Tag: Kansas state government

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

  • John Todd on Eminent Domain in Kansas

    To: The Kansas House/Senate Joint Committee on Economic Development.

    Subject: Testimony Regarding Eminent Domain at the October 11, 2005 hearing.

    My name is John Todd. I am a real estate broker and land developer from Wichita.

    I support the proposition to amend article 15 of the constitution of the state of Kansas by adding a new section thereto, concerning eminent domain as follows:

    “Private property shall not be taken except for public use, and private property shall not be taken without just compensation. The taking of private property with the intent to or in anticipation of selling, leasing or otherwise transferring any interest in the property to any private entity is not a valid public use and is prohibited.”

    I also support the immediate passage of legislation that would codify into law the exact meaning of the above amendment language. This would replace existing statutes.

    I do not support any additional language in the amendment or in any immediately passed legislation that would in any way mitigate the private property rights protection contained therein.

    The keys to the economic freedoms we enjoy in this country are “individual liberty”, “private property rights” and the “free market system”. Examples of failed economic systems like the former Soviet Union emphasized the “collective good”, “state owned property” and “state controlled markets”. Allowing governments the power to take privately owned homes and businesses from individuals and turn them over to private developers for potentially more profitable, higher-tax uses, is a good example of eminent domain abuse done for the “collective” benefit of a community. Using eminent domain to seize property for private/public partnerships projects is the rage today, privatizing profits for the inside group, and reserving losses for public taxpayers. The governments participation in the process of taking private property from one private group for the benefit of another private group, and placing governments in a position to choose which business groups wins and which fails, flies in the face of private property rights, freedom, and free market economics.

    A quote by Nobel Prize winning economists Milton Friedman, and Gary Becker as well as economics history Professor Douglass North in Tom Bethell’s book “The Noblest Triumph, Property and Prosperity Through The Ages” is appropriate here. “In an economically free society, the fundamental function of government is the protection of private property and the provision of a stable infrastructure for a voluntary exchange system. When a government fails to protect private property, takes property itself without full compensation, or establishes restrictions (and follows policies) that limit voluntary exchange, it violates the economic freedom of its citizens.”

    Please support the eminent domain reforms I have suggested.

  • The Kansas Productivity Puzzle

    The Kansas Productivity Puzzle

    Lance Kinzer
    Kansas State Representative, Dist. 14
    http://www.lancekinzer.com

    Among the many interesting things that occurred during the first week of the legislative session perhaps the most compelling involved a presentation to the House Tax Committee by Professor Arthur Hall of the Center for Applied Economics at The University of Kansas. Dr. Hall’s presentation was focused on something he calls The Kansas Productivity Puzzle. Simply put, Kansas lags behind both the national average and other states in our region in the crucial economic category of productivity growth.

    In economic terms productivity is the value of goods and services per worker. Kansas falls short with respect to productivity growth in every sector of our economy except durable goods manufacture. This is true not merely when the comparison is made against the nation as a whole, but also when the comparison is made against other agricultural states in our region. To understand why this matters it is important to recognize that productivity growth is a key factor in determining wages. It is also a crucial determinant in overall economic growth. If Kansas had enjoyed merely average productivity growth over the past 25 years our state economy would be some $18 billion dollars larger than it is at the current time. Furthermore, wages in Kansas lag some $5,000.00 per worker behind the national average for similarly educated workers.

    The impact of sub-par productivity growth also has a negative impact on unit labor costs for Kansas businesses. This is merely a fancy way to say that businesses in Kansas get less bang for their buck than elsewhere in the country. Indeed, Dr. Hall reports that Kansas has the 3rd worst unit labor cost growth rate in the country. The data suggests that this ‘productivity puzzle” is both long term and systemic. Understanding all of the various factors that contribute to our productivity lag is a complicated question. That having been said, Dr. Hall’s current hypothesis is that there is an important relationship between the size of government in Kansas and our low productivity growth.

    In particular, Dr. Hall points out that Kansas has the 4th highest number of local government employees per capita in the nation. Furthermore, the number of local government employees in Kansas is growing at the 4th highest per capita rate in the country. Part of this problem may result form the relatively large number of local government units that exist in Kansas. For a state of our size we have a large number of counties and school districts, and employment in these sectors of government is growing at a rapid rate.

