From the Topeka Capital Journal

Senate passes budget with higher ed cutConference committee will reconcile with House budget's bigger cutPosted: March 21, 2013 - 3:38pm

By Andy Marso

THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL

The Senate voted 24-16 for its budget Thursday, which will now have to be reconciled with the House's budget.Both chambers cut some from Gov. Sam Brownback's budget proposal, but the Senate hewed closer to it than the House, which had to make deeper cuts because its members refused to extend a sales tax increase.For example, the House offered a 4 percent cut to higher education as opposed to the Senate's 2 percent cut. The House also offered a salary freeze on all state agencies, locking them in at current salary payments regardless of vacant positions.The Senate's lower cut for higher education was still enough to turn off Sen. Oletha Faust-Goudeau, D-Wichita, who joined the other seven Senate Democrats in voting against the budget.“I proudly represent a district that is home to Wichita State University," Faust-Goudeau said. "This budget cuts more than $3 million from this college, including an aviation training program."Eight Republicans also voted against the budget, including Sen. Garrett Love, R-Montezuma, and Sen. Jacob LaTurner, R-Pittsburg.Love had objected to an amendment that swapped $5 million out of an oil and gas depletion trust fund that benefits rural counties and used the money to fund University of Kansas cancer research and an animal health laboratory at Kansas State University.LaTurner made several attempts to shift funds to low property value school districts, only to see each amendment fail.The most vocal opponents of the budget contained in Senate Substitute for House Bill 2143 were the Democrats.Sen. David Haley, D-Kansas City, pointed out that for the fourth straight year it provides no cost-of-living increase to public employee pension recipients, despite a 40 percent increase in such costs during that time.Sen. Tom Hawk, D-Manhattan, lamented the cuts to Kansas Board of Regents universities and also said it was unfair to low and middle-income Kansans to extend the sales tax increase a year after passing large income tax cuts.“Once again average Kansas taxpayers carry the burden of the income tax cuts,” Hawk said.

Sen. Anthony Hensley, D-Topeka, said he had "more than a dozen" reasons to vote against the budget, but he focused on three: the failure to include the fifth of five promised raises to underpaid state employees, the failure to pay into a fund that provides local property tax relief, and the usage of gaming funds to pay the state's contribution to the Kansas Public Employees Retirement System. Hensley said the law only allows lottery money to go to paying down KPERS' projected deficit, above and beyond the state's regular contribution.But at least one conservative legislator said the budget represented a breath of fresh air.“This is one of the first budgets I have had the pleasure of voting 'aye' on for as long as I’ve been up here," said Sen. Julia Lynn, R-Olathe. "This budget represents a fundamental shift in the ability of our state to grow jobs and to find efficiencies and to provide innovation.”One of the Senate's new members, Sen. Steve Fitzgerald, R-Leavenworth, said he looked forward to seeing what the conference committee — made up of three senators and three House members — will come up with."I place great faith in the leadership in crafting a very difficult bill," Fitzgerald said. "I look forward to the improvements they’ll be able to make in conference committee.”The Senate also passed 29-11 a bill to update state statutes related to quarantining those with infectious diseases. Opponents of HB 2183 expressed concerns that it removes a specific exclusion for Kansans with HIV/AIDS, but state officials have said that in the virus' current form there is no reason that population would ever be quarantined.The Senate also passed 28-12 a bill to create 28 "innovative districts" exempt from most of the state regulations that govern public school districts. Opponents of HB 2319 said the bill is far too broad in that it even allows such innovative districts to hire unlicensed teachers.

House rejects $45M in local property tax reliefBill requires vote, printing of result on property tax hike by city, county, school boardPosted: March 20, 2013 - 12:18pm

By Tim Carpenter

THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL

The Republican-led House rejected an amendment Wednesday that would have provided $45 million in state funding for distribution to cities and counties to reduce property taxes.

Rep. Jim Ward, D-Wichita, proposed an amendment to House Bill 2231 that funneled $22.5 million in each of the next two years based on a formula tied to county population and property valuations."They have to use it for property taxes," he said. "This amendment cuts property taxes."Rep. Steve Brunk, a Wichita Republican carrying the main bill, urged his colleagues to reject Ward's proposal because it would mandate local units of government to reduce property taxes. In addition, he questioned the wisdom of redistributing general state tax revenue across Kansas to curtail property taxes."This is a redistribution of existing wealth," Brunk said. "There is no tax relief here. This is a shifting of money."Brunk's bill was advanced to final action Thursday on a vote of 63-58. The bill would require local units of government — cities, counties, school boards or taxing entities with more than $1,000 in annual revenue — to conduct a public vote, rather than adopt an ordinance or resolution, when raising property taxes.It wouldn't set a cap on local property tax rates, but compels local elected officials to go on the record by publishing results of the vote in the official county newspaper. This bill was amended to exempt local units of government from the law if the increase was less than the rise in a consumer price index.The inflation provision will shrink criticism local government officials might have of House members supporting the bill, said Rep. Steve Huebert, R-Valley Center.House Minority Leader Paul Davis, D-Lawrence, said the state hadn't placed funding in the local ad valorem tax reduction fund since 2003. Objections by Republicans based on the theory that redistribution of tax burden was inherently wrong can't hold water because the GOP has endorsed millions of dollars in tax credits and exemptions, he said."Enough with the credits and exemptions," Davis said. "Let's give everybody some property tax relief."In terms of Ward's amendment on $45 million of property tax relief, defeated 48-73, the Topeka delegation was divided.Voting for the amendment were Reps. John Alcala, Annie Kuether, Harold Lane, Annie Tietze and Virgil Weigel, all Democrats, and Rep. Ken Corbet, a Republican. Opposing the amendment were Reps. Shanti Gandhi and Josh Powell, both Republicans.The House also defeated an amendment from Rep. Julie Menghini, D-Pittsburg, to restrict the vote and publication requirement in the bill to school boards, cities and counties. For example, her proposal would have exempted community colleges.

Kansas House slogs through sweeping tax reform debateAdjustment to Kansas' 6.3% sales tax key issue

Posted: March 20, 2013 - 4:55pm

By Tim Carpenter

THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL

The House launched into a much-anticipated debate Wednesday on legislation adjusting state income and sales taxes that put to a test Gov. Sam Brownback's influence in the Republican-led chamber.Rep. Richard Carlson, a St. Marys Republican and the tax committee chairman, said the reform bill easily given first-round approval was designed to make sustainable reductions in the overall tax burden on Kansans, restrict revenue to control government spending and promote job expansion."Kansas has begun the process of growing the Kansas economy," Carlson said. "Jobs for Kansas families create the self respect and the dignity of work providing for our families. More jobs, not more welfare and food stamps, is the answer."The House bill would deliver income tax rate reductions whenever annual state revenue grew beyond 2 percent. State itemized deductions, including those for mortgage interest and property tax payments, would be trimmed 24 percent in tax year 2013. Future deductions would be proportional to shrinkage in the state's top individual income tax rate.House Minority Leader Paul Davis, D-Lawrence, said the pending tax package and the new House budget was primarily structured to  pay for income tax cuts passed in the 2012 session of the Legislature that crater the budget."After 61 days, we are no closer to a solution that is fair, responsible or fiscally sound," Davis said. "No proposal offered solves the projected long-term deficit that Governor Brownback's tax plan created."A final vote on the House substitute for Senate Bill 84 is likely to occur Thursday in the House.Carlson opened more than two hours of floor action with an amendment contrary to the position staked out by Brownback, who recommended indefinite continuation of a 6.3 percent statewide sales tax scheduled to fall to 5.7 percent in June.Of the 1-cent increase passed in 2010 by a coalition of Democrats and moderate Republicans over the objection of conservative GOP legislators, 0.4 percent was to become a dedicated source of funding for state highway projects.The Senate recently adopted a bill complying with Brownback's strategy to rely on sales tax revenue to buy down income tax rates, but House Democrats and Republicans made clear any proposal for retention of the entire 6.3 percent sales tax was dead on arrival.Carlson responded to political reality by endorsing expiration of 0.6 percent in sales tax, but suggesting Kansas Department of Transportation receive half of the remaining 0.4 percent in sales tax. He said slicing  0.2 percent from the KDOT pot would help stabilize the state budget following adoption in 2012 of business and individual income tax cuts sought by Brownback and other Republicans.His amendment was adopted 59-58, but served as introduction to a dizzying series of proposals for adjusting the tax code.

In a bizarre reversal, Carlson surfaced with a follow-up amendment dedicating the 0.4 percent sales tax to KDOT for support of the 10-year, multibillion-dollar highway program called T-Works. That amendment passed easily on a voice vote."This is jobs folks," said Rep. Richard Proehl, R-Parsons. "That's what we've been striving for."Criticism emerged from Rep. Virgil Peck, a Republican from Tyro, who questioned whether earmarking this portion of Kansas sales tax for transportation projects would break the Legislature's habit of dipping into KDOT's reserves.In the past dozen years, Peck said, lawmakers raided the KDOT bank for about $2 billion. A separate budget bill given final approval Wednesday by the House stakes a claim to $150 million from KDOT in each of the next two years to bolster the bottom line of the state government's budget."We've all been guilty of using the bank of KDOT," Peck said. "This has been going on for many, many years."Peck, chairman of a House transportation budget committee, proposed an amendment folding all sales tax revenue for KDOT into the general fund. The maneuver would give House and Senate committees greater control of transportation finances and cease usage of KDOT accounts as a slush fund, he said.His colleagues disagreed with the idea, crushing the amendment on a 29-93 vote.The House also rejected an amendment offered by Rep. Don Schroeder, R-Hesston, that would have reset the state sales tax at 5.9 percent in July. He would forward 0.4 percent to KDOT and move 0.2 percent to the general fund. To make it revenue neutral, Schroeder said, the proposal would raise the highest individual income tax rate from 4.9 percent to 5.2 percent.His amendment, criticized as both an increase in the income and sales taxes, was lost on a voice vote.A similar fate met Lawrence Democratic Rep. John Wilson's amendment to restore a $1.4 million  adoption tax credit deleted in 2012."This is pro-family," Wilson said of the amendment denounced 53-60. "A strong family is one of the best ways a child can grow up to be a happy, thriving adult."Rep. Nile Dillmore, D-Wichita, proposed an amendment -- defeated 38-79 -- that would drop from the bill the provision gradually reducing the value of tax deductions. He said the House bill would result in tax increases of $490 million over the next five years.

Final House budget rejects highway funds diversionBudget cuts higher education funding, but reduces sales taxPosted: March 20, 2013 - 11:13am

By The Associated Press

The Kansas House gave final approval Wednesday to the chamber’s version of a $14 billion budget for the upcoming fiscal year, which includes a 4 percent cut to higher education.The 68-55 vote sends the bill to the Senate, which is scheduled to debate its version of the budget later in the day.The House budget spends about $6 billion in general state revenues in the fiscal year beginning July 1, but makes a $30 million cut in higher education budgets for state universities, community colleges and technical schools. The Senate version proposes a smaller reduction, taking 2 percent from operating budgets for a savings to the state of $15 million.Balancing the House budget will depend heavily upon passage of a tax bill, also scheduled for debate on Wednesday along with other property tax legislation. GOP leaders were confident the two plans would come together.“It’s something that we’ve been working for,” said House Speaker Ray Merrick, a Stilwell Republican. “At last we’re cutting budgets and trying to save the taxpayers some money.”Both chambers’ proposals closely follow a budget for spending on K-12 education, social services and public safety presented by Republican Gov. Sam Brownback.The Senate would increase state aid by $14 per pupil in 2014, raising it to $3,852. That increase is made possible by another part of the bill that calls to move the cost of providing school transportation services — $96.6 million — to the Department of Transportation. The House plan keeps base aid at $3,838 per student.The House on Wednesday rejected a tax package provision that would have diverted $382 million from the state transportation program to fund general government operations. The idea inspired strong protests. The House first voted 59-58 to reduce the diversion to $181 million, then voted to eliminate it altogether.The House budget did allow a decrease in the state sales tax scheduled for July. The Senate has approved a tax plan that would leave the sales tax rate at 6.3 percent, as it has been since 2010.Differences in both the tax and budget bills will be worked out by three House members and three senators in a conference committee in the coming weeks.“The Senate is taking an opposite approach of raising taxes and therefore they are able to cushion the blow of budget cuts,” said House Minority Leader Paul Davis, a Lawrence Democrat. “I don’t think the House is interested in taking a similar approach.”Under the House two-year budget proposal, the state would annually spend about $6 billion of the state general fund primarily from taxes and fees from July 1 of this year through June 30, 2014. The remaining $8 billion is raised through a combination of other state fees and federal funds, such as payments for Medicaid health care services for the poor and disabled.The $14 billion per year Senate plan is structured similarly.

Senate snubs state workers in budget billHensley laments lack of funds for undermarket pay raisesPosted: March 20, 2013 - 8:55pm

By Andy Marso

THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL

The Senate gave initial approval Wednesday night to a $14.6 billion budget that doesn’t fund promised raises for underpaid state employees. The budget represents a cut of about $35 million from Gov. Sam Brownback's proposal.The Senate worked well into the night, adjourning about 9 p.m.Senate Minority Leader Anthony Hensley, D-Topeka, said he was disappointed the budget bill didn’t include a payment to the State Undermarket Pay Program. The program is intended to bring state workers’ salaries more in line with those of their peers in the private sector and other states. The raises are to come in five installments, the fourth of which was paid out last year.Hensley said Kansas state employees still rank 49th in the nation in total compensation and are "being asked to do more with less" as state government has been cut back. He illustrated his point with an anecdote about an exhausted employee at Larned State Hospital being sent home after she began work on her fourth straight days of 16-hour shifts.“She didn’t even know what day it was when they asked her,” Hensley said.This is the first year the Senate's budget has been governed by the "pay-go" rule that caps the total amount of money at the level approved by the Ways and Means Committee and forces senators who want to add money in floor amendments to propose offsetting cuts.Hensley said he would have offered an amendment to pay for the final undermarket pay installment, but another senator already swapped out the funds from Hensley's offset target, the oil and gas depletion fund.“He beat me to the punch," Hensley said of Sen. Jim Denning, R-Overland Park.Denning's amendment took $5 million from the oil and gas fund, which helps mineral-rich counties hedge against the loss of property tax revenue when natural resources drying up. It split the $5 million between a University of Kansas Medical Center cancer research institute and a Kansas State University animal health lab.Denning's amendment pitted rural legislators against the rest of their colleagues, but it passed 30-10. Hensley and Topeka's other two senators voted for it. Sen. Laura Kelly, D-Topeka, said she is against raiding the oil and gas fund on principle, but the pay-go rule and last year's income tax cuts tied her hands."Every year prior to this I have voted no — let’s keep that trust fund there to do exactly what it’s intended to do," Kelly said. "But things are different now.”The pay-go rule pervaded Wednesday's debate on amendments, most of which failed.

Kelly successfully pushed for one of the evening's most modest changes, shifting $25,000 from the Kansas attorney general's $480,000 tobacco litigation fund and sliding it into a separate attorney general fund that reimburses counties for expensive prosecutions of violent sexual predators.Kelly said the sexual predator fund has never been funded, and counties are filing claims against the state to try and recoup money they are owed from cases that occurred as long ago as 2001.The Senate also tacked on an amendment requiring that the Legislature vote on Medicaid expansion under the federal health care reform law spearheaded by President Barack Obama before the state could participate in such an expansion.Sen. Ty Masterson, R-Andover, in his first year as Ways and Means chairman, noted that forming a balanced budget was complicated by the Senate's continued debate over tax reform — including revenue-producing measures proposed by Brownback.“We don’t have any confirmed tax policy yet," Masterson said. "We really don’t know exactly what we’re dealing with.”The Senate budget included a 2 percent cut for higher education funding.The House also passed its budget Wednesday and unless one of the chamber's adopts the other's budget outright, a panel of three from each body will have to reach a compromise.Hensley said he hoped the state employee compensation issue might be addressed in that process.

House moves closer to budget with sales tax cutProposal would raid highway funds, cut higher educationPosted: March 19, 2013 - 4:41pm

By Tim Carpenter

THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL

The House delivered first-round approval Tuesday of a budget for state government that balances by siphoning $300 million from highway projects over two years while imposing in July a 4 percent cut on higher education and targeting dozens of agencies for reductions of about $200 million.The bill assembled by the House Appropriations Committee and set for final action Wednesday would allow a three-year, 1-cent increase in the Kansas sales tax to expire as scheduled in June despite lobbying by Gov. Sam Brownback to reinstate the tax in July to secure about $260 million annually to help pay for state income tax reductions.“The House budget identifies savings in areas of state spending that do not affect core services,” said Rep. Marc Rhoades, a Newton Republican and chairman of the House budget panel.

The Senate’s version of the budget will be anchored by retention of the elevated state sales tax of 6.3 percent, which the 2010 Legislature voted to drop to 5.7 percent in 2013 with 0.4 of a percent dedicated to highway programs.For the first time, the House prepared a two-year budget plan that applied to the fiscal year starting July 1 and the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2014. The House's strategy chews through the anticipated $563.6 million in the state treasury at the close of the current fiscal year. It would leave a positive balance of $214 million in the $6.1 billion state general fund after one year and a deficit of $156 million after the second year.A House tax bill, likely to be debated Wednesday, could alter those bottom lines.While Republican representatives praised the budget bill as a responsible balance of revenues and expenditures, Democrats declared it fatally flawed."We have $564 million in the bank," said Rep. Jim Ward, D-Wichita. "Disabled people fight for scraps. This is morally and fundamentally wrong."House Minority Leader Paul Davis, a Lawrence Democrat, said he opposed the GOP plan for diverting transportation and higher education funds to shore up a state budget distorted by unnecessarily deep reductions in income taxes.“We passed a tax cut that was simply too large,” Davis said. “We can't afford it. It's a tax cut that benefits the rich. We can't properly fund our schools. We can't tell our state employees that they are valued.”Under the House’s budget, appropriations for the salaries of state employees would be frozen at existing levels. An amendment was passed by the House to exempt from the cap all six primary universities in the Kansas Board of Regents system, but that relief didn't apply to Washburn University in Topeka.Washburn would be required to take a share of the $56 million hit tied to the 4 percent rollback for higher education. Some legislators suggested this adjustment would trigger another round of student tuition hikes."Folks, on higher education, it's out of control," said Rhoades, the GOP budget chairman. "They raise tuition because they want to."While debate on the House budget consumed nearly three hours, the chamber's members were reluctant to adopt amendments. Representatives approved the university exemption offered by Rep. Ward Cassidy, R-St. Francis, as well as an amendment tied to the merger this year of the Juvenile Justice Authority into the Kansas Department of Corrections. The JJA measure stipulated no juvenile program funding could be converted to services for adult inmates in the state prison system.The House rejected amendments to delete $600,000 in the budget for public broadcasting — a 50 percent reduction from current funding.Rep. Pete DeGraaf, R-Mulvane, suggested the cash go to the judicial branch, while Rep. Allan Rothlisberg, R-Grandview Plaza, recommended the money be diverted to the Meals on Wheels program for senior citizens. Neither viewed subsidizing public radio and television programs for children a core government function."You're putting them in front of an idiot box and expecting people to teach your children," Rothlisberg said. "To me, the choice is very clear."

KDOT chief: Highway funds need sales taxSec. King urges House not to divert sales tax extensionPosted: March 18, 2013 - 3:01pm

By The Capital-Journal

Transportation Sec. Mike King urged House members not to divert funds from 2010 sales tax meant for highway projects that are expected to create hundreds of thousands of jobs across the state.King, in a statement released Monday, said House Substitute for Senate Bill 84 would rob the T-Works program of the funding it needs to be viable before it gets off the ground.“Loss of the sales tax revenue will reduce the agency’s anticipated revenues by nearly $382 million over the next two years," King said. "This is in addition to proposed transfers from the State Highway Fund of nearly $300 million. So, clearly, the loss of sales tax revenue will have serious consequences for the T-WORKS program as early as this summer. Highway projects will be cut or delayed. At this time, we haven’t analyzed which projects may be affected, but we will consider all categories of projects – preservation, modernization and expansion that are scheduled to be let in fiscal year 2014 and after.”Gov. Mark Parkinson signed a 1 percent sales tax increase in 2010 to solidify the state budget following the recent recession. Six-tenths of that tax will sunset July 1 under current law, with the remainder going to fund the highway projects.Gov. Sam Brownback has proposed keeping the full sales tax in place to help pay for last year's income tax cuts and maintain the highway funding.House members have expressed reluctance to keeping the elevated sales tax, which the Kansas Chamber of Commerce opposes.

