Category: Wichita Eagle opinion watch

  • Wichita Eagle argues for higher taxes

    Wichita Eagle argues for higher taxes

    The Wichita Eagle editorial board wants higher taxes. Relying on its data and arguments will lead citizens to misinformed and uninformed opinions.

    In a recent op-ed, the Wichita Eagle editorial board writes: “From the moment the budget was first proposed in July, city leaders made a point of emphasizing the city’s mill levy — the rate by which property is taxed — hasn’t been increased in 25 years. The 25-year figure wasn’t followed by exclamation points of pride or emojis of sadness. It’s just a fact: For one reason or another, the city’s mill levy hasn’t been increased.” 1

    I guess we shouldn’t be too harsh on the Eagle editorial board. They believed city leaders. And, I suppose the language is correct in one sense: “the city’s mill levy hasn’t been increased.”

    But a quick look at readily available data shows that the City of Wichita mill levy has increased, and by quite a bit.

    I don’t have data going back 25 years, but I have gathered and prepared data from 1993 to 2017. And during that time, the City of Wichita mill levy rose from 31.290 to 32.667. That is an increase of 4.40 percent.

    It is true that the Wichita City Council did not pass an ordinance to cause this mill levy rate to rise. This is where “hasn’t been increased” holds a grain of truth.

    Instead, the mill levy rate is set by the county based on the city’s budgeted spending and the assessed value of taxable property subject to City of Wichita taxation. Someone estimates the assessed value of property the city can tax, and that is subject to error.

    The city acknowledges this when pressed. It’s on video. 2

    But city leaders and elected officials act as though the mill levy is subject to the whims of forces beyond their control.

    While the city doesn’t have control over the assessed value of property, it does have control over the amount it decides to spend. As can be seen in the chart of changes in the mill levy, the council’s decisions result in a generally rising mill levy. From 1993 to 2017, there were seventeen years in which the mill levy rose from the previous year, and six years in which it declined.

    We have an estimating process that ought to be random — too high in half the years, too low in the other half — overwhelmingly producing higher tax rates. This nearly three-to-one ratio is beyond mere chance or coincidence.

    Also, while some may argue that an increase of 4.40 percent over two decades is not very much, this is an increase in a rate of taxation, not tax revenue collected. As property values rise, and as the mill levy rises, property tax bills can rise rapidly.

    But it doesn’t seem that the Eagle editorial board understands this, as it wrote: “A 2019 budget can’t be expected to function properly under 1994 tax rates. Nearly everything a city does costs more a quarter-century later.”

    True, I suppose. But the data tells us that property tax revenue rises, and rises faster than the rate of inflation, if inflation is what the editorial board means when it writes that things cost more.

    In the nearby table, I use a hypothetical $100,000 home and track the taxes paid to the City of Wichita. I use a home price index to track increases in residential home values. I use the Consumer Price Index to adjust dollars for inflation.

    In the table, a $100,000 house paid $360 in taxes to the City of Wichita in 1994. In 2017, the same house paid $665. The increase is due to rising property values and the rising mill levy.

    Adjusting for inflation to 2017 dollars, the tax paid in 1994 was worth $595. In 2017, the tax was $665, in 2017 dollars, of course.

    So from 1994 to 2017, the property tax paid to the City of Wichita by this hypothetical house rose by 11.7 percent, in inflation-adjusted dollars.

    When the Eagle editorial board writes “Nearly everything a city does costs more a quarter-century later,” the response ought to be “Yes, but property taxes paid by citizens on their homes are rising faster than inflation.”

    This needs to be considered in the light of cuts the city has made and threatens in the future.

    Click for larger.


    Notes

    1. Wichita Eagle editorial board. Wichita, it’s time to consider a tax increase. It’s past time, actually. August 17, 2018. Available at https://www.kansas.com/opinion/editorials/article216790960.html.
    2. Weeks, Bob. Wichita property taxes rise again. Available at https://wichitaliberty.org/wichita-government/wichita-property-taxes-rise/.
  • Wichita Eagle opinion watch

    Another nonsensical editorial from the Wichita Eagle.

    Stop messing with Sedgwick County ZooThis is contained in an editorial urging Sedgwick County government to “stop messing” with the zoo.1

    Nor is there any justification for a “non-disparagement clause” in the proposed operating agreement about the zoo director’s public statements, including a prohibition against doing anything to bring the county or society “unwanted or unfavorable publicity.” Even if the county is right — and the society wrong — about the constitutionality of such a gag rule on a public employee, it’s an insult to longtime director Mark Reed’s professionalism and another case of the county trying to pre-empt criticism and punish critics.