    Taking school districts as an example, during the 30 year period between 1972 and 2002 the total K-12 student population in Kansas decreased by 1%, yet the number of teachers and administrators employed by our schools have roughly doubled. Indeed, if the school district employee to student ratio in Kansas were the same today as it was when I was in high school about 15 years ago the cost savings would be approximately $400 million dollars per year. Looking at non-K-12 local government employees in the same way the cost savings would be more than $315 million dollars per year if local government worker per citizen numbers returned to their 1987 level.

    The issues of slow productivity growth and fast government sector growth brought to light by Dr. Hall have serious implications that all Kansas citizens and policy makers should consider. While seemingly abstract economic categories like productivity growth may appear detached from everyday life, they have important real world implications. In sorting through how best to address the Kansas Productivity Puzzle it is important to remember that the only way to increase overall productivity is by helping individual Kansas businesses to improve their productivity. This involves enacting polices that provide grater access to the capital, both financial and intellectual, that leads to innovation and in turn growth. It is also crucial that we keep in mind the negative impact an ever growing government sector can have on productivity growth.

    The solution to this complex problem may not then be so obscure after all. Policies that limit the size and growth of government and a tax and regulator structure that encourage business growth appear the best available solutions to addressing the Kansas Productivity Puzzle.

  • The decline In Kansas continues

    The Decline In Kansas Continues
    By Karl Peterjohn, Executive Director Kansas Taxpayers Network
    January 17, 2006

    The relative decline of Kansas continues. This decline is vividly demonstrated when state and federal revenue growth is examined.

    Total federal revenues grew 13.9 percent last year to total $2.142 trillion dollars. This was an increase in federal revenues of $262 billion. This increase was almost twice the percentage rate of growth of Kansas state revenues that grew only 7.1 percent or $322 million in fiscal year 2005 that ended June 30, 2005. The federal revenue figures are for the fiscal year that ended September 30, 2005.

    The variance in this growth between Kansas and the other 49 states is important. This data is another confirmation of two recent reports that compared Kansas economic trends and reported distressing results. K.U. economics professor Art Hall and Wichita State University’s Center for Economic Development and Business Research’s (CEDBR) Janet Harrah have issued separate reports indicating that Kansas is lagging in a number of key economic indicators.

    Harrah’s 2005 report showed that income, population, and job growth were lagging in Kansas. This CEDBR study looked at all 50 states using six measurements for population growth, income, and jobs (see: www.wichita.edu/cedbr/). Kansas lags nationally and, even more distressing, was at or near the bottom in almost every category used in this 10 year survey from 1994-2003. Harrah’s study used the most recent 10 year period of federal data that was available.

    Professor Hall’s “Local Government and the Kansas Productivity Puzzle,” focused upon weak productivity in Kansas as well as the sizable growth in government that appears to be a factor in the poor level of productivity growth. Hall’s work was particularly distressing due to the fact that Kansas scored poorly among all plains regional states in most of the measurements he examined. So not only was Kansas lagging nationally, it was also lagging regionally (see: www.cae.business.ku.edu).

    Kansas is a laggard being pulled by the faster growing parts of the United States. This state has an economic growth problem that must be addressed due to the high taxes and resulting high level of government spending in this state. This is a reality that can certainly be ignored by state policy makers in Topeka. However, this is a reality that cannot be denied. Kansas is in economic trouble.

  • Kansas Media Spin on Moderates and Conservatives

    Here’s a very good piece on Kansas politics written by Karl Peterjohn of the Kansas Taxpayers Network. Karl has amazing knowledge of Kansas politics and politicians of the past two decades. I wish he would write a book about it.

    Kansas Media Spin on Moderates and Conservatives
    Karl Peterjohn, Executive Director Kansas Taxpayers Network

    The liberal Republican Steve Rose has taken a break from advocating tax hikes to editorialize in the Johnson County Sun newspapers contrasting the difference between GOP “moderates” and “conservatives.” He does this without mentioning fiscal, property rights and other issues. I’m copying Rose’s commentary at the end of this response for your inspection.

