Voice For Liberty

Tag: Kansas state government

Articles about Kansas, its government, and public policy in Kansas.

  • Are you a second class Kansan?

    Are You a Second Class Kansan?
    By Karl Peterjohn, Kansas Taxpayers Network

    The Kansas legislature is in the process of deciding how wide the separation will be between various classes of Kansans. State Senator Peggy Palmer, R-Augusta, and State Representative Judy Morrison, R-Shawnee, introduced bills in their separate legislative houses that would have exempted social security payments from the Kansas personal income tax this year.

    Both bills attracted numerous co-sponsors for this tax cut proposal with a $19 million price tag. The intent was to eliminate the disparate treatment that exists in Kansas income tax law that exempts government pensions while taxing social security. Private pensions in Kansas are also taxable, but this bill does not address the entire disparity, just the social security portion.

    So government employees are granted a large tax break while citizens working in the private sector are expected to pay more. What is particularly outrageous about this disparity is the fact that folks with modest social security and private pensions are already paying substantially more in Kansas income taxes than, say a retired Kansas Supreme Court justice or a retired university professor.

    Now, everyone who pays into social security will be charged at both ends. They are taxed on their income when paying into social security while they are also taxed when receiving a social security check. Public employees are only taxed when they pay into their KPERS state/local pension contributions, but their government pension checks come back tax free.

    The private sector pensions and social security payments are taxed. In addition, additional state tax funds are needed by the state to make up for the unfounded liabilities within KPERS. Another pension cost is for the occasional “bonus” checks the legislature provides to government retirees that are most frequent in the fall of even numbered years when elections are pending. That price tag is another burden for the second class private sector citizen to pay in Kansas. The private sector also lacks civil service job protections too.

    Opposition to the Palmer-Morrison bills is coming from self-described “moderates” in both parties who are worried about excessive tax cuts as they get ready to debate whether state spending should grow as much as 9 percent and top $6 billion in the General Fund for the first time, or some smaller amount that might increase state spending by “only” 4.5 percent. Should state spending grow $250 million (4.5 percent) or over $500 million?

    Liberal Senator Janis Lee, D-Kensington, opposes exempting social security in the senate tax committee. Senator Lee believes that many low income folks are already exempt and this proposal would benefit, “the rich.” Apparently, the middle income folks with private pensions and social security should continue to pay more than retired bureaucrats and university professors from the Regents Institutions.

    In Kansas, the citizens who have worked in the private sector are second class citizens expected to pay more than their more affluent neighbors with government pensions. This is unfair. This is another reason that private sector Kansans have a tendency to retire to states with more equitable fiscal climates.

  • Higher Education Wants A Spending Spree

    Higher Education Wants A Spending Spree
    By Karl Peterjohn, Kansas Taxpayers Network

    Soaring spending has not been spent evenly. The six Regents universities in Kansas initially asked for $727 million to fix deeply neglected buildings at these campuses. Governor Sebelius has performed a valuable service by responding that the Kansas Turnpike have higher tolls to fund this spending.

    The value in Governor Sebelius’ proposal is not based upon its merits. Higher education and the Kansas turnpike are both state entities but are related about as much as lightning and lightning bugs. Since the Kansas turnpike is funded with tolls, so this state agency operates with very little legislative oversight and even less public attention.

    That is unfortunate because the Kansas turnpike was supposed to become a free highway when the original bond funding was supposed to be paid off well over a decade ago. Sadly, that hasn’t happened so the turnpike jobs are safe and additional bond funding has turned this temporary entity into a permanent fixture. Here is a case where one generation of politicians made promises and their successors’ successors ignored those promises. Politicians have been known not to keep their promises so it is not surprising that a former state senate minority leader now heads up the turnpike authority.

    The turnpike does generate a steady stream of income and Governor Sebelius wants an additional portion of that used for the six Regents universities initial spending plan. This is based upon the dubious notion that the universities are “under funded” and lack funds for building maintenance. That is despite the fact that these six universities are spending a combined total of over $1 billion in tax funds and tuition for their operations. Taxpayers have increased their funding 55 percent during the last decade and now totals over $9,000 per pupil and that ignores hundreds of millions more paid in tuition.

    The universities operate primarily for the benefit of administrators and senior faculty. Look at where a sizable portion of this increased spending will go. At K.U. there are two airport hangars that need $378,635 for covering their aircraft.

    The K.U. chancellor’s, home, garage, and guest house need $607,027 in repair spending. That is property tax-free housing for the chancellor. That is the largest chunk of the $1,392,547 needed to properly house the six Regents institutions’ presidents and one K.U. chancellor.

    In addition, the Regents are claiming that millions more are needed for facilities like Allen Field House, Bramlage Coliseum, and Ahearn Field House. A number of these sports complexes generate massive sums of cash in men’s sports. The universities complain about a lack of funding but their endowments have been growing nicely and that seems to be completely ignored in the public discussion here.