Wagle warming to Medicaid expansionSenate president says federal flexibility is keyPosted: March 22, 2013 - 11:44am

By Andy Marso

THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL

With a six-hour budget debate reaching an end, Sen. Dennis Pyle, R-Hiawatha, offered an amendment Wednesday to require legislative approval for any effort to expand Kansas Medicaid under the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, commonly called "Obamacare."Pyle, a staunch opponent of the health care reform signed by President Barack Obama in 2010, said that although Gov. Sam Brownback has given no indication he will

participate in the expansion, Pyle still wanted to make sure the Legislature has a say if he does.Senate President Susan Wagle, R-Wichita, stood up and said she was supporting the amendment, but not for the same reasons as Pyle. Wagle pointed to a part of the amendment that she said would allow the Legislature to decide how the money would be spent if Medicaid is expanded."We need to remain flexible here in this state and find our own Kansas-based solutions," Wagle said in explaining her comments Thursday. "If that means drawing down some of those federal funds, we need to be flexible in how we draw them down."With that, Wagle became the first of the Legislature's conservative leadership members to express some openness to the possibility of expanding Medicaid under Obamacare.Wagle said she still has serious reservations about the law, expressing frustration with former Gov. Kathleen Sebelius — now head of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services — "sending down a new set of regulations every week."But Wagle said she is intrigued by the negotiations Sebelius' department is having with states like Arkansas about taking the federal money for expanding Medicaid and using it to help low-income residents pay premiums for private insurance instead.Wagle said her openness to Medicaid expansion hinges on the feds allowing that kind of flexibility."Obamacare is changing our world," Wagle said. "It's changing our health care system. One thing we need to do is keep doors open, keep talking and keep trying to find Kansas solutions."Brownback said Thursday that he hasn’t shut the door to expansion yet."We're open on it," Brownback said. "We're very concerned about the long-term costs. I want to listen to the Legislature."Insurance Commissioner Sandy Praeger, a moderate Republican, has advocated for the expansion, noting that federal tax dollars from Kansans will be used for the program whether Kansas participates or not. Praeger also said Kansas currently has some of the country's most restrictive income thresholds for Medicaid and the expansion — which extends eligibility to citizens who make 138 percent of the federal poverty level — would offer health coverage to tens of thousands of Kansans currently without it.Kansas hospitals also have come out for the reform. Praeger said they stand to lose federal subsidies for treating uninsured patients, because the federal law assumes that fewer people will be without coverage. Without the Medicaid expansion, that change is projected to hit rural hospitals especially hard.But many Senate conservatives were elected last year on a platform that included unflinching resistance to Obamacare. They have expressed concerns about the costs of Medicaid expansion.Under the current law, the federal government provides 100 percent of the funding in the expansion's early years and 90 percent thereafter. But there are doubts that the feds will be able to live up to their end of that bargain.

"There's no guarantee the federal funding is going to continue," said Sen. Tom Arpke, R-Salina. "Just look at what's happening now, with the sequester. I just don't see how they're going to continue passing out these federal funds they don't have available."That sentiment also has some traction in the House. A committee from that chamber passed a resolution stating that Kansas shouldn’t participate in the Medicaid expansion. That bill remains in limbo, with no vote yet in the full House.A wildcard in the expansion debate may be Brownback's "KanCare" Medicaid reform, which delegated administration of the state's Medicaid dollars to three private managed care companies this year.The Brownback administration projects KanCare will save as much as $1 billion over five years while improving health outcomes. Wagle and Arpke said to their knowledge, the change is working well thus far. Participating in the expansion could bolster the program.Pyle said Brownback has the authority to "take the first step" on expansion, but his position on whether Brownback should take that step remains unchanged."We should say 'no' to Obamacare," Pyle said.Wagle's position seems more nuanced, and Senate Minority Leader Anthony Hensley, D-Topeka, said that is a good sign for Medicaid expansion in Kansas."I think she sees the trend in other states where Republican governors are basically agreeing to the whole Medicaid issue," Hensley said. "I would hope the governor of Kansas would follow suit.”

Fed report: 'Obamacare' already helping many KansansDespite opposition, insurance coverage available to more residentsPosted: March 19, 2013 - 3:50pm

By Megan Hart

THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL

Though many Kansans dislike Obamacare, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services says they are already benefiting from it.The department released fact sheets on how many people in the 50 states have received new or expanded health care coverage because of the Affordable Care Act, commonly known as Obamacare. The law passed in March 2010, and some of its features, such as exchanges or marketplaces where people who don’t receive coverage through their jobs can buy insurance, won’t come online until 2014.An email from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services said the fact sheet was compiled using data from Kaiser Family Foundation’s Employer Health Benefits Survey and the U.S. Census Bureau, as well as Medicare and Medicaid.

The fact sheet estimated as of December 2011 about 25,000 young people in Kansas had taken advantage of a provision of the law that lets them stay on their parents’ health insurance plans until age 26, if they don’t get jobs that provide coverage.Anna Lambertson, executive director of the Kansas Health Consumer Coalition, said the nonprofit had heard expressions of relief from college students and young professionals because they wouldn’t have to either find a way to pay for insurance or forgo it. The coalition has been following the implementation of the Affordable Care Act closely and has held educational programs for people about how the law will affect them, she said.Another popular measure has been a provision that bars insurers from denying coverage to children because of pre-existing conditions, such as asthma, diabetes and cancer, Lambertson said. Insurers also will have to cover adults with pre-existing conditions and can’t charge them extra or refuse to cover treatment for their conditions next year, and the state has set up a kind of bridge program for those people in the meantime, she said.“They had a lot of trouble getting coverage,” she said. “They could not afford insurance in the private market.”In 2012, 36,383 people who receive their prescription drug coverage through Medicare saved $24 million because of discounts on prescriptions in the “donut hole,” according to the fact sheet. The donut hole refers to what seniors have to pay for their prescriptions once they hit a coverage limit, but before their out-of-pocket expenses trigger another layer of coverage.It estimated older Kansans have saved a total of about $59.3 million since the law was enacted, because it mandates a 50 percent discount on covered brand-name drugs and a 14 percent discount for generics for people who have Medicare and have reached the coverage limit.It also requires insurers to cover preventative care like colonoscopies, mammograms, well-child visits and flu shots without deductibles or co-pays. A more controversial provision of the law places contraception under preventative care, sparking as-yet unresolved legal challenges from people who say paying for insurance that includes birth control would infringe on their religious freedom. It isn’t clear how many people with private insurance took advantage of the various preventative services, though about 284,396 people in Kansas who get their insurance through Medicare used at least one free preventative service in 2012, according to the fact sheet.Kansas’ 16 community health centers, which operate 48 sites, have received about $40.9 million for operations and to build new sites, expand services or make upgrades, the fact sheet said. It also said the number of doctors and other health practitioners working in underserved communities in Kansas through the National Health Service Corps has more than tripled in recent years, from 44 in 2008 to 138 as of Sept. 30, 2012.Other expenditures in Kansas under the Affordable Care Act included $6.2 million for home visitations with at-risk mothers and their young children, $4.4 million for school health centers and $287,000 for centers where families who have a child with special health needs can share information.The biggest question for the future of the Affordable Care Act in Kansas is whether the state will opt to expand Medicaid, Lambertson said. The federal government will cover 100 percent of the cost of expansion for the next three years, with that percentage

eventually falling to 90 percent, but some legislators are wary of taking on extra expenses and don’t trust the federal government to fulfill its obligations.The fact sheet estimated about 326,885 Kansans, or about 14 percent of the population, lack health insurance. If Kansas decided to expand Medicaid to people earning 138 percent of the federal poverty level, or about $31,000 for a family of four, about 95 percent of those without insurance would be eligible for either Medicaid or subsidies to purchase coverage. Now, only families making less than 32 percent of the poverty level, or about $6,000 for four people, are eligible for Medicaid in Kansas.“It’s very difficult, unless you have a qualifying disability, to get on Kansas Medicaid no matter how poor you are,” Lambertson said.Lambertson said she is concerned that low-income people will put off getting care if they are not covered by Medicaid, shortening their lives and leading to higher health costs when they seek help for health problems that could have been prevented.“You would find people still falling through the cracks,” she said. Expanding Medicaid “will also help local providers, especially in rural communities, who are providing care for people who are currently uninsured.”The law also says that 80 percent of premiums must be spent on health care and quality improvements. If insurance companies spend too much on other expenses, such as overhead and marketing, they have to issue consumers a rebate or lower premiums. The fact sheet estimated more than 67,000 Kansans could be eligible for more than $4.1 million in rebates this year, but it wasn’t clear how they arrived at that number.

Speaker: Education reform proposals will be backMerrick predicts renewed attempts next session to pass bills stalled in committeePosted: March 24, 2013 - 1:40pm

By Andy Marso

THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL

House Speaker Ray Merrick, R-Stilwell, acknowledged this past week that he didn’t get as far on public education reform this session as he would have liked to. But he isn’t giving up."We’ve worked very hard at it, and we haven’t made a lot of progress this year, but we’re not going away," Merrick said. "It’s still going to be on the agenda next year.”The House and Senate did pass a bill limiting automatic paycheck deductions for public employee union political activities — a measure that directly affects the state's teachers' union. And a bill to exempt a select number of "innovative districts" from most of the state regulations that govern K-12 public schools appears headed to Gov. Sam Brownback in some form.But other major reforms, including expanding charter schools, holding back third-graders who don't score well enough on reading tests, rejecting the 2010 "Common

Core" curriculum reforms and curtailing teachers' collective bargaining rights stalled in the House and Senate education committees, not making it to the floor for votes in their respective chambers.Rep. Kasha Kelley, R-Arkansas City, and Sen. Steve Abrams, R-Arkansas City, served as chairpersons of those committees for the first time this year, taking over for more moderate Republicans in former Rep. Clay Aurand and former Sen. Jean Schodorf.Abrams and Kelley voiced a preference early in the session for major changes to the state's philosophies on public education. Abrams spoke of switching the focus from funding "inputs" to student achievement "outputs" and Kelley said she wanted a "child-centric" revolution that would encourage students to explore their "natural proclivities," whether those lead to college or not.Both said the reform path should include more options for parents and less regulations for school districts.But structural changes have proven a tough sell, as the state's public education advocates have argued that Kansas' current system has produced good results at low costs and is not in need of an overhaul so much as a vote of confidence in the form of increased funding to make up for recent cuts.“I think we’ve gotten the attention of the school groups," Merrick said. "They can get mobilized, and they have.”And it isn’t just the usual groups like the Kansas National Education Association teachers union. Heather Ousley, a mother from Merriam, mobilized herself last week, walking 60 miles in three days to voice her displeasure with the current legislative direction in person.While none of the education reform bills can be declared officially dead until after the session, most appear to be on their last legs.Kelley's House Education Committee had its final meeting Friday and rejected the Common Core bill 7-11. The committee heard hours of testimony over several days in considering that measure, and Kelley thanked members for their work on the House floor, while adding "I would have changed some of your votes."Kelley's committee rejected the charter schools bill 9-10. The measure also was defeated in Abrams' committee by a single vote.Senate Minority Leader Anthony Hensley, D-Topeka, said Republican committee colleagues from rural areas, like Sen. Ralph Ostmeyer, R-Grinnell, had reservations about the possible cost to the state of allowing widespread expansion of public charters. Hensley said Ostmeyer surmised that the base state aid to traditional public school pupils might be reduced to fund the charters.“I agree with him," Hensley said. "I think that would have been the practical effect.”Hensley said Sen. Dan Kerschen, R-Garden Plain, made a good point in stating that for a Legislature that has repeatedly encouraged school districts to find efficiencies — possibly by consolidating administrative functions — starting new, publicly-funded schools seemed counterintuitive.Ostmeyer and Kerschen also voted "no" on the mandatory retention of third-graders. The 5-6 committee vote on that measure was perhaps more surprising because

holding back third-graders until they are proficient in reading was one of Brownback's signature education initiatives this year.But concerns were raised in committee about the appropriateness of cutting parents out of a decision that could affect the long-term development of their children. Merrick said that though he supports the governor's plan, he understands that perspective.“I think they’re doing a disservice to their child by doing it," Merrick said of parents who want their children to advance despite reading struggles. "But that’s still, as far as I’m concerned, their right.”No proposal caused more of a clamor in the education community than the collective bargaining bill, which KNEA said indicated a "war on teachers." The teachers' union also took on the Kansas School Superintendents Association and Kansas Association of School Boards for working with Rep. Marvin Kleeb, R-Overland Park, without KNEA input.Seaman USD 345 superintendent Mike Mathes has said he told Kleeb from the beginning that he wanted KNEA at the table. The group was eventually invited to talks, and Kleeb announced last week that he wouldn’t work the collective bargaining bill this session in favor of allowing all three organizations time to sit down and work out their differences.“I don’t think we ought to have moved forward on that issue to start with,” said House Minority Leader Paul Davis, D-Lawrence. “If the parties want to try to reach some compromise, I think we ought to allow them to have some discussions and try to achieve that rather than a bunch of legislators who probably don’t know a lot about that (collective bargaining) process trying to ram something through."But Merrick said his appetite for change next year remains strong.“In my opinion and the opinion of a lot of people in this building there needs to be reform," Merrick said. "It’s just a matter of getting it out of committee and on to the House floor.”

Editorial: Let board of education decide Common CorePosted: March 22, 2013 - 8:34pm

By The Capital-Journal Editorial Board

While we feel strongly that the Legislature should determine appropriate funding levels for Kansas public schools, we agree that such instructional issues as the Common Core teaching standards are the domain of the Kansas State Board of Education.The House Education Committee made the right call Friday in rejecting a bill that would have banned those standards (House Bill 2289).Without naming a specific bill, state board of education chairwoman Jana Shaver had sent a letter to all legislators and the governor asking that they respect the board’s authority. Shaver said HB 2289, which would have overturned the state’s math and English teaching standards (Common Core), mainly prompted the letter.

“Our Board takes seriously our responsibility to Kansas students and schools and the decisions we make come after considerable thought and deliberation,” she wrote. “We understand you exercise the same care in the decisions you make. We are hopeful we can continue to work together in fulfilling our respective responsibilities for the benefit of the people of Kansas.”Critics had argued states were pressured by the federal government to adopt the Common Core standards. Proponents, such as Shaver, say that isn’t the case and that Kansas has been involved in their development from the beginning. More than 40 states have adopted the Common Core. The Common Core math and English standards were adopted in Kansas in 2010.Just like legislators, our state board of education members are elected and are beholden to their constituents. Voters select their board of education members to wrestle with these very matters. Concerns about teaching standards and other instructional issues are best taken up within the board framework, and members of the public and interested parties have a voice in that forum to air complaints and debate the merits of teaching standards, which the board approves in seven-year cycles.That said, concerns from legislators that certain standards could lead to appeals for more money are understandable. The board of education must accept that schools have to live within the means provided by legislators when it comes to implementing any standards.We’ll defer to the subject-matter experts as to the effectiveness of the Common Core standards themselves, but the number of teachers who have spoken out in favor is telling. All five local school district superintendents and such professional associations as the Kansas Association of Teachers of Mathematics are among those who supported the Common Core.These standards have been evaluated by the board of education through its review committees and have been voted on by the board in its public forum. It wasn’t the Legislature’s place to second-guess them now.

Legislature developing 'creative teaching' flexibilityEducation committee hopes to unlock passion of studentsPosted: March 23, 2013 - 4:25pm

By John Milburn

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Legislators are continuing efforts to develop a pilot program aimed at freeing Kansas school districts from rules and regulations that many claim impair creative teaching.Republican legislators and school administrators said the program would foster creative ways to get more out of student achievement, while having the flexibility to operate outside of state rules and regulations.

“The more that we tailor education to unlock the passion of children the more we win,” said House Education Committee Chairwoman Kasha Kelley, an Arkansas City Republican.The plan would set up a five-year pilot program allowing up to 28 districts to form a coalition of innovative districts. They would apply to be part of the program, spelling out what their goals would be for improving student performance.Senators approved the bill Thursday, sending it to the House for consideration. The Senate made changes to a similar version the House approved earlier in the session to expand the program from 10 school districts to 10 percent of the 286 Kansas districts.The Kansas National Education Association and other detractors worry about the rights of teachers and whether such a proposal is even constitutional.“Most of what (school districts) are complaining about are federal things. What does that leave?” said Mark Desetti, lobbyist for the KNEA. “There are either things around the edges or teacher issues.“There’s tremendous innovation going on under current law all over the state.”KNEA and its members have been vocal during the 2013 session that the conservative GOP Legislature is attacking teacher rights, aiming to break the organization through a range of efforts, including collective bargaining rights and the ability to deduct political action contributions from paychecks.Desetti said education laws, like any law, are established because of a few individuals who will attempt bad things, such as driving too fast on highways, not to “interfere with people who do the right thing.” KNEA’s concern is that districts granted innovative status will opt out of contract negotiations or hiring licensed teachers which could harm educators and schools.“We have to watch these kinds of things. These are dangerous trends,” Desetti said.Senate Education Committee Chairman Steve Abrams said such concerns about teacher negotiations and putting unqualified staff in the classroom were “a red herring.” He, like Kelley, doesn’t think superintendents and local school boards will scrap contracts or teacher quality if designated an innovative district.“It’s no different than a private business that wants to be successful. You will want the employees to be on board with the plan and happy,” said Abrams, an Arkansas City Republican.Abrams said because the districts are part of a pilot program and under more scrutiny for showing student progress they will want to involve the teaching staff and community to make the process work.“They are going to be under the spotlight. They are going to do everything possible to be successful,” he said.But Rep. Ed Trimmer, ranking Democrat on the House Education Committee and former teacher, said the bill is unnecessary and that many districts will choose to participate.“We’ll see. There’ nothing to indicate that it will make them any better,” said Trimmer, of Winfield. “Why don’t we just fund education properly and let all schools be innovative?”

The Kansas Association of School Boards has been supportive of the proposal. Lobbyist Mark Tallman said districts aren’t going to scrap teacher contracts or licensure just to be innovative.“We support it as a way of promoting higher standards with more local flexibility within the public school system under the direction of a locally elected board,” Tallman said.He said if districts would be inclined to use unlicensed or certified teachers the boards would be held accountable for getting better student performance or risk losing innovative status.“That’s ultimately what it comes down to,” Tallman said.

Math and English standards survive voteRep. Hedke introduced an amendment that failed to convince the bil's opponentsPosted: March 22, 2013 - 11:13am

By Celia Llopis-Jepsen

THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL

Kansas’ mathematics and English standards survived a vote in the House Education Committee on Friday despite a late attempt to amend the Common Core bill to make it more palatable to opponents.The committee’s chairwoman, Rep. Kasha Kelley, R-Arkansas City, and Rep. Shanti Gandhi, R-Topeka, were among the seven votes in favor of the bill to ban the set of math and English standards that the Kansas State Board of Education adopted in 2010.The standards, called the Common Core, are being used in more than 40 states and have been one of the committee’s key topics this session.The measure failed in an 11-7 vote with one abstention.Rep. John Bradford, R-Lansing, introduced the bill and made a final plea for support before the vote, telling the committee that the issue was straightforward.“I would just remind everybody that House Bill 2289 was about money,” he said. “The basic question was, are we going to spend the money?”Opponents of the Common Core argue that its use is costing Kansas millions of unnecessary dollars, a claim that the Kansas State Department of Education and the Kansas State Board of Education deny.Brad Neuenswander, deputy commissioner of education, says costs are involved every time Kansas updates its standards — something the state board does on a seven-year cycle — but that the Common Core had saved the state money.KSDE estimates it would have cost between $150,000 and $200,000 to develop other math, reading, and writing standards and an additional $25,000 to $30,000 for

external reviews by companies that evaluate standards. Developing state tests would cost another $9 million to $30 million, it says, depending on the technological complexity of the computer-based tests.Critics, however, point to a report by the Pioneer Institute, a free-market think tank in Massachusetts, that tallies costs of textbooks, technology and other expenses it says result from the Common Core. Former state board of education member Walt Chappell, who vigorously lobbied for H.B. 2289 and was the board’s sole vote against the Common Core in 2010, says Pioneer’s figures indicate Kansas will spend $186 million. KSDE says those figures include expenses that don’t apply to Kansas, where school boards budget annual textbook costs anyway, increasingly use open-source materials, and already use computer-based testing.Speaking after the hearing, state board member Deena Horst — a former legislator of 16 years — said it was a relief that the bill hadn’t passed.“We would’ve had to start completely over,” Horst said, “and frankly many local districts would’ve had to start over and repeat teacher training.”Horst said that a last-minute attempt to amend the bill had made sense in some ways, but that it still would have infringed on the board’s authority.The amendment, introduced by Rep. Dennis Hedke, R-Wichita, and supported by Bradford, included several points and would have kept current Common Core standards in place, while banning adoption of future standards produced by the Common Core consortium.But the committee voted down the amendment, with some saying it would have made the bill pointless.The amendment also would have banned Kansas from sending “personally identifiable data” about students to any public entity outside of Kansas.H.B. 2289 had worried the state board of education not only because it would have required the board to redevelop math, reading and writing standards, but because the board considered it an infringement on its constitutional role.Bradford said this week that he disagreed that the bill would have encroached on the board’s authority.Rep. Melissa Rooker said the bill was the single measure that the committee spent the most time on this session.

