas, there is a nominating commission that accepts applications for open positions on either the Kansas Supreme Court or the Kansas Court of Appeals. In secret, the commission deliberates and votes to send three finalists to the governor. The governor must select one of those three to become a new member of the court.

Therefore, the members of the commission exercise great power compared to average citizens, Ware explained. The nine-member commission has four members who are selected by the governor, which Ware said is a democratic process, as the governor is elected by the people. But the other five members — which constitute a majority of the commission — are selected by the 9,000 members of the Kansas bar (the lawyers licensed to practice law in Kansas).

Ware said this is an inequality that goes against the “one person, one vote” principle of democracies. The power of a vote of a member of the bar is “infinitely more powerful” than the votes of non-lawyers.

When comparing the method of judicial selection in Kansas to other states, Ware said that “Kansas is the only state that gives its bar the power to select the majority of its supreme court nominating commission.”

There are three basic ways that states use to select their Supreme Court members. The “Missouri Plan” makes use of a nominating commission, where the governor must select one of the commission’s recommendations. Kansas uses a version of the Missouri plan.

A second method is similar to the way United States federal court judges are selected, where the governor makes a nomination that is then confirmed by the state Senate or other legislative body.

A third method is elections. Ware distinguished between contestable elections — where there are two or more candidates running against each other — and retention elections, where the question is simply should a serving judge be retained in office. Supreme Court judges in Kansas to have to stand for retention elections. In Kansas, as is typical around the country, no serving judge has ever failed to win a retention election.

Ware gave these reasons for reform: First, basic democracy, the one person, one vote principle. The secrecy of the nominating commission is troubling, too.

As to options for reform, one measure would be to reduce or eliminate the number of nominating commission members who are selected by the bar. Commission members might be selected by the governor and legislature, for example. This is a more democratic method as the governor and legislators are elected by the people.

Another way would be to add senate confirmation to the existing process, or to do away with the nominating commission and have senate confirmation of the governor’s nominee. Finally, we could have contestable elections.

Any change to the method of judicial selection would require an amendment to the Kansas Constitution. That requires a two-thirds majority vote in both the Kansas Senate and House of Representatives, and then a majority vote of the people.

Responding to questions, Ware said that in states that use senate confirmation of a governor’s nominee, the nominee is nearly always confirmed with very few dissenting votes. He said that this is evidence of governors getting a feel in advance for potential nominees’ prospects for confirmation and using that to help select a nominee, rather than senators simply rolling over and acceding to whomever a governor nominates.

Judicial selection among the statesJudicial selection among the states. Kansas is alone in giving the bar extreme power.

{ 1 comment }

Here’s a look at the August 3, 2010 Kansas primary election contests that had the possibility of changing the character of the Kansas House of Representatives, and in one case, the Kansas Senate.

A Kansas Chamber of Commerce endorsement is a reliable measure of a candidate’s conservative credentials from a fiscal perspective. The Kansas Economic Freedom Index and AFP legislative scorecards provide additional insight into legislators and their voting records.

Here are races where there may be a shift in the makeup of the House, sometimes depending on the results of the November general election.

In Kansas House District 17 (parts of Shawnee and Lenexa) the Kansas Chamber of Commerce endorsed Kelly Meigs, and she defeated one-term incumbent Jill Quigley 53 percent to 47 percent in the Republican primary. Bryan Cox has filed as a Democrat. Quigley had a liberal voting record, scoring just nine percent on the Kansas Economic Freedom Index.

In Kansas House District 29 (parts of Overland Park) conservative challenger Richard Downing wasn’t able to defeat first-term incumbent Sheryl L. Spalding (19 percent on KEFI), although the margin of Spalding’s victory is just 29 votes of 2,695 cast and could possibly change. The winner will face Democrat Doug Dowell in the general election.

In Kansas House District 65 (Junction City and parts of Geary and Wabaunsee counties), Barbara Craft did not seek re-election. Her Kansas Economic Freedom Index rating of 19 percent places her in the left-wing Republican camp. The Kansas Chamber did not make an endorsement in this district, but Republican primary winner James P. Fawcett has been described as a conservative. He’ll face Democrat Larry Hicks in November.

In House District 110 (Osborne, Rooks and Russell Counties, Cities of Ellis and Victoria, Buckeye, Catherine, Ellis, Herzog and Victoria townships) three Republicans vied to fill this seat previously held by Dan Johnson with his 16 percent Kansas Economic Freedom Index score. Chamber-endorsed Dan L. Collins won. No Democrat filed in this district, so this is a certain pick-up for conservatives.

In House District 69 (parts of Salina) Chamber-endorsed Tom Arpke defeated incumbent Republican Deena L. Horst, who has represented the district since 1995. Horst had earned a score of 69 percent on the Kansas Economic Freedom Index. On AFP’s rating for this year she scored 60 percent and 100 percent the year before. She voted for the big-spending budget this year, but not the sales tax increase. Arpke will face Democrat Gerrett Morris — not to be confused with Garrett Morris of Saturday Night Live fame — in November.

Kansas House District 120 (Cheyenne, Decatur, Norton, Phillips and Rawlins counties) is a loss for conservatives as incumbent John Faber lost to challenger Ward Cassidy. The winner will face Democrat Robert Strevey in the general election. The Chamber had endorsed Faber, who earned a Kansas Economic Freedom Index rating of 72 percent and an AFP rating of 90 percent. A resident of St. Francis, Cassidy and his wife are public school employees, and he lists education as one of his priorities. When public school employees say this, it usually means that spending on schools is a priority over everything else. His website also says he pledges to “look at every means possible to increase revenue within the state without raising taxes.”