    In this commentary Rose cites the pathetic left-wing Iola Register owned and operated by the Lynn family. Emerson Lynn’s daughter Susan now runs this daily southeastern KS newspaper with a gradually shrinking paid circulation of 3,803 subscribers. Emerson never found a statewide tax hike proposal that he didn’t like. He never found a fiscal conservative that he did. Emerson is a liberal in a conservative county in a conservative state and so he tried to influence public policy the way that liberals who dominate the Kansas news media do: they back the liberal faction in the Republican Party at whenever time they think it matters. If the Democrats have a chance, they back them. If the Bolsheviks had an electable candidate on the ballot and occasionally a couple win GOP nominations in certain areas of Johnson County, they would back them.

    The liberal Kansas media lets liberals, like Governor Sebelius, campaign as “fiscal conservatives,” while she prevaricated on whether she’d support raising taxes or not while running for office in 2002. Like her predecessor, once the inconvenience of the election was behind her, she was looking for places to spend more tax money. Higher taxes then became part of the scene. See her 2004 tax hike scheme. Her proposal in December for a tax cut on machinery and equipment is an election year ploy that is needed as a starting point but inadequate to restoring a competitive Kansas. It might be enough to help her reelection prospects on the fiscal front.

    I had hoped that Lynn’s daughter would turn the Iola Register both fiscally and editorially around when I heard that she had taken over from Emerson but I suspect that is probably a faint hope based upon the word I’ve heard from KTN supporters who see that paper regularly. I suspect Susan is more like her counterpart running the N.Y. Times than a David Horowitz.

    If you are in a “red” county in the “red” state of Kansas and you want a career or role in KS politics you often become a Republican even if down deep your politics are more socialist or just another big government advocate. That explains part of the voter registration disparity here.

    Just look at the “moderate” Republicans who have voted against protecting private property from eminent domain abuse. When this was voted upon in a floor amendment in the Kansas senate last year it was mainly conservatives and some Democrats trying to stop this abuse. GOP “moderates” were uniform in clobbering property rights.

    Liberal Republicans in Kansas are well connected and often have business ties to the spending lobbies or certain developers with connections who don’t want to negotiate with unhappy landowners. That’s one of the reasons for the liberal Republicans desire for expanding the ability of local units to grab private property.

    A few days ago I posted the fiscal vote ratings of four former state senators (Bond, Buhler, Emert, and Langworthy) who are part of the latest liberal Republican effort to “take back,” the Kansas Republican Party. Based on their votes that I have seen while monitoring the Kansas legislature from 1993 to the present here is what these four GOP “moderates” stand for (their average KTN fiscal vote rating: of 27.4% (I’m including Buhler in this too) is actually lower than the very liberal Democrat leader Sen. Hensley’s vote rating. It doesn’t matter whether you look at between 1996-2000 or 1996-2005, their combined score is below Hensley’s on fiscal matters.

    Expanding taxes, preferably on consumer and excise taxed items but income and property tax hikes are not beyond the pall–look at former RINO (Republican In Name Only) Rep. Bill Kassebaum’s tax hike proposals in 2004; expanding bonded indebtedness (a number of bond houses have traditionally helped fund the KS GOP) without voters having any say; using the property tax appraisal process to automatically generate additional state and local taxes and stopping automatic income tax hikes; weakening 2nd amendment provisions and making Kansas one of only four states without any sort of conceal carry law; stop any laws that would limit or restrict abortions; tried unsuccessfully to kill the marriage amendment and keep it from getting to voters; stop voter referendums particularly on fiscal issues like property taxes and non school bonding by local units; expand select businesses ability to use their local government contacts to do eminent domain and grab property on the cheap; often vote against any death penalty legislation; defend the school spending lobby’s efforts to expand school spending without providing accountability or choice; and keep the political power in the hands of bipartisan “experts” who receive suitable cover from the news media while expanding government faster than our ability to pay for it. This last point is crucial because it explains why there was a large number of GOP “moderates” siding with Democrats to protect the activist and Democrat dominated (5 of 7 judges are registered Democrats) Kansas Supreme Court from any legislative or citizen response to their spending edicts in the school finance lawsuit.