State board of education asks lawmakers, Brownback to respect its roleHouse considering bill to overturn math, English standardsPosted: March 20, 2013 - 4:38pm

By Celia Llopis-Jepsen

THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL

The Kansas State Board of Education has sent a letter to lawmakers and Gov. Sam Brownback expressing concern that some bills in the Legislature may infringe on the board's authority."We respect the Legislature’s constitutional responsibility to provide for the suitable finance of education for Kansas students," says the letter, signed by chairwoman Jana Shaver on behalf of the board. "We ask that our legislators likewise respect the State Board’s constitutional responsibility for the general supervision of schools, which includes accrediting schools, providing for academic standards and the licensure of teachers."The letter is brief and doesn't specify any bills, but it was prompted in large part by House Bill 2289, which would ban Kansas' current mathematics and English standards.Lawmakers in the House Education Committee are considering that bill, with proponents arguing that the standards, called the Common Core and adopted by dozens of states, are a federal imposition on Kansas schools and not academically rigorous.Though the committee had missed a deadline to pass the bill out, it revived the measure this week by sending it briefly to the House Appropriations Committee. The House Education Committee will discuss the bill again at noon Thursday.Shaver said the purpose of the letter was to clarify the board’s constitutional role.“I would say our major goal is to work together with the Legislature to provide the best quality education that we can,” she said. “We have worked very hard over the years to establish standards that we think are challenging and will help move our students forward toward college and career.”Shaver acknowledged that H.B. 2289 was the main impetus for the letter.“Several of the board members expressed concern” about the bill, she said.Two members of the board, Ken Willard and Deena Horst, who serve as legislative liaisons for the board, also have been speaking to lawmakers one-on-one about the math and English standards and what effect banning them would have.A former board member, meanwhile, Walt Chappell, has been lobbying lawmakers in favor of the bill. Chappell, who believes the standards aren’t rigorous enough, was the only vote against adopting Common Core in 2010.Chappell disagreed that the bill would infringe on the board’s constitutional authority since the Legislature funds education.“They can say, ‘We want Common Core,’ but they can’t say, ‘Now pay for it,’ ” he said.At a meeting earlier this month, the state board discussed the bill and others that also touched upon standards and curriculum. A number said such matters are the prerogative of the state board and not lawmakers. Article VI of the Kansas Constitution delegates “general supervision of public schools” to the state board, which by law revises and passes standards for core subjects on a seven-year cycle. In 2010 it adopted new math and English standards. This year it will vote on new science and history standards.Seven members voted to send the letter. Willard abstained and two opposed the idea, Steve Roberts and John Bacon.

“I appreciate that my fellow board members want a clearer distinction of our constitutional authority,” Roberts said Wednesday, adding, however, that it is important to “treat everyone with respect, especially when we have serious issues before us.”All five school superintendents in Shawnee County say they support the Common Core standards.

Hensley: Innovative districts unconstitutionalMinority leader says state board of education needs oversightPosted: March 20, 2013 - 4:14pm

By Andy Marso

THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL

The Senate gave initial approval to a bill Wednesday that would allow 10 percent of Kansas school districts to opt out of most state rules and regulations, despite Senate Minority Leader Anthony Hensley's warning that it violates the state constitution.House Bill 2319 allows for 28 "innovative districts" that would have autonomy over almost all matters other than special education requirements. Questions from Sen. Marci Francisco, D-Lawrence, revealed that the state board of education wouldn’t have unilateral authority to end the districts "innovative" status for the statutory duration of the program.“I’m very concerned about that part of the bill,” Francisco said. “It seems like we’ve turned over responsibility for supervision to the state board of education and now for five years they’ll have no control.”Hensley, D-Topeka, sounded the constitutionality alarm.“That’s in direct violation of Article 6 of the Kansas Constitution,” Hensley said.Other Democrats objected that one of the regulations from which the innovative district will be exempt is the requirement that teachers be licensed.“What type of message are we sending to high school students when we say, 'Hey if you want to teach in Kansas, you don’t have to be certified anymore?’ " asked Sen. Tom Holland, D-Baldwin City. "What does that say?”But the bill, carried by Sen. Steve Abrams, R-Arkansas City, still passed handily to final action.Abrams, chairman of the Senate Education Committee, said district after district has come to him complaining about red tape holding them back.“What this does is it gets rid of those rules and regulations and focuses on performance of the students,” Abrams said.

Abrams said the innovative districts could become models for the rest of the state if student achievement improves.The House which passed a bill establishing 10 total "innovative districts" will have to approve the expansion of the program in the Senate bill.

Funding questions postpone charter school votePosted: March 20, 2013 - 5:23pm

By Celia Llopis-Jepsen

THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL

A vote on the charter schools bill was postponed another day Wednesday by opponents who continued their barrage of questions about how the measure would work.But despite the delay, Sen. Steve Abrams, chairman of the Senate Education Committee, which is considering the bill, seemed determined to put the measure to a vote by the end of Thursday.Sen. Pat Pettey, D-Kansas City, led much of the conversation, asking for specifics on the bill’s provisions concerning charter school facilities, funding, enrollment and oversight. Pettey argued that supervision of public schools would be inadequate under the bill.“It boggles my mind that we would want to take this risk,” she said.She homed in repeatedly on the bill’s potential costs, drawing objections from Abrams and Sen. Tom Arpke, R-Salina.Pettey said the bill could cost $25 million or more if private schools converted to charter schools, qualifying them for state aid.“I don’t believe that’s going to be a reality,” Abrams responded, suggesting that most students at parochial schools would want to stay there.“They value the religious training they are getting,” he said.Pressed by Sen. Anthony Hensley, D-Topeka, about the costs of the bill, Abrams said there was no way to know how much Kansas’ public student population would expand under the bill, and that it was unclear where the funding would come from.“First things first,” Abrams said. “There’s no use getting an appropriation if we can’t get this into law.”But Abrams assured Hensley repeatedly that the Legislature wouldn’t dip into existing public education funding to finance new charter schools or private schools that convert into charter schools.“The money’s got to come from somewhere,” Hensley said, “and I think we should have an answer to that question before this Legislature proceeds with this bill.”

“This doesn’t take money away from existing schools,” Abrams responded. “I don’t know where (the money) is going to come from because that is a legislative process.”Abrams asked members of the committee to meet early on Thursday and if necessary to stay into the evening until they are done with the bill.

House bill creates $10M aid program for private schoolsCritics contend measure lacks academic accountability, unfair to disabled studentsPosted: March 18, 2013 - 4:07pm

By Tim Carpenter

THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL

The House's education committee gathered conflicting testimony Monday on a bill granting $10 million annually in state tax breaks to finance a new scholarship program for  students attending K-12 private schools.An advocate of Catholic schools and the representative of an influential business organization praised the reform as a modest step toward student "choice" in Kansas education, while public school supporters declared the measure a misguided precursor to a damaging voucher initiative long sought by parochial and unaccredited schools.State law allows donations to nontraditional schools, but this legislation would create a new format for directing gifts for benefit of disabled or low-income students interested in enrolling outside the public school system."Parents should have the right to choose the best school for their children without being penalized for enrolling them in a school not operated by the government," said Michael Schuttloffel, executive director of the Kansas Catholic Conference.He said Kansas should follow the lead of states adopting school-choice laws to empower parents who lack financial means to afford a private school."This bill is not about choice," said Tom Krebs, governmental relations specialist with the Kansas Association of School Boards. "This bill is about discrimination. They (schools accepting scholarships) can't discriminate on race or religion, but they can discriminate on severity of the disability, the capacity of the income-eligible family or even athletic prowess."Under House Bill 2400, donors paying privilege, premium or corporate taxes — banks, insurance firms and other entities — would receive a 70 percent state tax credit for contributions to a scholarship granting organization. The corporate donors also could claim a federal tax break.These nonprofit organizations would be responsible for coordinating distribution of scholarships to students attending anything other than a public school.Individual awards to a student could not exceed $8,000 annually. The money must be used for tuition and transportation. A donor business would be blocked from earmarking scholarships for  specific student.

Eligibility for scholarships would be defined in two ways. Children in families making no more than 185 percent of the federal poverty rate, which, for a family of four, is close to $44,000, could apply. In addition, students with an individual education plan for a disability, such as autism, traumatic brain injury or blindness, would qualify. Academically gifted students with an IEP couldn't receive these scholarships.A clause in the bill would mandate students accepting scholarships to waive their right to special education services, meaning a private school wouldn’t have to abide by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.Deborah Meyer, director of special education services in the Shawnee Mission school district, said schools accepting these scholarships could ignore service standards for disabled students rigorously applied to public schools."A private school under HB 2400 could discriminate against students with disabilities and not be held accountable," she said.Former House Speaker Mike O'Neal, the president of the Kansas Chamber, said legislators shouldn’t allow the bill to fall victim to debate about how much tax revenue would be subtracted from the state treasury or how much money public schools might lose by virtue of tax incentives to private education."Those who question businesses' contributions to education need look no further than the names inscribed on the hundreds of education buildings that dot our landscape," he said. "Many are our members."The House Education Committee didn't take action on the bill, but chairwoman Rep. Kasha Kelley, R-Arkansas City, said she would attempt to gain committee adoption of the measure.

Emotions flow during immigrant tuition hearingIndian lawmaker to Kobach: Who's the illegal immigrant here?Posted: March 20, 2013 - 10:29am

By Andy Marso

THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL

The Legislature's annual attempt to repeal a statute allowing in-state tuition for Kansas students without legal residency drew an emotional crowd to a House committee Wednesday.Students who have lived in the United States most of their lives got choked up as they described the academic lifeline in-state tuition has provided to improve their lives. A counselor who works with such students in Wichita high schools shed tears as she showed legislators a scrapbook of success stories. Murmurs of unrest were heard in the gallery as one House member asked about the prevalence of illegal immigrants from gangs and drug cartels in American prisons.

But nothing drew a bigger reaction than when Rep. Ponka-We Victors, D-Wichita, wrapped up a series of questions to the bill's chief proponent, Secretary of State Kris Kobach.“I think it’s funny Mr. Kobach, because when you mention illegal immigrant, I think of all of you,” said Victors, the Legislature's lone American Indian member.The heavily pro-immigrant gallery burst into cheers and applause — a rare reaction in normally staid hearings."Please don't do that," said Rep. Arlen Siegfreid, R-Olathe, the chairman of the House Federal and State Affairs Committee.Wednesday's hearing on House Bill 2192 would have repealed a nearly 10-year-old statute that allows students who graduate from Kansas high schools and have lived in Kansas for at least three years to pay in-state tuition at state universities and community colleges, regardless of residency status.Kobach, a lightning-rod for controversy on immigration issues, told the committee federal law conflicts with that statute.“U.S. citizens should always come first when it comes to handing out government subsidies,” Kobach said.Kobach also pointed out that natives of foreign countries who seek student visas to attend Kansas universities must pay out-of-state tuition.“I think that is an absurd reverse incentive," Kobach said. "If you follow the law, we’re charging you three times more.”Proponents of the bill were outnumbered at Wednesday's hearing, but Kobach was joined by Leah Herron, of Shawnee."As a taxpaying citizen, I believe it’s unfair for me to shoulder this responsibility," Herron said.Fred Logan of the Kansas Board of Regents, said the students involved pay the same tuition as their high school classmates. Logan said of the 630 immigrants currently accessing in-state tuition under the law, more than 500 attend community colleges. He called the 2004 law a "pro-growth" initiative and said it treats students without legal status fairly.“They’re innocent," Logan said. "That’s important to remember. They came here because their parents brought them here.”But Rep. Allan Rothlisberg, R-Grandview Plaza, could be seen shaking his head repeatedly as Logan said the word "innocent."Rothlisberg later said he believes illegal immigrant parents are "using their children as pawns" and he finds it "patently offensive" when governments are asked to provide information in languages other than English. Rothlisberg asked Elias Garcia, the head of the Kansas League of United Latin American Citizens, why there are so many illegal immigrants affiliated with drug cartels and violent gangs, such as El Salvador-based MS-13, in U.S. prisons.Garcia said Rothlisberg was overstating the problem.“I used to work with the Department of Corrections," Garcia said. "I kind of know a lot about who’s in our jails and our prisons.”

Garcia said comprehensive immigration is on its way at the federal level and it would be a mistake to repeal the tuition law. He and Logan were joined in opposition by a string of students, including Georgina Hernandez, a Wichita State University graduate student who said her parents brought her to the U.S. from Mexico when she was 10.Not eligible for federal student aid, Hernandez said she has worked nights as a hotel clerk and days as a housekeeper in order to afford in-state rates, while watching peers in southwest Kansas give up their college dreams for work in meat-packing plants.“It’s like we’re already on the floor, and this bill would just kick us in the face,” Hernandez said.Kim Voth, the Wichita schools counselor, said that before coming to testify she talked to one of her students who used the in-state tuition law to get an education degree and has since become a U.S. citizen and been teaching for five years.“I asked her what I should say today," Voth said, beginning to cry. "She got very quiet, then said, 'Please tell them that my college degree changed my life.' ”Several religious groups, including the Kansas Catholic Conference, also opposed the bill.The committee took no action on it.

Supreme Court justices argue citizenship voting lawKansas requirements similar to those being challenged in ArizonaPosted: March 18, 2013 - 1:30pm

By Jesse J. Holland

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON — Supreme Court justices disagreed Monday over whether states can require would-be voters to prove they are U.S. citizens before using a federal registration system designed to make signing up easier.Arizona and other states told the justices the precaution is needed to keep illegal immigrants and other noncitizens from voting. But some justices asked whether states have the right to force people to document their citizenship when Congress ordered the states to accept and use federal “motor voter” registration cards that only ask registrants to swear on paper that they are U.S. citizens.“I have a real big disconnect with how you can be saying you’re accepting and using, when you’re not registering people when they use it the way the federal law permits them to,” Justice Sonia Sotomayor said to Arizona Attorney General Thomas C. Horne.Said Horne, “It is the burden of the states to determine the eligibility of the voters.”This is the second voting eligibility issue the high court is tackling this session. Last month, several justices voiced deep skepticism about whether a section of the Voting

Rights Act of 1965, a law that has helped millions of minorities exercise their right to vote, especially in areas of the Deep South, was still needed.The court will make decisions in both later this year.In Monday’s case, the court is deciding the legality of Arizona’s requirement that prospective voters document their U.S. citizenship in order to use a registration form produced under the federal “motor voter” registration law. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said that that 1993 National Voter Registration Act, which doesn’t require such documentation, trumps Arizona’s Proposition 200 passed in 2004.Arizona appealed that decision to the Supreme Court.The case focuses on Arizona, which has tangled frequently with the federal government over immigration issues involving the Mexican border. But it has broader implications because four other states — Alabama, Georgia, Kansas and Tennessee — have similar requirements, and 12 other states are contemplating such legislation.The federal “motor voter” law, enacted in 1993 to expand voter registration, requires states to offer voter registration when a resident applies for a driver’s license or certain benefits. Another provision of that law — the one at issue before the court — requires states to allow would-be voters to fill out mail-in registration cards and swear they are citizens under penalty of perjury, but it doesn’t require them to show proof. Under Proposition 200, Arizona officials require an Arizona driver’s license issued after 1996, a U.S. birth certificate, a passport or other similar document, or the state will reject the federal registration application form.Justice Antonin Scalia seemed to think that a sworn statement wasn’t enough to allow people to register to vote.“If you’re willing to violate the voting laws, I suppose you’re willing to violate the perjury laws,” he said.But attorney Patricia Millett, representing those challenging the law, answered that courts accept sworn statements as proof in criminal cases, some of which end in executions. Congress decided that a sworn statement with the risk of perjury was sufficient to register to vote in the federal system, she said.“This is not just a ticket into the state’s own registration process so they can go, ‘Thank you very much, (throw) it in the garbage can, now do what we would like you to do.’ It is a registration form,” Millett said.The Arizona requirement applies only to people who seek to register using the federal mail-in form. The state has its own form and an online system to register to vote when renewing a driver’s license. The appeals court ruling didn’t affect proof of citizenship requirements using the state forms.Opponents of Arizona’s law see it as an attack on vulnerable voter groups such as minorities, immigrants and the elderly. They say they have counted more than 31,000 potentially legal voters in Arizona who easily could have registered before Proposition 200 but were blocked initially by the law in the 20 months after it passed in 2004. They say about 20 percent of those thwarted were Latino.But Arizona officials say they should be able to pass laws to stop illegal immigrants and other noncitizens from getting on their voting rolls. The Arizona voting law was part of a package that also denied some government benefits to illegal immigrants and required Arizonans to show identification before voting.

The case is 12-71, Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona Inc.

House, Senate bills toe constitutional tightropeCompeting forces praise individual spirit, condemn reckless arrogancePosted: March 23, 2013 - 6:09pm

By Tim Carpenter

THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL

Secretary of State Kris Kobach infused academic flair and bare-knuckle politics into drafting a bill aimed at stopping gun-control fanatics in their tracks.More than 90 members of the House voted to pass the Second Amendment Protection Act, making it illegal for local, state or federal law enforcement agents to enforce U.S. regulations on firearms or ammunition manufactured and sold in Kansas. The bill calls for federal authorities crossing that line to face prison time.Kobach said the legislation, scheduled for a hearing Tuesday in a Senate committee, was woven tightly enough to survive constitutional challenge.On the other hand, Kansas assistant attorney general Charles Klebe said, "to state the obvious," the supremacy clause of the U.S. Constitution "cannot be waived by state law and any conflict between a valid federal law and a state law will be resolved by the courts" against a state.The three-year cost of defending Kansas taxpayers against lawsuits linked to this gun bill was estimated at $475,000. If supremacy is indeed found to be supreme, awards to plaintiffs and for attorney fees could be costly."It's a fight worth having," said Kobach, a former law professor at the University of Missouri-Kansas City. "These are fundamental principles of federal and state authority." RANGE OF THOUGHTThis gun-rights bill is among a barrage of legislation arcing through the House and Senate during the 2013 session. If signed into law, some could light the fuse on lawsuits. Topics capable of starting legal fights include concealed and open carry of guns, abortion, lobbying, education policy, religious symbols, airport security, drug testing, agriculture, worker rights and regulatory reforms capable of starting legal fights.Veteran political figures in Kansas have distinctly different ideas about the trend.Joan Wagnon, chairwoman of the Kansas Democratic Party and a former House member, said legislators in Kansas too often dropped into the hopper bills prepared by

the conservative American Legislative Exchange Council in Washington, D.C., without reflection on whether the proposed reform served Kansas' interests."There's a certain arrogance in the Legislature now that leads them to think there are no constraints," she said. "The Constitution is a big constraint that every legislator should respect."House Minority Leader Paul Davis, a Lawrence Democrat and a lawyer, said some questionable bills were intended as political statements. A "significant" portion of the Legislature isn't concerned with constitutional implications or legal challenges that could cost the state hundreds of thousands of dollars, he said."They're not using common sense," said Senate Minority Leader Anthony Hensley, D-Topeka. "They're out of touch with their constituents."A NATURAL TENSIONHowever, the executive director of the Kansas Republican Party said it was normal for different parts of American government to counter each other."Kansas is pushing back against what many see as federal encroachment," said Clay Barker, who leads the Kansas GOP. "There is a focus on protecting individual freedom. The legislative leadership, with the governor's support, want to let people have their say in committee. So, controversial bills get proposed and debated."House Speaker Ray Merrick, R-Stilwell, said he would like to have $1 for every time someone urged caution due to the threat of a lawsuit."It's an overused phrase," said Merrick, who has served in the House and Senate. "I've never said, 'Is there going to be a lawsuit over this?' We'd be in a lot of trouble if we did that every time we did something."Merrick said legislators must "do the right thing" with regard to their personal beliefs and sentiment of voters in their districts.For example, a bill in the House demonstrated that some representatives are uninhibited about wading into legal feuds. The measure affirms that state law permitting open carry of firearms eclipses local municipal ordinances banning such a practice. The cities of Leawood, Prairie Village and Kansas City, Kan., are the target of pending lawsuits because each maintains a ban on open carry.Senate Majority Leader Terry Bruce, a Hutchinson Republican and lawyer, said the dual-chamber legislative mechanism combined with executive branch veto authority effectively checks defective bills at the Statehouse."The ones, I feel, that will pass are very solid legally," he said. ON CLOSER INSPECTIONThe roster of bills raising eyebrows in some circles includes an offering by Rep. Brett Hildabrand, R-Merriam, who introduced a measure intended to put an end to "aggressive, humiliating pat-downs" by airport security in Kansas. His bill would make it illegal for Transportation Security Administration employees to touch an airline passenger's private parts — buttocks, genitals, female breasts — even through clothing. This type of restriction on TSA operations appears to brush up against the supremacy clause.

