Voice For Liberty

Search results for: “smoking”

  • Kansas legislature special session possible

    Yesterday’s edition of the KPTS television public affairs program Ask Your Legislator featured talk on taxes and speculation that a special session of the Kansas Legislature might be needed this summer.

    Senator John Vratil, a Republican from Leawood and vice-president of the Senate, said that the way to solve the budget problem is through a combination of cuts and tax increases. He said its unlikely that there will be increases in income taxes and property taxes.

    Vratil has been in favor of a variety of tax increases, including raising the sales tax and starting a tax on soda pop.

    Representative Marti Crow, a Leavenworth Democrat said she’s heard rumors that House leadership is talking about “going home” without a budget. She said it’s been a “do nothing” year in the house, and that it’s irresponsible for the legislature to not be doing its job.

    Vratil said that the Senate leadership has taken the position that the budget should be handled until after the consensus revenue estimates become available on April 16. This is different from the usual practice, where the legislature creates on budget by the end of March, and then revises it after the April estimates are available.

    He said it is possible that there could be a special session of the legislature in July to deal with the budget.

    Both Vratil and Crow said that there will probably be future efforts to extend the recently-passed smoking ban in Kansas to include casino floors. They also added that their constituents are in favor of tax increaes.

    Reporting from the Lawrence Journal-World is at Senate vice president says special session on budget possible.

  • Kansas news digest

    News from alternative media around Kansas for March 29, 2010.

    Passenger Trains Are One Step Closer To Rolling Into Kansas

    (State of the State KS) “Governor Parkinson (D) signed two bills Wednesday that pave the way for passenger rail in Kansas.”

    Governor Mark Parkinson on the Economy, the Budget and Kansas Health

    (State of the State KS) “Kansas Governor Mark Parkinson (D) addresses budget shortfalls, key Capitol legislative issues and the need for bipartisan work in Kansas and Washington.”

    Chamber vs. Chamber: The Battle of Economic Theories

    (State of the State KS) “The growing divide between the Chambers of Commerce reflect the battle of economic theories facing off at the Capital.”

    President Obama Signs Health Care Reform Prompting Some To Block The Law Locally

    (State of the State KS) “President Obama signed historic health care reform into law Tuesday prompting some Kansas Republicans to try to block pieces of the legislation.”

    Rep. Moore’s wife interested in Third District race

    (Kansas Liberty) “Moore afraid of threats but doesn’t fear for his wife.”

    Health care freedom amendment fails in House

    (Kansas Liberty) “The Kansas Health Care Freedom Amendment failed to pass out of the Kansas House today after the measure gained a vote of 75-47, which was nine votes short of what was needed for the legislation to be adopted.”

    Kansas GOP playing defense against ObamaCare

    (Kansas Liberty) “Kansas legislators from the local and the national level have already waged a full attack against the health-care reform bill President Barack Obama signed into law Tuesday. Kansas lawmakers in Washington, D.C., have started to promote bills that would repeal the health-care plan, and proposed initiatives to ensure that the health-care overhaul does not receive federal funding. Several congressional candidates have taken a different approach by asking Kansas Attorney General Steve Six to join the list of attorneys general who are legally questioning the constitutionality of the health-care bill.”

    Senate stands against EPA ruling

    (Kansas Liberty) “The Kansas Senate passed a resolution today 34-3 which sends a message to the federal government criticizing the Environmental Protection Agency’s ruling that greenhouse gasses are harmful to the public’s health.”

    Groups claiming to represent the interest of business ask for tax hike

    (Kansas Liberty) “Representative says residents who benefit from taxpayer dollars have ‘infiltrated’ local chambers of commerce, resulting in the pro-tax message.”

    Much undone as Legislature heads for first adjournment

    (Kansas Health Institute News Service) “TOPEKA – The Legislature will take first adjournment sometime this week with budget and tax work far from complete and a statewide smoking ban still one of the few far-reaching accomplishments of the session.”

    “I’ve been defamed,” Kansas Speaker O’Neal tells panel

    (Kansas Reporter) “TOPEKA, Kan. – Kansas House Speaker Mike O’Neal, a Hutchinson Republican, told an investigating panel Tuesday that he’s been defamed by House Democrats who earlier this month filed an ethics complaint against him.”