In Kansas House District 124 (Grant, Morton, Stanton and Stevens counties, Haskell County: City of Satanta and Dudley Township, Seward County: Seward Township), incumbent Bill Light did not seek re-election. Republicans Dan Widder and J. Stephen Alford sought the Republican party nomination, with no Democrats having filed. The Chamber endorsed Widder. Alford narrowly won with 51 percent of the vote. Light was a left-wing Republican with a Kansas Economic Freedom Index rating of 11 percent. Alford, endorsed by liberal Senate President Stephen Morris (his own KEFI rating is only seven percent), can’t be much more to the left than Light.

There were a handful of instances where moderate or liberal Republicans withstood challenges by conservatives.

In Kansas House District 9 (Allen County plus parts of Woodson, Coffey, Anderson, and Franklin Counties, including the city of Iola), the Chamber selected Raymond “Bud” Sifers over incumbent Bill Otto in the Republican primary. Otto won with 56 percent of the vote. No Democrat filed. Otto is sometimes difficult to classify. He scored 60 percent on the Kansas Economic Freedom Index, but only 40 percent on AFP’s scorecard for this year after rating 82 percent the year before. This year, Otto voted against the spending bill but for the sales tax increase, the only member of the House to vote this way on these two bills.

In Kansas House District 60 (parts of Emporia) incumbent Republican Don Hill defeated challenger Daniel Buller. Hill scored a very liberal nine percent on the Kansas Economic Freedom Index and is mentioned as one of the leaders of the left-wing Republican faction of the House that votes for spending and tax increases. Hill will face Democrat Michael “Mike” Dorcey in the general election.

In Kansas House District 64 (Clay County plus parts of Dickinson, Geary, and Riley counties) incumbent Republican Vern Swanson was challenged by Michael Musselman. Swanson won. No Democrat filed. Swanson scored 19 percent on the Kansas Economic Freedom Index.

In Kansas House District 68 (parts of Morris and Dickinson counties including Council Grove and Abilene) two-term incumbent Republican Tom J. Moxley was challenged by Calvin Seadeek Jr. Moxley has a liberal voting record, scoring 19 percent on the Kansas Economic Freedom Index. There is no Democratic party opponent in the general election.

In Kansas House District 70 (Chase and Marion counties, plus part of Butler County) Cheryl Green challenged first-term incumbent J. Robert (Bob) Brookens (KEFI 19 percent). Brookens won with 60 percent of the vote. There was no Democratic Party filer.

In Kansas House District 71 (parts of Salina) incumbent Charlie Roth withstood a challenge by two opponents in the Republican primary. There is no Democratic Party filer. Roth scored a liberal nine percent on the Kansas Economic Freedom Index and played a leadership role in passing the statewide smoking ban in the House of Representatives this year.

In Kansas House District 83 (Eatborough and parts of east Wichita) veteran incumbent Jo Ann Pottorff defeated conservative challenger Kyle Amos. The Chamber chose Amos for its endorsement, and Pottorff scored a low 13 percent on the Kansas Economic Freedom Index. Sean Amore is the Democratic Party opponent in the general election.

In the Kansas Senate, there was one election this year. The appointed incumbent for Senate District 7 (In Johnson County the cities of Countryside, Fairway, Merriam, Mission, Mission Hills, Mission Woods, Prairie Village, Roeland Park, Westwood, Westwood Hills, and parts of Leawood and Overland Park) is Terrie Huntington, and she faced a conservative challenge from David Harvey. Huntington’s votes for the big-spending budget and the sales tax increase earned her a Kansas Econimic Freedom Index score of 20 percent, and led to the Kansas Chamber endorsement of Harvey. Huntingon won with 54 percent of the vote.

Conservatives withstood some challengers in these districts.

In Kansas House District 13 (Eureka, Yates Center, Fredonia, Neodesha and surrounding area) the Chamber endorsed incumbent Forrest Knox over challenger Trent Forsyth in the Republican primary. No Democrat filed. Knox scored 95 percent on the Kansas Economic Freedom Index, and Forsyth was endorsed by the liberal teachers union. Knox won with 54 percent of the vote.

In Kansas House District 94 (parts of west Wichita and part of Attica, Delano, and Waco townships), incumbent conservative Joe McLeland handily defeated two challengers, including one endorsed by the liberal Wichita Eagle editorial board. There is no Democratic Party candidate in this district

In Kansas House District 121 (Graham, Sheridan, Sherman and Thomas counties), Brenda McCants challenged incumbent Jim Morrison, with no Democrat filing for the general election contest. Martin Hawver, dean of Kansas Statehouse reporters, described this as a a race “more about experience — coming up to reapportionment — than philosophy, not a moderate/conservative split.” But Morrison had the Kansas Chamber’s endorsement and a reliably conservative voting record.

{ 0 comments }

In Kansas, revenue flowing to the state has declined. How can our state cope with a loss in revenue?

One way would have been to set aside money in good times, the so-called “rainy day fund” idea that some groups have promoted. But Kansas didn’t do that. We spent all the revenue that flowed in during the recent prosperous years of the mid 2000s.

Governments can also cut spending by cutting services. They can also raise taxes.

Operating more efficiently is another option. In order to gauge how efficiently Kansas counties are operating in different areas of operation, the Kansas Policy Institute has gathered information from all Kansas counties.

Some interesting differences have been found. For Sedgwick and Johnson counties, the state’s two largest in terms of population, KPI found a huge difference in spending on county commissioners: $1.50 (on a per-person basis) in Sedgwick County, but $4.42 for Johnson County.