"Because the federal government has given someone a blue uniform and a badge, we are told that person has authority over our bodies and we must endure," Hildabrand said.The Kansas Association of Counties has Senate Bill 109 on its radar, as do organizations representing cities, school boards or education administrators. The bill presented to a Senate committee prohibits public funds from being used to pay lobbying services or membership dues to an association engaged in lobbying."If it goes forward, there will be some First Amendment issues that arise," said Nathan Eberline, associate legislative director and legal counsel to the county group.Meanwhile, the House and Senate adopted versions of a Religious Freedom Preservation Act. Both allow a person who believes their exercise of religion was burdened or was substantially likely to be burdened could file suit.Versions of this legislation in 2011 and 2012 made local anti-discrimination ordinances unenforceable, but that language was stricken from the 2013 edition. The Kansas Equality Coalition stands "neutral" on the remodeled bill, but KEC executive director Thomas Witt said the act could still be a litigation magnet."The bill still gives standing to someone who believes their religious liberties are 'likely to be burdened,' " Witt said. "We pointed out that this low standard could lead to unnecessary litigation." CHARTER SCHOOLS, FARMSSen. Steve Abrams, an Arkansas City Republican and chairman of the Senate Education Committee, urged colleagues to support Senate Bill 196, which would give cities and counties and the governing board of any public or private post-secondary institution the power to authorize an alternative school.Currently, only local school boards, such as Topeka Unified School District 501, possess the power to approve a charter school.Abrams said the new wave of independent charter schools would be eligible for state taxpayer funding and remain free of most state laws and regulations. The 15 current charter schools would remain bound by existing government mandates.Tom Krebs, representing the Kansas Association of School Boards, said the bills expanding charter schools in Kansas — rejected by House and Senate committees — appeared to be unconstitutional."Every school that gets state funding is to be operated by a locally elected board," he said. "These bills wouldn't do that."In one instance, inaction by the Legislature could provide incentive for a constitutional challenge of Kansas' corporate farming law.Attorney General Derek Schmidt issued a letter to the Kansas Department of Agriculture indicating a clause establishing divergent barriers of entry to business held by a family-farm corporation and other types of corporations could be defective.Bills to repeal state limits on corporate agriculture stalled in the House and Senate, which makes the issue ripe for review.

"The day has arrived to remove this unnecessary hurdle," said Agriculture Secretary Dale Rodman.

Analysis: Kansas highway programs are tempting targetsPosted: March 24, 2013 - 3:46pm

By John Hanna

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Three successive multibillion-dollar transportation programs have given Kansas some of the best highways in the nation, but they also have created a ready source of rainy day funds whenever the state faces budget problems.Borrowing funds meant for the Kansas Department of Transportation’s highway, bridge and road maintenance projects has become so common that some legislators have nicknamed the state’s transportation programs “the Bank of KDOT.” Both the efforts to siphon away funds and complaints about the “raids” are bipartisan habits stretching back nearly a quarter-century.This year is no exception. Republican Gov. Sam Brownback and many members of the GOP-dominated Legislature want to follow up on massive income tax cuts enacted last year and to position the state to eventually phase out personal income taxes. But they also have to stabilize the budget.Brownback has proposed diverting $510 million in highway funds during the next two years, according to legislative researchers. The House wanted to increase that amount by $382 million over two years but backed off the idea amid heavy criticism and a warning from Brownback’s own transportation secretary that already scheduled projects would be delayed.Yet, despite the rebuke for the House’s proposal, the Legislature appears likely to siphon off at least several hundred million dollars of highway funds, because both chambers have endorsed most of the diversions Brownback has proposed.“I think there’s an impression among some legislators that there is more than enough money in transportation to adequately fund roads and roads improvements,” said Senate President Susan Wagle, a Wichita Republican.The push for big, multiyear commitments to highway projects began in 1987 with then-Republican Gov. Mike Hayden, and it took him almost two years to overcome legislators’ skepticism. For that first program, the state increased its sales tax, boosted motor fuels taxes, hiked vehicle registration fees and authorized a then-gargantuan-sounding $890 million in bonds.Republican Gov. Bill Graves, the scion of a trucking-company family, followed suit with a bigger, 10-year program in 1999, and the last program was enacted with a big push from Democratic Gov. Mark Parkinson.In pushing the first program, Hayden lamented deficient bridges, narrow highway shoulders and unsafe stretches of road. A recent report from the Libertarian-leaning,

Los Angeles-based Reason Foundation said Kansas has no interstate miles in poor condition, and in 2010, it ranked the state third in the nation for the quality of its highways. That same year, Reader’s Digest magazine ranked Kansas first.Legislators in both parties also believe that keeping the current program on track preserves thousands of jobs.“We have decades of transportation programs that have created jobs and spurred economic development all across this state,” Rep. Julie Menghini, a Pittsburg Democrat, said during a House debate last week.And even as he proposes his own diversions of highway funds, Brownback is promising that what he proposes won’t delay projects, and his spokeswoman, Sherriene Jones-Sontag, has described transportation as a “core” function of state government. Brownback’s administration has been careful this year to tie most of the diversions to transportation-related items currently financed with general tax revenues, such as $246 million for public schools’ transportation programs.Brownback said during a brief interview with The Associated Press that he would have liked to have avoided diverting money from the transportation program but he had to deal with “the big trough” in the budget caused by last year’s income tax cuts.“We said, ‘Well, we need to fill this because we’re trying to protect core functions,’ and we were still able to do it and do the projects that had been announced and put forward,” Brownback said. “People put the money there in the roads. They’re going to build the roads, and then they look at ways they can, at times of being cash-tight, use it for an interim period for other things.”After Hayden’s program was enacted, supporters battled regular attempts to recapture some of the money. A year after Graves pushed successfully for his program, he was seeking to divert funds, and in 2002, his administration put nine projects on the chopping block until lawmakers raised motor fuels taxes. More siphoning occurred during the next administration of Democrat Kathleen Sebelius, and lawmakers brokered a deal with her to cancel a sales tax cut set for 2006 to keep the program on track.The back and forth has helped create a cadre of conservative, anti-tax, small-government skeptics. Some of them wonder whether the estimates of the revenues needed to sustain programs are overstated if projects remain intact despite raids. Some wonder whether the spending has gotten enough scrutiny.“Build government from the ground up with what you need -- not always what we want, but what we need,” said Jeff Glendening, director of the chapter of Americans for Prosperity. “And KDOT is probably the first department that needs to get looked at.”In the meantime, the Bank of KDOT is open for loans and withdrawals, and it is likely to stay that way as long as governors and legislators keep enacting big transportation programs.

Editorial: Artwalk wine bill worthy of supportPosted: March 24, 2013 - 5:03pm

An attempt by two Topeka senators to resurrect the free wine offerings that had become part of the city’s growing First Friday event art scene is worthy of support. Sen. Vicki Schmidt, R-Topeka, and Sen. Laura Kelly, D-Topeka, added language to Senate Bill 203 that would allow free alcoholic beverages in limited circumstances “at events sponsored by nonprofit organizations promoting the arts.”Many participating First Friday Artwalk locations had been offering complimentary wine as part of the monthly art gallery crawl. That came to a halt in late fall as the Kansas Division of Alcoholic Beverage Control began reviewing the practice in wake of citizen complaints, particularly in the NOTO Arts District.Mike Padilla, ABC chief of enforcement, noted in November that the public nature of these events was part of the problem. “You can’t give away free alcohol to the public in the state of Kansas,” he said.SB 203 would allow a business owner or owner’s agent to serve complimentary liquor or cereal malt beverage without a liquor license at an event sponsored by a nonprofit organization promoting the arts when approved by ordinance or resolution of the local governing body. The bill also would require notification of the ABC director at least 10 days in advance of the event.We like this compromise because it creates an opportunity for the city to allow alcoholic beverages at the artwalk, but it also gives the city a say in when and where such offerings are allowed. It also includes a mechanism to alert the ABC.Obviously, allowing alcohol to get into the hands of minors is unacceptable, and, to avoid running afoul of public consumption rules, stipulations may be needed about keeping the drinks within the building where they are served. In NOTO, there had been reports of artwalk patrons bringing beverages with them onto the sidewalks between galleries.Requiring that someone either monitor or physically serve the alcohol to patrons could be another helpful stipulation at the city level — versus offering drinks from an unattended table — in order to ensure no minors are served and that anyone who appears overserved is cut off. Some mechanism to deny future permission to businesses that don’t follow the rules would also be necessary.Sarah Carkhuff Fizell, executive director of ARTSConnect in Topeka, which organizes the First Friday Artwalk, said Senate Minority Leader Anthony Hensley, D-Topeka, also lent support to the measure, which she called a win-win. “It’s mostly an adult event, and we think that people ought to be able to serve a glass of wine on private property,” she said.Wine and other alcoholic beverages don’t make the artwalk, but they do help to make the event successful. We want to see that success continue. We appreciate the efforts of the Topeka senators to address an issue about which local arts patrons and galleries had been concerned and to open up the potential for a local solution, and we hope the House will offer its support, too.

Committee won't audit Brownback's $2 billion error

Spreadsheet error led to governor's claim of cutsPosted: March 23, 2013 - 7:15pm

The Associated PressLawmakers have decided not to investigate an incorrect figure that led Gov. Sam Brownback to make erroneous claims about state spending under his Democratic predecessor.The Wichita Eagle reports that the Legislative Post Audit Committee rejected the audit request Friday on a 5-4 party line. The vote followed a harsh debate over the integrity of the Republican governor and Budget Director Steve Anderson.Anderson offered his resignation after the $2 billion error on a spreadsheet found its way into a chart the governor used to claim credit for spending cuts that never happened. Brownback declined to accept the resignation.Senate Minority Leader Anthony Hensley requested the audit, saying the error caused a “serious misrepresentation of the truth.” Republican Sen. Julia Lynn, of Olathe, said the request was politically motivated.

House panel endorses change in local electionsOpponents suspect partisan element will taint billPosted: March 22, 2013 - 3:12pm

By Tim Carpenter

THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL

A House committee narrowly adopted a controversial bill Friday that would shift city, school board and a series of lower-profile local spring elections to the fall.The provision requiring these races to be conducted as partisan events was excluded from the bill before Rep. Scott Schwab, chairman of the House Elections Committee, saved the measure by breaking a 6-6 tie.Schwab justified his endorsement of the bill by referencing a February snowstorm that crushed turnout in local elections in Kansas. In Topeka, a record-low 4.4 percent voted to determine who advanced to an April general election.Overall, Schwab said,  these local races should feature an August primary and a November general election when the weather might be more accommodating to folks interested in participating in electoral decisions."The intent is to do all we can to increase voter turnout," said Rep. Lance Kinzer, R-Olathe.While advocates of the change spoke to expanding voter participation, there was no data offered to the committee proving such a move would alter turnout.Opponents of the bill indicated local government officials preferred to maintain the status quo.

"Election officers want it left alone," said Rep. Melanie Meier, D-Leavenworth.Rep. Julie Menghini, D-Pittsburg, said her heartburn with the House's substitute for Senate Bill 64 centered on suspicion the language making local elections partisan affairs would be inserted during debate on the House floor. Adding that word will block active-duty military members from serving in these public offices, she said."I think this is the place it should stop," Menghini said.Under the revised bill, local races would continue to be held in odd-numbered years. A bill introduced in the Senate would have ended the practice of nonpartisan local elections and stipulated they occur in even-numbered years along with state and national elections.Senate Minority Leader Anthony Hensley, D-Topeka, said conservatives in the Republican Party were behind the reform because their goal was to inject partisan divisions throughout Kansas' political spectrum."Whatever arguments they raise for increased turnout and reducing cost is just a big smoke screen to hide the fact that they are out to take over and have as much control over state and local government as they can possibly get," Hensley said.

Panel pushes KPERS 401-k discussion to next yearDebate on pension switch tabled as committee asks for more studyPosted: March 21, 2013 - 9:25am

By Andy Marso

THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL

With the session ebbing, members of a House committee said Thursday they felt rushed into considering major changes to the state's pension plan and put off further discussion of reform until next year.Rep. John Barker, R-Abilene, made the motion to table Senate Bill 117, a vehicle for designing a 401(k)-style direct contribution plan for new members of the Kansas Public Employees Retirement System.Barker, a former judge, said he prefers to be "methodical, prudent and cautious" on all major decisions.“I don’t think in the last few days we have been methodical," Barker said. "We’ve tried to be reasonable and prudent, but we can’t be cautious cause of time constraints.”Barker's motion was adopted by the House Pensions and Benefits Committee nearly unanimously.The KPERS debate was revived last week when big-name associates from financial firm Dimensional Fund Advisors came to testify about their direct-contribution plan after

private talks with Gov. Sam Brownback and other high-level state officials at the company's headquarters in Austin, Texas.Direct-contribution plans are favored by many conservatives because they place the risk for investment losses on the employee rather than the state. Market downturns were a factor in the estimated $9 billion shortfall between what KPERS has promised current members and what the system is projected to have available to pay out. Other states have run up even higher projected pension shortfalls, known as "unfunded actuarial liability."During Thursday's committee hearing Rep. John Alcala, D-Topeka, noted that after much study last year's Legislature passed a bill to integrate a "cash balance" plan into KPERS — seen as a compromise between the traditional pension system and the direct-contribution plans now common to the private sector.The cash balance plan, which isn’t yet in effect, is projected to help pay down the unfunded liability by 2033. Alcala said that given that, he was "not sure why this issue was rushed before this committee.”“I felt this was really on the fast track," Alcala said of the direct-contribution debate. "I didn’t feel comfortable making a decision on this right now. In fact, if I had to make a decision without this being tabled, it would have been no. It would have been no to all of this.”Rep. Virgil Weigel, D-Topeka, said he echoed Alcala's comments and also was put off by what he perceived as an "undertone" of blaming state employees — who held up their end of the pension contribution agreement — for the KPERS shortfall.Rep. Jim Howell, R-Derby, agreed that the committee hadn’t had enough time to debate the merits of various direct-contribution schemes. But he said he remains interested in giving state employees that option — which provides more portability than traditional pensions — and he would welcome revisiting it next year.“I don’t want to shy away from this forever," Howell said. "I think this is something we need to explore.”

Bill to sell $1.5B in KPERS bonds heads to HouseHouse panel passes bill 7-6 after analyzing risk in measured debatePosted: March 21, 2013 - 11:38am

By Andy Marso

THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL

With unusual coalitions on both sides, a House committee voted 7-6 Thursday in favor of a bill to sell $1.5 billion in bonds and infuse that cash into the Kansas Public Employee Retirement System.

Rep. Virgil Weigel, D-Topeka, joined six Republicans in voting for House Bill 2403, while Rep. John Alcala, D-Topeka, and the committee's top Democrat, Rep. Kathy Wolfe Moore, D-Kansas City, joined four other Republicans in voting no.Rep. Steven Johnson, R-Assaria, the committee chairman, said that leaves the bill's chances in the full House difficult to predict."I'm thrilled it was not party line," Johnson said of the vote. "I'm concerned it was not more decisive."Thursday's unusual vote came after committee members voiced concerns more practical than ideological and had a debate that was more reasoned than rhetorical.Johnson set the tone by telling the committee members that though he thinks issuing the bonds is a good idea, there are valid arguments on both sides that aren’t to be taken lightly.“A 'yes' vote and a 'no' vote are both very appropriate because this is a weighty decision,” Johnson said.The plan is to take advantage of historically low interest rates, locking in the bonds at a cap of no more than 5 percent, and then allow the KPERS Board of Trustees to invest the money in the hopes it will get at least the historical 8 percent return that has held over the past two to three decades despite serious swings.If all goes as planned, the infusion of capital will help shore up a KPERS system that is estimated to be about $9 billion under water and save the state about $3 billion in pension contributions over 20 years while getting the system to a key 80 percent funded threshold two years earlier than projected under the cash balance reform passed last year. An estimated $86 million — or about one-fifth — of the state's KPERS contribution would go to pay the bonds for the first four years.But, as with all investments, there are risks to the principle — risks that Johnson said shouldn’t be brushed off."That is something we need to go into with our eyes open,” Johnson said.Johnson said the long-term horizon of KPERS allows for more risk than he might take in his personal portfolio, because the system's investment specialists will have time to adjust to market fluctuations.But that wasn’t enough to mollify Rep. John Rubin, R-Shawnee, who voted against the measure.“I think we should be less risk-tolerant with the taxpayers' money than we are with our own,” Rubin said.Rubin also said that even if the market acts as projected and the bond proceeds are invested successfully, the Legislature has a history of sweeping such revenues for other purposes — most notably with bonds ostensibly sold for Kansas Department of Transportation projects.“We know how every year we like to raid the bank of KDOT,” Rubin said.Wolfe Moore said she "echoed" many of Rubin's comments, especially on the investment risks."I know it’s probably a really good gamble, but it’s still a gamble,” Wolfe Moore said.

Rep. Dan Hawkins, R-Wichita, noted that the KPERS board invests in more than just the volatile stock market, dispersing money amongst a global variety of options that should minimize risk.Hawkins, who voted for the bonds, said he saw them as a "booster shot" for a sickly KPERS system."We’re not adding new debt," Hawkins said. "We’re just exchanging where that debt’s at.”Alcala said he saw selling the bonds as a Band-Aid solution that might be used as an excuse to keep the state from fully addressing the structural contribution shortfalls that have threatened KPERS in the first place.Johnson said Monday would be the earliest the House would vote on the bill.

Legislators tackle city regulation of open-carry firearmsHouse bill seeks to thwart municipal bans on exposed gunsPosted: March 21, 2013 - 1:22pm

By Tim Carpenter

THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL

Kansas Libertarian Party leader Earl McIntosh wants nothing more than to buckle a handgun to his hip and walk unmolested by law enforcement in the cities of Prairie Village, Leawood and Kansas City, Kan.These municipalities, he said, defiantly reject a Kansas statute affirming the right to openly carry firearms and prompted the political party's lawsuits against the trio."Just imagine for a second that after all the new state legislation and laws that were enacted in 2013 are sent out to municipalities of Kansas and some local jurisdictions decided to pick and choose which laws they are going to follow," McIntosh said. "Well, I can tell you that is why we're here today." McIntosh, the Second Amendment chairman of the Libertarian group, said the House Federal and State Affairs Committee should vote Friday to endorse House Bill 2111 because it would dispel confusion cities may have about enacting codes contrary to state law. Topeka allows open carry of firearms.Representatives of several cities and the Kansas League of Municipalities urged legislators to holster the bill.Mike Taylor, a representative of the Unified Government of Wyandotte County and Kansas City, said "home rule" provisions of the Kansas Constitution placed a premium on local control and small government. The theory is policy decisions critical to a city ought to be made at the city level, he said.