    Kansas teacher policies fall short

    (Kansas Reporter) “TOPEKA, Kan. – Kansas teacher policy standards did not make the grade in 2009 according to a new report by the National Council on Teacher Quality. The state policies received an overall grade of D-minus. The report examined areas in which state policy affects the delivery of well prepared teachers by schools in the state; expansion of the teacher pool; identifying effective teachers; retaining effective teachers; and exiting ineffective teachers.”

    My View: Kansas should pass shield law

    (Kansas Watchdog) “Trust, confidence, protection, faith — these are the words that describe the relationship between doctors and patients, lawyers and clients, and reporters and sources. However, only two of those three relationships are provided legal protection from sharing the secrets passed between parties. In several states, reporters have absolutely no protection when it comes to revealing their sources on a given story.”

    Obama’s second cousin, a doctor from Kansas, pushes for Kansas Health Care Freedom

    (Kansas Watchdog) “On his web site Barack Obama’s second cousin, Dr. Milton R. Wolf, Leawood, is pushing for passage of the Kansas Health Care Freedom Amendment.”

  • Surveillance state arrives in Wichita

    In an effort to control crime in Old Town, Wichita is importing the police surveillance state. Right now the targeted area is a small part of the city during certain periods of time. But once camera use has started, it is likely to spread across town, especially given the enthusiasm of police and elected officials like Wichita city council member Lavonta Williams (district 1, northeast Wichita), according to Wichita Eagle reporting.

    Many people may not be aware of the gross invasion of privacy that government cameras represent. Have you used the facial recognition technology in Google’s Picasa software? It’s uncanny how accurate it is. In the hands of government, it’s a concern.

    Some surveillance cameras can read car license plates two blocks away. With facial recognition technology and optical character recognition, police don’t have to actually watch the live or recorded video to learn who has been in a location. Computers can create databases, updated in real time with who is where at what time. Alerts can be programmed, so that if a person or car is seen, police can be notified.

    Then, we have to wonder whether the cameras work as advertised. The website You Are Being Watched, a project of the American Civil Liberties Union, comes to this conclusion: “An increasing number of American cities and towns are investing millions of taxpayer dollars in surveillance camera systems. But few are closely examining the costs and benefits of those investments, or creating mechanisms for measuring those costs and benefits over time. There is extensive academic literature on the subject — studies carried out over many years — and that research demonstrates that video surveillance has no statistically significant effect on crime rates. Several studies on video surveillance have been conducted in the UK, where surveillance cameras are pervasive. The two main meta-analyses conducted for the British Home Office (equivalent to the US departments of Justice and Homeland Security) show that video surveillance has no impact on crime whatsoever. If it did, then there would be little crime in London, a city estimated to have about 500,000 cameras.”

    An irony is that law enforcement likes recording citizens, but not the other way around. As John Stossel has noted, police don’t like to be recorded. In some states its a crime to tape a police officer making an arrest. A video excerpt from Stossel’s television shows the attitudes of police towards being recorded. At Reason Radley Balko details the problem, writing “As citizens increase their scrutiny of law enforcement officials through technologies such as cell phones, miniature cameras, and devices that wirelessly connect to video-sharing sites such as YouTube and LiveLeak, the cops are increasingly fighting back with force and even jail time—and not just in Illinois. Police across the country are using decades-old wiretapping statutes that did not anticipate iPhones or Droids, combined with broadly written laws against obstructing or interfering with law enforcement, to arrest people who point microphones or video cameras at them. Even in the wake of gross injustices, state legislatures have largely neglected the issue.”

    Further irony is found in the parties promoting the cameras. Council member Williams was instrumental in crafting Wichita’s smoking ban. So too was Charlie Claycomb, president of the Old Town Association. One of their arguments was that everyone should have the right to enter any business and not be subjected to secondhand smoke. It was an argument based on civil liberties.

    I’d like to be able to enjoy a cocktail in Old Town without my presence monitored and noted by the police. Is that a civil liberty worth preserving?

    Wichita should reconsider this decision. It seems like an easy solution to a problem. But it’s another journey down the road of the ever-growing regulatory regime in Wichita.

  • Wichita city council endorsements

    Voters in Wichita are deciding on who should fill three city council district positions. Here’s some information to help make a decision.

