Voice For Liberty

Category: Kansas state government

  • Kansas continues to suffer from job growth deficit

    This press release from the Kansas Chapter of Americans For Prosperity calls attention to the poor growth in jobs under the leadership of Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius, contrary to what her television advertisements claim.

    We should not construe that Kansas State Senator and Republican challenger Jim Barnett would do much better. 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%.

    Kansas Continues to Suffer from Job Growth Deficit

    Kansas is #50 in private sector job growth this year
    Kansas is #1 in government job growth this year

    TOPEKA – The Kansas chapter of the grassroots group Americans for Prosperity today released the results of an analysis of recent employment data released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

    “Just in case our Governor and policy makers don’t get it by now, hopefully this data makes it crystal clear and our economy is struggling. In order to address this problem, we have to recognize that we have a problem, and unfortunately, too many of our elected leaders respond to this challenge with misleading information, meaningless anecdotes and defensiveness.”

    • From January 2006 to August 2006, Kansas ranks #50 in private job growth, losing 3,800 jobs (.35%)
    • Kansas is only one of three states to have an actual loss of jobs in this calendar year.
    • From January 2006 to August 2006, Kansas ranks #1 in government job growth, gaining 15,800, an increase of more than 6%
    • Kansas employment peaked in March 2001 and has since lost jobs.

    (Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, data seasonally adjusted)

    Americans For Prosperity Foundation (AFPF) is a nationwide organization of citizen leaders committed to advancing every individual’s right to economic freedom and opportunity. AFPF believes reducing the size and scope of government is the best safeguard to ensuring individual productivity and prosperity for all Americans. AFPF educates and engages citizens in support of restraining state and federal government growth, and returning government to its constitutional limits. For more information, visit www.afpks.org

  • Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius and Kansas jobs

    A recent television advertisement by Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius touts “… nearly 2.5 years of positive job growth.” The viewer is, by my estimation, supposed to credit the governor for this growth.

    But a look behind the scenes reveals a situation that only a politician could take pride in. Our governor must be hoping that people won’t take a moment to examine the reality.

    As reported in The Wichita Eagle on July 7, 2006:

    Kansas’ job growth was fourth-worst in the nation during the first quarter, according to a quarterly report by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.

    The number of jobs in Kansas grew at a rate of 0.4 percent in the year ending March 31. The national rate was 1.6 percent.

    The fastest-growing sectors were in government and construction, which each added about 4,000 jobs.

    If it wasn’t for government jobs growing at a rapid rate, our state’s job figures would be even worse.

    A quick gathering of some statistics from the Bureau of Labor Statistics shows that for every year from 2002 to 2005, Kansas lags the nation in job growth rate, and by a large amount.

    There have been some periods of spectacular job growth in Kansas. The Kansas City Star reported in March 2005 “Nonfarm payroll employment in Kansas grew from January to February by the largest percentage increase of any state, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported this morning. ” But this growth was sustained for only one month, and may be the result of some statistical anomaly.

    For growth in jobs over a period of time, however, our state is lagging far behind the country as a whole, and this is something Governor Sebelius is proud of.

  • Kansas Governor’s Race Heats Up

    Kansas Governor’s Race Heats Up
    By Karl Peterjohn, Executive Director, Kansas Taxpayers Network

    The first of a series of debates highlighting significant differences between the two leading candidates for governor have begun in Kansas. The kick off was the state fair debate between Governor Sebelius and her GOP opponent state Senator Jim Barnett September 9.

    The conventional wisdom is that this gubernatorial race was going to be a snoozer with Sebelius’ huge fund raising advantage but a number of minor events, none hugely significant by themselves, indicates that the Sebelius reelection campaign has some problems. A decline in poll numbers according to a Rasmussen poll in late August had Sebelius with only a 48-to-37 percent lead over Barnett.

    The real problem for Sebelius is that her poll number dropping below 50 percent is bad news at a time when Barnett is not advertising on TV and Sebelius’s ads still rule the airwaves. It is a bad sign when your poll numbers are slipping and only your ads are being broadcast. The controversy over several of the Sebelius ads hasn’t helped.

    As this is being written, Sen. Barnett has taken a modest lead at the state fair straw poll conducted by the Secretary of State. That’s a change from four years ago when Sebelius easily won that straw poll. Nationally, Professor Larry Sabato’s ranking on the Kansas gubernatorial race dropped a notch from “solid” to “likely” retention by Democrats.

