Voice For Liberty

Category: Kansas state government

  • Record setting spending in Topeka

    Record Setting Spending in Topeka
    By Karl Peterjohn, Kansas Taxpayers Network

    Now that the inconvenience of the 2006 election is behind us, the statehouse is getting back to what it does best: spending your tax dollars. Governor Sebelius’ latest state budget will set two new records for increased spending.

    Is this news to you? State spending is growing at close to double digit rates so these fiscal milestones are being passed with a rapidity that would stun the frugal founders of this state.

    The next state General Fund budget is proposed to be $6.015 billion. That is a 7.7 percent hike above last year. That percentage growth is actually down from the 8.7 percent spending growth in the fiscal year that will end June 30. That’s an increase of over 17 percent over two years.

    Have you had a 17 percent pay hike in the last two years? Not many Kansans have had increases at half that rate as our average income continues to lag well below the national average.

    A second dubious spending distinction was contained in Governor Sebelius’ budget. The state’s All Funds budget, that includes highway, Medicaid, and other federal program spending, is being revised up. Way up. The initial budget approved by the 2006 legislature kept this spending growth under $12 billion and 4.0 percent. The governor’s revised budget raises this amount to almost $12.4 billion, or an 8.2 percent hike.

    There have been the usual complaints about spending growth but there have seldom been so many examples of dubious and wasteful spending to provide. The rapidly growing spending for the state capitol remodel now has a price tag that could eventually exceed $300 million.

    The state’s bonded indebtedness tops $4 billion. That’s almost $1,500 per Kansan or over $5,900 for a family of four.

    The state’s universities are seeking over $700 million for facilities. This includes dubious projects like over $607,000 for Chancellor Hemingway’s home, guest house, and garage at K.U. That university would like taxpayers to provide $8,176,385 to spend on Allen Field House. Where else could they find money to refurbish that sports facility? Ditto for K.S.U. that at least had a smaller request of $3,171,040 for Ahearn Field House.

    Wichita State University had initially included the usually vacant Cessna Stadium but pulled this off the official list when an Americans for Prosperity lobbyist raised questions about it being listed. W.S.U. ended their football program decades ago and the stadium gets very light use. The last significant event there was hosting the Rolling Stones last October.

    Another example of wasted state spending was provided to legislators early this year. There are roughly 17 percent of students receiving free and reduced lunches who are ineligible according to a state audit. This is critically important when measuring state spending for K-12 public schools since this lunch count is the basis for a massive amount of “at risk” student spending. That translates into taxpayers paying $19 million for ineligible students. That doesn’t include breaking out the out-of-state students or dare one say it, illegal alien students that taxpayers must fund in Kansas. Legislative Post Audit published a two-part audit on this over spending and legislative hearings were held this month.

    If tax growth and the private sector continue to expand, the statehouse spending spree will continue. If tax growth stops, watch out for more tax hikes besides the usual appraisal and inflation “revenue enhancement” increases.

  • Tax Growth Exceeds Income Growth

    Tax Growth Exceeds Income Growth
    By Karl Peterjohn, Kansas Taxpayers Network

    Kansas Legislative Research is reporting that state and local taxes grew 9.83 percent last year. That is a major reason the state has $300 million in revenue growth to either spend or return to the folks who earned it: taxpayers. It is clear that Kansas has some sizable economic problems facing this state.

    Governor Sebelius’ State of the State speech did recommend some business tax breaks but there does not seem to be any breaks for the average taxpayer. In fact, the opposite is true as spending proposals for “universal health care,” a $700 million regents building request, and the rest of the K-12 spending on public schools in the wake of the Kansas Supreme Court’s spending edicts each have the potential to easily exceed the $300 million growth.

    Do any of these folks remember the children’s tale about the goose that laid the golden eggs?

    The Kansas economy is growing, although nowhere near the almost 10 percent growth enjoyed by 2006 revenues. The fastest growing tax is the state’s corporate income tax that grew over 54 percent in 2006. The tax on financial institutions saw revenue growth in excess of 40 percent. Both of these rates are highly dependent upon the underlying economy and these increases are based on relatively weak state tax revenues in the previous few years.

    Another fast growing tax was the severance tax on oil and gas. That rose over 29 percent last year. High energy prices are good for the high state energy taxes. These are all reasons explaining the growth in tax revenues.