KPI estimates that if outlier counties (those that spend a lot, again on a per-person bases) reduced their spending to that of the median for counties with similar population, the savings could be in the range of several hundred million dollars per year.

From working on this project, KPI has several recommendations for counties regarding budget reporting. First, we should have a uniform chart of accounts for Kansas counties. Budgets and financial statements should be published in a standardized and easily understood format. Documents should be published online, retained for several years, and available in machine-readable format.

Kansas County Budget Analysis — In Search of Efficient Government

By Dave Trabert, Kansas Policy Institute.

It’s quite possible that twenty years from now we’ll look back on some of the decisions made during the current recession as either being responsible for catapulting Kansas into a much more competitive position for job growth and economic prosperity or causing the state to fall farther behind. Recessions certainly cause economic havoc as they unfold but they also create opportunities.

There are numerous examples of businesses that reinvented themselves and emerged from the recession in a much stronger and more competitive position, while competitors who tried to ‘ride out the storm’ were worse off than before the recession. Recessions naturally make customers much more open to change as they seek better value for their dollar. Imagine how a business would fare that tried to make up for reduced revenue by raising prices during a recession. Unless the business had a monopoly on an essential product it would likely lose even more customers, but that is exactly how many governments react in a recession — they raise prices on their customers.

There is ample evidence that higher taxes prompt customers (taxpayers) to leave. One example of such evidence can be found in a comparison of domestic migration data1 with the Tax Foundation’s most recent ranking of state and local tax burdens expressed as a percentage of income. The ten states with the highest combined state / local tax burden had a combined average 3.3% net loss from domestic migration (more U.S residents moving out of the state than moving in), whereas the ten states with the lowest tax burden had a combined average 3.8% net gain. The low-burden grouping includes one outlier, Louisiana, which suffered significant population loss following Hurricane Katrina; the average net gain of the other nine low-burden states is 5.0%.

Kansas has a domestic migration net loss of 2.5% over the same period and is ranked #38 among the states (#1 being the best). Kansas also has the worst performance in the region; Nebraska is the only other state with a net loss (2.3%) and other states have all gained population from domestic migration (Colorado 4.2%, Texas 3.4%, Oklahoma 1.1% and Missouri 0.7%).

Continue reading at Kansas County Budget Analysis — In Search of Efficient Government

{ 0 comments }

This week the Kansas Department of Health and Environment will hold public hearings on the expansion of the coal-fired steam electricity generating unit at Holcomb. This plant became controversial when KDHE Secretary Rod Bremby denied a permit on the basis of the plant’s carbon dioxide emissions. That was the first time a permit had been denied for that reason.

While former Governor Kathleen Sebelius opposed the plant, one of the first things new Governor Mark Parkinson did last year was to negotiate a permit for a smaller plant than had been originally requested.

According to a KDHE news release, here is the schedule for hearings:

Overland Park: Monday, August 2 at 2 pm and 6:30 pm at Blue Valley Northwest High School, 135th and Switzer, Overland Park

Salina: Wednesday, August 4 at 2 pm and 6:30 pm at Highway Patrol Training Center Auditorium, 2025 East Iron, Salina.

Garden City: Thursday, August 5 at 2 pm and 6:30 pm at 801 Campus Drive, Garden City

Written comments may be submitted before August 15 by email to sunflowercomments@kdheks.gov, or in writing to: KDHE Bureau of Air, Attn.: Sunflower Comments, 1000 S.W. Jackson, Suite 310, Topeka, KS 66612-1366 or presented at the hearing.

{ 0 comments }

Two Kansas Republicans — one running for re-election, the other for higher office — both claim to have led the way in cutting the Kansas state budget. These claims, however, are at odds with the facts and both candidates’ records.

Kansas Senator Jean Schodorf is a candidate for the Republican Party nomination for United States Congress from the fourth district of Kansas. A television advertisement states that she “led the effort in the Senate to cut over $1 billion from the state budget.”

In Kansas House District 83 in east Wichita, Jo Ann Pottorff is seeking re-election. In a Wichita Eagle advertisement, she made a similar claim to Schodorf, stating “I forced state government to live within its means by cutting $1 billion in excess spending and voting down attempts to grow government by more than $185 million.”

There are a few ways to look at these claims. First, both of these politicians have big-spending and big-taxing records. In any sort of legislative vote rating system that rewards fiscally conservative votes, these two women rank very low year after year. Both voted for the spending programs that grew Kansas spending so much over the last five years that cuts in the rate of growth were necessary this year.

But these “cuts” were not cuts in actual spending. They were cuts in planned spending. The budget that both candidates voted for this year increased state spending by $200 million over the past year.

By the way, both candidates voted to increase the statewide sales tax this year. They attempt to justify this vote by saying that if the state didn’t increase taxes, it would force local governments and school districts to increase property taxes.

That would be the case only if schools kept spending at current levels. There are plenty of things schools could have done to save money — including implementing school choice programs which save money — but neither of these candidates considered that politically feasible. Their generous campaign contributions from the school spending lobby may have helped form their thinking on this issue.

In the chart below, you can see that Pottorff has had a few years in which she earned respectable vote ratings. But Schodorf has not.

Voters who desire conservative candidates should not be fooled by the efforts of both Schodorf and Pottorff to portray themselves as fiscally conservative legislators. It may turn out that their constituents prefer their left-wing voting records, and it’s the right of voters to do so. But voters should understand the choice they’re faced with.