    This also explains why the “economic development” seems to center around narrow projects or narrow provisions in the law to help various special interests instead of a broader policy that benefits all Kansans and levels the playing field and strengthens the rule of law. Instead, there are too often special benefits for special folks.

    These policies, that are often hard to distinguish between the moderate GOP and Democrat governors in this state over the last 50 years explains why there is low interest in politics among some Kansans: 1) few meaningful differences between liberal factions–the GOP liberals are more pro-business on workers compensation or unemployment insurance than AFL-CIO Democrats and rearranging the decks chairs at SRS seem like their big issues but for many Kansans these issues are secondary to issues like taxes or abortion; 2) regardless of election results the same group of insiders keeps rotating between the top state positions; 3) elections that are more often dominated by personality than policies; 4) continuing to limit the ability of the people to participate either through tax referendums, bond votes, and binding votes on other issues reduces voter interest and hence participation; 5) a political structure where many candidates are unopposed in both (or either) primary and general elections; 6) this is why many Kansas governors have been Democrats because they could easily run to the right of these spend and tax Republicans.

    Here are some examples of how this works in practice naming some of the names: 1) Dave Corbin is a RINO senator who loses his senate seat in 2004 and is shortly thereafter hired into the Sebelius administration’s revenue department; 2) Sebelius and Graves retain their predecessors from the theoretically “opposite” political parties in the critical position as budget directors; 3) Former RINO Governor Mike Hayden is now serving in the Sebelius cabinet–hey, he needs a job; 4) One of the candidates seeking to replace Democrat State Rep. Bruce Larkin ran for the GOP nomination to that state senate seat (dist. 1) that covers that same area in 2004 as a GOP “moderate”; 5) Look at the numerous “Republicans for Moore,” “Republicans for Sebelius,” and “Republicans for (fill in the blank for your favorite left-wing Democrat)” organizations: Audrey Langworthy, Tim Emert (former senate majority leader and current law partner to the current senate majority leader) were both prominent Republicans for Sebelius members, as well as a large cast of other “moderate” folks whose policies are LIBERAL in office and often become more liberal once they get bumped out of office; 6) Legislators “hand off” their seats to hand picked successors by resigning in mid-term. Conservatives are learning this latter maneuver and are almost as good at doing this as liberal Republicans or Democrats.

    These self-described GOP “moderates” claim national ties to the Republican Party but seem out-of-step with the national GOP and President Bush. These are the same folks who had no use for a conservative like Ronald Reagan 20 years ago. President Bush has signed a pledge not to raise taxes and has succeeded in getting two major tax cutting bills passed as well as repatriation of overseas corporate money which has strengthened the U.S. dollar. In contrast, Kansas GOP moderates prefer raising taxes, fees, and other “revenue enhancements,” (see KTN’s vote ratings at www.kansastaxpayers.com for details).

    Bush is pro-life on abortion and conservative on defending marriage from activist judges. Kansas GOP moderates are not. Bush is from Texas where conceal carry has been working for ages and the death penalty is not a legal joke like it is here. GOP moderates have been successful in stifling these policies in Kansas. Actually, GOP liberals in Kansas are more of a throw back to an earlier GOP president and I’m not thinking of Eisenhower. Think Nixon. Think “we’re all Keynesians now,” with wage and price controls, more federal bureaucracy (think what was then new agencies like OSHA/EPA), higher taxes, and expanding government lands and employees. While a Democratically controlled U.S. Congress hindered Nixon the buck stops with the top elected official whether it is in Washington or one of the 50 statehouses and KS GOP moderates are very Nixonian in their use of government.