    State Senator Jim Barnett was unsuccessful in convincing voters that high Kansas taxes place this state’s economic future in jeopardy. While Barnett may have failed at convincing a majority of voters, he apparently succeeded in convincing his opponent, Governor Sebelius, that there is a real problem here. She has now proposed reductions in the state’s business franchise, corporate income, and unemployment tax placed on business in her 2007 State of the State speech.

    Several recent national fiscal surveys have pointed out that Kansas’ fiscal climate is not conducive to economic growth and we rank poorly with most of our neighboring states. There is tremendous tax uncertainty that is reflected in both the high level of property taxes in Kansas but the sizable property tax increases that occur through the appraisal process as well as higher mill levies.

    All Kansas property taxes grew 7.45 percent according to these state figures. That’s bad news for property owning taxpayers whose incomes were not able to grow that fast. Sadly, that covers a large number of Kansans. If the bulk of the state’s $300 million windfall gets spent on growing Kansas government, the fundamental economic problems will remain.

  • Maximum taxes means minimum growth

    Maximum Taxes Means Minimum Growth
    By Karl Peterjohn, Kansas Taxpayers Network

    Kansas has high taxes. Even worse, the high taxes are high property taxes that stifle capital formation and hold down wages. Two new studies rank Kansas at the bottom of this region when it comes to soaring property taxes. That should not be too surprising since Kansas and Nebraska are the two states that provide their citizens will almost no opportunity to vote on whether or not property taxes should be raised.

    The Tax Foundation as well as the Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council both issued reports recently pointing out Kansas’ high property tax status. The Tax Foundation measured property taxes per person as well as a percentage of income and Kansas scored 13th and 14th highest among the 50 states and the District of Columbia on these two measurements.

    All of the surrounding states in our region were lower than Kansas. Nebraska came closest to Kansas with slightly lower property taxes than Kansas. Oklahoma easily had the lowest property taxes in this region scoring 47th out of the 50 states and the District of Columbia, according to this Tax Foundation study using 2004 federal tax data.

    High property taxes are a major burden stifling economic growth. So it really should not be a surprise that Kansas has had lagging growth for quite a while. While federal tax revenues have grown 30 percent over the last two years, Kansas growth has been less than 2/3 the national rate. That type of stagnation occurs when taxes are excessive.

    Confirming the Tax Foundation was the Small Business & Entrepreneurship’s 2006 study ranking the business climate in all 50 states. The SBE property tax data also ranked Kansas with the 13th highest property taxes in the country. Nebraska was 18th, Colorado 33rd, Missouri 40th, and Oklahoma 47th.

    If a business has a bad year and loses money, there is no corporate income tax due. The corporate income tax is paid only when a profit is made. Property taxes ignore profits or the lack thereof. These taxes must be paid regardless of the success or failure of the business, farm, or family.

    Kansas high property taxes make this state a much harder place to successfully operate for the average business. In addition to having higher property tax rates, the fact that citizens do not get to vote on raising property taxes makes it easier to raise these rates even higher and this increases the uncertainty and risk of operating a Kansas business.

    In the second largest county in Kansas, Sedgwick County commissioners took up a proposal to raise county property taxes as much as 14 percent last summer. The unanimous and bipartisan five member commission voted to raise the property tax over eight percent. This was in addition to the automatic property tax hike through higher appraisals that totaled six percent.

    If Sedgwick County voters would have had the opportunity to vote on this tax hike, it is likely that this tax hike would have been defeated. Two of the three incumbent commissioners who were up for reelection who voted for this tax hike lost their office to challengers who opposed that tax hike and pledged not to make any further increases.

    The largest private employer in Sedgwick County covering the Wichita area is Cessna Aircraft. Cessna and other large aircraft firms testified in support of raising this property tax to get taxpayer subsidies for training aircraft workers in this highly cyclical industry. Cessna President Jack Pelton personally testified in support of raising property taxes to subsidize his business by expanded worker training programs.

    The aircraft industry layoffs in the Wichita area followed the September 11 attack and the 2000 recession. Since 2005 the aircraft industry has been on a cyclical rebound.

    The Wichita aircraft industries were back in front of the Wichita city council seeking hundreds of millions of dollars in property tax abatements in November. Sadly, this segment of big business in Kansas is supportive of higher property taxes for everyone else besides themselves.