    A much larger problem is the new state’s budget estimates just came out showing that a major state budget problem is real. That is a point that Sen. Barnett has been complaining about beginning at the state fair debate. State revenues are not likely to grow fast enough to match the spending hikes demanded by the activist Kansas Supreme Court and government spending advocates. That could lead to the state needing an additional $262-to-519 million if revenue growth continue lagging.

    This bad budget news is not getting much news coverage. If the average Kansan knew about this fiscal problem, the gubernatorial campaign would shift in a fiscal direction hurting the incumbent. Governor Sebelius does not want to spend the last two months of this campaign debating her 2007 tax hike proposal. In addition, she does not want to talk about the Democrat dominated Kansas Supreme Court and how the tax ‘n spend liberals from the Kansas Supreme Court, to a majority of state legislators, to the governor’s office have created a new fiscal mess.

    In 2006, major tax cuts were enacted in nearby Oklahoma and Texas. Billions in property, income, and estate tax relief were enacted. Other states enacted significant tax reform too. Sadly, Kansas revenue growth in the last two years is roughly half of the national average. The large economic stimulus in neighboring states enacted this year is huge when compared with the paltry $35 million in personal property tax cuts for business enacted by the Kansas legislature over the next two years. Contrast this with the $1 billion in increased government school spending plan enacted this year in Topeka.

    Two other issues where Senator Barnett scored well at the state fair debate were the role of the Kansas Supreme Court in setting spending as well as the state providing a special tuition break for illegal aliens at Kansas state universities. Judicial activism is an issue helping Barnett but the state university subsidy for illegal aliens’ tuition is one that resonates enough that the governor’s campaign felt compelled to respond with a new radio ad in mid-September.

    Barnett touted his proposal for strengthening the state’s economy with four tax cuts and reducing the growth rate in state spending. Barnett also blasted the governor’s unsuccessful proposal to raise property, income, and sales taxes. Sebelius fired back criticizing Barnett for backing the Graves tax hike on sales and cigarettes in 2002.

    Sebelius is at a disadvantage over four years ago since she has her record as an incumbent to defend. In addition, Sebelius’ legislative votes helped create the statewide property tax in 1992 and set a tax hike record, voted to raise that property tax again in 1994, and proposed an additional hike as governor. These are fiscal votes that will confirm the traditional, tax ‘n spend liberal label that Sen. Barnett will try to stick on Gov. Sebelius if he can raise the cash to advertise. Sebelius, who has the strong backing of Wichita abortion Dr. George Tiller’s ProKanDo PAC money, remains by far the record setting fundraiser in Kansas gubernatorial history so her ads will dominate the airwaves. Sebelius remains the favorite to win reelection despite these problems.

    No matter how lively the Kansas gubernatorial race becomes during the last two months of the campaign it will struggle to come close to the intensity of newly minted Democrat Paul Morrison’s effort to remove Republican incumbent Phill Kline as Kansas Attorney General

    Karl Peterjohn is the executive director of the Kansas Taxpayers Network and is a former California Department of Finance budget analyst and newspaper reporter.

  • Whitewash

    Writing from Dallas, Texas

    Thank you to Karl Peterjohn for this excellent piece. You can read more about the Kansas Supreme Court at this link: Summary of Blogging on Judicial Ethics in Kansas

    Whitewash
    By Karl Peterjohn, Executive Director, Kansas Taxpayers Network

    There are laws and rules while there are lawyers and judges but there is truly one unique and privileged class where the rules do not apply in Kansas: The Kansas Supreme Court.

    Friday, August 18 the “ethics” panel that handles ethics complaints issued their weakest penalty of an “admonishment” for the egregious misbehavior of Kansas Supreme Court Justice Lawton Nuss in the school finance lawsuit.

    Nuss had been exposed discussing this pending case with several legislative leaders last March. Nuss had trampled on the judicial cannon of ethics like a tap dancer with a leg twitch (Canon’s 1, 2A, 3B(7)). For this extended transgression he received an “admonishment.” The dictionary definition for an admonishment is, “to warn,” or to “reprove mildly.”

    There were a number of penalties that could be imposed on Nuss, one of the two Republicans on the seven member Kansas Supreme Court. A more severe penalty would have been censure, “to blame, to condemn as wrong.” Most severe would have recommended Nuss removal from the court. Nuss’ transgressions are so severe that he should resign or face impeachment.