    GOP “moderates” campaign as “conservatives” when they run for office. I remember voting for the “fiscal conservatives.” I could name some folks but let me stick with former Governor Graves. Bill Graves’ first campaign for governor was successful because he campaigned as a fiscal conservative advocating a constitutional lid on state spending growth (it didn’t hurt that 1994 was a great year to run as a Republican anywhere). He did everything he could to get away from that promise after being elected. Graves is a prototype for the successful “moderate” Republican. He holds only one elected office that has only administrative functions so his policy positions are largely a blank slate; he campaigns as a “fiscal conservative” but begins “growing in office” almost the day after he is sworn in; he’s personally wealthy so campaign fund raising is not as critical for his candidacy; and now that he’s left office he’s bailed out of Kansas and cashing in as a national trucking lobbyist. Ain’t politics great in Kansas!

  • More Under Reported Kansas News

    More Under Reported Kansas News
    By Karl Peterjohn, Executive Director Kansas Taxpayers Network

    There are at least two stories that have not received the mainstream news media attention that they deserve in Kansas. Kansans need more information than they have received and the readers should decide whether the following is unreported or just under reported in their daily, mainstream newspaper coverage.

    It was headlines across Kansas when Johnson County District Attorney Paul Morrison announced his candidacy for Attorney General. Morrison, a liberal Johnson County Republican prior to his announcement, bailed out of the GOP said he was going to run as a Democrat. This announcement and the headline news stories that followed led to analysis pieces discussing the split in the Kansas Republican Party and the “problems” facing Attorney General Phill Kline’s 2006 campaign for reelection.

    What is fascinating in seeing the mainstream Kansas press’ bias was a couple of weeks later when Attorney General Kline announced that 89 of 105 county sheriffs were endorsing him for reelection. Even more remarkable was the fact that 8 of 13 Democrat sheriffs were among the 89.

    There has been very little news media coverage of this announcement in the Kansas press. In a few cases the information has been grudgingly and belatedly provided. There have not been any “analysis” articles discussing the weakness in Morrison’s candidacy when over half of the sheriffs in his new party are already rejecting his candidacy. These endorsements have been filling the internet sites with comments about the 89 endorsements. It is noteworthy that the Kansas City Star did not mention this until over two weeks after the news conference where the Attorney General Kline made this announcement. This belated mention of this story in early December in the Kansas City Star is likely due to the pressure from internet bloggers’ commentaries.

    This reflects more badly upon the news coverage in the Kansas City Star, the Wichita Eagle, and the other daily papers that are trying to skew state news coverage the way the New York Times and Washington Post have been caught skewing national news.

    A second story that has been ignored involves the Texas Supreme Court’s decision on school finance. Texas’ highest court threw out their statewide property tax but specifically told the legislature that additional funds were not a solution needed to make their state’s school finance system pass constitutional requirements.

    This case is similar to the ongoing Kansas litigation in terms of subject but not in terms of remedy or violating the separation of powers provisions. So, the Texas case is not only timely but is also quite relevant since it contrasts with the Kansas court’s $853 million in new spending demands. The Texas court ruling is going to set the stage for that state’s 2006 legislative session. However, this ruling specifically avoids the ongoing spending edicts being issued by the top Kansas court’s school finance edicts. Kansas is awaiting more edicts from our judicial masters.

    That’s a notable judicial difference. Kansans should know that five of the seven members of the Kansas Supreme Court are registered Democrats. Kansas Chief Justice Kay McFarland may complain about the fact that citizens are restless about her court’s edicts and activism on school finance, the death penalty, the court’s support for eminent domain abuses, and other hot button social issues. There are consequences to judicial short-circuiting of the political process to arrive at the politically correct conclusions of our new judicial oligarchs.

    The Kansas Supreme Court needs to be seen as the Sebelius court with her appointments, her campaign manager’s family ties to this court, and the Democratic domination among its members. The contrast, as well as the similarities, between Kansas and Texas in this school finance litigation is an important story that deserves more attention than it has received.

  • Kansas Income Growth Lags

    By Karl Peterjohn

    You will earn more if you do not work in Kansas. That is nothing new but the size and scope of the economic problem facing Kansans has become more vivid. National data has regularly shown that Kansans’ incomes are lower than the national average and this is impacting the economic climate in this state.

    In September, Wichita State University’s Center for Economic Development and Business Research issued a report showing how badly Kansas lagged with the fastest and slowest growing parts of the United States. In this report Kansas vividly contrasted with fast growing Colorado in all of the measurements being used.