"Too many of you rail against the federal government imposing unwanted policies on the state," Taylor told the House committee, "but then the Kansas Legislature turns around and does the same thing to local governments."He said the open carry of firearms had been regulated by city ordinance since before Kansas achieved statehood.Overland Park Police Chief John Douglass said weapons training and background check laws passed by the state for conceal-and-carry licensees should be relied upon for oversight of individuals choosing to open carry."It would be the intent of the city council to regulate open carry in the same manner as concealed carry — meaning that the same training required for persons to carry concealed would also be required for open carry," Douglass said.

Kansas corporate agriculture reform law stallsBrownback seeking business growth, while skeptics urge caution on reformPosted: March 21, 2013 - 9:12pm

By Tim Carpenter

THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL

The legislative business model for passage of a bill repealing Kansas law restricting corporations' involvement in agriculture dictated endorsement in the Senate, affirmation by the House and a signing ceremony with Gov. Sam Brownback.On Friday, that plan officially slipped off the rails.The Brownback administration ran into unexpectedly stiff bipartisan opposition after two months of lobbying for a plan to erase corporate restrictions on farm ownership and open Kansas wider to out-of-state investment in agribusiness.With a bill stalled in the Senate, a parallel measure was introduced Monday in the House and then followed by two days of hearings in the House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee.Rep. Sharon Schwartz, Republican chairwoman of the committee, said members of the House panel were sufficiently uneasy Friday with House Bill 2404 to delay action on the legislation and request the Kansas Judicial Council evaluate potential constitutional problems with existing state law on corporate agriculture. The Senate committee exploring Senate Bill 191 voted to request an interim legislative committee study the topic."I don't sense a lot of urgency to move on the measure," Schwartz said. "There's a lot of questions. I do want Kansas to be competitive with other states."Postponing action until the 2014 session will create opportunity for supporters and opponents of reform to make their case.

"We knew this would likely be more than a one-year effort," said Jackie McClaskey, assistant secretary in the Kansas Department of Agriculture. "There's a lot of misinformation out there about what we're trying to accomplish."Donn Teske, president of the Kansas Farmers Union, said the majority of Kansans don't support amendment of law to promote unrestrained out-of-state corporate ownership of farming businesses."If we're lucky enough to hold it off the rest of the session, and we have a year-long discussion, it will be really hard to pass it next year," he said.Kansas law generally limits corporate ownership of agricultural land to family farm corporations, family partnerships or corporations with 15 or fewer stockholders, who must all be Kansas residents. The state requires at least one partner or shareholder to live on the land or be actively engaged in supervising the work. There are exceptions for feedlots, poultry operations, dairies and hog farms.Attempts to loosen restrictions in recent decades have met with fierce opposition from advocates for family farmers and some rural legislators."Unfortunately, restrictive corporate farming law on the books are inhibiting and driving businesses to other states," said Dale Rodman, the state agriculture secretary. "We need to clean it up and make it more simple."He said current law hindered growth of agribusinesses interested in making investment in dairy, hog and poultry production facilities.Statute granting a county commission or county voters the right to reject corporate, but not family farm, facilities for hog and dairy operations presents an obstacle to investors, said Mike Beam, of the Kansas Livestock Association."Let's omit the county-by-county approval process and make our state laws more inviting to entities wanting to locate their business in the state," Beam said.Organizations aligned against the House and Senate bills included the Kansas Rural Center and Kansas chapter of the Sierra Club.Paul Johnson, who represents the Kansas Rural Center, said the Brownback administration's proposal deserved deliberative evaluation by an interim committee of legislators that could advise the 2014 Legislature"Kansas deserves better than a rushed, end-of-the-session discussion," he said. "The governor got it right in forming a drought task force and holding meetings across Kansas to solicit input. Why can't the Kansas Legislature use a similar model to take this debate on repealing corporate restrictions to Kansas' public?"In January, Attorney General Derek Schmidt sent a letter to the agriculture secretary indicating a provision of the current Kansas corporate agriculture law might be found unconstitutional if challenged in court.The section stipulating only corporations formed by Kansans may own land appears discriminatory, Schmidt said.

Senator concerned about AIDS quarantine possibilitySenate approved bill that would repeal quarantine ban despite Francisco's worriesPosted: March 20, 2013 - 3:47pm

By Andy Marso

THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL

The Senate gave initial approval Wednesday to a bill that would update public health statutes related to quarantine of Kansans with infectious diseases, despite one senator's concern that it might allow harassment of people with HIV or AIDS.Sen. Marci Francisco, D-Lawrence, said previous law explicitly stated that HIV or AIDS isn’t grounds for quarantine because the disease doesn’t spread through casual contact. She said House Bill 2183 would end that specific exclusion."Some people are concerned about that," Francisco said.The Senate voted down a Francisco amendment that would have restored the HIV/AIDS exclusion.When the bill was heard in committee the head of the Kansas Equality Coalition, which lobbies for gay rights, said his group was worried about ending the explicit exclusion of AIDS patients from quarantine statutes.But members of both parties said removing mention of HIV and AIDS from the quarantine statute simply reflects the modern knowledge that there is no fear of the disease spreading like more infectious illnesses.Sen. David Haley, D-Kansas City, said the Kansas Department of Health and Environment made it clear there is no reason to quarantine an AIDS patient."If we were putting anybody in harm’s way of discrimination, I would not be carrying this bill," Haley said.“In fact, this amendment makes it discriminatory," Sen. Mary Pilcher-Cook, R-Shawnee, said of Francisco's proposal. "We are separating people out with a certain disease from all other people.”But Sen. Laura Kelly, D-Topeka, said Francisco's amendment would have had merit in clarifying the law's intent.“Unless it were dealt with in administrative rules and regulations, it would allow for the isolation and quarantine of folks with HIV and AIDS even though the department of health has said in no circumstance would you do that,” Kelly said.

JoCo parent hikes to Topeka to support public education

Capitol activists seek more financing, less political intrusion into schoolsPosted: March 19, 2013 - 11:32am

By Tim Carpenter

THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL

A Johnson County mother of three completed a journey by foot Tuesday from Merriam to Topeka for the purpose of raising awareness about bills in the Legislature viewed as an assault on public education.Heather Ousley stepped out of her front door Saturday and completed the 60-mile trek to emphasize her support for a relatively new organization, Game on for Kansas Schools, and opposition to proposed financial and management restraints on K-12 public education."It's been a long few days," she said during a Statehouse news conference. "Since this legislative session began, there has been an unprecedented number of bills and attempts to dismantle and defund the system that provides public education in Kansas."She said the public school system had functioned admirably for years despite inconsistent financing from the state.The Legislature's restraint of funding to schools prompted a lawsuit now before the Kansas Supreme Court and a movement to amend the Kansas Constitution to step away from financial obligations to school children, she said."I will not sit idle," she said. "I will not sit idle while they attack the teachers that educated me. I will not sit idle while they cut the vital backbone of our state."Ousley was accompanied for portions of her walk by teachers from the Shawnee Mission, Lawrence and Olathe school districts, said Barbara Casey, a teacher in the Shawnee Mission branch of the state's National Education Association."None has gotten into the game more completely that Heather," Casey said. "At a time when teachers have been under very harsh attack in this building, Heather has lifted our spirits and inspired us. Heather is the parent that the teachers have been waiting for. We've been waiting for a parent who would match the passion with action." Beth Koon, the 2013 elementary teacher of the year in the Shawnee Mission school district, said she was frustrated by the perception among some legislators that public school educators were liberal union activists."I'm in the trenches," Koon said during the news conference. "Most people I work with are Republicans, are conservatives, are Christians and Catholics. Teachers are hard working. They aren't just 'lazy liberals.' "Representatives of KNEA gathered in the Capitol on Tuesday to speak with legislators about proposals for state budgets for public education. Other bills undergoing review during the session would alter collective bargaining rights for teachers, create tax breaks for donors of scholarships for unaccredited or private schools, prevent automatic deduction from teacher paychecks for donations to KNEA's political action committee, and allow cities and counties to authorize formation of charter schools. 

Ousley said she was motivated to walk to Topeka after learning of Gov. Sam Brownback's recommendation that third-graders with reading difficulties could be held back a year. One of the governor's top priorities is improving the standardized test scores in reading among fourth-graders."We have to stand up for our kids," she said.

Bill limiting public employee unions headed to governorPosted: March 19, 2013 - 10:37pm

By John Hanna

AP POLITICAL WRITER

A bill barring public employee unions in Kansas from deducting money from members’ paychecks to help finance political activities cleared the Republican-dominated Legislature on Tuesday.The House voted 68-54 in favor of the measure, and it now goes to GOP Gov. Sam Brownback, who’s expected to sign it. The Senate approved an identical version last week after supporters narrowed the bill’s scope to address concerns that the legislation violated free speech rights.The bill’s passage was a political victory for conservative Republican legislators and the Kansas Chamber of Commerce. They failed to push it through the Legislature in 2011, despite large GOP majorities and Brownback taking office as governor, because of a split among GOP senators including some who lost their seats last year.Supporters of the bill argue that state and local government agencies processing payrolls shouldn’t be entangled in transactions that divert money to political action committees. Supporters also contend the change will protect public employee union members from having part of their pay funneled to candidates or causes they oppose.“It gives members of public sector unions a choice in whether they want to contribute to the political actions of these organizations,” said Eric Stafford, a Kansas Chamber lobbyist.Opponents of the bill note that union members generally must agree to paycheck deductions beforehand. Kansas also has been a right-to-work state since the late 1950s, meaning workers must opt into unions and cannot be forced to pay union dues as a condition of employment.“This is the Legislature trying to tell employees and employers what they can and cannot do with what is the employees’ money ultimately,” said House Minority Leader Paul Davis, a Lawrence Democrat. “I just don’t think we have any business inserting ourselves into something like that.”Critics see the bill as an attempt to weaken the political influence of public employee unions by making it less convenient for them to contribute to political causes. Such unions strongly support Democrats and are vocal critics of Brownback.Another bill pending before the House Commerce, Labor and Economic Development Committee would narrow the scope of contract negotiations between teachers’ unions

and local school boards. In addition, Brownback’s administration and some GOP House members have renewed a push to mandate a 401(k)-style pension plan for new teachers and government workers, despite an overhaul last year aimed at bolstering the long-term financial health of the state retirement system.The House vote on the paycheck bill came only hours after Heather Ousley, a Merriam mother, finished a three-day, 60-mile walk from her home to the Statehouse to protest what she sees as attacks on teachers and public education.Mark Desetti, a lobbyist for the 25,000-member Kansas National Education Association, the state’s largest teachers’ union, said public employee groups are “under siege.” He said the bill singles out public employee unions for special restrictions.“The bill is there because we disagreed with the Chamber and the governor, and we need to be silenced,” Desetti said. “Go after us, but you’re not shutting us up.”Unions became more suspicious in January when Stafford, answering questions during a hearing by Kleeb’s committee, snapped, “I need this bill passed so we can get rid of public sector unions.” Stafford later acknowledged he lost his cool and apologized, saying supporters of the bill have no such goal.Also, when the House passed a version of the bill in January, it defined political activities broadly enough that critics said it could prevent unions from testifying before the Legislature about worker safety or hinder communications between a union and its members.Rep. Marvin Kleeb, who is chairman of the commerce committee, said that was never the intent, and the Senate rewrote the bill before passing it last week. The House’s vote Tuesday was to accept the Senate’s changes.Kleeb, an Overland Park Republican, said union members will still be able to write checks or give money individually to PACs but, “The point is to protect individual rights.”

Topeka senators look to preserve First Friday drinksSenators team up after state receives free wine complaintPosted: March 19, 2013 - 4:29pm

By Andy Marso

THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL

Sen. Vicki Schmidt, R-Topeka, said she and Sen. Laura Kelly, D-Topeka, inserted language in a bill passed by the Senate on Tuesday that would protect the free wine samples some art galleries offer during Topeka's First Friday events.Schmidt said the state's Alcoholic Beverage Control division was compelled to investigate the samples after receiving a complaint recently."They decided to enforce the rules, and the rules are that a public event free alcohol cannot be served," said Sarah Carkhuff Fizell, executive director of ARTSConnect in Topeka.

But Senate Bill 203 now specifies that the state is to "allow under certain conditions the serving of complimentary liquor at events sponsored by nonprofit organizations promoting the arts.""Which is a very good thing for our Friday art walk," Schmidt said.Fizell said Senate Minority Leader Anthony Hensley, D-Topeka, also lent his help to the measure, which she said will give the city of Topeka final authority to decide where the free samples may be served. Fizell said 60-some galleries now participate in First Fridays, and that it has become an important cultural activity for the city."It's mostly an adult event, and we think that people ought to be able to serve a glass of wine on private property," Fizell said, calling the measure a "win-win."SB 203 also includes language allowing vending machines to disperse liquor in certain establishments, which Schmidt said came at the request of the Kansas Star Casino.That proved more controversial.“I think we’re opening up Pandora’s box not having live people dispense alcohol,” said Sen. Pat Apple, R-Louisburg.But Sen. Ralph Ostmeyer, R-Grinnell, said the location and licensing of such machines would have to be approved by ABC, and he believes the agency will allow them sparingly.

Automatic cuts hit pocketbooks of some KU studentsTuition assistance programs for military members suspendedPosted: March 19, 2013 - 6:41am

By The Associated Press

LAWRENCE — Automatic federal spending cuts that took effect this month are hurting some U.S. military service members taking college courses, including 64 at the University of Kansas.The Army, Air Force and Marine Corps have suspended tuition assistance programs for active-duty, reserve or National Guard service members because of cuts that went into effect March 1.The Lawrence Journal-World reports (http://bit.ly/ZElJM6) a University of Kansas spokesman says students who enrolled in spring classes won’t lose the funding they already were awarded.It is unclear whether future classes of students will be able to apply for tuition assistance, which can be as much as $4,500 per year.Two U.S. senators are pushing this week for an amendment to restore the tuition assistance programs.

House panel votes to shrink classified staff ranksBill makes new state IT workers, supervisors, lawyers to work at will of governorPosted: March 18, 2013 - 11:31am

By Tim Carpenter

THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL

The House budget committee voted Monday to begin unraveling decades of civil service protections for state workers by advancing a bill requiring new information technology workers, supervisors and attorneys to be employed at the will of the governor.State agencies with public safety personnel, ranging from the Kansas Highway Patrol to the Kansas Department of Corrections, were removed from the sweeping bill that would otherwise apply to state government hires and people who transfer within the bureaucracy to a new position.The bill developed in concert with members of the administration of Gov. Sam Brownback passed on an unrecorded vote in the House Appropriations Committee that appeared to fall along party lines.It is unclear precisely how many employees the reform would touch if affirmed by the House, Senate and governor.Republicans on the House committee hailed House Bill 2384, which had the distinction of having a mystery sponsor. No individual stepped forward — in public — to testify on behalf of the measure. GOP legislators said state employees working under Brownback privately expressed enthusiasm for the reform.Rep. Gene Suellentrop, R-Wichita, said realignment of the hiring system would allow for upgrading of technology and legal staff employed by the state."We've all expressed frustration with the technologies of some of these agencies — how they deal with it and how they get their systems to perform individually and to communicate with others," he said. "One of the areas where we've been deficient, to some disagree, is the technology people in those agencies.”"This will allow us to bring in qualified people that we need to address those problems," Suellentrop said. "This also will address some of the issues from areas where we need better legal counsel."Democrats on the panel expressed dismay a bill substantively altering hiring formats had received so little evaluation by the Legislature. They urged formation of a study group to consider the best approach for modernizing hiring."We still have no proponent," said Rep. Jerry Henry, a Democrat from Cummings. "We have really had no, at least, written explanation as to what are the goals to be obtained by passage of this legislation. Who is the proponent? What is the objective? How does this improve how we handle state agencies?"

Rep. Marc Rhoades, R-Newton and chairman of the appropriations committee, said he wouldn't shed light on origins of the bill."I can't give you any particular agency that asked for it, but I can tell you anecdotally that I talked to agencies and they want to have the flexibility to have a reward system," Rhoades said. "This, in my opinion, will benefit departments in terms of performance bonuses."He said placing employees in the unclassified category would be useful to the state in terms of employee recruitment and by creating an avenue to possibility save on labor costs.Without civil service standards developed since 1941, state workers in the three categories covered by the bill could be more easily dismissed by virtue of serving in an unclassified position. For example, a classified worker can appeal dismissal or demotion to a review board but unclassified staff can’t."The fairness issue is always an important one to me," said Rep. Barbara Ballard, a Lawrence Democrat who believes the state's priority ought to be "protecting the employees against the coercion or the partisan political activities that could happen as a result of how some people were appointed and some people were not."Ballard said the legislation was structured in a manner that could run afoul with portions of federal equal employment and nondiscrimination law.Under the bill, agencies retaining the classified employee model would include the Kansas Bureau of Investigation, the Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks, the Kansas Adjutant General's office, the highway patrol, the Kansas Juvenile Justice Authority and the state corrections department.In addition, the bill was amended to permit agencies receiving federal grant funding to exempt workers from the reform to maintain the state's eligibility for U.S. government aid.Blogs / Political Runoff 

Political RunoffTim Carpenter reflects on governmentBY TIM CARPENTER

Thu, 03/14/2013 - 6:12pm

Pompeo: Working overtime to shape intelligence oversight

WASHINGTON -- Rep. Mike Pompeo leaned on his military record, aviation experience and Republican credentials to secure a cherished spot on the House's national security committee.

Scope of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence is as broad as its name implies. Members delve into intelligence gathering and analysis activities of the military, CIA, NSA and more than a dozen other elements of the U.S. government.

The oversight job is in addition to regular House committee assignments, and includes travel overseas to places not typically listed on holiday travel brochures.

"It's incredibly important we provide good, solid oversight on these agencies so the American people can have confidence that they're doing the things they're supposed to do," Pompeo said in an interview.

Pompeo, elected in 2010 in the 4th District dominated by Wichita, graduated first in his class at West Point and served in the cavalry in central Europe during the Cold War. He is a law school graduate of Harvard University and worked in the commercial aviation industry prior to entering politics.

In terms of the military's footing in Kansas, the state hosts McConnell Air Force Base, site of the Kansas Air National Guard’s 184th Intelligence Wing, as well as Fort Leavenworth, Fort Riley and Forbes Field.

House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, said Pompeo's "strong conservative principles and military background will be a major asset to our national security."

Pompeo sought advice of U.S. Sen. Pat Roberts, a Kansas Republican who chaired the Senate's version of the committee.

"He encouraged me to do it," Pompeo said. "He feels he made a significant contribution to America."

In terms of general national security issues, Pompeo said President Barack Obama made a mistake by declaring a date for withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq. He welcomed participation of women in the armed services, but was "very troubled by the almost inevitable changing of the standards" as females move into more combat roles.

From the Wichita Eagle

How will state fund its budget without income tax?

Count former state budget director Duane Goossen among those wondering how

Kansas will fund a state budget without a state income tax, which currently represents 46.5 percent of

state general fund revenue. None of the options Goossen offered sounded possible, let alone politically

viable, including more than doubling the sales tax or newly applying it to professional services,

pharmaceuticals, farm machinery and more, or implementing a 100-mill statewide property-tax levy. “A

decision to not replace the income-tax revenue would dramatically lower education and human service

budgets,” Goossen wrote on his blog for the Kansas Health Institute. “The governor and other supporters

of a zero income tax have not identified how income-tax receipts might be replaced other than to suggest

that economic growth will somehow take care of it.”