Kansas legislative vote ratings for Jo Ann Pottorff and Jean SchodorfKansas legislative vote ratings for Jo Ann Pottorff and Jean Schodorf

{ 4 comments }

Kansas University law professor Stephen J. Ware is an expert on the process of judicial selection in Kansas and other states. His research shows that Kansas is at the undemocratic extreme end of the spectrum in concentrating power in members of the bar when it comes to selecting judges for our state’s highest courts.

This week Ware will speak at two events in Wichita.

The first event is titled “Are you a Second-Class Citizen? Selecting the Lawmaking Judges of Kansas.” The free event is sponsored by The Federalist Society and hosted by Americans for Prosperity Foundation. It is on Thursday August 5th from 7:00 pm to 8:30 pm at the Lionel D. Alford Library located at 3447 S. Meridian in Wichita.

For more information on this event contact John Todd at john@johntodd.net or 316-312-7335, or Susan Estes, AFP Field Director at sestes@afphq.org or 316-681-4415.

The second event is the regular weekly luncheon meeting of the Wichita Pachyderm Club on Friday August 6. This meeting is also open to the public. It costs $10, which includes lunch. More information about this meeting is available at Kansas judicial selection expert to address Pachyderms.

{ 0 comments }

This Friday (August 6) the Wichita Pachyderm Club features Kansas University law professor Stephen J. Ware. Ware is an expert on the process of judicial selection in Kansas and other states. His research shows that Kansas is at the undemocratic extreme end of the spectrum in concentrating power in members of the bar when it comes to selecting judges for our state’s highest courts.

All are welcome to attend Wichita Pachyderm Club meetings. The program costs $10, which includes a delicious buffet lunch including salad, soup, two main dishes, and ice tea and coffee. The meeting starts at noon, although it’s recommended to arrive fifteen minutes early to get your lunch before the program starts.

The Wichita Petroleum Club is on the ninth floor of the Bank of America Building at 100 N. Broadway (north side of Douglas between Topeka and Broadway) in Wichita, Kansas (click for a map and directions). You may park in the garage (enter west side of Broadway between Douglas and First Streets) and use the sky walk to enter the Bank of America building. The Petroleum Club will stamp your parking ticket and the fee will be $1.00. Or, there is usually some metered and free street parking nearby.

{ 0 comments }

In Kansas, the deadline to register to vote or to change party affiliation is Monday July 19th. Voters need to register if they have moved or changed names.

According to the Kansas Secretary of State’s office, “Kansas elections are conducted by the counties with oversight by the Secretary of State’s office. Voter registration application (español) forms must be submitted to the county election officer where the applicant lives. You may also register to vote or change your registration information online with a valid Kansas driver’s license.” The link for online registration is here.

In Kansas, the Republican Party primary is closed, meaning that voters must be registered as Republican in order to vote for Republican candidates. The Democratic Party primary, however, is open to voters registered as Democrats or unaffiliated.

Besides selecting candidates for federal offices, 125 Kansas House of Representatives positions, one Kansas Senate position, county commission, and a number of statewide Kansas races such as governor, secretary of state, treasurer, insurance commissioner, and attorney general, voters in the Republican and Democratic parties vote for precinct committeemen and committewomen in this election. Carrying on a quaint tradition, each precinct has both a committeemen and committewomen. That is, if there are candidates, as it is not uncommon for these party positions to go unfilled.

State of the State KS is working with other organizations to help register voters. For more information on these events, see State of the State KS Partners With Groups Across Kansas For Voter Registration Drive in Hays, Topeka and Wichita.

{ 1 comment }

Recently Kansas Senate President Stephen Morris wrote an op-ed in which he explained the legislature’s reasons for passing a one cent per dollar increase in the statewide sales tax. That tax started on July 1. His piece may be read at State of the State KS.

Not everyone agrees with Morris. Derrick Sontag of the Kansas Chapter of Americans for Prosperity weighed in at For Kansas Senate President Stephen Morris, raising taxes is responsible.

Now Kansas House of Representatives member Steve Brunk, a Republican from Bel Aire, offers another rebuttal of Morris in his article Tax increase was neither necessary nor responsible.

Brunk mentions two sources of revenue that could have been tapped to help the state make it through a shortfall: utilizing unused fund balances and selling a small portion of state-owned assets. Advocates of government spending opposed both proposals.

Tax increase was neither necessary nor responsible

By Steve Brunk

In a recent editorial, “Legislature took responsible path,” State Senator Stephen Morris from Hugoton wanted to set the record straight regarding the final budget and tax increase enacted by the legislature for next year. He concluded that after listening to Kansans in every corner of the state the only responsible way to move forward was with a tax increase. He also stated that some lawmakers chose not to be part of the solution and are spreading false information to frighten Kansans.

I would like to offer a different viewpoint.

It’s true that during this recession the state faced revenue shortfalls from the proposed budgets approved by the Governor. But that doesn’t tell the whole story.

Continue reading at Kansas Liberty

{ 2 comments }

It was a bad year for economic freedom in the Kansas Legislature. There were the big votes that most people know of — the big-spending budget, the increase in the sales tax, and the statewide smoking ban — but the legislature passed — and the governor signed — many other laws that chip away at personal liberty and economic freedom. The following list contains many of these bills.

This list was produced by Bob Corkins of Kansas Votes, a project of the Kansas Policy Institute. It contains only bills that were enacted into law. There were, of course, some bad bills that didn’t make it all the way through the lawmaking process.

Corkins said that 2010 was the worst session for personal liberty that he could think of in more than two decades of working in the Kansas Statehouse. In many cases these bills had broad support among conservatives.