    Cessna has over 8,000 Wichita area employees. This is down several thousand from 2001. However, despite the declining workforce, the demands for special property tax breaks for Cessna and other aircraft firms continue to grow. Small business, homeowners, and other property taxpayers get to make up the difference for these corporate tax hypocrites. That shift in the tax burden is not apparent when examining Kansas’ overall property tax rating. This makes Kansas’ effective tax rate much higher for the Kansans excluded from the special property tax breaks. These are all reasons why Kansas growth lags.

  • The next four years

    The Next Four Years
    By Karl Peterjohn

    The gubernatorial race in Kansas is generating fewer negative ads statewide than a single Wichita area race for the Kansas House of Representatives. If this crude barometer of political sentiment is correct, Kathleen Sebelius will easily be reelected governor November 7.

    For political prognosticators in the mainstream Kansas press this is as much a certainty as criticism of President Bush leading the nightly news or Senator Kerry sticking his foot in his mouth. A second term for Governor Sebelius is going to impact Kansans and for many of them it will be an expensive experience.

    Governor Sebelius is already calling for increases in excise taxes. More tax hike proposals will appear after November 7. What will be interesting is seeing if the next Kansas legislature will finally be ready to pass the property, income, sales, and excise tax hikes she unsuccessfully sought during her first term. When Bill Graves was governor he got his tax hikes passed during his second term in office. Second terms have had a history of being rather ugly with both the Graves and Carlin precedents as a warning to any second term Kansas governor.

    The governor’s tax and spending programs may rest on her success in getting like minded legislators elected November 7. Former Republican turned Democrat Cindy Neighbor is running for the legislature against conservative Republican Mary Pilcher Cook. A Neighbor victory will be a significant step towards raising Kansas taxes. The governor’s coattails for down ticket legislative races will be an important factor in determining the reception the governor’s next tax and spend proposal will receive at the statehouse.

    The next Kansas budget covering all funds will top $12 billion. It took some budgetary sleight-of-hand to keep it under $12 billion this year. If spending growth expands in Governor Sebelius’ second term as fast as it did during her first, expect the spending to grow above $14 billion. If the judicially active Kansas Supreme Court continues to budget state spending, the growth could easily double and raise total spending over $16 billion.

    More spending by lawsuit will become a common part of the Kansas governmental scene as the legislature becomes an increasingly secondary factor in setting state spending priorities. The next school finance lawsuit is going to be a factor in state spending during the next four years. Lawsuits directing other parts of the state budget will continue to be major events impacting Kansas government finances too.

    Government job growth will be an increasingly important factor in Kansas. The school finance studies beginning with Augenblick and Myers indicate that the solution for improving Kansas public schools is more school employees. Despite the stagnant number of students, the solution is to expand the schools. Since some schools, like Wichita, already had 8,587 employees last year for fewer than 49,000 students, so lowering an already low six students per employee ratio seems unlikely to improve educational achievement. Costs will soar as will the taxes needed to pay for this profligacy.

    Governor Sebelius is already proposing higher excise taxes to finance expanded Hillary-style state health care programs. In addition, Medicaid costs that require a state payment for 40 percent of the costs are growing rapidly with annual increases exceeding $100 million.

    During their last Topeka debate Governor Sebelius and Senator Barnett were both asked what they would do if the state received a fiscal windfall. Senator Barnett cited his proposal to cut state taxes and said he would return the windfall to taxpayers. Governor Sebelius said she would increase state spending for school children.

    Government will grow during the next four years regardless of who is elected. However, the size and rate will vary dramatically. Governor Sebelius’ reelection guarantees that Kansas government spending will soar. Economic growth will not be able to keep up with spending. Kansans need to get ready for some major “revenue enhancements,” to help Governor Sebelius fulfill her spending schemes.

  • Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius, opponent of liberty

    According to “Fiscal Policy Report Card on America’s Governors: 2006” recently released by The Cato Institute, Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius earns a grade of “D.”

    How did she fare so poorly? According to the report: “Governors who have cut taxes and spending the most receive the highest grades. Those who have increased spending and taxes the most receive the lowest grades.” What is unusual and good about this report is that it considers what governors recommended, as well as what actually happened.

    This is important. Governor Sebelius takes credit for having no increases in taxes during her term. That’s not for trying, though. Her proposed tax increases were rejected by the legislature. The Cato study, however, sees through that, and grades her accordingly.