Read more here: http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2013/03/how-will-state-fund-its-budget-without-income-tax/#storylink=cpy

So they said

“‘The sky is falling’ is so much rhetoric.” – House Speaker Ray Merrick (in photo), R-

Stilwell, defending the House budget’s 4 percent across-the-board cut to the state’s higher-education

system

“I would submit to you that higher ed is out of control.” – Rep. Marc Rhoades, R-Newton, pointing to rising

tuition indefending the proposed cut

“I think they understand that there is so much bad stuff in this budget that they don’t want people to have

time to read it – or else they wouldn’t support it.” – Rep. John Wilson, D-Lawrence, on the 512-page

budget By Rhonda Holman

Read more here: http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2013/03/so-they-said-162/#storylink=cpy

Eagle editorial: Speak now on budget Published Thursday, March 21, 2013, at 8:15 p.m. Updated Thursday, March 21, 2013, at 8:16 p.m.

The tax and budget debates of the past week have stirred worries and further demonstrated how the Kansas Legislature’s makeup and fiscal priorities have changed. Kansans who care about the budget areas being slighted amid the tax-cutting zeal need to make themselves heard loudly and soon.

The chambers’ negotiators must reconcile the plans now that the House has declined to extend the higher sales-tax rate after July 1 (as the governor and Senate want to do) or to divert $382 million in sales-tax revenue from the transportation plan over the next two years (as the House Taxation Committee wanted).

The House and Senate would cut funding by $30 million and $15 million, respectively, for the higher-education system of state universities, community colleges and technical schools – which officials say will further drive up tuition rates and endanger programs. Only the Senate would increase K-12 per-pupil funding, and then only by $14 per pupil in fiscal 2014, doing little to ease the severe budget problems districts face statewide.

Area priorities at risk include the National Center for Aviation Training and scheduled highway improvements.

Despite the tenacious efforts on the floor of Sen. Carolyn McGinn, R-Sedgwick, the Senate-passed budget lacks funding to help Sedgwick County keep the Judge James Riddel Boys Ranch open, to help community mental health centers recover from the deep cuts they’ve sustained, or to support the arts at the level Kansans fought for two years ago. As it is, the Kansas Creative Arts Industries Commission would receive just $200,000 – a $500,000 cut from the current year and far from the kind of support needed to reclaim the $1.2 million in annual regional and federal matching grants that enriched Kansas’ cultural life.

The week also saw another failed effort by Rep. Jim Ward, D-Wichita, to give $45 million to cities and counties for lowering property taxes – which are the taxes Kansans fear and loathe most.

“At last we’re cutting budgets and trying to save the taxpayers some money,” said House Speaker Ray Merrick, R-Stilwell.

Yes, but with what Rep. Nile Dillmore, D-Wichita, called “a giant leap of faith” – and with far too little regard for the impact that decimating the state’s tax base will have on schools, college students and those who rely on state-funded social services.

Let it be said again that the state’s revenue crisis is entirely of its own making because of Gov. Sam Brownback’s historic bill last year eliminating income taxes for 191,000 businesses and farms and cutting income-tax rates for individuals. Now, when lawmakers should be cautiously trying to repair the damage and mitigate more, they seem eager to cut spending to clear Brownback’s desired “glide path to zero” income tax.

If Kansans have a problem with that, it’s now time to say so.

For the editorial board, Rhonda Holman

Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2013/03/22/2727082/eagle-editorial-speak-now-on-budget.html#storylink=cpy

House approves tax-cut plan after backing off proposal to use highway money

By BRENT D. WISTROM Eagle Topeka bureau Published Wednesday, March 20, 2013, at 3:01 p.m. Updated Thursday, March 21, 2013, at 3:54 p.m.

TOPEKA — Extended sales tax, stealing highway improvement money or deeper cuts to state service.

Something’s got to give if lawmakers want to accommodate the income tax cuts that Gov. Sam Brownback and his conservative Republican allies pushed through last year and the additional reductions they seek this year.

It will likely come down to negotiations between the House and Senate, which have approved competing tax cut plans. Both aim to solve budget problems created by last year’s massive income tax cuts while also promising to continue a march to join nine other state with no income taxes.

Leaders on both sides said Wednesday that they’re optimistic they’ll find middle ground in the next couple of weeks before lawmakers take a month-long break.

But no one seems willing to speculate on how that compromise will be reached.

The Republican-dominated Legislature does, however, seem to agree that driving down income tax rates is the best way to spur job creation, a concept some Republicans and virtually all Democrats dispute.

“Jobs for our Kansas families create self-respect and the dignity of work providing for our families,” said Rep. Richard Carlson, R-St. Marys. “More jobs – not more welfare and food stamps – is the answer our working families are looking for in Kansas.”

Agreement on a tax cut plan likely comes down to extending some or all of the temporary sales tax increase that is set to expire this summer, shifting money away from highways, eliminating tax credits or deductions – or some combination of that – paired with spending restraint.

The House got a powerful 82-37 preliminary vote for its plan, after rejecting an idea to use money intended for long-term transportation projects to pay for income tax cuts. A final vote comes Thursday.

Without the highway money, the House plan is likely to cause major budget headaches as early as next year. The plan also doesn’t guarantee quick income tax cuts on top of those approved last year. Instead, it promises to drive down rates any year state revenues grow by more than 2 percent.

The state usually plans on 4 percent growth, but that’s less likely if the state stops collecting a six-tenths of a cent sales tax scheduled to expire in July.

The Senate plan, meanwhile, cuts the state’s lower tax rate to 1.9 percent by 2016 and drops the top rate to 3.5 percent in 2017. It extends that six-tenths of a cent sales tax increase indefinitely. That helps keep the state’s budget relatively healthy, at least in the short term, but it’s politically problematic for lawmakers who promised to let it expire or view it as a tax hike.

Senators’ plan would take any growth in state revenues beyond 4 percent each year and channel it toward more income-tax cuts.

Vastly outnumbered Democrats bristle at both plans.

“Every proposal offered either raises sales tax on the middle class, de-funds the state’s largest jobs program, or requires massive cuts to core investments, like education,” House Minority Leader Paul Davis, D-Lawrence, said in a prepared statement. “No proposal offered solves the projected long-term deficit that Gov. Brownback’s tax plan created.”

The House plan took shape during a roughly 2.5-hour debate Wednesday.

Under Carlson’s original proposals, about $382 million that would have otherwise helped fuel a 10-year road improvement plan would have gone to the state’s general fund for the next two years.

That proved politically unpopular, and Kansas Department of Transportation Sec. Mike King warned it could delay or cancel projects statewide.

Carlson advocated cutting the proposed KDOT transfer in half. It passed on a 59-58 vote. He followed that up with a push to let all the money flow to KDOT, as planned. It passed on a voice vote.

Both the House and Senate plans would phase out the value of income tax deductions, such as the mortgage interest deduction, as income tax rates decline. The first step would trim the value of the deductions by 24 percent.

Democrats have blasted Republicans for pushing through massive income tax cuts last year, virtually forcing the state to find more revenue this year to avoid deep cuts.

That tax bill eliminated the tax on the profits of about 191,000 businesses and farms and lowered rates to 4.9 percent for the higher-income bracket and 3 percent for the lower-income bracket. It eliminated a host of tax credits and deductions, such as the food sales tax rebate that benefits poor working families.

House lawmakers tried revisit to last year’s cuts.

One attempt sought to reinstate the adoption credit. That failed.

Another push would have kept all deductions at full value, as opposed to phasing them out as tax rates decline. It failed on a 38-79 vote. And a push to tax rental and royalty for businesses that had taxes eliminated last year failed on a 37-70 vote.

“Somewhere there are winners, somewhere there are losers,” Rep. Nile Dillmore, D-Wichita, said of the plan to find new revenue to backfill the tax cuts. “The losers are the ones who have to pay half a billion over the next five years to pay for this tax plan.”

Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2013/03/20/2724761/house-backs-off-plan-to-take-sales.html#storylink=cpy

Kansas Senate gives final approval to bill offering tax relief after disasters; amendment provides tax breaks

By Dion Lefler Eagle Topeka Bureau Published Wednesday, March 20, 2013, at 8:22 p.m. Updated Thursday, March 21, 2013, at 3:54 p.m.

TOPEKA — The state Senate unanimously granted final passage Wednesday to a bill to make it possible for tornado-stricken residents in and around south Wichita to get back property taxes they had to pay after their homes were destroyed in April.

Senate Bill 165 passed with an amendment by a Sedgwick senator that also would allow Sedgwick County to join area cities’ efforts to jump-start the building industry by offering property tax breaks for buyers of newly-built homes.

But the heart of the bill is a provision to allow county commissions to abate property taxes levied after a home is destroyed in a disaster.

As state law stands now, property values and tax liability are established at the beginning of the year, so residents hit by the April 14 tornado were surprised and dismayed to get tax bills eight months after their homes were destroyed and the debris hauled to a landfill.

Eleven site-built homes and 134 mobile homes were wiped out, most in the Pinaire Mobile Home Park at the south edge of Wichita.

County officials said they wanted to give property tax relief for the balance of the year on the destroyed homes, but their hands were tied by state law.

Members of both the House and Senate moved to change that after a December report on the situation in The Wichita Eagle.

SB 165 was written to be retroactive to the beginning of 2012, so Sedgwick County could, if it chooses, give rebates to residents billed for property taxes after the destruction of their homes.

“It passed 40-0; that’s great,” said Sen. Michael O’Donnell, R-Wichita, who sponsored the bill with two other Wichita senators, Republican Mike Petersen and Democrat Oletha Faust-Goudeau.

“This gives them (the counties) more flexibility,” O’Donnell said.

“Now the House just needs to concur.”

HB 2063 takes a different approach to tax relief than the Senate version of the bill does.

It would offer owners of destroyed homes a variable state tax credit, shifting the cost of the lost property taxes from the county to the state.

Co-authors of that bill are Reps. Brandon Whipple, D-Wichita, and Joe Edwards, R-Haysville.

Whipple said a House committee plans to vote on HB 2063 on Thursday.

He said he thinks the House approach is better because the tax relief would be automatic and the cost would be spread across the state, not dependent on whether an individual county could afford to give up the revenue.

“If a tornado was to ravage a smaller county, that would leave them holding the bag, and they wouldn’t have money to rebuild,” he said.

While the House bill as written would apply only to future disasters, Whipple said he expects an attempt to make it retroactive to cover the April tornado victims.

Sen. Carolyn McGinn, R-Sedgwick, attached an amendment to the Senate bill to allow counties to participate with cities in tax-rebate programs to spur new home construction.

Last year, Wichita offered five-year property tax rebates for as many as 1,000 buyers of new homes, an effort to revive a housing industry that has been moribund since the recent recession.

Several other cities followed suit with similar but smaller programs.

However, those programs could provide a rebate on only part of a tax bill, the city’s share of property taxes.

Sedgwick County officials said they were forbidden to participate by state law.

McGinn said her amendment would provide that freedom.

“This is really just to kick-start the building industry,” she said.

“It improves the (tax) valuation of a community.”

Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2013/03/20/2725252/kansas-senate-gives-final-approval.html#storylink=cpy

Senators vote to restore $5 million in grants for KU, K-State programs

By Dion Lefler Eagle Topeka bureau Published Wednesday, March 20, 2013, at 9:28 p.m. Updated Thursday, March 21, 2013, at 3:54 p.m.

TOPEKA — KU and K-State don’t start playing in the NCAA basketball tournament until Friday, but both schools got a first-round win for their budgets in the state Senate on Wednesday.

Senators voted to restore $5 million in state grants for the Cancer Center at the University of Kansas and the Animal Health Program at Kansas State University.

Each of the schools will get $2.5 million as a result of an amendment offered during debate on the Senate’s $14.5 billion spending plan for 2014.

The amendment by Sen. Jim Denning, R-Overland Park, brings the state grants to the programs to $5 million each, the same amount the Senate had earmarked for the National Institute for Aviation Research at Wichita State University.

Denning said he tried to get the funding for KU and K-State into the budget during a Ways and Means Committee meeting earlier this week, and brought it as a floor amendment because it’s crucial to maintain the funding for cancer and animal-health research.

“The Cancer Center is important to Kansas and the United States,” he said. “It’s a flagship hospital and a flagship employer.”

Of K-State, he said “It’s the same logic. Animal health is a growing industry with a lot of potential – very important to the food chain and homeland security.”

Denning’s amendment was opposed by Sen. Carolyn McGinn, R-Sedgwick, who objected to Denning’s proposed funding source, a gas depletion fund established to benefit rural Kansas.

“The oil companies in their area put money in a fund to offset the depletion of the natural gas to those counties,” McGinn said. “My question is why are we as a body taking money from 40 counties in western Kansas, that that money does not belong to us?"

Denning’s amendment was approved 30-10.

All in all, it was a difficult day for McGinn, who lost her position as chair of the budget-writing Ways and Means Committee after more conservative Republicans took control of the Senate in the 2012 elections.

McGinn tried but failed to add $750,000 in funding for the Judge James Ridell Boys Ranch, an intensive Sedgwick County correctional program for juvenile offenders.

In addition to incarceration, the ranch “also teaches life skills to turn their lives around,” McGinn said. “Juveniles can be turned around if given a second chance.”

The amendment never came to a vote because the Rules Committee decided it didn’t meet the Senate’s new pay-go rule.

Under that rule, a senator who wants to increase the recommended funding for a program has to take the money from another appropriation in the proposed budget.

The committee ruled that McGinn’s amendment was out of order because she tried to shift the money for the ranch from a “fund,” not an “appropriation.”

McGinn also lost on amendments to increase funding for community mental health centers, the Creative Arts Industries Commission, and a program to help rural communities design septic systems and sewage lagoons that won’t pollute groundwater.

“I think I’m going to go back to playing basketball,” said McGinn, who played in high school. “My odds at 54 are probably better than playing this (pay-go) game.”

Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2013/03/20/2725317/senators-vote-to-restore-5-million.html#storylink=cpy

House, Senate to act on Kansas budget By JOHN MILBURN The Associated Press Published Tuesday, March 19, 2013, at 4:09 a.m. Updated Wednesday, March 20, 2013, at 4:09 a.m.

TOPEKA, Kan. — The Kansas House and Senate are set to act on their respective versions of a $14 billion budget for the upcoming fiscal year.

The House planned a final vote on its budget bill Wednesday after debating it for more than four hours Tuesday. The measure would spend about $6 billion in general state revenue in the fiscal year that starts July 1.

Senators are scheduled later Wednesday to debate their version of the budget, spending roughly the same amounts as the House on public schools, social services and public safety.

A final version of the budget will be reconciled by negotiators from the two chambers before lawmakers begin a monthlong break at the end of March.

Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2013/03/19/2722685/kansas-house-to-debate-14b-state.html#storylink=cpy

Kansas Legislature may use state parks earnings to pay for income tax cuts

By Michael Pearce The Wichita Eagle Published Tuesday, March 19, 2013, at 6:40 a.m. Updated Tuesday, March 19, 2013, at 6:59 a.m.

For years, Kansas’ state parks have dealt with declining funding from the state Legislature.

Now, they may lose about $500,000 from state park earnings, one of several budget actions being proposed to pay for income tax cuts that took effect in January.

Robin Jennison, Kansas Department of Wildlife, Parks and Tourism secretary, said last week the House Appropriations Committee recommended taking money from fees earned from park cabin rentals. The money would go to the state’s general fund.

Rep. Marc Rhoades, R-Newton, the committee chairman, said he has been checking the accounts of scores of state departments for several weeks.

“The tax cut we got as of Jan. 1 is going to cost us $400 million, so you have to make it up in other ways,” Rhoades said.

Rhoades said the cabin fee fund was picked because it had a growing balance, and it was his job to “find funds that had more money coming in than going out.”

In all, the House Appropriations Committee is recommending taking about $18 million from various funds from a variety of state agencies.

Linda Lanterman, state parks director, said it is important for parks to maintain a sizable amount of funds this time of the year, when a lot of maintenance is done, but peak attendance and income is still a few months away.

Jennison said the move comes as the financially strapped agency deals with other cutbacks and the challenge of finding ways to pay more of its own bills.

“We made the commitment last year to become more self-sufficient, and try to get away from state tax money,” Jennison said. “Now they want to take revenue from the people paying to utilize the parks. ... That’s 180 degrees from what we’ve been trying to do.”

He said the annual state park budget is more than $10 million. Earlier this year the department had been notified it also will get about $660,000 less from the state’s lottery fund compared to last year, and $350,000 less from the Kansas Department of Transportation, which annually shares some funds with the state parks.

“That’s a loss of about $1.5 million, an 18 percent reduction in our budget from last year,” Jennison said. “My gosh, that’s huge when you consider how things have already been.”

He said state parks’ budget has grown steadily since it was about $9 million in 2007, even though help from state sources has dropped from about $5 million in 2009 to as low as about $3 million in 2011.

Financial strainJennison said parks have been under increased financial strain the past few years because of things like the cuts in state funding and decreased state park attendance due to extreme heat, drought and blue-green algae infestations, which made reservoir waters unsafe for many sports.

Meanwhile fuel and utilities, some of the department’s highest expenses, have gone up dramatically in that same time.

Lanterman said tight park budgets have largely put a hold on capital improvements for several years, putting off things like road repairs, replacing roofs on outbuildings and replacing worn-out maintenance equipment.

Also, state parks have postponed hirings to fill vacant jobs and delayed the hiring of seasonal help for spring and summer maintenance.

To help raise funds, Lanterman said state parks have recently stopped offering discounts for second vehicles owned by park users, started a reservation system that requires payment in advance and raised utility fees.

“We’re trying to do our part,” Lanterman said.

Beginning this year, it also has begun offering reduced-rate annual state park vehicle permits at county courthouses when motorists register their vehicle. Jennison hopes the new Parks Passport program eventually does well enough to wean parks from state funding, but said it’s too early to predict income amounts.

Revenue from cabinsJennison and Lanterman said fees from state park cabins are considered an important part of funding the parks.

Kansas’ first state park cabins were created in the mid-1990s, when basic shelter structures were enclosed to create primitive cabins. Jennison estimates the roughly 115 cabins that are scattered amid most state parks, and some other state areas, earn about $1 million annually.

Most of that is profit, too, because Gov. Sam Brownback allocated about $1.7 million from state casino revenue in 2012 to pay off any debt owed for building the cabins.

Mike Hayden, a past governor and later a Wildlife and Parks secretary for nine years, said very little, if any, state general fund money ever went into the cabins. Hayden said most were paid for by the Kansas Wildscape Foundation, a nonprofit group he helped found in 1991 as a way to promote outdoor enjoyment and education in Kansas.

For several years fees from cabin rentals went to pay back Wildscape, until Brownback’s one-time allocation.

Kansas Wildscape gets no funding from the Legislature. Hayden added many of the cabins were constructed by inmates at Kansas correctional facilities to help keep costs low while providing some educational opportunities for inmates.

“What we have is a lot of legislators with no history of the program,” Hayden said “They don’t realize they never paid a penny for (the cabins). They say they want (state parks) to become self-sufficient, then they take away some of the major sources of funding. It’s not right.”

Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2013/03/19/2722771/kansas-legislature-may-use-state.html#storylink=omni_popular#storylink=cpy

Lawmakers: Hospitals that serve uninsured could lose some funding if state doesn’t expand Medicaid

By BRENT D. WISTROM Eagle Topeka bureau Published Tuesday, March 26, 2013, at 11:03 a.m. Updated Tuesday, March 26, 2013, at 11:06 a.m.

TOPEKA — Hospitals large and small that serve people who don’t have insurance could lose millions if the state doesn’t expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act, and the state is poised to not expand, lawmakers said Tuesday.

To help buffer a potential dropoff in federal “disproportionate share money” for hospitals that help the uninsured, Overland Park Republican Sen. Jim Denning is pushing to at least keep up with the state part of that funding to provide “a soft landing.”

The roughly $76 million in state and federal money is intended to help safety net clinics take care of people who don’t have insurance. Lawmakers say they think federal funding will drop significantly, if not be eliminated, as funding shifts to Medicaid expansion.

That could drop funding for Wichita’s Via Christi hospital by more than $10 million, and it could leave rural safety net hospitals nearly broke, according to some lawmakers.

“Without it, they would not be able to continue operations,” Denning said.

The state covers about 40 percent of the total for the fund and the federal government takes care of the rest, meaning hospitals could see big impacts even if the state continues with its $33 million in aid.

“They’ll have to do more with less,” Denning said.

The state’s share of money is subject to debate as House and Senate negotiators work out the differences between the proposed state spending plans that have been approved by each chamber.