Some of these bills are concerned with what people might consider to be minor, unimportant matters. But the legislature thought they were important enough to be the subject of legislation. And while some might seem to chip away at personal liberty and economic freedom in small, insignificant ways, taken together over years, it all adds up.

Further, when lawmakers pass laws like this and no one complains, and when they get re-elected year after year, it emboldens them to take on bigger challenges to personal liberty and economic freedom, like increasing sales or other taxes. It hardens their resolve to block expansions of economic freedom like school choice programs.

An example of a bill contrary to personal liberty and economic freedom is House Bill 2130, which requires every occupant of a car to wear a safety belt. Now I happen to think seat belts are a great idea. I always wear mine and ask everyone in my car to wear theirs. But it’s a different matter when the state requires their use. It’s an example of lawmakers trying to protect us from ourselves. Once they start down this road, it’s very difficult for them to stop.

I’m aware of the argument that says because automobile accidents produce serious and costly injuries that drive up the cost of health care for everyone, and seat belt use reduces the severity of these injuries, we ought to regulate the behavior of people by requiring use of seat belts. We can expect to see arguments made like this more often as our nation moves towards greater collectivization of health care and its costs. What we ought to do, however, is reverse this trend in health care.

An example of a move away from a uniform tax system is House Bill 2554, authorizing the PEAK (Promoting Employment Across Kansas) program. This program allows certain employers to keep most of the withholding tax their employees pay. Programs like this are contrary to economic freedom because, in this case, we have the state deciding how to direct resources. An alternative that is in harmony with economic freedom is to rely on free markets for this guidance. Besides being contrary to economic freedom, there is scant evidence that economic development programs like this work, in terms of increasing overall prosperity.

Don’t think for a moment, however, that conservative Kansas legislators rose in opposition to this bill and its intervention into free markets. In the Senate, the bill passed 40 to zero. In the House, the bill passed 109 to 12. Of the 12 votes in opposition, eleven were from Democrats who mostly have far-left voting records. Brenda Landwehr was the only Republican to vote against this bill.

Another example of government intervention in markets is Senate Bill 430, which restored and boosted a historic preservation tax credit program. In my testimony to a House committee on this bill, I said “We must recognize that a tax credit is an appropriation of Kansans’ money made through the tax system. If the legislature is not comfortable with writing a developer a check for over $1,000,000 — as in the case with one Wichita developer — it should not make a roundabout contribution through the tax system that has the same economic impact on the state’s finances.”

Principles of economic freedom and personal liberty contend that the state should not be spending this money, whether through direct appropriations or the tax system. Very few conservatives voted against this bill on these principles.

The following list of enacted bills is ordered, Corkins says, from the “most atrocious to the merely very bad.” Each bill is linked to its page on Kansas Votes.

Senate Bill 572 (Propose state budget for 2011)
to approve a state budget that would authorize total spending for the current 2010 fiscal year of $5.416 billion in State General Fund spending (SGF, that portion of the budget paid primarily with state-imposed sales and income taxes) and $14.414 billion from All Funds (including SGF, federal aid, and state agency fees), and for spending $5.621 billion SGF and $13.685 from All Funds in fiscal year 2011.

House Bill 2360 (Increase state sales, income taxes)
to enact a state sales tax increase from the current 5.3 percent up to 6.3 percent, amend the Kansas Taxpayer Transparency Act, expand the food sales tax rebate program, and expand the state earned income tax credit (EITC) program.

House Bill 2221 (Ban smoking in public and workplaces)
to ban smoking in enclosed areas, including all public places, any placy of employment, taxicabs, hallways and more, but would not apply to outdoor areas, private residences, hotel or motel rooms, tobacco shops, certain private clubs and casino gaming floors.

House Bill 2320 (Impose nursing home tax)
to create a provider assessment tax on nearly all licensed beds within skilled nursing care facilities in the state of Kansas; deem the Kansas Health Policy Authority to be the state agency to calculate and implement the provider assessment; establish a Quality Care Fund where all assessments and penalties collected through the assessment program would be deposited; and, establish a Quality Care Improvement Panel.

House Bill 2356 (Increase state inspections of child care facilities)
to adopt “Lexie’s law” requiring the Department of Health and Environment to inspect every child care facility once every 15 months. The inspection frequency of a family child care home following an initial inspection will be at intervals that the department determines to be appropriate to assess the health, safety and well-being of children being cared for in the family child care home. In addition, to open certain records to the public regarding the identity of maternity center, family day care home, and child care facility licensees, but would allow the state to withhold such information if necessary to protect public health and safety or that of the facility’s patients or children.

House Bill 2130 (Mandate seat belts, allow traffic stops)
to amend state law to require every occupant of a passenger care to wear a safety belt. A law enforcement officer would now be permitted to stop a passenger car for any violation of the seat belt requirement by anyone in the front seat or anyone under 18. The fine for violations would be $5 until July 1, 2011, when it would increase to $10.

House Bill 2650 (Launch new state transportation works program)
to initiate a new state transportation works program, providing for the construction, improvement and maintenance of the state highway system; authorizing financial transfers between the State Highway Fund and the Rail Service Improvement Fund; increasing vehicle registration fees; increasing the borrowing authority of the Kansas Department of Transportation; and, pledging $8 million in transportation projects for each county in Kansas over the next 10 years.