    It’s common for employees, especially those in managerial and executive positions, to have such agreements. Companies don’t want their employees bad-mouthing the company. I would not be surprised if Holman herself has such an agreement with her employer, the Wichita Eagle. Even if there is no such agreement, can you imagine how long she would last in her job if she started complaining in public about her low pay, her drab office, how her editor censors her best editorials, the crappy publisher, etc.

    Employees have protection through whistleblower laws, so if there is corruption or criminality, employees can report it. And the fact that the zoo director is a government employee: I don’t know if that makes a difference, constitutionally speaking.

    1. Holman, Rhonda. Stop messing with Sedgwick County Zoo. Wichita Eagle, July 20, 2016. Available at www.kansas.com/opinion/editorials/article90624332.html.
  • ‘Trump, Trump, Trump’ … oops!

    An event in Wichita that made national headlines has so far turned out to be not the story news media enthusiastically promoted.

    When two Wichita State University students — one a Muslim and also a student leader — reported they were victims of a hate crime, national news media took up the story. A Washington Post headline read “‘Trump! Trump! Trump!’ attacker allegedly yelled as he beat Hispanic man, Muslim student.” USA Today headlined with “Muslim student claims attacker yelled ‘Trump, Trump!”

    From the Wichita Eagle: “A Muslim student at Wichita State University says he and a Hispanic friend, who also is a student, were attacked over the weekend by a man who shouted racial epithets and ‘Trump, Trump, Trump’ before riding away on his motorcycle.” 1

    The Kansas chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-Kansas) demanded that the incident be investigated as a hate crime.

    On this matter, Wichita Eagle editorialist Rhonda Holman opined “Yet, regrettably, Wichita is making national headlines this week for an incident early Saturday at the KwikShop at 21st and Oliver that’s being investigated by the Wichita Police Department as a hate crime. … As described, the deplorable incident further confirms that GOP front-runner Donald Trump’s divisive, nativist talk is finding an audience willing to not only vote for him but also target Muslims and ethnic minorities for verbal abuse and even violence.” 2

    But now it is reported that one of the two student “victims” has been charged with a crime. 3 The police report charges that one of the students — not the Muslim student — “provoked another to commit battery or breach of peace by shouting ‘Bernie Sanders’ at Joseph Bryan, rolling up his sleeves and stepping toward him.” 4 Bryan, who is the motorcycle rider alleged to have used the word “trump” in a hateful manner — has been charged, also. But apparently not for using the word “trump,” as that word does not appear in the police report. No one has been charged with a hate crime.

    Complaint against Christian Saldana-Banuelos

    So shouting “Bernie Sanders” doesn’t seem to rise to the level of a hate crime, while yelling “Trump” does. Go figure.

    But there’s something else. The Wichita Eagle jumped all over this story, both the newsroom and opinion page. But so far I haven’t seen an Eagle story on the actual charges that have been filed. (Oh. As I write this, the Eagle has belatedly filed a small story.)

    Now we have to wait and wonder whether the Eagle editorial staff will walk back its — shall we say, “regrettable” — conclusions drawn before facts were known.

    Who knows what really happened? Does it really matter? Does a scuffle involving three young people in Wichita rise to the level of national news, and does it really say much about the state of race relations in America?

    But if the police report accurately describes the event, I have to wonder what charges will be filed against the two WSU student “victims” for lying to the police and the public. Will the Eagle editorial board pursue this deception with the same enthusiasm it showed for covering the original purportedly “deplorable” act?

    1. Morrison, Oliver. Muslim student at Wichita State reports attack by man shouting ‘Trump, Trump, Trump”. Wichita Eagle, March 14, 2016. Available at www.kansas.com/news/local/crime/article65903602.html.
    2. Holman Rhonda. Stand up to intolerance and hate. Wichita Eagle, March 15, 2016. Available at www.kansas.com/opinion/editorials/article66248057.html.
    3. Farris, Deb. WSU students accused of provoking fight KAKE Television. Available at www.kake.com/home/headlines/Students-accused-of-provoking-fight-they-called-hate-crime-376138421.html.
    4. Wichita Municipal Court. Available at lintvksnw.files.wordpress.com/2016/04/charging-documents.pdf.
  • Was Jesus a socialist, according to Crowson

    Was Jesus a socialist, according to Crowson

    If you’ve ever wondered when is the time to start ignoring Wichita Eagle editorial cartoonist Richard Crowson, perhaps the time is now.

    Here’s what Lawrence Reed had to say on the topic of this cartoon: “The fact is, one can scour the Scriptures with a fine-tooth comb and find nary a word from Jesus that endorses the forcible redistribution of wealth by political authorities. None, period.”

    For more from Reed on this topic, see his essay Rendering Unto Caesar: Was Jesus a Socialist?