Gov. Sam Brownback has not said whether he wants to expand Medicaid, but lawmakers seem unlikely to approve it. Under an addition to the Senate budget, lawmakers would have to approve expansion.

The debate over funding for the hospitals come as a coalition of residents plan to deliver a 2,700 signature petition to Brownback on Wednesday afternoon.

The Kansas Medicaid Access Coalition petitions urge lawmakers to accept federal money in 2014 to expand access to Medicaid. The Coalition includes AARP Kansas, the Kansas Farmers Union, Kansas Action for Children, the Kansas Coalition Against Sexual and Domestic Violence and many others.

Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2013/03/26/2733790/lawmakers-hospitals-that-serve.html#storylink=cpy

Interhab to host discussions in Topeka on KanCare By Dion Lefler The Wichita Eagle Published Tuesday, March 19, 2013, at 12:10 p.m. Updated Saturday, March 23, 2013, at 6:12 p.m.

InterHab, a statewide organization for people with developmental disabilities and their care providers, will host two discussions Wednesday at the state Capitol in Topeka to make a case why

services to that population should be excluded from KanCare, the state’s privatized health-care plan for the poor.

The discussion will be part of “A Day at the Capitol” and is expected to draw about 300 people with developmental disabilities and their supporters.

Barbara Ladon, managing director of Newpoint Healthcare Advisors, will provide information on why she thinks the state should either exclude bringing the developmentally disabled population into KanCare, or at least delay implementation until a comprehensive study shows private insurers are ready to handle their specialized needs.

KanCare, which began operation on Jan. 1, is Gov. Sam Brownback’s plan to control the state’s health-care costs by contracting for services with three for-profit managed care plans.

Implementation of KanCare for non-medical services to the developmentally disabled was delayed a year to give lawmakers time to study whether the managed-care programs could adequately administer services to that population.

Ladon will lead discussions for lawmakers and interested members of the public at 9 a.m. and 2 p.m., in Room 212b at the Capitol.

Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2013/03/19/2723121/interhab-to-host-discussions-in.html#storylink=cpy

Smart to back off on collective bargaining

Good for the Legislature for backing off on a bill that would limit the collective-

bargaining rights of teachers. Instead, lawmakers decided to give groups representing teachers, school

superintendents and local school boards the rest of the year to work on the issue, the Associated

Press reported. “Hopefully, some good can come out of this,” said Rep. Marvin Kleeb, R-Overland Park.

But as Sen. Laura Kelly, D-Topeka, noted, “It should have been done this way in the first place. It would

have created a lot less angst.”

Read more here: http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2013/03/smart-to-back-off-on-collective-bargaining/#storylink=cpy

Illegal immigrant in-state tuition law faces challenge again in Topeka

By BRENT D. WISTROM Eagle Topeka bureau Published Wednesday, March 20, 2013, at 11:16 a.m.

Updated Thursday, March 21, 2013, at 3:54 p.m.

TOPEKA — Ever since Kansas approved in-state college tuition rates for illegal immigrants who have attended Kansas high schools in 2004, efforts have emerged virtually every year seeking to repeal the law.

An attempt surfaced again Wednesday.

“How can we be just … giving benefits to people who break our laws?” said Sen. Caryn Tyson, R-Parker, testifying before the House Federal and State Affairs Committee.

Kansas law allows people who have lived in Kansas at least three years and have a degree from a Kansas high school to attend state colleges at in-state rates, as long as they have applied for legal immigration status or sign an affidavit promising to do so once they’re eligible.

In fall of 2012, 630 students took advantage of it, according to state documents. Of those, 498 attended community colleges, 117 were at universities and 15 went to technical colleges.

It’s not clear how many students would pay out-of-state tuition if the law were repealed.

But if they all attended at non-resident rates, it would mean $10,295 more per student in tuition for universities, $1,262 for community colleges, and $99 at technical colleges.

That’s a total of $1.8 million. If none of the students enrolled, state schools would lose $3.9 million, according to the state.

Secretary of State Kris Kobach, who has fought the law since he was a 3rd Congressional District candidate in 2004, said Kansas law violates federal laws and that it encourages illegal immigrants to continue to defy the law.

“Stop using taxpayer money to subsidize an illegal workforce,” he said.

Rep. Allan Rothlisberg, a Republican from Grandview Plaza, said that some illegal immigrants join gangs, and he suggested that illegal immigrants use their children as “pawns” when they come to the United States.

“We’re either a nation of laws, or we just say the heck with it,” he said.

Rothlisberg said illegal immigrants bypass the proper immigration process, and he said he’s even annoyed by customer service phone lines that offer to provide assistance in Spanish.

“We’re catering to people who come in and break the law,” Rothlisberg said. “Pretty soon, why even have any laws, why even have any borders?”

Phones, ATMs and other services in Europe, Mexico and other places commonly offer assistance in English.

Advocates of the existing law out-numbered those pushing to repeal it, and some gave emotional pleas to keep the law on the books.

Georgina Hernandez, a master’s in public administration student at Wichita State University who came to the United States at age 10, said she understands how some people might see it as unfair.

But she said her parents have been here paying sales and use taxes for 16 years and that after her family’s contributions and hard work she deserves in-state tuition.

She said that too many young immigrants are settling for jobs at meat packing plants and farms, and she said reasonable tuition rates provide some hope for ambitious immigrants.

“Taking this hope away from us would just kill our dreams,” she said.

Elias Garcia, state director of the League of United Latin American Citizens, said national immigration reform is likely to happen soon, and he said the state shouldn’t again try to repeal the law with reform en route.

“It’s time to move on,” he said.

It’s unclear if the Republican-dominated House Federal and State Affairs Committee will vote onHouse Bill 2192. Efforts in recent years have failed to gain traction.

At least 13 states have laws similar to Kansas, including Nebraska, Oklahoma and Texas.

Rep. Ponka-We Victors, D-Wichita, questioned why the state would try to repeal the law when Congress is working on nationwide reform, and she provide another perspective.

“When you mention illegal immigrants, I think of all of you,” said Victors, who is from the Ponca Tribe of Oklahoma and has a Hispanic grandpa.

Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2013/03/20/2724467/illegal-immigrant-in-state-tuition.html#storylink=cpy

Senate approves bill for plain-language ‘explainer’ on complicated ballot issues

By Dion Lefler The Wichita Eagle Published Monday, March 25, 2013, at 6:43 p.m.

Thirteen months after Wichitans voted on an incomprehensibly worded hotel-tax referendum, a proposal to provide voters with plain-language explanations of confusing ballot questions is on the verge of becoming a state law.

The state Senate on Monday gave its initial approval to House Bill 2162, which would allow county election officials to request that a county or state official write an “explainer” when the language used in a ballot measure is confusing or too legalistic for voters to easily understand.

“If they (election officials) feel like an explainer needs to be done, they can request it; if they don’t, they don’t need to,” said Sen. Kay Wolf, R-Prairie Village, who carried the bill on the floor.

The bill passed on a voice vote, with only a minor grammatical change from the version that earlier cleared the House.

The explainers would not appear on the ballot, but would be posted at all polling places and sent along as an insert with absentee ballots. “It would also be available for public inspection at the county election office and it could be placed on their website if they so determine,” Wolf said.

The issue arose out of voter frustration with the ballot language in a February 2012 Wichita referendum on whether the developer of the Ambassador Hotel downtown should get to keep a portion of the hotel’s future guest-tax revenue.

The tax rebate would have been part of a package of incentives approved by the City Council, but opponents gathered enough signatures to put it to a public vote.

A “yes” vote meant the developer would get the tax break; a “no” vote meant he wouldn’t.

But the language on the ballot question read:

“Shall Charter Ordinance 216 entitled: ‘A charter ordinance amending and repealing Section 1 of Charter Ordinance No. 213, of the city of Wichita, Kansas, which amended and repealed Section 1 of Charter Ordinance No. 183 of the city of Wichita which amended and repealed Section 1 of Charter Ordinance No. 174 of the city of Wichita, Kansas, pertaining to the application of revenues from the transient guest tax’ take effect?”

Election workers were besieged with phone calls and questions about what that meant, but were only allowed to answer “Yes means yes. No means no.”

Wichita City Attorney Gary Rebenstorf said he had to write the measure using the legalese to comply with the requirements of the state Constitution and that he could not add any explanatory language.

After voters rejected the hotel subsidy, local lawmakers said they would seek legislative action to help future voters know what they’re voting on.

While they can’t change the Constitution without a statewide election, the lawmakers determined they could pass a law to allow officials to provide extra information on the effects of a “yes” or “no” vote on ballot measures.

HB 2162 has passed the House twice, this year and last, most recently on a vote of 120-4 on Feb. 28.

In the case of measures brought to the ballot by voter petition, the explainer would be written by the district attorney, county attorney or county counsel. The secretary of state would then review the explainer for accuracy and neutrality.

With measures that are put on the ballot by governmental bodies, the secretary of state would write the explainer and the attorney general would review it.

Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2013/03/25/2732942/senate-approves-bill-for-plain.html#storylink=cpy

Kansas Senate advances bill with tax break for private fitness businesses

By BRENT D. WISTROM Eagle Topeka bureau Published Monday, March 25, 2013, at 9:58 p.m.

TOPEKA — Rodney Steven’s drive to spare private fitness businesses statewide from property taxes advanced in the Senate on Monday.

The property tax exemption, intended to let private clubs get one of the tax breaks enjoyed by nonprofit YMCAs, is a twist on a familiar debate over tax fairness for private fitness clubs.

The specialized tax break comes a year after lawmakers eliminated taxes on profits for 191,000 businesses, including several of Steven’s Genesis Health Clubs. Republican Gov. Sam Brownback has said he wants to eliminate specialized tax deductions and take the “social engineering" out of the tax code.

But Steven and others argued, successfully so far, that nonprofit clubs have an unfair advantage because of their tax exemptions.

Last year, Steven and other fitness clubs sought to end that by taxing nonprofit clubs. That idea didn’t take hold.

“The mood isn’t to go that way,” said Greg Ferris, a former Wichita City Council member who is a lobbyist with the Kansas Health and Fitness Association working alongside Steven. “Although it may be changing.”

Monday’s debate and voice vote approving the bill showed that some conservative lawmakers feel YMCAs have outgrown their community-based image, and it provoked questions about tax fairness when GOP lawmakers are trying reduce income taxes for a second year in a row while chipping away at tax deductions.

Sen. Jeff Melcher, R-Leawood, said 100 private health clubs in Kansas have gone out of business in the last 15 years. He said that lawmakers should be talking about eliminating exemptions for the YMCA because it is competing with private business without paying taxes.

“It’s not as though they serve some community interest,” Melcher said. “These are big businesses with a protected class of taxation that’s unfair to the private sector.”

Senate Majority Leader Terry Bruce, R-Hutchinson, said private health clubs are being hit from both sides with competition from nonprofits like the YMCA and community centers owned by city governments. He said many nonprofits have strayed from their original community-based intent.

“They are now, for lack of a better term, just a health club,” he said.

The Greater Wichita YMCA said earlier this month that it provided a record $10.2 million in free or assisted services in 2012. The money went to things such as youth sports camps, child care and before-school and after-school programs for 9,500 children.

Democrats decried the bill as a special-interest tax break that could hurt local governments that depend on property tax revenues while reducing the amount of property tax money the state automatically funnels to schools.

Sen. Pat Pettey, D-Kansas City, said eliminating the property tax for fitness clubs would likely lead other businesses, such as private golf courses that compete with municipal ones, to also ask for an exemption.

“This bill really shifts that burden to our homeowners and says if you’re one particular type of business you should not be paying property tax,” she said.

Senate Minority Leader Anthony Hensley, D-Topeka, said the tax break is a bad idea.

“This is just a special industry carve-out of the worst kind,” he said. “This is special-interest legislation.”

CompetitionSteven, the health club management company he owns and several health clubs in Wichita and across the state got a boost from the state last year when it eliminated nonwage income tax on about 191,000 businesses. Steven also has a corporation unaffected by that exemption.

This year, he sought to also eliminate the property and membership sales taxes at health clubs. He and other club owners said it’s necessary to compete with tax-exempt YMCAs.

Senators rejected the sales tax break, which would have cut $3.4 million in state revenue, but advanced the plan to exempt qualified health clubs from property taxes. Those include most clubs with weight and cardio equipment, but not specialty clubs such as golf courses, spas, dance studios, swimming pools and tennis facilities.

Steven has a complicated history in fighting for tax breaks.

He sought tax-free financing from the city of Wichita for an expansion of his clubs in 2004 only to have the city back out of the deal. Steven filed a lawsuit over the perceived broken promise, but the city won.

Since then, he has sought to force the YMCA to pay tax or some payment in lieu of taxes as the YMCA sought $23 million tax-free financing from the city to build its new downtown facility.

“Continuing to shrink the tax base in the face of severe spending cuts really makes no sense,” he said in 2011.

But, as the state considers budget cuts to afford the tax reductions it approved last year, Steven is seeking approval of Senate Bill 72. The bill faces a final Senate vote Tuesday. If approved, it moves to the House for debate and a vote.

Losing the property tax would reduce state funding for schools by $200,000 and money for the state’s buildings fund by $20,000, budget officials said. The biggest impact would be for local governments and school districts, which collect most property taxes.

‘Bad perception’Democrats suggested that the advancement of the tax exemption bill this year could be tied to the campaign contributions Steven and Genesis provided during last year’s election cycle.

Sen. David Haley, D-Kansas City, said that contributions tied to such specific legislation add to the perception some have of politicians doing favors in support for re-election money.

“It just gives us a bad name, a bad perception, that we can bend the rules,” he said.

Steven and Genesis Health Clubs donated at least $45,000 to senators during last year’s summer and fall campaigns. That included maximum donations to Senate President Susan Wagle and Senate Majority Leader Terry Bruce.

Steven and the club each gave maximum donations to Wichita Republican Sen. Michael O’Donnell, bolstering his campaign with $4,000 as he sought to unseat incumbent Republican Sen. Jean Schodorf and beat Democrat Timothy Snow in the general election.

Ferris said Steven considers O’Donnell a friend and that O’Donnell asked him for help during the campaign, leading to the maximum donations. But some lawmakers who Steven has helped aren’t supporting the bill, Ferris said.

“A lot of people ask Rodney for campaign contributions,” he said.

Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2013/03/25/2733126/kansas-senate-advances-bill-with.html#storylink=cpy

Kansas Senate advances bill with tax break for private fitness businesses

By BRENT D. WISTROM Eagle Topeka bureau

TOPEKA — Rodney Steven’s drive to spare private fitness businesses statewide from property taxes advanced in the Senate on Monday.

The property tax exemption, intended to let private clubs get one of the tax breaks enjoyed by nonprofit YMCAs, is a twist on a familiar debate over tax fairness for private fitness clubs.

The specialized tax break comes a year after lawmakers eliminated taxes on profits for 191,000 businesses, including several of Steven’s Genesis Health Clubs. Republican Gov. Sam Brownback has said he wants to eliminate specialized tax deductions and take the “social engineering" out of the tax code.

But Steven and others argued, successfully so far, that nonprofit clubs have an unfair advantage because of their tax exemptions.

Last year, Steven and other fitness clubs sought to end that by taxing nonprofit clubs. That idea didn’t take hold.

“The mood isn’t to go that way,” said Greg Ferris, a former Wichita City Council member who is a lobbyist with the Kansas Health and Fitness Association working alongside Steven. “Although it may be changing.”

Monday’s debate and voice vote approving the bill showed that some conservative lawmakers feel YMCAs have outgrown their community-based image, and it provoked questions about tax fairness when GOP lawmakers are trying reduce income taxes for a second year in a row while chipping away at tax deductions.

Sen. Jeff Melcher, R-Leawood, said 100 private health clubs in Kansas have gone out of business in the last 15 years. He said that lawmakers should be talking about eliminating exemptions for the YMCA because it is competing with private business without paying taxes.

“It’s not as though they serve some community interest,” Melcher said. “These are big businesses with a protected class of taxation that’s unfair to the private sector.”

Senate Majority Leader Terry Bruce, R-Hutchinson, said private health clubs are being hit from both sides with competition from nonprofits like the YMCA and community centers owned by city governments. He said many nonprofits have strayed from their original community-based intent.

“They are now, for lack of a better term, just a health club,” he said.

The Greater Wichita YMCA said earlier this month that it provided a record $10.2 million in free or assisted services in 2012. The money went to things such as youth sports camps, child care and before-school and after-school programs for 9,500 children.

Democrats decried the bill as a special-interest tax break that could hurt local governments that depend on property tax revenues while reducing the amount of property tax money the state automatically funnels to schools.

Sen. Pat Pettey, D-Kansas City, said eliminating the property tax for fitness clubs would likely lead other businesses, such as private golf courses that compete with municipal ones, to also ask for an exemption.

“This bill really shifts that burden to our homeowners and says if you’re one particular type of business you should not be paying property tax,” she said.

Senate Minority Leader Anthony Hensley, D-Topeka, said the tax break is a bad idea.

“This is just a special industry carve-out of the worst kind,” he said. “This is special-interest legislation.”

Competition

Steven, the health club management company he owns and several health clubs in Wichita and across the state got a boost from the state last year when it eliminated nonwage income tax on about 191,000 businesses. Steven also has a corporation unaffected by that exemption.

This year, he sought to also eliminate the property and membership sales taxes at health clubs. He and other club owners said it’s necessary to compete with tax-exempt YMCAs.

Senators rejected the sales tax break, which would have cut $3.4 million in state revenue, but advanced the plan to exempt qualified health clubs from property taxes. Those include most clubs with weight and cardio equipment, but not specialty clubs such as golf courses, spas, dance studios, swimming pools and tennis facilities.

Steven has a complicated history in fighting for tax breaks.

He sought tax-free financing from the city of Wichita for an expansion of his clubs in 2004 only to have the city back out of the deal. Steven filed a lawsuit over the perceived broken promise, but the city won.

Since then, he has sought to force the YMCA to pay tax or some payment in lieu of taxes as the YMCA sought $23 million tax-free financing from the city to build its new downtown facility.

“Continuing to shrink the tax base in the face of severe spending cuts really makes no sense,” he said in 2011.

But, as the state considers budget cuts to afford the tax reductions it approved last year, Steven is seeking approval of Senate Bill 72. The bill faces a final Senate vote Tuesday. If approved, it moves to the House for debate and a vote.

Losing the property tax would reduce state funding for schools by $200,000 and money for the state’s buildings fund by $20,000, budget officials said. The biggest impact would be for local governments and school districts, which collect most property taxes.

‘Bad perception’Democrats suggested that the advancement of the tax exemption bill this year could be tied to the campaign contributions Steven and Genesis provided during last year’s election cycle.

Sen. David Haley, D-Kansas City, said that contributions tied to such specific legislation add to the perception some have of politicians doing favors in support for re-election money.

“It just gives us a bad name, a bad perception, that we can bend the rules,” he said.

Steven and Genesis Health Clubs donated at least $45,000 to senators during last year’s summer and fall campaigns. That included maximum donations to Senate President Susan Wagle and Senate Majority Leader Terry Bruce.

Steven and the club each gave maximum donations to Wichita Republican Sen. Michael O’Donnell, bolstering his campaign with $4,000 as he sought to unseat incumbent Republican Sen. Jean Schodorf and beat Democrat Timothy Snow in the general election.

Ferris said Steven considers O’Donnell a friend and that O’Donnell asked him for help during the campaign, leading to the maximum donations. But some lawmakers who Steven has helped aren’t supporting the bill, Ferris said.

“A lot of people ask Rodney for campaign contributions,” he said.

Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2013/03/25/2733126/kansas-senate-advances-bill-with.html#storylink=cpy

Tax help for disaster victims

Praise is due members of the south-central Kansas legislative delegation for

their bipartisan efforts to spare disaster victims from paying property tax on destroyed homes. There are

significant differences between the bill that passed the Senate unanimously Wednesday and the House

version, including whether the cost of the tax relief would fall on the state or individual counties. But many

lawmakers clearly recognize the unfairness of receiving a property-tax bill in December for a house that

was blown away in April, which is what some south Wichitans experienced in 2012. Good for area

legislators for leading the way on this commonsense fix.