    The average Kansas taxpayers do not get to live in property tax-free housing. The average Kansan is not making the large salaries enjoyed by Regents institution leaders who are all making massively more in salary than even the governor. In the last few years the average student at these schools has been facing double digit annual percentage increases in their tuition while the university presidents are enjoying annual double digit percentage increases in their salaries.

    There is support from free spending editorial pages, like the Wichita Eagle, that have endorsed the Regents original spending package. Providing the Regents with a fiscal pass on how this deterioration in facilities occurred ignores responsibility for operating the university system during the last decade. In Bill Graves’ first term as governor his “crumbling classrooms” proposal was passed and was supposed to help the Regents universities and their buildings and facilities. Basically a decade later, taxpayers are spending more, students are paying higher tuitions, and facilities are still a mess.

    Needless to say, salaries for administrators and faculties as well as benefits have grown much faster than the average Kansan’s income. Ohio University Professor Richard Vedder’s “Going Broke By Degree” book outlines this problem well. The situation in Kansas is not unique and exists in many other states. The absolute real financial burden of sending a child to college has grown substantially over time. Moreover, that burden has grown faster than people’s incomes. Giving the Regents a blank check will aggravate and worsen this state’s fiscal problems while not addressing the real challenges in higher education.

  • Kansas lags fiscally again

    Kansas Lags Fiscally Again
    By Karl Peterjohn, Kansas Taxpayers Network

    Kansas is once again falling behind. The growth in state tax receipts has allowed the legislature to increase state spending. This revenue growth could also provide some much needed tax relief to try and make this state’s fiscal climate more competitive.

    This is an urgent priority that is coming home to folks in Topeka as a recent major employer in Topeka, Payless ShoeSource Inc., announced a distribution center will close and that will cost that community as many as 550 jobs. Businesses restructure all the time but losing all of these jobs at one time should get the attention of this state’s leaders. This loss hurts.

    Triple taxation of business revenue and assets by the state helps make Kansas an uncompetitive state. Business property taxes, business income taxes, and taxes on assets through the state’s business franchise tax are all significant burdens. Governor Sebelius has proposed cutting the state’s franchise tax by $7 million or about 15 percent. In addition, she has also proposed a small reduction in the state corporate income tax that would be paid for by eliminating some corporate income tax credits.

    A surprisingly unified Republican caucus on Valentine’s Day had all house Republicans and about a 1/4 of house Democrats voting for a bill that would cut the business franchise tax by over $15 million and begin a three year phase. In three years, Kansas would join the other 30 some states without this tax. A number of legislators are also looking at trying to reduce property taxes and the tax burden on the elderly so broad based tax relief is provided too.

    Kansas tax law discriminates against seniors receiving social security and private pensions. Kansas personal income taxes are owed by Kansans receiving social security and private pension income. Government pensions for federal, state, and local government employees are exempt from the state income tax.

    This is unfair. This is another way that Kansas treats government and government employees better than taxpayers and private pension recipients. Bills are pending in both the house and senate tax committees that would add social security payments to the tax exemption. State Senator Peggy Palmer, R-Augusta, and Rep. Judy Morrison, R-Shawnee, are leading the push for this tax reform. A large number of their colleagues have joined them as co-sponsors in pushing for this $18 million tax cut.

    Senate leadership has been telling legislators not to pass more than $15 million in tax cuts this year. That’s only about 5 percent of the revenue growth. The bipartisan senate leadership under Senate President Steve Morris, R-Hugoton, that got a huge $466 million state school spending hike enacted last year, wants to limit tax cuts.

    Fiscal conservatives in the Kansas legislature want at least $60 million or 20 percent of the windfall revenue created by growth in the state’s economy returned to taxpayers.

    Making the Kansas economy competitive is a critical, but tax reform is also a regional issue too. Democratic Governor Mike Beebe of Arkansas has just forced through that state’s Democratic controlled legislature a $319 million package of individual and business tax cuts to make Arkansas’ economy more competitive. Arkansas recently passed Kansas in population and is projecting a large $840 million state surplus this year.

    The Republican Governor of Nebraska is pushing for over $240 million in across the board income tax cuts and an end to state death taxes to make Nebraska more competitive. This would follow in the footsteps of the large income tax cut and death tax abolition enacted last year by Oklahoma’s Democratic Governor and Republican legislative leadership in Oklahoma. Last year Texas with Republican Governor Perry and that state’s GOP controlled legislature passed over $11 billion in mainly property tax cuts.

    Our neighbors are serious about becoming fiscally competitive. In Kansas, it looks like all too many leaders including the Democratic Governor and Republican Senate President are concerned about growing spending and throwing a few small crumbs to taxpayers. There is a real need at the statehouse to focus on this state’s economy by enacting significant tax cuts that will improve this state’s dismal fiscal climate.