    Nuss’ contempt for the rule of law has a long history. As a lawyer in private practice in Salina, Nuss and his law firm had represented the Salina school district. When Governor Graves appointed his hometown neighbor onto the Kansas Supreme Court in 2002, it would have seemed obvious for Nuss to recuse himself from the Montoy school finance lawsuit that was already being litigated. The lead plaintiff named Montoy was a son of a Salina public school district principal. The Salina public schools were a lead plaintiff among the numerous public schools suing for tax money. Despite 2005 ethics complaints that were dismissed by the Supreme Court’s ethics commission, Nuss demonstrated his legal arrogance and continued on this case until his legislative ex parte meeting was exposed.

    Yet Nuss’ ex parte conversations are not the sole ethics problem for the Kansas Supreme Court. A leading critic of the judicial activism in Kansas, Andover attorney Richard Peckham, filed ethics complaints against the entire Kansas Supreme Court (www.kansasjudicialwatch.org). Peckham’s complaint extends Nuss’ improper behavior and communications to the entire Kansas Supreme Court relying upon Nuss’ own defense as the basis for this complaint (the entire court went outside their ethics rules in this case). As of August 22 Peckham’s complaint is still pending in front of the court’s ethic’s panel.

    Peckham criticized the Nuss ruling as “It is too light a penalty. …the other six (justices) are all culpable for the same ex parte communications.” Peckham pointed out that the court’s ethics panel was designed for transgressions from lawyers and lower court judges and is inadequate for examining the Supreme Court ethical lapses itself.

    Liberal editorial pages like the Wichita Eagle were quick to declare this issue resolved and were ready to move on, “That should be the end of the Nuss fuss. The inappropriate discussion of an ongoing case has been investigated,” The Wichita Eagle editorialized August 19. “No evidence has been revealed to suggest the conversation influenced either the court’s or the legislature’s action, or that it was one of many ex parte communications.” Sadly, it looks like the Eagle did not follow the spending spree performed in the name of judicial compliance by the 2006 legislature and Governor Sebelius, or even bothered to read Nuss’ response to the charges against him which were like the kid caught with his hand in the cookie jar saying, “all the other kids (judges) were eating them too.”

    Republican gubernatorial candidate state Senator Jim Barnett, R-Emporia, who deserves much of the credit for helping expose the legislative leaders who participated in these improper communications, has complained about the impact that Nuss’ misbehavior had on the Kansas senate. Barnett’s amendment limiting the public school spending growth to roughly $400 million failed on a 20-20 vote in the senate the day after this infamous luncheon was held. Legislators lunching with Nuss voted against Barnett. A few days later the four top senate leaders from both political parties issued their $660 million public school spending spree proposal that many legislators viewed as receiving a judicial “green light” from the court’s back channel communications.

    The judicial misbehavior in the school finance lawsuit is corrosive to the rule of law in this state as well as expanding the negative fiscal climate in Kansas. Judges should not be setting budgets. Kansans need truth and not a judicial whitewash.

  • High tax Kansas exposed again

    High Tax Kansas Exposed Again
    By Karl Peterjohn, Executive Director, Kansas Taxpayers Network

    Businesses and homeowners know that Kansas has high taxes. The appointed and occasionally elected officials setting this state’s fiscal policy are often contemptuous of the fiscal burden being imposed upon Kansans but this is a reality that should not continue to be ignored.

    USA Today reported July 28 that Kansans pay the 14th highest level of per capita property taxes among all 50 states. This was 2004 Census Department data. The high property tax in Kansas means that Kansans pay well above the U.S. average property tax too. This is a bigger problem for Kansans because income in Kansas is only 93 percent of the U.S. average. The number one and two states having the highest property taxes in this survey, New Jersey and Connecticut, both have higher than average income levels.

    The high Kansas property tax creates several surprises that are being ignored by public officials. This includes residential and farm property tax hike advocates like Governor Sebelius. Since there are high taxes on property in Kansas there is a relative decline in housing prices. When relatively hidden property taxes, like special assessments, are included on newer housing, the property tax burden is actually higher since most other states do not impose this extra property tax burden.

    So national surveys look at affordability in housing and Kansas scores well. There is a lot of reasonably priced housing that has large property tax bills on it in this state.

    Since capital goes where it is appreciated, there is a relative decline in business here so commuting times are low. When business leaves, so go the jobs. Kansas employment growth lags behind the U.S. average. According to the governor’s most recent Economic and Demographic Report for the 2007 state budget, show Kansas job growth and income levels both lagging behind national and regional growth. So, it should not be a surprise that public school enrollment continues to decline too. Job seekers take their children with them.