Senate Bill 409 (Development of passenger rail service in Kansas)
to authorize the Kansas Secretary of Transportation to establish and implement a passenger rail service program in the state. To establish the program, the Secretary would enter into agreements with Amtrak and other rail operators to develop passenger rail service serving Kansas and other state. The agreements can include cost-sharing agreements and joint powers agreements. The Secretary should also enter into agreements with local jurisdictions along a proposed route. The bill also gives the Secretary authority to make loans or grants to passenger rail service providers for the purpose of restoring existing rail infrastructure, for rail economic development projects and the cost to initiate and operate passenger rail service. The bill does not specify where program funding would come from.

House Bill 2476 (Extend and increase court fees)
to increase a number of court fees and extend such judicial branch surcharges through fiscal year 2011 to fund non-judicial personnel working in the court system; the compromises recommended would alter specific fee increases for specific court actions with the fees ranging generally between $10 and $20.

Senate Bill 200 (Repeal partial HMO tax, apply full rate to all)
to repeal the partial state tax of 0.5 percent imposed on premiums charged against a few Health Maintenance Organizations so that the full one percent premiums tax would be applied uniformly against all HMOs.

House Bill 2582 (Extend and reallocate e-911 tax revenue to locals)
to delay for one year — until July, 1, 2011 — a provision in current law that discontinues the wireless enhanced 911 grant fee and the VoIP enhanced 911 grant fee, abolishes the wireless enhanced 911 advisory board and the grant fund, and that directs the distribution of the unobligated balance in the grant fund to public safety answering points (PSAPs).

House Bill 2554 (Expand tax incentives for hiring new workers)
expanding the PEAK program (Promoting Employment Across Kansas) by liberalizing its definitions, relaxing its requirements so that a company would be eligible if it relocated or expanded a portion of its business operations into the state, permitting qualified companies to retain 95 percent of the employees’ withholding taxes if the median wage paid to the new employees at least equals that paid throughout the county, and by requiring an independent evaluation of economic development incentives administered by the Kansas Department of Commerce.

House Bill 2226 (Change earmarks of traffic fine revenue, increase fines)
to increase the fine assessed on traffic infractions that are on the uniform fine schedule by $15. The revenue generated by the increased fines would be distributed to several justice related programs, including the Crime Victims Compensation Fund, the Crime Victims Assistance Fund, the Community Alcoholism and Intoxication Programs Fund, the Boating Fee Fund, the Children’s Advocacy Center Fund, and the criminal justice information system line fund.

Senate Bill 430 (Limit use of certain tax credits)
make a 10 percent cut in certain income tax credits permitted under current law; repeal a $3.75 million cap that had been imposed on historic preservation income tax credits; make statutory amendments needed for Kansas to remain in national compliance with the streamlined sales tax act; impose a $10 fee for delinquent taxpayers who enter into an installment payment plan agreement in excess of 90 days from the date of the payment plan agreement; and, people with intangibles tax liability would be required to file their returns with county clerks, rather than the Department of Revenue.

House Bill 2501 (Allow exemption from liability limit on mortgage insurers)
to allow the Kansas Department of Insurance to waive (at the sole discretion of the Commissioner of Insurance) the current requirement that a mortgage guaranty insurance company must have a total liability that does not exceed 25 times its capital, surplus and contingency reserve; to amend the definition of “RBC instruction” to mean risk-based capital instructions promulgated by a specified national insurance association; to prohibit firms that offer health care plans from requiring or requesting genetic tests, and prohibiting insurance companies from charging a higher premium because of any genetic test results; and, to grant rights to insurance customers in seeking special exceptions for cases in which their credit histories may affect their insurance coverage, allowing any such customer who experiences an “extraordinary life circumstance” that hurts their credit, and thereby causes an adverse insurance action, to obtain reasonable exceptions to the insurer’s rates.

House Bill 2485 (Increase evaluation period for trucking licenses)
to increase the time period from the current 12 up to 18 months for the Kansas Corporation Commission to verify a trucking company’s fitness and regulatory compliance for its continued operation.

House Bill 2472 (Specify rights in common interest communities)
to enact a set of rights and duties regarding people who live in common interest communities such as associations of apartment owners, but not owners currently and similarly bound by covenants unless they agree otherwise – setting forth duties in such communities regarding bylaws, owner voting rights, dispute resolutions, access to property, borrowing money, communications with owners, recordkeeping, and other matters; to prohibit until July 1, 2011, any city from adopting or enforcing any rule requiring the installation of a multi-purpose residential fire protection sprinkler system; and, to decrease down to 90 days, but permit a court to extend to up to 180 days, a compliance period for an abandoned property owner to carry out a rehabilitation plan where the property is brought into compliance with fire, housing and building codes and current on all ad valorem property tax owed, and to reduce from three to two years the time a person who purchases a house from an organization that has rehabilitated an abandoned property must occupy the house.

Senate Bill 389 (Compensation to dentists in health insurance plans)
to only permit a health insurance plan — including any individual health insurance policy, the State Children’s Health Insurance Plan and the state Medicaid program — to set fees for covered services (and not for uncovered services)provided by a dentist who is a participating provider in the plan.

Senate Bill 377 (Regulate retainage in construction contracts)
to prohibit an owner, contractor or subcontractor from withholding more than a five percent limit on the contract as retainage (money withheld to ensure proper work performance); to require release of retainage on an undisputed payment within 30 days after substantial completion of the project; to permit no more than 150 percent of the value of incomplete work, due to a contractor or subcontractor, to be withheld by an owner or contractor and require it be paid within 45 after completion of the work; and, to permit a general contractor to request an alternative security in lieu of retainage, such as an irrevocable bank letter or credit, certificate of deposit or cash bond.