  • For Wichita Eagle, no immediate Kansas budget solution

    For Wichita Eagle, no immediate Kansas budget solution

    The Wichita Eagle shows how its adherence to ideology misinforms Kansans and limits their exposure to practical solutions for governance.

    In an op-ed posted the day before election day, the editorial board of the Wichita Eagle wrote of the problems it believes the next Kansas governor will face:

    The candidates vying to be Kansas governor have lofty-sounding goals and campaign promises. But here’s the grim reality: Whoever wins Tuesday will spend the next several years trying to fill a budget hole.

    And that hole keeps growing deeper. (“Budget hole awaits winner,” November 3, 2014)

    The state has to make changes. We’ve cut taxes, but we’ve not yet met the challenge of cutting spending to match. The problem with this op-ed is the assertion that will take several years to fix. Here’s what I left in reply:

    I have to disagree. Kansas Policy Institute has examined the Kansas budget and found ways to make several structural changes that would immediately (within one year) balance the Kansas budget. This would preserve existing services and fully fund the increases in K-12 school spending and social service caseloads that Kansas Legislative Research has projected. The policy brief that KPI has prepared on this matter is only ten pages long and not difficult to comprehend.

    The changes that KPI recommends are specific adjustments to the way Kansas spends money. They are not the vague calls to eliminate waste that we see politicians campaign on. This is something that Kansas could do if both Democrats and Republicans have the will.

    Dave Trabert, president of Kansas Policy Institute, added this:

    Bob is right. And the Eagle is well aware of our budget plan but declines to let readers know that the budget can be balanced without service reductions or tax increases. It won’t take “several years” to fix the budget; our plan could be implemented by passing a few pieces of legislation.

    The policy brief I referenced may be downloaded from KPI at A Five-Year Budget Plan for the State of Kansas: How to balance the budget and have healthy ending balances without tax increases or service reductions or alternatively from Scribd here (may work better on mobile devices). A press release from KPI announcing the policy brief is at 5 Year Budget Plan Outlines Path To Protect Essential Services and Tax Reform.

  • Wichita Eagle editorial board on the truth

    Wichita Eagle Opinion: Brownback Numbers are Suspect

    A recent Wichita Eagle editorial penned by Rhonda Holman took Governor Sam Brownback to task for a mistake made in reporting Kansas spending numbers. (Eagle editorial: Brownback ’s numbers are suspect.)

    Specifically, Holman wrote:

    What’s going on here is clear: Brownback is embracing and repeating numbers that help promote his agenda, including what he sees as the need to push back against a court order for more state funding of public schools.

    But Kansans need to trust that what they hear from their governor, especially again and again, is rooted in truth, not cherry-picked, spun or flat wrong.

    So let’s look at the use of numbers by the Wichita Eagle editorial board. When discussing school spending, the editorialists refer to base state aid per pupil and treat that as though it was the totality of school spending.

    Base state aid per pupil is just part of school spending, and most schools spend much more than that. Specifically, base state aid per pupil for the last school year was $3,780. But the state spent an average of $6,983 per pupil that year, which is an additional $3,203 or 84.7 percent more than base state aid. Overall spending from all sources was $12,656 per pupil. Both of the latter numbers are higher than the previous year.

    Also, base state aid per pupil has declined in recent years. That’s a convenient fact for school spending boosters. They can use a statistic that contains a grain of truth in order to whip up concern among the uninformed over inadequate school spending. They can cite this as an argument for increasing spending, even though spending has been rising.

    (By the way, when citizens in Kansas and across the nation are asked questions about school spending, we learn they are totally uninformed. Even worse, several candidates for the Wichita school board are similarly uninformed. See Wichita school board candidates on spending.)

    Further, citing only base state aid reduces “sticker shock.” Most people are surprised to learn that our schools spend $12,656 per student. It’s much easier to tell taxpayers that only $3,780 was spent. But that’s not a complete picture. In fact, using base state aid as a measure of school spending defines “cherry-picked,” a practice of which Holman accuses the governor.

    Informed readers are left wondering whether the Eagle editorial board is ignorant of these facts, or does it have an agenda to push — just like they accuse Brownback.

    Here’s something else from Holman in the editorial:

    Plus, Brownback has said that “29 percent of Kansas fourth-graders can’t read at a basic level.” That’s a misuse of the results of the 2011 National Assessment of Educational Progress survey, in which Kansas actually ranked 10th best in the nation. The better measure is the state assessment, which found 10.1 percent of fourth-graders failed to meet the state standard in reading that year.

    The high ranking of Kansas on the NAEP can be explained by the demographic composition of Kansas students compared to other states. As I show in Kansas school test scores, in perspective, Kansas students score better than Texas students on the NAEP. This is a fact congruent with Holman’s citing of Kansas’ high ranking among the states.