    When Kansas students graduate and enter the job market they often discover that economic opportunity is not in Kansas and they move to more economically vibrant and competitive areas. Even former Governor Graves joined this exodus and left Kansas. Often these folk become “Kansas tourists” who return to see family at Christmas, Thanksgiving, or maybe for a week in summer.

    Affluent Kansans have a tendency to move to states without income taxes as well as states where there are limits on government growth like Colorado with their Taxpayers Bill Of Rights. Colorado scored 23rd on per capita property taxes but far exceeded national income averages.

    Oklahoma, which requires super-majorities for some tax hikes and voter approval before state taxes are raised, had the lowest property taxes in this region scoring 47th nationally. Arkansas scored 49th while Alabama was 50th. Missouri was 37th. It is interesting to note that only Nebraska has a lower percentage growth in population than Kansas according to Census figures. Nebraska’s average property taxes were only a couple of notches lower than Kansas at 16th.

    This per capita rating does not adjust for the wide variance in property taxes within or between states. Utility property is the highest taxed in Kansas with a 33 percent assessment that is almost three times higher than the 11.5 percent assessed on residential property. Small businesses in Wichita pay a much higher proportion of property tax on $100,000 of commercial property than Boeing or Cessna who enjoy their 100 percent property tax abatements. The details in taxation matter a lot.

    The average Kansan may not know the tax details but they do know that when all else fails, they can still vote with their feet. The fact that neighboring Arkansas has now passed Kansas in population is a wake up call that is being ignored by Kansas public officials. High Kansas property taxes in particular and high Kansas taxes in general are both reasons for Kansas’ decline.

  • Kansas Taxpayers Network 2006 legislative vote ratings released

    Thank you to Karl Peterjohn for compiling this valuable resource. You can examine the rankings at the Kansas Taxpayers Network website at www.kansastaxpayers.com. Following is a press release describing the ratings.

    17 Legislators Earn 100% rating for 2006 Fiscal Votes

    “There are 17 Kansas legislators who scored 100% on the Kansas Taxpayers Network’s 2006 fiscal scorecard,” said KTN Executive Director Karl Peterjohn. Legislators were measured on their votes on tax and fiscal issues as well as their votes on reining in judicial activists and judicial appropriations. This scorecard also measured on their votes on correcting eminent domain abuse in the wake of the controversial Kelo decision by the U.S. Supreme Court. KTN also scored legislators on votes cast that would make this state more economically competitive with the rest of the country and provide property tax relief.

    “KTN has posted the 2006 legislative vote rating at www.kansastaxpayers.com,” said Peterjohn. “We hope that all fiscally concerned Kansans will carefully examine how their legislators have been voting at the statehouse during this election year.”

    There are nine house members who scored 100% on KTN’s rating: Rep. Anthony Brown, R-Eudora; Rep. Steve Huebert, R-Valley Center; Rep. Lance Kinzer, R-Olathe; Rep. Forrest Knox, R-Fredonia; Rep. Brenda Landwehr, R-Wichita; Rep. Ty Masterson, R-Andover; Rep. Don Myers, R-Derby; Rep. Mary Pilcher-Cook, R-Shawnee; and Rep. Jason Watkins, R-Wichita.

    Eight senators earned 100% from KTN. They are: Sen. Jim Barnett, R-Emporia; Sen. Tim Huelskamp, R-Meade; Sen. Phil Journey, R-Haysville; Sen. Kay O’Connor, R-Olathe; Sen. Ralph Ostmeyer, R-Grinnell; Sen. Peggy Palmer, R-Augusta; Sen. Mike Petersen, R-Wichita; Sen. Dennis Pyle, R-Hiawatha; and Sen. Susan Wagle, R-Wichita.

    In addition, there were 16 senators and 50 representatives who scored 75% or higher on KTN’s 2006 vote rating and are listed as “taxpayer friendly,” by this group. Peterjohn added, “KTN’s scorecard is valuable since many other groups that used to measure legislators” votes no longer use a straightforward scoring system that is transparent and readily understandable to Kansans.”