Senate Bill 373 (Amending application of municipal court fees)
to require a $19 municipal court fee be imposed uniformly statewide in each case filed in municipal court, other than a nonmoving traffic violation, where there is a finding of guilty, a plea of guilty, a plea of no contest, or a forfeiture of bond or a diversion.

House Bill 2433 (Liberalize school purchasing process, Prison sales)
to allow all state educational institutions more independence in choosing how they acquire goods, supplies, equipment, services and land leases without the need to route acquisitions through the Kansas State Director of Purchases; and, to authorize the Department of Corrections for the next three years to sell prison-made goods to private citizens and businesses in Kansas.

House Bill 2415 (Exempt universities from surplus property law)
to exempt the six Kansas Regents universities from the current duty to dispose of any of their personal property through the terms of the Kansas Surplus Property Act. That law ordinarily makes the goods available for sale to the general public.

House Bill 2411 (Criminalize incense, “K2″)
to criminalize the unauthorized use or possession of certain chemicals known as “K2″, BZP and TFMPP that have been added to herbs and incense to produce hallucinogenic effects when inhaled or consumed.

House Bill 2353 (Ratify local sales tax vote for jail)
to retroactively validate a local election last year in Chautauqua County to impose a countywide sales tax where money raised would pay for a new county jail and law enforcement facility.

House Bill 2160 (Require state workers’ health plan to cover autism)
to require the state employees’ health plan to cover services for the diagnosis and treatment of autism spectrum disorders in any covered person less than 19 years old, and to require health insurance policies include coverage provisions for orally administered anti-cancer medications.

Senate Bill 83 (Require licensure of naturopathic doctors)
to change the regulatory status of naturopathic doctors with the Board of Healing Arts from registrants to licensees and to permit naturopaths to form professional corporations; and, to include two licensure categories — “exempt license” and “federally active license” — in the Physical Therapy Practice Act.

{ 0 comments }

Holland/Kultala ticket endorsed by Kansas Governor Parkinson

July 1, 2010

At an event this afternoon in Wichita, bipartisanship and reaching across the aisle — plus some Sam Brownback bashing — was the theme as outgoing Kansas Governor Mark Parkinson endorsed the team of Kansas Senator Tom Holland of Baldwin City and fellow Senator Kelly Kultala of Kansas City for the Democratic Party nomination for Kansas governor.

Read the full article →

Kansas sales tax increase starts today

July 1, 2010

Today Kansans will face an added tax burden on retail purchases, as the statewide sales tax rate goes up by one cent per dollar. Touted by its backers like Kansas Governor Mark Parkinson as a “one percent” increase in the tax, it is actually an increase of (6.3 – 5.3) / 6.3 = 15.9 percent.

Read the full article →

For Kansas Senate President Stephen Morris, raising taxes is responsible

June 25, 2010

Recently Kansas Senate President Stephen Morris wrote an op-ed which explained the Kansas Legislature’s reasoning for passing a one cent per dollar increase in the statewide sales tax effective July 1. His piece may be read at State of the State KS.

Read the full article →

Kansas judicial retention election attracts attention

June 21, 2010

Kansas Watchdog’s Earl Glynn reports on the fund-raising and politics surrounding Kansas Supreme Court Justice Carol A. Beier and the retention election she faces this year. Normally these judicial retention elections are not newsworthy, although perhaps they should be. This year’s retention election for Justice Beier, however, is attracting attention.

Read the full article →

Kansas restrictive neighborhood covenants don’t apply to political yard signs

June 20, 2010

It’s common for neighborhoods to have restrictive covenants that prohibit homeowners from placing any signs in their yard, except for signs advertising homes for sale. But a 2008 Kansas law overrides these restrictive covenants to allow for the placement of small political yard signs starting 45 days before an election.

Read the full article →

Kansas Insurance Commissioner to address Pachyderms

June 20, 2010

This Friday (June 25) candidate for the Republican party nomination for Kansas Insurance Commissioner Sandy Praeger will address members and guests of the Wichita Pachyderm Club. Her opponent for this nomination is David Powell. As no Democrat has filed for this position, the primary election is almost certain to determine who will be the next insurance commissioner.

Read the full article →

For Payne, good news means opportunity delayed

June 10, 2010

A candidate for the Republican party nomination for the Kansas House of Representatives from the 87th district is withdrawing from the race. But it’s really good news for Eric Payne and his family, as his wife is expecting triplets sometime in the fall.

Read the full article →

Holland / Kultala ticket pairs two Kansas Senate liberals

June 9, 2010

Today Kansas senator and gubernatorial candidate Tom Holland chose fellow senator Kelly Kultala of Kansas City as his lieutenant governor running mate.

Read the full article →

Kansas agency websites: campaign flyers?

June 7, 2010

Kansas state government agencies are headed by a mix of elected and appointed officials. After looking at the websites for agencies headed by elected officials, Kansans would be justified in asking if some are using their agency websites for campaign purposes.

Read the full article →

AFP Kansas legislative scorecards released

June 3, 2010

The Kansas Chapter of Americans for Prosperity has released its legislative scorecards for the 2010 session of the Kansas Legislature. These scorecards rank members of the Kansas House and Senate by the way they voted on selected legislation and amendments.

Read the full article →

Kansas Democrats described as ‘imploding’

June 3, 2010

Larry J. Sabato, who is director of the University of Virginia Center for Politics, is a respected analyst of national who publishes Sabato’s Crystal Ball, an informative look at campaigns and races around the country.