    In district 1, voters can choose between the appointed incumbent Lavonta Williams and businessman James Barfield. There’s quite a contrast between these two. In my opinion, Williams supports increasing government intervention and intrusion into the lives of Wichitans. This comes in her support of policies such as a smoking ban and TIF districts, but also even in things like the city considering to start providing computer tech support to citizens.

    Barfield is opposed to many of these things, in particular TIF districts. I appreciate enough of Barfield’s positions — and as a liberty-loving Wichitan I am so opposed to many of Williams’ — that I have provided volunteer service to the Barfield campaign. I encourage district 1 voters to vote for James Barfield.

    In district 3, incumbent Jim Skelton faces Charles Dahlem. Skelton has worked hard for his district. He is often the only council member to ask some tough questions of city staff. Sometimes he has frustrated me, as he will express concern or even disagreement with a matter before the council, but he votes for it in the end. I’d like to be able to persuade him that there’s nothing wrong with being on the short end of a six to one vote.

    Also, sometimes when asking city staff members a tough question, instead of sitting still and letting staff answer the question, he may talk over his question, giving staff an easy out. Despite these reservations, I believe Skelton can grow in a second term, and if I lived in district 3, I would vote for him.

    In district 6 voters can choose between Bob Aldrich and Janet Miller. Both have a history of involvement in civic affairs. In endorsing Miller, the Wichita Eagle noted her effectiveness and leadership during her service on various boards. But her positions are wrong. A recent letter in the Eagle got it just right when the writer called her a “Sharon Fearey protoge,” meaning that there are few government programs that she would not be opposed to starting or expanding.

    While I do not agree with Bob Aldrich on all issues — TIF districts and economic development, for example — he would provide a fiscally conservative voice on the city council from a district that doesn’t often send such representatives to the council. I recommend that district 6 voters vote for Bob Aldrich.

  • Raj Goyle tax cut votes not exactly as advertised

    In his campaign, Democratic Party candidate for Congress Raj Goyle says he has voted to cut taxes 50 times. Examination of the record shows some genuine votes against taxes, but also examples of voting with the herd, and some votes that actually increase taxes on most Kansans.

    On Goyle’s campaign website, we can read these words: “He is a proven fiscal conservative who voted to cut government spending and lower taxes on middle class families and small businesses every year he has been in office. Other candidates talk about cutting taxes, but Raj has done it. In just four years, he has voted to cut $500 million in wasteful government spending and voted more than 50 times to relieve Kansans of a total of $900 million in taxes.”

    Other material on his site promotes his “record of bipartisanship and fiscal responsibility.” So an examination of his votes against taxes is in order.

    The record of tax cut votes claimed by Goyle is on his campaign website at the page Pompeo distorts Goyle’s record on taxes. Some votes, such as his vote against the statewide sales tax increase that took effect on July 1, are actual votes against increased taxes. To which I say — even though it’s widely believed that this vote was election-year window dressing during a campaign for Congress — thank you.

    Some of the measures Goyle voted for passed nearly unanimously. In these cases, these votes are simply him following the legislative herd. An example is his vote for HB 2264, where on March 14, 2007, he was on the winning side of a 121 to one vote. Another example given was his vote on HB 2004 in 2007, where he was again in the majority of a 117 to three landslide.

    What is more important from a public policy perspective, however, is Goyle’s votes for various tax credit programs. These programs are not tax reductions with broad application. Instead, these programs spend money using the tax system as the vehicle. Unless the legislature votes for offsetting spending cuts — and it hasn’t — other taxpayers must pay more.

    Ironically, the Center for American Progress, where Goyle once worked, has an article that accurately explains how tax expenditures (tax credits) masquerade as tax cuts. See Tax Expenditures 101: What They Are and How They Slip Under the Radar. Other information may be found at The ‘tax expenditure’ solution for our national debt.

    Here are some of the tax credits that Goyle’s campaign website says he voted for:

    Goyle Voted For A Historic Preservation Tax Credit: In 2007, Goyle voted for HB 2405.

    Goyle Voted For An Amendment Regarding Corporate Tax Credit: In 2010, Goyle voted for an amendment that would have allowed a business to receive up to $50,000 in tax credit for complying with smoking regulations

    Goyle Voted Twice For Rural Business Tax Credits: In 2007, Goyle voted twice for HB 2004. The bill continued the annual $2 million Rural Business Development Tax Credits. The bill also created a tax credit for Kansas film production.