    Kansas Taxpayers Network (KTN) is a statewide taxpayer organization based in Wichita. This is the 11th year that KTN has rated legislators’ fiscal votes. Legislators are measured on both their 2006 votes as well as their lifetime score based upon votes cast while serving in the legislature since 1996. KTN also circulates the Taxpayer Protection Pledge and will be issuing a news release on pledge signers before the August 1 primary election.

  • Liberal “Moderates” Unite In Governor’s Ticket

    Thank you to Karl Peterjohn of the Kansas Taxpayers Network for this fine piece.

    For the record, here’s how the Associated Press quoted Mark Parkinson in 2002:

    “I would say that any Republican who supports Kathleen Sebelius for governor is either insincere or uninformed,” Parkinson said. “She is a left-wing liberal Democrat and no Republican in good conscience can support her.”

    It is hardly surprising to me that two politicians, Mark Parkinson and Governor Kathleen Sebelius in this case, could have such a dramatic change of heart. I think we can reasonably conclude that these two politicians are so hungry for power that either will do anything that is necessary to gain or keep their office.

    There is a simple solution. Reduce the power of government. If government was limited to performing only those very few functions that only government can do, politics would be so boring that few would be so attracted to political offices. Private life would be much better, however, as we regain the liberties that government has taken from us.

    Liberal “Moderates” Unite In Governor’s Ticket
    Karl Peterjohn, Kansas Taxpayers Network

    Over 40 years ago the Conservative Party candidate for Mayor of New York City provided the perfect response to describe his liberal Democratic and Republican opponents in that 1965 election, “Their differences are biological, not political,” said William F. Buckley. Kansas statehouse observers would not be cynical for having the same feeling about the self-described “moderates” in both the Republican and Democrat parties. This became vividly clear as Governor Sebelius made her selection of former GOP state chairman and former Johnson County legislator Mark Parkinson as her 2006 Lieutenant Governor running mate official May 31.

    Naturally conservative Republicans were quick to point out the liberal positions on taxes, on judicial dominance over state school spending, on a variety of hot button social issues from illegal immigration subsidies for state college tuition, drivers licenses, expanding gambling, late term abortions, and the governor’s unsuccessful veto of conceal carry legislation in criticizing Kathleen Sebelius. Many self described GOP “moderates” in the legislature have voting records that reflect many of these positions along with their Democratic colleagues. For many average Kansans, if not the bulk of the Kansas news media establishment, these are left-wing, not “moderate” positions on key state issues.

    Kansas GOP state party chairman, Tim Shallenburger, the unsuccessful GOP gubernatorial candidate in 2002, described Parkinson as, “…want to raise taxes, want to spend more, want to give their friends jobs.” The irony is that Parkinson’s comments in 2002 as state party chairman sound utterly prescient today, “Clearly, she’s (Sebelius) worried about her record which puts her squarely in the liberal camp. No running mate can disguise that.” In 1994, then Sen. Parkinson had joined with then Rep. Sebelius and a majority of the Kansas legislature to raise the statewide property tax from 33 to 35 mills or over six percent.

    In 2002 then candidate Sebelius kept making fiscally conservative claims about opposing tax hikes before that gubernatorial election. Kansans now know from the last four years that Governor Sebelius supports tax hikes, expanding state gaming to raise revenues, as well as other revenue “enhancements” to help grow Kansas government. Recent polling indicates that will not go over well with the average Kansan.

    Rasmussen Reports conducted a Kansas survey between April 3 and May 4 this year. This scientific poll asked 500 Kansans if tax increases helped or hurt the economy. By a better than 3-to-1 majority, Kansans said tax hikes hurt 59 percent-to-19 percent. When asked if tax cuts helped or hurt the state’s economy, a similar 3-to-1 majority said tax cuts helped. The figures here were 58-to-18. On a third question a narrow plurality said they would rank tax preparation worse than visiting the dentist 43 percent to 41 percent.

    The conventional statehouse wisdom is that Governor Sebelius was going to win easy reelection against a weak GOP opponent coming out of the August primary in November. Actually, despite her hefty campaign treasury and all of the advantages of incumbency, Governor Sebelius is struggling with voters. Her poll numbers in a heads up match up with any of the likely GOP challengers has her stuck in the high 40’s despite the fact that none of her challengers even has 50 percent name recognition statewide.