    Why are low taxes important? From the study:

    This report card emphasizes the importance of tax cuts in general because the evidence shows that states that reduce taxes improve their prospects for economic growth. For example, a 1996 study by Zsolt Besci of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta found that “relative marginal tax rates have a statistically significant negative relationship with relative state growth averaged for the period from 1961 to 1992.” The message of the study for state governments is that “lowering aggregate state and local marginal tax rates is likely to have a positive effect on longterm growth rates.” A study for the congressional Joint Economic Committee by Richard Vedder of Ohio University came to a similar conclusion. A study by Thomas Dye of Florida State University found that states with no income tax had higher personal income growth (and smaller government growth) than states that had an income tax.

    Tax changes enacted in the states offer a useful laboratory for exploring the effects of tax policy. A comparison of the economic performance of the 10 states that increased taxes the most with the economic performance of the 10 states that cut taxes the most during 1990–2005 suggests that when states reduce taxes they improve their relative economic performance.

    Kansas, as has been noted, has a relatively high tax burden, and had our governor had her way, our taxes would be higher now. If re-elected, there is no reason to believe her appetite for more tax revenue would be diminished. As poor as our economic growth and job growth has been recently, it would undoubtedly have been worse had our governor been able to pass the tax increases she proposed.

    But there’s something even more important than economic growth and jobs at stake. Collecting more tax revenue and spending more means Kansas government is getting larger, and that’s been happening even though there has not been a tax increase. Large and powerful governments, be they local or national, are the opposite of liberty and freedom. That’s why Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius, with her only partially unfulfilled goal of higher taxes and larger government, is an opponent of liberty.

  • Personal income up in Kansas, but …

    As reported in the Lawrence Journal-World on September 27, 2006, personal income in Kansas grew at the rate of 1.4 percent for the second quarter of 2006. That sounds pretty good, and Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius uses facts like this in her campaign ads.

    But our growth can be understood only when placed in context. Here’s what the Journal-World said:

    Kansans are putting more money in their pockets, but the extra income isn’t keeping up with increases for residents in other states.

    Personal income rose by 1.4 percent in Kansas during the second quarter, according to a report released Tuesday by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. That rate of growth was surpassed by all but nine other states.

    (As has been mentioned, most of the growth in jobs in Kansas has been in government.)

    The governor must be hoping that voters get their information only from her campaign ads, and that they don’t take a moment to read an entire news story. Even if they do read a newspaper, it might not help much. I can’t find mention of this news in our state’s largest newspaper, The Wichita Eagle.

    Would Republican challenger Jim Barnett do much better leading Kansas? Although he earned a legislative vote rating of 100% from the Kansas Taxpayers Network this year, his voting in 2006 was very different from his past behavior. Before this year, Sen. Barnett had a lifetime ranking of only 28%. I would imagine that had Kathleen Sebelius been in the senate these same years, her rating would be similar. You do the math.

  • Kansas revenue growth lags

    Writing from Shreveport, Louisiana

    As Karl writes, things are getting better in Kansas, but not at anywhere near the rate the economy is growing nationwide. But that doesn’t seem to bother our governor.

    Kansas Revenue Growth Lags
    By Karl Peterjohn, Executive Director, Kansas Taxpayers Network

    Governor Sebelius continues to spread the message that the Kansas economy is growing again. State tax collections are rising. The expansion in tax revenue has allowed the big spending members of the Kansas legislature and the Kansas Supreme Court to go on a spending spree without anyone having to vote to raise state taxes in 2006.

    State Senator Jim Barnett, the Republican gubernatorial candidate opposing Sebelius, is citing federal job data showing that private job growth in Kansas is 50th among all the states while government job growth is the only area where Kansas employment is rising. At the same time the state’s unemployment rate continues to exceed the national average. Barnett has a proposal to get the state’s economy moving with a series of tax cuts to stimulate economic growth.

    Outside of Kansas and outside the boundaries of a Kansas election campaign, the federal tax collections from all 50 states are also reporting sizable growth. President Bush does not seem to be getting any credit for the growth in the national economy but there is strong growth in federal tax collections. The two rounds of federal tax cuts have dramatically changed federal tax policy nationally during his six years in office. The most recent Bush tax cut has now had a couple of years to take effect.