    Colorado, which has been benefiting from their Taxpayers Bill Of Rights limits on state and local government spending increases, had the best economy in our region. Colorado was in the ten fastest growing states when total personal income, earnings per job, per capita income, full, and part-time job growth were measured. Naturally, jobs and income then have an impact reflected in Colorado’s fast growing population too.

    What the Wichita State University study did not report was how Kansas measured when compared with all four of our immediate neighbors. This is bad news for Kansas.

    Personal income growth is weak in Kansas. It is one of the lowest in the entire country at 43rd out of the 50 states plus the District of Columbia for a ten year time period ending in 2003. This federal data ranked Colorado as 3rd highest while our other three neighboring states ranked between 28th and 33rd.

    Kansas was a dismal 41st and once again in the bottom 10 when it came to per person or per capita personal income. Colorado was once again in the top ten at number 9 while Nebraska was 12th, Oklahoma 19th, and Missouri 30th. Earnings by place of work was another measurement W.S.U.’s study examined and Kansas again scored badly. Kansas was worst in this region at 37th while Colorado was once again 3rd.

    There was a bit of good news in job growth percentages since Kansas did not score at the bottom in our region. Missouri was at the regional bottom at 37th and Oklahoma was slightly worse than Kansas at 32nd. The growth in jobs could be attributed to other factors like Missouri and until recently Oklahoma both being states without Right To Work laws that have a positive impact upon job availability.

    Jobs, wages, and income are all factors in a society where people can, and do, vote with their feet. Americans have always been a restless lot and the level of jobs, wages, and income are all important factors on where people decide to live. The W.S.U. study looked at population trends. In 1970, there were more Kansans than Coloradans. Today, there are 1.5 million more residents of Colorado than Kansas. During the 1990s in the hey-day of TABOR, Coloradans’ incomes soared and their population grew over 30 percent.

    Government spending advocates like Governor Sebelius have cited the recent growth in state tax revenues as a sign that the Kansas economy is growing. Sadly, the 7.1 percent growth in state revenues in the fiscal year ending June 30 was less than half the national percentage growth in revenues. Tax revenues show a continuing relative decline for Kansas.

    WSU’s survey indicated that Kansas had the lowest population growth in our five state region. This is not a surprise since there is a costly and highly uncertain fiscal climate to own or operate a business in this state. The judicial activism coming from the Kansas courts with a billion dollar price tag raises this uncertainty even higher and that is too recent for this data. Many liberals in Kansas claim that additional spending on government, particularly public schools, is the solution to economic growth. Higher government spending is much more connected with economic stagnation and decline. Kansas, with high property, income, and sales taxes, provides a regional model on why this state is lagging in wages, incomes and job growth and this is hurting population growth here.

  • Taxpayer Bill Of Rights (TABOR) eviscerated

    By Karl Peterjohn

    Governor Bill Owens won a Pyrrhic victory in his campaign to eliminate the Taxpayers Bill Of Rights (TABOR) limits on government growth in Colorado. Owens’ short lived Proposition C victory will lead to a host of long term consequences that are mainly negative for Coloradans looking for a better economic future for themselves and their families. Passage of Proposition C is huge defeat for economic freedom across the country and a setback for fiscal responsibility.

    The passage of Proposition C will mark a key political and public policy turning point that ends Owens’ career as a fiscally conservative Republican. Owens is truly now a political lame-duck who will be known forever more as the individual primarily responsible for the demise of TABOR. Among fiscal conservatives nationwide he is now a political dead-duck. A couple of years ago National Review featured Owens as a potential presidential model for GOP conservatives. Now he is nothing more than another Republican office holder who “grew in office.”

    While it is certainly true that the entire Colorado Democrat Party, their mainstream media allies, and the usual leftie academic types also bear significant responsibility for the outcome of this vote, the face on the evisceration of the Taxpayers Bill of Rights will be, and should be, Governor Bill Owens. Now, TABOR is wounded but it not dead. Here’s what the Left will target next based on the Kansas model.