    There is a huge vulnerability to the governor from the activist and Democrat dominated Kansas Supreme Court that has forced the rest of the state government to submit to their specific fiscal demands. The average Kansan is not comfortable with judicial appropriation of state spending, an oligarchy of black robed lawyers steering state government, state subsidies for illegal aliens receiving everything from drivers licenses, in-state college tuition, as well as various forms of welfare. Throwing billions of more tax dollars at the government school structure in Kansas seems like a dismal repetition of the fiscal and educational failure that occurred in a Kansas City, Missouri courtroom 20 years ago.

    Kansans view this judicial spending spree as left wing judicial activism but all practical Kansans want to see success in government and not a repetition of very expensive past failures. That’s why Governor Sebelius along with her activist and ethically challenged liberal Supreme Court are in political trouble in 2006. Mark Parkinson’s selection won’t solve that primary problem facing the governor since she must defend her record during the last four years.

  • Judicial Scandal Grows

    Judicial Scandal Grows As $3 Billion Public School Spending Bill Advances
    By Karl Peterjohn, Kansas Taxpayers Network, www.kansastaxpayers.com

    The Kansas legislature’s school spending spree is racing the latest developments in the judicial-legislative misconduct scandal over school finance in Kansas. The outcome of this race could influence the size of the spending spree going on at the Kansas statehouse right now. The latest revelations on the school finance scandal brings the governor into the story. Senate President Steve Morris has now informed at least some in the statehouse press that he told the governor about his meeting with Supreme Court Justice Nuss and Senator Pete Brungardt.

    Morris cannot recall exactly when he spoke to the governor and how much of the details of his luncheon meeting with Nuss he relayed to her. What makes this story compelling is not only the governor’s involvement, that has been percolating at the fringes of this story ever since she told legislative leaders last summer that the court was going to come down hard on them the next day–and then the court did so but as another vivid reminder of the culture of arrogance among this state’s bipartisan, self described “moderate” leadership in this state.

    The governor’s ties to the Supreme Court through her former chief of staff Joyce Allegrucci who is married to long time Supreme Court Justice Donald Allegrucci is obvious for anyone who has any common sense. Governor Sebelius’ knowledge about the outcome of the court’s most recent edict in this case frustrated legislative leaders like house speaker Doug Mays and pro-tem speaker Ray Merrick last summer.

    When the governor expressed her “outrage” over the revelation of the Nuss-Morris-Brungardt school finance luncheon it now appears that she was probably more upset about it being revealed to the public than about the contents of the meeting. She already knew about the meeting from her buddy, the nominally GOP senate president Morris.

    Senate Minority Leader Tony Hensley now admits that he knew about the meeting in sometime shortly after the meeting was held in March. Hensley did not see a problem with this meeting and this view demonstrates the culture of arrogance that exists in Kansas government. If Hensley did not see it as a problem, I’m sure that he was happy to share his knowledge with legislative friends who share his support, as a public school teacher/KNEA member, with an additional $3 billion spending spree. This is going to total $6,650 per pupil or $133,000 per classroom (assuming 20 kids per class) in new spending over these five years.

    What is compelling today about this latest revelation is being connected to the timeline of events. March 1 is the luncheon meeting between the court and legislative leaders. March 2, a Thursday, the senate leadership plan (the four main senate leaders including two attorneys, senators Morris, D.Schmidt, Hensley, Vratil–with Schmidt and Vratil being the lawyers) for spending billions (SB 584, the senate leadership plan has a five year price tag beginning with the increased spending from last summer of $3.2216 billion) through the 2009-10 fiscal year is made public! Is that just a coincidence??? That’s the Kool-Aid the “moderate” i.e. Leftist leadership in this state’s judicial/executive/legislative branch wants you to believe.

    A day after the Nuss revelation appeared, and only about 10 days ago, the Chief Justice Kay McFarland went to a lunch with the powerful chair of the senate’s spending, Ways and Means Committee, Senator Dwayne Umbarger. Supposedly nothing more controversial than the weather, families, and judicial budgets were discussed then according to Umbarger, but the following week Umbarger’s got the latest school spending spending plan for his fellow senators to consider. Another coincidence … yeah … sure.

    Another revelation is the open records requests that are being made and now denied. The Kansas Supreme Court is refusing to release any information from documents and email being sought by legislators who are upset at this scandal. Similar open record requests are also being made to the governor’s office concerning communications between the Sebelius administration and the KS Supreme Court too.

    Stay tuned on the request to the governor’s office because the exemption the court is using to stonewall any requests does not extend to the executive branch. The culture of arrogance is also being exposed as the court refuses to provide anything to the public.