    Despite soaring levels of bipartisan federal spending growth the federal tax collections have managed to expand faster than congressional pork masters can grow it. Federal tax collections for the fiscal year that ended September 30 are 29.7 percent higher than two years ago. The federal budget deficit for last year was $260 billion, well below the $423 billion deficit projected by federal budget estimates last February.

    In August, 2005 Governor Sebelius’s office put out a news release touting the fact that state tax collections had grown over 7 percent for the fiscal year ending June 30. To compare the percentage growth of federal and Kansas tax revenues, one must adjust one of these fiscal years. Total state tax collections grew from $4.423 billion in 2004 to just over a billion dollars more, $5.440 billion as of September 30 putting receipts on a October 1 fiscal year. That is 19.7 percent growth.

    Nationally, at the same time federal tax revenues are growing over 50 percent faster and are approaching $2.4 trillion annually. Kansas tax revenue growth is significant but we are lagging way behind the national growth level percentage. Another point that would confirm this data is a new Tax Foundation study that surveyed business taxation covering all 50 states October 10, 2006. Kansas scored a mediocre 31st on this Tax Foundation score card (see www.taxfoundation.org) and was almost unchanged from the 2004 measurement looking at data from the beginning of Governor Sebelius’s first term.

    Meanwhile, in her campaign commercials Governor Sebelius touts a two year old Pacific Research Institute and last year’s Beacon Hill surveys claiming that Kansas has one of the best business and economic climates at 13th in the country. The Beacon Hill study examined a wide variety of criteria. The specific data included a student achievement measurement. Kansas students scored well using data from before the Montoy case spending began. In addition, Kansas scored highly in the number of engineering and science students graduating. Sadly, Kansas scored much lower in the number of engineering and science degree holders who were able to find jobs in Kansas after graduating.

    Kansas also scored well on Beacon Hill’s ranking for commuting times and rental cost for apartments but scored badly in venture capital, new company formation, and near the bottom of all 50 states when measuring government employment. Kansas also scored well in having a low percentage of citizens without health insurance and percentage of the population seeking post high school degrees too.

    Kansas’s economy is growing as reflected in the expansion in tax revenues but we are lagging behind the rest of the country when compared with federal tax growth from all 50 states. This is grist for both of the major party gubernatorial campaigns but this data actually helps the challenger, Senator Barnett, much more in his uphill race against Governor Sebelius.

  • Rhonda, markets are the answer

    Writing from New Orleans, Louisiana

    An editorial in the October 13, 2006 Wichita Eagle by Rhonda Holman expresses disgust with the Kansas State Board of Education, and praises Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius’s criticism of the board.

    (I am a little ashamed to admit that I am in New Orleans, but still reading The Wichita Eagle.)

    Now it is no secret that Ms. Holman disagrees with some of the actions the board has taken the past few years. I am quite certain that if she agreed with what the board has done, she would have not written this editorial, and the governor would have not criticized the board. After all, both are in favor of expansion of government, as long as they agree with what the government is doing.

    That illustrates the problem with government-mandated solutions: everyone has to accept what government decides to provide, or pay doubly to decide in favor of something else. Few families can afford to do that when it comes to the education of their children.

    Ms. Holman, if we were to reduce the government’s role in the supplying of education, we wouldn’t have to worry about what the Kansas Board of Education is doing, as there would be no such board, or their power and influence would be greatly diminished. Instead of everyone accepting what politicians and government bureaucrats decide we should have, everyone would be free to choose the type of education they want for their children. No matter how specialized your requirements or uncommon your preferences, market-based provision of education would almost certainly supply what you desire.

    Wouldn’t that be a wonderful! No more fretting about what the Board of Education is doing, as people would be free of its power over their lives.

    Similarly — and most refreshing — we would be free from Kathleen Sebelius’s authority and Rhonda Holman’s influence. But that’s something I don’t think they want.

  • Kansas Attorney General Election Will Set Spending Record

    Attorney General Election Will Set Spending Record
    By Karl Peterjohn, Executive Director Kansas Taxpayers Network

    Will the checkbook of the controversial abortion doctor from Wichita, George Tiller be large enough to defeat Attorney General Phill Kline’s bid for reelection? That is the underlying financial fact beneath the most expensive race for Kansas Attorney General in state history. The huge amount of spending for this position is now unfolding before voters’ eyes.