    All of these tax credit programs increase taxes on the vast majority of taxpayers in order to convey benefits to a chosen few.

    Finally, some of the tax cuts that Goyle voted for are outright corporate welfare that benefited only one company, on in another case, a narrow range of companies. An example is this item, again from Goyle’s campaign website: “In 2007, Goyle voted for SB 240, which was a bill that established a single-factor corporation income tax apportionment formula option for manufacturers constructing a new facility in Kansas that would cost at least $100 million and would employ at least 100 new employees by December 31, 2009. The bill was designed to help keep Hill’s Pet Nutrition in Kansas.”

    Goyle’s site explains that this measure was necessary to keep this company located in Kansas, and that the company added at least 100 jobs. Perhaps it was necessary, and maybe even wise. But it wasn’t a vote to cut taxes — except for the taxes on one company. This is more properly described as corporate welfare for which other Kansas taxpayers have to pay.

    Besides Goyle, other candidates in the race are Reform Party candidate Susan Ducey, Republican Mike Pompeo, and Libertarian Shawn Smith.

  • Kansas Governor Parkinson says “thank you”

    This week outgoing Kansas Governor Mark Parkinson released a “thank you” to Kansans that has been commented on — favorably — in many Kansas newspapers and media outlets. The entire piece may be read at the governor’s site at Thanks So Much.

    The governor’s list of “achievements” — his language, not mine — is a reminder that under Parkinson and his predecessor Kathleen Sebelius Kansans have lost economic and personal freedom. It’s nothing that we should thank Parkinson for, and nothing he should be proud of.

    Under achievement number one (“Steering the state budget through a very challenging time”) Parkinson wrote “Suffice it to say that I cut state spending more than any governor in Kansas history.” He doesn’t mention that he was forced to make these cuts, as Kansas can’t run deficits like the federal government.

    Achievements two, three, and four have to do with his promotion of wind power in Kansas. It’s almost impossible to overstate how unwise these policies are. See Wind power: a wise investment for Wichita and Kansas? for a recent discussion of why wind power is a bad investment. Relying on the manufacturing of wind power equipment as an economic development strategy is an even worse idea. The governor praises legislation that requires utilities to increase their usage of renewable power such as wind. But I’d ask the governor this: If electricity from wind is so desirable, why do utilities have to be forced — and heavily subsidized — to produce it?

    Achievement seven highlights “Economic development wins,” mentioning Black and Veatch, Cerner, Bombardier LearJet, and Hawker Beechcraft in particular. Each of these “wins” required large subsidy from the state. Worse, these taxpayer giveaways cement our practice of bureaucratic management of economic development instead of creating a vibrant Kansas business climate where innovation and entrepreneurship thrive. This state policy filters down to counties and cities, to the point where the first consideration for businesses and entrepreneurs is not is this something that will create value for customers and profit for me and my investors but rather what type of government help can I get?

    Achievement eight is the statewide smoking ban. Parkinson’s championing of it means that he doesn’t believe that adult Kansans can decide for themselves whether they want to be around smokey places, and that he has little respect for private property rights.

    Achievement nine is the new transportation plan. The governor claims it will create or keep 175,000 jobs. Most of these must be highway construction jobs, as it is that industry that heavily supported the plan. As usual, the governor and other advocates of government spending fail to see the jobs that are lost due to the government spending and the taxes necessary to pay for it. Veronique de Rugy explains: “Taxes simply transfer resources from consumers to government, displacing private spending and investment. Families whose taxes have increased will have less money to spend on themselves. They are poorer and will consume less. They also save less money, which in turn reduces the resources available for lending.” In addition, Kansas roads rate very well, even number one among the states in one highly-publicized study. Why the need to so much new investment?

    Finally, achievement number ten is “Keeping Kansas a great place to do business.” If this is true, I wonder why do we have to spend so much on subsidies to keep Kansas companies from expanding elsewhere or packing up and leaving entirely, as with Hawker Beechcraft?

  • Voice For Liberty in Wichita Tags and Topics

    [st_tag_cloud]

     

    [xxxtag_groups_accordion append=“{count}” collapsible=0 separator=“ • ”]

More posts