    Legislatively, the Kansas house is taking up the latest school spending plan later today (May 1). Their original version was actually about $40 million a year more expensive than the senate’s propsal (HB 2986). The special house school finance committee’s latest school spending proposal is slightly smaller than the senate plan but the price tag is still approaching $3 billion over five years. The out year funding sources for either the house and senate plans are not visible–these folks are acting like they are congressman who can get the federal reserve to cover for them. If state revenues continue to grow at 10 percent or more a year and the rest of the state’s budget is largely frozen, they might be able to thread this fiscal needle between now and 2010, but a lot of unusual events would need to occur for this to happen.

    Just in case this needle is not threaded, then the governor wants to try and use this legislation as a lever to try and get gambling expansion revisited too. Governor Sebelius has close ties to ex-Wichitan and now-Nevadan Phil Ruffin who owns the Wichita Greyhound Park and Kansas could still become the first state to have state “owned and operated” casinos created under a previous piece of legislating from the bench by the Kansas Supreme Court that ruled that the 1986 vote on creating the state lottery also meant that five “state owned and operated casinos” would be permissible under their interpretation of the infinitely flexible Kansas Constitution. No one among the casino advocates has come up with a way for gambling expansion to generate more than about 30% of this $3 billion proposed spending spree.

    The stage is being set for a tax hike similar to the governor’s 2004 property, income, and sales hike that was backed by her legislative allies like senators Hensley and Morris and the rest of the spend and tax crowd in Topeka. Hensley has his own plan for raising income and sales taxes too. Liberals in both parties have a variety of tax plans that will appear shortly after the inconvenience of this year’s gubernatorial and house elections are behind us.

    A $3 billion public school spending spree is ultimately going to be a fiscal boat anchor thrown into the hands of the Kansas economy that is struggling to stay afloat right now. This state’s economy is already performing well below the national average in terms of productivity, population growth, and average income per Kansan. This new fiscal burden will destroy this state’s economy leaving a growing percentage of tax consumers as the foundation for Kansas’ economic future. This is going to be grim as we become the next New York or Ohio on the prairie. The success of suing for more spending is going to continue as the school finance spending plan will not significantly diminish the variances in state funding for the mid-sized school districts led by Salina and Dodge City public schools that started this case with their extra tax dollars. That means we’ll get another lawsuit filed soon and this fiscal litigation game will begin again.

    God help Kansas because the power establishment in Topeka is fiscally destroying this state while demonstrating a culture of arrogance that is a national model for what should NOT be done. Kansas struggles economically but the new spending commitments being made today will harm this state’s economy for the next generation. This is similar to the harm Governor Sebelius’ father imposed when John Gilligan was governor of Ohio for four years in the early 1970’s. Like father, like daughter. As Ohio went, so goes Kansas now.

    The irony is that the disastrous school spending in Kansas City, Missouri under earlier judicial activism in the 1980’s, albeit in the federal courts, proved disastrous in terms of student achievement and performance back then. Now Kansas is repeating this mistake. The mess in Kansas City is being exported statewide to Kansas. While there was plenty of corruption in Kansas City back in the old Pendergast days there was never a judicial scandal that cost the people billions to pay for on a statewide basis.

  • Summary of blogging on judicial ethics in Kansas

    News accounts report that there will be an investigation into the lunch that Kansas Supreme Court Justice Lawton Nuss shared with legislators. If it is the Kansas Commission on Judicial Qualifications that performs this investigation, I doubt we will see much happen.

    Last year, I along with Karl Peterjohn of the Kansas Taxpayers Network filed complaints with this commission against Justices Allegrucci and Nuss. I thought we made compelling cases, but the commission disagreed. (You may read my complaints and commentary in the links referred to below.) There was very little reporting in Kansas news media. Only lately has Kansas news media sensed that something might be wrong.

    The Kansas Meadowlark has uncovered a Salina Journal article published on October 22, 2002, that tells how, in 2002, Justice Nuss recused himself from the school finance case, as he had represented the Salina school district in the past. This is the very issue that Karl and I placed before the Kansas Commission on Judicial Qualifications. See www.saljournal.com/blogs/?p=667. Meadowlark also has some good ideas here: www.kansasmeadowlark.com/2006/04-21.htm.