    The Left’s next step will be to figure out a similar evisceration of TABOR’s provisions affecting local governments spending in Colorado. Naturally, extending the time limit for TABOR’s evisceration at the state level will be needed, but that can wait for a couple of years until Democrats return to running all levers of power in state government in Colorado.

    Owens success November 1 in passing Proposition C and possibly (the preliminary vote indicates a very narrow defeat for Proposition D that a re-count may reverese) Proposition D will lead to a host of long term negative consequences for Colorado. In the short run the state will be free to go on a spending spree. They will.

    The state spending Bacchanalia will be certainly be followed by a fiscal hangover. The spending will be short run stimulative and long run drag on the state. This is not unexpected and in fact, there is a model for this pattern: California. Almost 20 years ago the Gann Amendement that limited state spending growth was a 1970’s (the Gann Amendment was enacted in the wake of Proposition 13) forefather of the Taxpayers Bill of Rights. The spending lobbies in California hated it and roughly a decade after passing it, they succeeded in eliminating Gann.

    California has fiscally struggled ever since this cap on government was terminated. Massive fiscal uncertainty was created and the California fiscal climate clouded up in the wake of this policy change. Next week a very pale imitation of a state spending limit will be voted upon in California as part of the four initiative package promoted there by Governor Schwarzennegger. A narrow, 52-48 percent Colorado majority has decided that California is the fiscal path to follow instead of the tried and true Taxpayers Bill of Rights.

    As the fiscal hangover appears following the Colorado state spending spree in a few years this is will help my state, Kansas, compete with Colorado. The model Governor Owens and his bipartisan spending coalition has adopted is very similar to the pattern of higher spending adopted by Kansas’ nominally Republican Governor Bill Graves and a bipartisan majority of the Kansas legislature during his second term here (1999-2003). Record spending leading to more taxes leading to more economic stagnation leading to more Kansans leaving for states with more fiscally prudent policies. Kansans number one destination state to move to today is Texas according to census figures. The most delicious irony of the anti-TABOR campaign is the fact that the leading TABOR critic touring Kansas these days is Carol Hedges. She is one of many Kansans who have moved to Colorado which has a large number of expatriate Kansans.

    These economic and demographic changes will take years and possibly even decades to fully play out. It is possible that a taxpayers bill of rights will eventually stage a comeback in Colorado, but that is unlikely for the rest of this decade. What is likely is resurrection of the Democratic Party as the Republicans fracture because of Owens’ fiscal apostasy in abandoning TABOR. The next governor of Colorado will be a Democrat.

    In the decade before Coloradan’s adopted the Taxpayers Bill of Rights in 1992 there wasn’t much difference in economic growth between my state of Kansas and Colorado. Both states grew below the national average. Colorado did slightly better than Kansas. That lethargic growth ended in 1992 in Colorado with TABOR’s passage. The growth in Colorado compared to Kansas in the 13 years of TABOR was dramatic and compelling. Soon it will be gone. TABOR will be a memory for Coloradans and that state’s economy will drift back into the tax ‘n spend lethargy that is Kansas today. What a shame.

  • Reports of TABOR’s Demise Have Been Greatly Exaggerated

    by Alan Cobb

    The supporters of Big Government were overjoyed this week when 52 percent of Colorado voters backed an effort to fix a glitch in that state’s hugely successful Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights by allowing the state government to keep an estimated $3.7 billion in scheduled tax relief over the next five years.

    This vote, they claimed, was a sign that the voters of Colorado had rejected their Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights, and that taxpayers across the nation should consider the Colorado vote a reason to oppose similar tax-and-spending limits in their own states.

    On the contrary, what Coloradoans actually did on Tuesday is vote to make their Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights look more like the improved version that is currently being proposed here in Kansas and in more than 20 other states.

    Colorado approved the nation’s first constitutional Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights in 1992. It limits the growth in state spending to the rate of inflation plus population growth, and it requires voter approval before politicians can raise taxes or spend above that limit.