    The Democratic Party challenger for Kansas Attorney General is Johnson County District Attorney Paul Morrison. Morrison, who began running TV ads in mid-September, raised almost $1 million for his campaign treasury as reported to the state after the last reporting period in late July, just a few days before the August 1 primary.

    Morrison is the second of the two, well publicized liberal GOP defectors this year, the other being Governor Sebelius’ running mate Mark Parkinson, who have recently become democrats and are now statewide candidates.

    Both attorney general candidates began hard campaigning with a mid-September debate at a forum hosted by Wichita State University. Naturally, the abortion issue appeared but what is fascinating is the expansion of the abortion debate into other issues. Dr. George Tiller’s ProKanDo Political Action Committee (PAC) was not only attacking Phill Kline but labeled the attorney general as their number one election target. No surprise there. What was fascinating was the ProKanDo PAC flyer distributed at the state fair that blasted two fiscally conservative groups, the Club for Growth and Americans for Prosperity, that are not involved in the abortion battle or even social issues in general. Both groups oppose tax hikes and higher spending.

    Attorney General Phill Kline’s role in a variety of legal issues has gotten press attention. Kline’s office ended up playing a major role in trying to defend the state’s budget from the activist Kansas Supreme Court’s school finance ruling. Kline’s record as a leading advocate for tax reform when he chaired the Kansas house’s tax committee, cutting property and a wide range of other taxes in 1997 and 1998, and later trying to limit tax growth seems to have become part of the ProKanDo abortion advocates criticism of what this PAC calls, “…ultra conservative groups…” Abortion advocates now have a big government fiscal position according to Dr. Tiller’s PAC. That is likely to be unsettling news to fiscally conservative voters who are not partisans in the abortion battles as well as fiscal conservatives and libertarians who support keeping abortion legal.

    The abortion battle is also going to be fought on traditional legal issues. Kline had taken what was largely viewed as a “legal hail Mary” appeal of the Kansas Supreme Court’s latest ruling against the Kansas death penalty law to the U.S. Supreme Court.

    Kline, who has been criticized for not having extensive prosecutorial or a huge amount of litigation experience, not only took the Marsh death penalty case to the U.S. Supreme Court, but won this case this year. That is a major accomplishment for any lawyer. Kline will certainly point out that his opponent, Paul Morrison, who enjoys extensive experience as a prosecutor, cannot point to any U.S. Supreme Court wins in his resume.

    Morrison is hurt by the endorsement of Kline by 89 of 105 county sheriffs in Kansas. Even more painful for Morrison is the 89 sheriffs backing Kline include a majority of the Democratic sheriffs. It is notable that the largest and most liberal Kansas newspapers gave extensive news coverage to Morrison and Parkinson’s defections from the Republican Party earlier this year but not the sheriffs’ endorsement. The paucity of news coverage about the sheriffs’ endorsement was followed by endorsements from police groups like the Kansas Fraternal Order of Police as well as the Kansas State Troopers Association for Kline. These Kline endorsements have also been largely ignored on most daily news coverage in Kansas.

    The largest fact that has been ignored is campaign cash, PAC’s, and Dr. Tiller’s role in the 2006 attorney general race. Kline spent $700,000 in getting elected attorney general in 2002. Kline had faced a three-way GOP primary and spent roughly half of his funds just getting the Republican nomination according to his campaign spokesperson. Freestatemedia.org reports that Dr. Tiller provided $153,000 of last minute campaign donations into the last minute effort to defeat Phill Kline in 2002. Kline won by a paper thin margin of less than 5,000 votes four years ago. The Kline campaign attributes $300,000 in Dr. Tiller funds were spent against him from the 2002 attorney general’s race. News coverage about this last minute spending spree by the abortion lobby only appeared in a handful of Kansas newspapers and this belated coverage only appeared well after the 2002 election was history. That was unlike the independent campaign expenditures reporting on behalf of Sam Brownback’s campaigns for U.S. senator in 1996 and 1998.

    That six figure spending for attorney general will be far eclipsed in 2006. Dr. Tiller’s spending on behalf of his attorney general candidate, Paul Morrison, will appear in force after the reporting deadline is passed. Expect a new PAC to appear to fund these last minute ads that will disappear right after the election using the plan that almost beat Kline in 2002. The key question in Kansas politics is: will Dr. Tiller have enough cash to change enough votes with a last minute attack that will be successful to unseat the Republican, Phill Kline?