  • Spending and the true cost of government

    (WICHITA) – While lawmakers face a challenge to increase spending from many directions, they need to resist some of these pressures in order to control excessive government spending. In a policy brief released by the Flint Hills Center, “The Virtue of a Self-Imposed Spending Cap for the Kansas Legislature,” Jonathan Williams documents the growth of state spending in Kansas. This year the combined spending of state and local government in Kansas will exceed $15 billion, up from $ 4 billion in 1957. Even when adjusted for inflation, that represents a 279 percent increase in that period. Accordingly, in that same period, per capita spending has grown from $2000 to $5700.

    The constant pressure on lawmakers to continually spend more is also reflected in Williams’ review of Kansas spending over the last 15 years. The Kansas Department of Budget statistics show a 54 percent real growth of State General Fund spending and a 51 percent real growth of total state spending.

    There is a tendency for legislators and citizens to focus their attention on taxes. Often, however, taxes will remain constant while the economy is strong, but spending will increase at double digit rates. The spending then becomes unsustainable when the economy weakens. Williams warns that lawmakers and citizens need to understand the concept that total spending equals the truest cost of government, or excessive spending will continue at all levels of government. Read more in The Virtue of a Self-Imposed Spending Cap for the Kansas Legislature found at www.flinthills.org.

  • 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.

  • Minimum wage price controls hurt Kansas

    This article presents compelling evidence that raising the minimum wage is not in the best interests of low-wage workers.

    An issue that the very existence of a minimum wage reveals, one that no one seems to talk about is this: Why are so many workers capable only of doing work valued so low? We should be asking why we spend so much on public schools and education, only to have groups of workers with so little skill that their work output is valued so little.

    Minimum Wage Price Controls Hurts Kansas
    By Karl Peterjohn

    The minimum wage is going to rise. That is the consensus from both political parties out of Washington. Raising the minimum wage is at the top of the rather thin 2007 public policy agenda for the new Democratic majority in Congress. The new GOP senate minority leader Mitch McConnell has indicated that senate Republicans will not stop this price control expansion from being enacted.

    The federal minimum wage is $5.15 per hour and has been for the last nine years. The new increase is likely to be $7.25 an hour and this could be very bad news in Kansas. Federal labor data indicates that Kansas is one of four states with the highest percentage of the workforce getting paid between $5.15 and $7.25 per hour. Over 10 percent of working Kansans are getting paid $7.25 or less. The other three states over 10 percent are South Carolina, Mississippi, and Louisiana.

    Raising the minimum wage to $7.25 won’t have much of an impact in the coastal areas of the U.S. where hour wages already easily exceed these levels. In low income Kansas, the impact is likely to be substantial and highly negative. One senior Kansas legislator discussed this new price control expansion with this pithy comment: “Look for a lot of small town restaurants to close.”

    The recent death of Nobel Laureate and free market economist Milton Friedman ties into this return to government expansion of price controls, in this case over labor. “Economists may not know much. But we know one thing very well: how to produce surpluses and shortages. Do you want a surplus? Have the government legislate a minimum price that is above the price that would otherwise prevail,” Friedman said. Numerous examples of the negative results of price controls are cited in his classic “Free To Choose.”

    Friedman warned against the negative impact of price controls hurting job hunters. People looking for work will be banned from working at less than the new legally mandated minimum. A surplus of labor in the form of increased unemployment will appear next year.

    Since these minimum wage workers are at the lower end of the job scales, they will be disproportionately the under-educated, low-skilled, and least employable workers losing their jobs. This will create a demand for more government spending to aid the newly unemployed.

    If raising wages was as simple as having the government wave a wand and pass a law, why stop at $7.25 per hour? How about $1,000 an hour? If government price controls on labor are a good thing, why not? There would be lots of folks willing to work at that wage. However, there would not be many willing employers. Government created labor surpluses in the form or massive unemployment would soar. The economy would collapse.

    Everyone knows that setting this type of extreme price control is bad. Why are folks so willing to make this mistake to a smaller degree? Unions benefit since the minimum helps to serve as a floor underneath their contractual efforts. This union tie explains the Democratic Party’s adamant support for expanding this price control. This still harms low income people by destroying their jobs and, with it, opportunity for something better.

    Government price controls also weaken the economy by sending incorrect signals, mis-allocating both capital and labor. This hurts the economy by misallocating resources. Price controls remove necessary incentives for efficiency. Economic misallocation occurs when signals from market pricing are replaced with government edicts.

    The most pernicious impact of this price control is removing the first step for people entering the labor market. While most folks make a lot more than the minimum wage, these entry level jobs are important to first time workers, low skill level workers, and poorly educated workers. Price controls that destroy the jobs these folks perform are pernicious to society and destructive to individuals striving to get their first step into the job market. A large number of Kansas jobs will be destroyed by a $7.25 minimum wage. Look for more unemployment ahead in 2007.

    Why won’t Republican senators filibuster against government mandated job destruction? The only accomplishment for the Democrats during the last two years in the U.S. Senate has been their filibusters. The Democrats won their majority with their filibusters.

  • 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.