    Since Colorado enacted its Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights, millions of that state’s citizens have reaped the benefits. For example, in the eight years before Colorado voters enacted the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR), the state ranked 43rd nationally in median family income growth. Since then, Colorado is 7th. Before TABOR, Colorado ranked 33rd nationally in job growth. Since then, Colorado is 6th. Before TABOR, Colorado ranked 43rd nationally in economic growth per capita, and since then it ranks 7th. TABOR opponents give the credit for Colorado’s recent economic success to the Rocky Mountains, apparently forgetting that the Rockies didn’t just spring up from the Plains in the 1990s.

    Still, like all first-of-its-kind products, Colorado’s Taxpayers Bill of Rights wasnt perfect. Think of Colorado’s TABOR as the first version of amazing new computer technology that helps millions of people become wealthier and more productive: overwhelmingly positive, a benefit to millions, but with a minor bug or two. In the case of Colorado’s TABOR, the bug is called the ratchet effect.

    Under the ratchet effect, when state revenue levels dip during a recession, the TABOR limit drops with it, and it cant automatically increase to the pre-recession high-water mark. Colorado’s TABOR also doesnt have any effective “Rainy Day” funds that would smooth out budget shortfalls in the lean years. This ratchet effect, when coupled with a competing constitutional amendment unique to Colorado that mandates large automatic increases in education spending, can create a budget squeeze. Fortunately, this ratchet effect bug in Colorado’s TABOR version 1.0 has been corrected in the TABOR version 2.0 that is now being considered in other states.

    It would obviously be ridiculous to declare the computer age dead or to call for the abolition of laptops because of a minor bug that can and will be fixed in subsequent versions. The cost of doing that would far outweigh the benefits that will come by improving and promoting a very effective and popular product.

    Colorado’s voters did not throw out their Taxpayers Bill of Rights. They used their TABOR-provided right to temporarily suspended scheduled tax relief in an attempt to fix the ratchet effect — essentially trying to make their TABOR look a little more like the improved TABOR version 2.0 that is under consideration in other states.

    To paraphrase Mark Twain, reports of the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights’ death have been greatly exaggerated. The truth is Colorado’s taxpayers just endorsed the improvements that we’ve proposed, which would help bring tax relief, economic freedom and a generally higher standard of living to millions of Americans, including many Kansans.

    Alan Cobb is the Director of the Kansas chapter of the Americans for Prosperity Foundation.

  • What Is the true state of public education in Kansas?

    On a web page that is part of the National Education Association website, we can read some good news about Kansas schools. Here are some of the headlines to be found on that page:

    Math Scores Are Among the Nation’s Best
    Math Scores Are Up
    Among the Best in the Nation in Students Going on to College
    College Entrance Exams Are Among the Nation’s Best
    Among the Best Gains in the Nation in Students Going to College
    ACT Scores Are Rising
    More Students Are Taking ACTs
    Public School Students Outperform Private School Students on AP Exams
    AP Scores Are Among the Nation’s Best
    More Public Schools Offer AP Courses
    Public School Students Outperform Private School Students on AP Exams
    Among the Best in the Nation in Students Receiving a High Score on AP Calculus Exams

    You can read the entire story here: Good News about Public Schools in Kansas.

    These headlines stand in contrast to what the Kansas Supreme Court has said, and to what we were told this summer during the Kansas Legislature’s special session. We were told that Kansas schools were in grave danger, that Kansas schools were not adequately funded, and that if the legislature didn’t do its job and adequately fund schools, then Kansas schoolchildren were in danger of being outperformed by children in all other states.

    But here we have the teachers union citing much evidence that Kansas schools are among the nation’s best.

    So what is the true state of public education in Kansas? There are many studies and statistics available. Many contradict the conclusions made by others. Constituencies such as the teachers unions and the education establishment tell us they have only the welfare of the children as their concern, but many times they act otherwise. Who is qualified to decide what to do?

    The answer is simple. Ultimately, parents have the responsibility for educating their children. They are the ones in the best position to know what is best for their children. We need to empower parents to be in control of education. The way to do that is to give parents a choice as to where to send their children to school. For most people, that choice doesn’t exist in a meaningful way. School choice through vouchers can give them that choice.

    The teachers union and education establishment say that competition and school choice through vouchers will ruin public education. But if they’re doing as good a job as the headlines above indicate, they should fare well under competition.