In the most recent issue Sabato takes a look at 2010 gubernatorial races and concludes that “There’s now no question that the gubernatorial turnover in November will be historic.” He estimates that Republicans will add six or seven states to the count of those states with Republican governors

Read the full article →

Brownback, Colyer announce in Wichita

June 2, 2010

On Tuesday, United States Senator Sam Brownback formally filed to become a candidate for the Republican party nomination to be governor of Kansas. He also introduced his running mate.

Read the full article →

Some Kansas high tax zones are over 10%

May 27, 2010

When the Kansas statewide sales tax is increased effective July 1, there will be a few districts in Kansas where the combined sales tax rate — state, city, county, and any special districts — will be over ten percent. My research shows there will be 55 districts where the combined sales tax will be nine percent or greater. Some high-tax districts are entire cities such as Pomona and Sedan at 9.8 percent, but many are special districts where sales tax is diverted from general government to special purposes. Perhaps we should require warning signs to be posted to warn visitors that they’re about to enter a high-tax area. But that would go against the purpose of many of these districts, which is to extract revenue from those outside the immediate area. Kansas Reporter has more on this issue.

Read the full article →

Some Kansas House Members voted for spending, but not the taxes

May 26, 2010

This year both the Kansas House of Representatives and Senate voted for increased spending and increased taxes. The taxes are primarily in the form of a one cent per dollar increase in the statewide sales tax, scheduled to take effect July 1.

When the budget and taxes were debated in the Senate, several senators made the point that if a member voted in favor of increased spending, they should also vote for the tax increase. In the Senate, all members who voted for increased spending also voted for the tax increase.

Read the full article →

At forum, Kansas Secretary of State candidates have different attitudes regarding voter fraud

May 25, 2010

Last week’s meeting of the Sedgwick County Republican Party featured a forum with the three candidates seeking the Republican party nomination for Kansas Secretary of State. The candidates and links to their campaign websites are J.R. Claeys, Elizabeth “Libby” Ensley, and Kris Kobach.

During the forum, the different attitudes of the candidates towards the extent of voter fraud in Kansas and the measures that should be taken to combat it — such as photo ID and proof of citizenship — became apparent.

Read the full article →

The fight for Kansas jobs

May 24, 2010

When seeking to bring additional businesses to Kansas, no one champions higher taxes as an additional benefit. The Chamber will always defend Kansas entrepreneurs and taxpayers against policies which inhibit their ability to increase capital investment, grow private-sector jobs and reduce the burden on government services. Responsible government and a friendly business climate can and should co-exist.

Read the full article →

Bill Light, facing conservative challenger, withdraws Kansas House bid

May 20, 2010

The Kansas Republican Assembly blog reports on the withdrawal of Kansas House of Representatives member Bill Light from consideration for re-election.

Read the full article →

Amtrak passenger service shown in Wichita

May 20, 2010

The possible expansion of Amtrak passenger rail service in Kansas was the topic of a meeting held last night in Wichita.

Expansion of rail service in Kansas is controversial, at least to some people, in that any form of rail service requires taxpayer involvement to pay for the service. First, taxpayer funding is required to pay for the start-up costs for the service. There are four alternatives being presented for rail service expansion in Kansas, and the start-up costs range from $156 million up to $479 million.

Read the full article →

Kansas Governor, Wichita Eagle: why ‘pigs’ at the trough?

May 19, 2010

When the Kansas Chamber of Commerce recently referred to the need to control Kansas government spending and taxes, a few politicians and newspaper editorial writers embellished what the Chamber actually said in order to make their own political points.

Read the full article →

Kansas Economic Freedom Index updated

May 18, 2010

Now that the 2010 session of the Kansas Legislature is over (except for a largely ceremonial final day) and the important votes have been cast, I’ve updated the Kansas Economic Freedom Index.

Read the full article →

Kansas or New Jersey: Which state is on the better road to prosperity?

May 18, 2010

What’s the difference between Kansas and New Jersey? One answer that comes to mind: unlike the comparison to our neighboring states, Kansas has a more limited, fiscally conservative government than the Garden State. Or so we thought.

Read the full article →

Kansas Senate passes tax bill, on to House

May 6, 2010

Tonight the Kansas Senate passed its tax bill, adding about $330 million in new taxes for fiscal year 2011, which begins on July 1, 2010. The primary source of the new tax revenue is a one cent on the dollar increase in the sales tax. The measure passed with 23 votes in the 40 member Senate.

Read the full article →

Kansas House starts debate on new budget; little progress made

May 6, 2010

This afternoon the Kansas House of Representatives is debating its replacement budget. The legislation being considered is known as the “Feuerborn amendment”. At 417 pages, it has been divided into 13 sections, with part “A” being the language that “guts” the existing bill.

Read the full article →

Kansas budget, taxes, still being worked on

May 6, 2010

At the Kansas statehouse yesterday, some progress was made on the budget, but much work remains. With the session about to end, large decisions about taxation and spending have yet to be made.

Read the full article →

Kansas budget still being worked on

May 5, 2010

Yesterday the Kansas House failed to pass a budget that did not require raising taxes. The budget, referred to as the “cuts budget” or the “Yoder budget” had only 45 votes in its favor, and would have been vetoed by the governor, based on his stated criteria for an acceptable budget.

Read the full article →

Kansas budget may be settled today

May 4, 2010

Last night the Kansas Senate Ways and Means committee came up with a new tax package. The main ingredients are a one cent per dollar increase in the statewide sales tax, but no increase in cigarette taxes. The package relies on the federal government extending a Medicare matching funds program boost, which Congress has not yet passed.

Read the full article →