    But it is also true that Texas white students score better than Kansas white students, Texas black students score better than Kansas black students, and Texas Hispanic students score better than or tie Kansas Hispanic students. The same pattern holds true for other ethnic subgroups. If we examine figures for low-income students, we see a similar pattern.

    How can this be? You have to look more closely at the figures than the Wichita Eagle editorial board is willing or able. But if you do this, you will understand more about Kansas schools.

    As far as relying on Kansas state assessments to gauge our schools’ performance, we need to be careful. When compared to other states, Kansas has low standards, and these standards have declined.

    The U.S. Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) has analyzed state standards, and we can see that Kansas has standards that are below most states. The table of figures is available at Estimated NAEP scale equivalent scores for state proficiency standards, for reading and mathematics in 2009, by grade and state. An analysis of these tables by the Kansas Policy Institute shows that few states have standards below the Kansas standards.

    The editorial board might also wonder why scores on the Kansas assessments — the ones under control of Kansas education officials — are rising, while NAEP scores are not.

    A reader sent in this comment, which I believe is apt:

    To paraphrase a trusted source:

    “[The Eagle’s] numbers matter because they’re being used by [Democrats] and [government employees’ unions] to guide and justify state spending policy decisions, especially in education. The [Eagle] has used [misleading statistics] to drum up public support for plans to [raise] income taxes and to [support] a recent court decision that found the state isn’t meeting its constitutional mandate to provide adequate funding for schools.”

    I don’t expect a correction anytime soon.

    Wichita Eagle editorial board: When writing that “Kansans need to trust that what they hear from their governor, especially again and again, is rooted in truth, not cherry-picked, spun or flat wrong” please apply this standard to yourself.

  • To sway opinion, basic facts must be correct

    A Vince Corbett of Wichita makes the case for riding an electric bicycle to work instead of driving a car. (“Biking saves,” August 30, 2009 Wichita Eagle) Unfortunately, the letter contains a mistaken fact and an unreasonable assumption.

    To make his case, he outlines a commuting trip that someone might make: ” … from 29th Street North and Woodlawn to Douglas and Main to work and to return — a distance of about 32 miles …”

    Google maps reports the one-way distance between these two intersections as 7.7 miles. Bing maps found a shorter route at 7.2 miles. Mr. Corbett’s one-way distance of 16 miles is over twice as large as these two numbers. Taking the freeway route is longer at 10.3 miles (according to Bing) but still not anywhere near Corbett’s one-way distance of 16 miles.

    Corbett then makes a claim that driving these 32 miles requires three gallons of gasoline, implying a car that gets 10.7 miles per gallon. (I don’t know if we should interpret this as city or highway driving.)

    But according to the EPA, a mid-size car like a Chevrolet Malibu gets 22 mpg in the city. A large car like a Buick Lucerne gets 17 mpg. Even a large SUV like a Chevrolet Suburban gets 14 mpg, still quite a bit above Corbett’s illustration.

    (A Toyota Prius gets 48 mpg in the city, 4.5 times the figure used by Corbett.)

    Letters to the editor of a newspaper are a place for people to express their opinions and attempt to sway public opinion. These letters, however, need to be based on facts that are correct and assumptions that are reasonable. Newspapers do their readers a disservice when letters are not fact-checked in even a very basic way. This letter is such a case.

  • Wichita Eagle building says something

    Wichita Eagle Building detailDetail of Wichita Eagle building on East Douglas. (For a larger version, click on the photo, then click on “All sizes.”)

    The Wichita Eagle building is saying something to me, but I can’t quite figure out what.

    In a series of four tiles facing Douglas Avenue, it appears that the history of mass communications is described. But I’m not sure of the precise meaning of each diagram. Can someone help?

  • Opinion line makes me wonder again

    Sometimes the Wichita Eagle Opinion Line makes me wonder. Here’s something from today’s collection:

    “Wanda Sykes should be given a $400 million contract and radio airtime opposite Rush Limbaugh. Let the free market and capitalism work, and we’ll see which one America really supports.”

    The writer wants the free market to work. At the same time, the writer seems to be saying that someone should give the subject Wanda Sykes $400 million. (I think that’s the same amount as Limbaugh’s recent contract.)

    Where I think this writer is confused is that Limbaugh was not given anything. He earns his pay, as far as I know. No one is forced to listen to or sponsor his show. Should the tastes of his listeners change, his show would fold.

    The writer doesn’t say this, but I suspect the point is that the government should give Sykes this contract, giving her the chance to compete with Limbaugh. This has nothing to do with free markets and capitalism. It is just the opposite.

    In reality, the fact that Sykes has no such contract is evidence of the free market working just perfectly.