    Links to Voice For Liberty in Wichita articles:

    Ethics Require Recusal in School Finance Lawsuit

    The Ethics Case Against Justice Donald L. Allegrucci

    The Wrong Canon; The Wrong Allegrucci

    The Ethics Case Against Justice Lawton R. Nuss

    Judicial Abuse Authorized in Kansas

    Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner, or, Judicial-Legislative Dinners Continue in the Age of Montoy

    Karl Peterjohn, Kansas Taxpayers Network

    The April 20, 2006 newspapers contain articles about the member of the Kansas Supreme Court, Lawton Nuss, belatedly recusing himself following the revelation that he had lunched with at least two legislators March 1 and improperly discussed the school finance lawsuit. I keep hearing reports of possibly at least one more legislator (Senate President Morris and Sen. Brungardt are the two who have been publicly identified as meeting with Nuss) also attending this luncheon meeting while discussing the continuing and apparently perpetual Montoy school finance lawsuit.

    KTN is now in a position to reveal that Kay McFarland, the court’s chief had lunch yesterday with the chair of the senate’s powerful spending committee, Ways and Means chairman, Sen. Dwayne Umbarger.

    Now I don’t know if anyone else from the court or the legislature joined Dwayne and Kay. I’m sure a fascinating discussion was held about the wonderful spring weather we’ve been having with only a slight diversion to discussion of something that would justify the taxpayers picking up the luncheon costs…..who picked up the tab and paid? Or was it a dutch treat? Do they dine together regularly or was this the very first time? My mind is filled with so many questions in the age of perpetual litigation and judicial usurpation. However, I am just a lowly taxpayer with a penchant for posting and too many bad experiences following closed door meetings where the public is banned and often fiscally damned.

    The luncheon discussion must have been over “judicial budgets” or something like that. School finance would be a topic taboo. In the age of perpetual school finance edicts heralding the age of Montoy, that is another meal that is hard for many hard working Kansas taxpayers to swallow. Taxpayers pay for the six figure judicial salaries, the expense accounts plus a wide assortment of other expensive benefits, and most importantly, the odious and outrageous spending edicts coming from this activist court.

    Let me remind the readers of this post that this is not the first time that there have been indications of irregular communications occurring between the court and elected officials in this case. House speaker Doug Mays has publicly expressed his frustration over the knowledge that Governor Sebelius had about the court’s, at that time unreleased edict, that she expressed in a legislative leadership meeting in the governor’s office during the special session last summer. At that time the governor’s chief of staff was Joyce Allegrucci. Ms. Allegrucci is the wife of another Supreme Court member, one of the five Democrat members of this court, Don Allegrucci. Since April, 2005 the governor has been publicly backing the position that Kansas public school spending is inadequate and following the court’s $284 million spending hike edict last year.

    When it comes to the rule of law in Kansas, this is a mandate applying only to the peasants and peons who get to pay the tab for our statehouse masters. When I use the word “statehouse” it includes the appointed masters operating out of the KS “Judicial” Center too.

    Last year I filed two ethics complaints against Nuss and Allegrucci that were dismissed by the court’s “ethics” panel after closed door hearings that no one except the panel itself could attend. It now is apparent that the complaints against Nuss that were filed by myself and a separate complaint filed by Bob Weeks were valid. The court’s self appointed committee meeting rejected our complaints during their closed door meetings last year. Yesterday’s recussal is a vindication of a sort but totally inadequate for providing an explanation of what is going on in the perpetual school finance imbroglio created by the Kansas Supreme Court continuing edicts in Montoy. The public and press must remember that the Kansas Supreme Court has issued no decision that is appealable to a court with real ethics!

    Last year the court finally said that the Kansas Constitution requires $285 million in additional school spending in 2005 (where does it say that and how does this amount change yearly?) and for this year the amount is … drum roll please … don’t forget — we’ve got the $289 million in additional revenue estimates to spend with the latest revenue forecast … do the judges get their pay raise too? … what part of Article six, section 6 sets specific school expenditure figures? … oh, what the hell, who are we lunching with tomorrow? … let’s announce it … after lunch!

    An aside for those who care about the future of Kansas: Yesterday the U.S. Census issued their latest report from 2000-2004 on population growth trends and Kansas came in a dismal 46th out of the 50 states in terms of population growth, “average annual rates of net domestic migration,” see figure 2 on page 4 of this report. We did beat New York that scored 50th.

    Actually, “population growth” is a misnomer. It’s population loss in the case of Kansas. This report is the most recent listed on the U.S. Census Department’s web site.

    Karl Peterjohn, Kansas Taxpayers Network
    www.kansastaxpayers.com