Read more here: http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2013/03/tax-help-for-disaster-victims/#storylink=cpy

Joe Aistrup: Session raising bar for bad bills By Joseph A. Aistrup Published Saturday, March 23, 2013, at 6:15 p.m. Updated Saturday, March 23, 2013, at 6:16 p.m.

Every legislative session produces its fair share of onerous bills. But this year is exceeding all quotas in the number and potential for far-reaching negative consequences.

Topping this list is a bill to gradually eliminate the civil-service system in most of state government, except for public safety agencies. The civil-service system was the crowning achievement of the Republican good-government reformers of the early 1900s. Before the civil-service system, employees were chosen based on party loyalty and nepotism. Power was a function of an employee’s connection to politicians, not organizational position and expertise.

The civil-service system established that state administrative, technical and managerial personnel are hired based on merit – their qualifications and expertise.

Politics is the exercise of power and influence. Public administrators need the protections of the civil-service system. It ensures that special interests wishing to escape the fair implementation of Kansas’ laws will not be able to exert undue influence on governmental personnel who administer our laws. Reform the civil-service system, yes. Eliminate it, no.

Second on the list is an attempt by Secretary of State Kris Kobach – who seems to have a penchant for these types of things – to turn nonpartisan local elections into partisan elections. In addition, he would move city council elections to November when midterm and presidential elections are held. He claims this would increase interest and participation in local elections.

Removing partisan politics from city government was another crowning achievement of the Republican good-government reformers of the early 1900s. They reasoned that city governments would be run more like a business if party politics were removed. They were right.

Kobach is correct in one respect. Moving municipal elections to November on even-numbered years will increase voter participation. But at the cost of infusing partisanship into decisions about potholes, sewers, zoning and economic development. Poll after poll indicates that the people want less partisanship, not more. Let’s listen.

Last, but certainly not least, is the charter school bill being considered in the Kansas Senate. A wide variety of entities – including universities, religious colleges and local school boards – would be allowed to set up charter schools. While these charter schools would enjoy the same tax-supported funding levels as public schools in that district, they would have to live by very few public schools’ requirements such as teacher certification. Nor would locally elected school boards exercise any control.

What happened to democracy, trusting the people and local control? These ideas represent the best of Republican conservative traditions.

The framers of our state constitution in 1859 did not limit the number of days that the Legislature could meet. By 1875, voters had learned their lesson. They ratified an amendment to limit legislative sessions to odd years. By 1900, voters doubled down, limiting these odd-year sessions to 90 days. Perhaps we should consider one more constitutional amendment this year. How about 60 days, every four years?

Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2013/03/24/2730120/joe-aistrup-session-raising-bar.html#storylink=cpy

Capitol Beats: 'We need to remain flexible here in this state and find our own Kansas-based solutions.'

Published Saturday, March 23, 2013, at 9:43 p.m. Updated Sunday, March 24, 2013, at 12:47 a.m.

Capitol beatsCheck this spot on Sundays for a few quick hits about what’s driving the debate in the Legislature.

Say what?

“We need to remain flexible here in this state and find our own Kansas-based solutions.”

That’s what Senate President Susan Wagle said, apparently trying to keep the door open for Kansas to expand Medicaid services under the new federal health care law. But an amendment to the Senate’s version of the state budget could make expansion less likely. It says the Legislature has to approve it. Wagle supported that but said she’d like to keep searching for ways to expand services. Gov. Sam Brownback hasn’t decided whether he’ll advocate expansion, but a growing number of GOP governors are favoring expansion, which could get more low-income people on the health care program and send new federal money to hospitals to take care of patients who otherwise couldn’t afford routine services.

$108.3 million

That’s how much new revenue the state would bring in by trimming the value of tax deductions, as is proposed in the House GOP tax plan. The plan aims to replace some of the revenue lost by the massive cuts signed into law last year while promising further rate reductions whenever the state’s revenue grows beyond 2 percent. Democrats say it is a

big tax hike. Republicans say it’s a big cut given that it allows a six-tenths of a cent sales tax to expire this summer as scheduled.

Trending

State universities appear to be trending down. The House aims to cut state spending on regents schools by 4 percent. The Senate aims to cut it by 2 percent. Regents officials say it could cause yet another round of tuition increases.

News Ahead

Republican leaders say they’ll begin a potentially long set of budget debates between the House and the Senate this week, which could significantly change the future of Wichita’s National Center for Aviation Training, Judge Riddel’s Boys Ranch and other state services. Proposals could shift significantly as the two chambers begin negotiations on competing tax cut plans.

Brent Wistrom

For more legislative news, go to www.kansas.com/politics and follow @BrentWistrom on Twitter.

Say what?“We need to remain flexible here in this state and find our own Kansas-based solutions.”

That’s what Senate President Susan Wagle said, apparently trying to keep the door open for Kansas to expand Medicaid services under the new federal health care law. But an amendment to the Senate’s version of the state budget could make expansion less likely. It says the Legislature has to approve it. Wagle supported that but said she’d like to keep searching for ways to expand services. Gov. Sam Brownback hasn’t decided whether he’ll advocate expansion, but a growing number of GOP governors are favoring expansion, which could get more low-income people on the health care program and send new federal money to hospitals to take care of patients who otherwise couldn’t afford routine services.

$108.3 millionThat’s how much new revenue the state would bring in by trimming the value of tax deductions, as is proposed in the House GOP tax plan. The plan aims to replace some of the revenue lost by the massive cuts signed into law last year while promising further rate reductions whenever the state’s revenue grows beyond 2 percent. Democrats say it is a big tax hike. Republicans say it’s a big cut given that it allows a six-tenths of a cent sales tax to expire this summer as scheduled.

TrendingState universities appear to be trending down. The House aims to cut state spending on regents schools by 4 percent. The Senate aims to cut it by 2 percent. Regents officials say it could cause yet another round of tuition increases.

News AheadRepublican leaders say they’ll begin a potentially long set of budget debates between the House and the Senate this week, which could significantly change the future of Wichita’s National Center for Aviation Training, Judge Riddel’s Boys Ranch and other state services. Proposals could shift significantly as the two chambers begin negotiations on competing tax cut plans.

Brent Wistrom

Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2013/03/23/2730404/capitol-beats.html#storylink=cpy

Bill sets up potentially disruptive split in client care for hundreds of the developmentally disabled in Sedgwick County

By Dion Lefler The Wichita Eagle Published Saturday, March 23, 2013, at 6:59 p.m.

About 40 percent of developmentally disabled people who receive support services in Sedgwick County would have to change either the person who guides their care or the provider who gives them services under a bill scheduled to come before the state Senate on Monday, officials said.

Senate Substitute for House Bill 2155, proposed as a way to eliminate potential conflicts of interest in disability services, would require clients to get their case management from one organization and their care services from another.

The bill contains language encouraging disabled people to seek case management services from one of three insurance companies under contract to the state through the new KanCare managed-care health program.

In practice, the bill would force a change onto 702 developmentally disabled people in Sedgwick County who now get their case management and assistive services from a single provider, said Dee Stoudt, director of the county’s Community Developmental Disability Organization.

That represents about one in four of the 1,800 developmentally disabled people currently receiving case management countywide, Stoudt said.

The bill will “interject some chaos into the system that is unnecessary,” she said. “A lot of our persons served don’t do very well with change.”

That was on full display Saturday morning as some angry and frustrated parents and advocates voiced emotional pleas to kill the bill during a South Central Kansas Legislative Delegation forum.

“I have a 34-year-old son, he’s literally a 5-year-old,” James McNulty told lawmakers. “If you’re going to pass that (bill), then just euthanize him. Legalize euthanasia so he and I can just walk into the chamber together.”

Sally Fahrenthold, mother of an autistic 51-year-old daughter, told lawmakers the existing system “is not broken and doesn’t need to be fixed.”

“The service system allows my daughter – who has a 50 IQ, they say – to work, to live semi-independently, to have good social relationships, to do so many things for herself,” Fahrenthold said. “We don’t want to see this change.”

Last week, the Senate Public Health and Welfare Committee advanced the bill to a floor vote by stripping an earlier House bill of its contents and replacing it with the more controversial provisions from another bill.

Sen. Michael O’Donnell, R-Wichita, the only area member on the committee, said the impetus for the bill was concern over potential conflict of interest if the same company or agency is deciding what services a disabled person needs and then is providing those services.

After hearing from parents at Saturday’s meeting, he said he would be willing to consider delaying the change until an audit could be done to determine whether the system is actually being abused.

Stoudt said she doesn’t think there’s a problem with conflict of interest because disability care is much like any other medical service.

“If you’re a physician, you diagnose a condition and you treat it,” she said.

Sedgwick County currently has a three-step system for connecting developmentally disabled people to services they need to live without hospital or nursing care:

• The Community Developmental Disability Organization, a county government agency, acts as the first contact with the system and makes the initial evaluation of a person’s eligibility and overall need for services.

• The client, or his or her guardian, then selects a case manager to determine what services are needed for that person to live as independently as possible, such as placement in a group home, help with daily living tasks in his or her own home, employment training and/or job placement.

• The client then selects from a menu of service providers based on which would best meet his or her needs. At present, he or she could use the same organization that employs the case manager, or he or she could choose a different provider.

Under HB 2155, the CDDO, case manager and service providers would all be required to come from separate and unaffiliated organizations.

Of the 702 people who would be affected in Sedgwick County, about 500 don’t have a legal guardian, so “their targeted case manager is very important to them,” Stoudt said. Often, that relationship between a case manager and a client is developed over a period of years, she added.

The effect of change could be even more disruptive in low-population counties where service providers and choices are few, she said.

In some communities where there’s only one combined case management/service provider organization, the developmentally disabled person would most likely be forced to work with an out-of-area case manager, Stoudt said.

Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2013/03/23/2730206/bill-sets-up-potentially-disruptive.html#storylink=cpy

Legislative forum draws vocal advocates of medical marijuana

By Dion Lefler The Wichita Eagle Published Saturday, March 23, 2013, at 5:34 p.m. Updated Saturday, March 23, 2013, at 6:12 p.m.

Two medical issues, marijuana and Medicaid expansion, held center stage Saturday at a raucous town hall meeting where residents were allowed to bring their concerns to state lawmakers from the Wichita area.

Legislators heard impassioned pleas from advocates of medical marijuana, those who used it to combat cancer and other debilitating conditions — and a few who served prison time for using it themselves or providing it for loved ones.

They also heard from a number of residents who urged them to support state acceptance of a Medicaid expansion that would extend health coverage to a group left in a gap created by the Supreme Court’s ruling on the national Affordable Care Act.

In contrast to most such meetings of the past, Saturday’s event drew a crowd of about 200 people and more than 50 spoke to the 13 lawmakers in attendance.

Attendees were greeted at the door of the Wichita State University Metropolitan Complex by costumed activists dressed as the Grim Reaper and the Statue of Liberty, carrying signs protesting Gov. Sam Brownback.

Nearby, musicians performed the Woody Guthrie classic “This Land is Your Land,” which opponents of corporate influence over government have recently revived as a protest song.

In the meeting, the loudest ovations came for speakers advocating for a hearing on long-stalled bills that would allow use of marijuana with a doctor’s prescription.

“I am a cancer survivor,” said Sharon Gordon of Udall, secretary of the marijuana reform group Kansas for Change. “I was hesitant to use the addictive drugs that doctors prescribed for me to deal with the chemotherapy, and when I did use them, I found out I was allergic to them, developing rashes like poison ivy all over my upper body. So I found relief only with medical marijuana.”

But when her husband began growing it for her at their nursery and farm business, “he was arrested and imprisoned for six months while I was still recovering, leaving me without a caregiver,” she said.

“It is the height of hypocrisy that either the federal government or any state is still continuing to prosecute and imprison patients and their caregivers who seek the proven benefits of medical marijuana.”

Before his incarceration, her husband, Mike Morton, had been active in Democratic politics, serving as chairman of the Cowley County Democrats and the party representative for the 4th Congressional District.

He said he knew the risks when he started growing but did what he had to do to help his wife.

“It was one thing I could do and it was the only thing,” he said. “I had just lost my daughter to a brain tumor and I wasn’t real concerned about the consequences, although I was aware. The world understands what the judge and the Legislature have not understood so far and you have the power to change that.”

Most of the lawmakers sat silently when they and other marijuana supporters spoke.

The notable exception was Rep. Gail Finney, D-Wichita, who has undergone chemotherapy for lupus and has tried for years to get a medical marijuana bill considered at the Capitol.

“We talk about the hypocrisy, it’s hypocrisy when someone introduces a bill because their constituents want this bill, and the state Legislature doesn’t even give it the time to even listen to, that’s hypocrisy,” Finney said. “So I tell you, there’s no shame in my game. I support it. I continue to support it and it’s up to you to keep advocating to get it heard.

“Here are your legislators, they are the ones who can make it happen, put ’em to work.”

Several other speakers argued for more conventional approaches to medicine, calling on lawmakers to support an expansion of Medicaid proposed as part of the implementation of Obamacare.

The national health plan originally envisioned expanding Medicaid to cover all Americans whose income falls below 138 percent of the poverty line.

However, the Supreme Court decision that upheld most of Obamacare left that decision to the states, leaving a coverage gap for those who make too much to qualify for Medicaid and too little to receive subsidized coverage in health exchanges that are being developed.

To close that gap, the Obama administration has offered to fund Medicaid expansion fully for the first three years before tapering down longterm support to 90 percent.

The decision of whether to accept rests with each state’s governor.

Nancy Ross, of Wichita, was one of several speakers urging the lawmakers to support the deal.

“We rank 33rd in the nation for uninsured individuals,” she said. “That’s one-twelfth of our population that is without health insurance.

“When we don’t have people insured we just shift the cost to other programs and we pay for it as citizens,” she added.

Senate President Susan Wagle, R-Wichita, responded “we’re dealing with a lot of unknowns as we implement Obamacare.”

She said former Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, now federal secretary of health and humans services “is sending down a new set of regulations every week.

“We are trying to determine what our options are for covering the uninsured here in Kansas and if there’s something we can do.”

Two Democratic lawmakers, Wichita Reps. Pat Sloop and Carolyn Bridges, drew cheers when they announced they support expanding Medicaid.

“Many of us are hearing you,” Sloop said. “I really get it and I really hope you will continue your advocacy for expanding Medicaid.”

Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2013/03/23/2730070/legislative-forum-draws-vocal.html#storylink=cpy

Rep. Joe Seiwert: Kansas’ policies need to match tech reality

By Rep. Joe Seiwert Published Wednesday, March 20, 2013, at 6:09 p.m. Updated Wednesday, March 20, 2013, at 6:10 p.m.

As chairman of the House Utilities and Telecommunications Committee and one of the 118 lawmakers in the House who voted to update Kansas communications policy, I would like to respond to issues raised about legislative efforts in “Protect phone users” (March 14 Eagle Editorial).

The Eagle editorial board essentially drew the same conclusion as lawmakers, which is that the telecommunications industry is changing and regulations need updating to reflect this new reality.

Today nearly 40 percent of Kansas adults choose to give up their landline and live in wireless-only households. And according to the Federal Communications Commission, the entire state of Kansas has access to either wired or wireless broadband.

While the technology in Kansas has clearly changed, state policies have not kept up and in some cases have not changed in more than a decade. That is the reason the House decided to move forward with this legislation.

The primary goal of the bill is to ensure that Kansas policies make sense for consumers and companies in today’s rapidly changing digital marketplace. Additionally, updated policies will encourage investment in the next wave of communications technology, enhancing economic competitiveness and growth throughout Kansas.

My committee met with various members of the telecommunications industry to come up with this bill, which modernizes state policies to promote competition and growth in the telecommunications sector. It puts all competitive companies on equal footing to compete and deliver the services that consumers want and that businesses need.

In terms of consumer interests, the bill eliminates or reduces state subsidies to many providers, which should result in lower telephone bills for consumers. And as on other consumer issues, individuals with complaints can take them to the Kansas attorney general, local county attorneys or the Better Business Bureau. The best consumer protection of all, of course, is vibrant and fair competition.

Modern regulatory frameworks make sense for Kansas, especially since they have been successfully enacted for other communications technologies at the state and federal levels. The wireless industry has thrived under a modern regulatory framework enacted in the 1980s, and the results of that approach are evident. The wireless industry directly and indirectly employs more than 3.8 million Americans, and wireless providers have invested more than $230 billion in capital expenditures since 2002.

Given the success of the wireless sector under a modern regulatory regime, it is only logical for lawmakers to update policies for the rest of the communications industry and ensure that they facilitate competition, protect consumers and encourage infrastructure investments in network upgrades and expansion.

As this bill moved through the legislative process, it became very clear that a wide array of communications options are available to Kansas consumers and businesses. However, if we want to make sure that Kansas can continue to benefit from competition and innovation in the tech sector, we need to ensure that our state’s policies make sense for the technology of today and encourage investment in the innovations of tomorrow.

The entire Kansas House recognized this need for modernization, which is why the bill was passed with only one dissenting vote. I hope our colleagues in the Senate will shortly follow suit.

Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2013/03/21/2725045/rep-joe-seiwert-kansas-policies.html#storylink=cpy

Senate advances bill that gives property tax relief to those who lose home in a tornado

By Brent D. Wistrom Eagle Topeka Bureau Published Tuesday, March 19, 2013, at 3:51 p.m. Updated Tuesday, March 19, 2013, at 7:44 p.m.

TOPEKA — County governments could give property tax abatements or credits to people whose property is damaged or destroyed in natural disasters, such as the tornado that swept through Wichita last year, under a bill given initial approval in the Senate on Tuesday.

Senate Bill 165 lets property owners apply for property tax abatements after disasters or apply for credits if they’ve already paid a year’s worth of taxes on property that was destroyed part of the way through the year.

The bill, along with a similar one in the House, stems from the April 14 tornado in south Wichita that destroyed 11 houses and 134 mobile homes.

The damage wasn’t enough to trigger individual federal disaster aid.

Residents were dismayed to get tax bills for homes that had been destroyed. Current state law sets the property tax for the entire year based on the property value as of Jan. 1.

Republican Sens. Mike Petersen and Michael O’Donnell and Democratic Sen. Oletha Faust-Goudeau introduced the bill. Senators will take a final vote on it Wednesday.

House Bill 2063, which seeks to fix the same problem in a different way, is awaiting action from a House committee.

The House version was introduced by Reps. Brandon Whipple, D-Wichita, and Joe Edwards, R-Haysville.

Their bill would compensate disaster victims by providing a state tax credit for property taxes paid after the destruction of a home in a designated disaster area.

Both bills would relieve the property owner of tax liability for a disaster-destroyed home.

The main difference between the bills is that in the Senate version, local communities would have to absorb the cost in lost tax income, while under the House bill, the state would take on that responsibility.

Contributing: Dion Lefler of The Eagle

Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2013/03/19/2723401/senate-advances-bill-that-gives.html#storylink=cpy

Wichita Rep. Les Osterman has heart surgery Published Tuesday, March 19, 2013, at 8:27 p.m. Updated Wednesday, March 20, 2013, at 12:08 a.m.

Wichita representative undergoes heart surgeryWichita Rep. Les Osterman underwent heart surgery Tuesday morning.

A person who answered his office phone in Topeka late Tuesday afternoon said the Republican representative was out of surgery and doing well. Osterman, 65, is serving his second term in the Legislature. His district covers southwest Wichita.

House Speaker Ray Merrick, R-Stilwell, issued a statement late Tuesday afternoon:

“Our thoughts and prayers remain with Rep. Osterman and his family. We pray for a quick recovery and look forward to seeing him back on the House floor as soon as he’s ready.”

Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2013/03/19/2723671/wichita-rep-les-osterman-has-heart.html#storylink=cpy

Kansas universities brace for state cuts to program funding

By BRENT D. WISTROM and ROY WENZL The Wichita Eagle Published Sunday, March 17, 2013, at 6:56 a.m. Updated Saturday, March 23, 2013, at 6:12 p.m.

TOPEKA — The relentless push to shrink government and cut taxes could trigger tuition hikes and mean less state money for a program that provides aviation companies with work-ready employees.

Competing versions of budget cuts from the House and Senate both include reductions in state aid for universities, a move that could add to ever-increasing tuition rates.

Meanwhile, the National Center for Aviation Training in Wichita, essentially a tech college built primarily by Sedgwick County to produce work-ready employees for aircraft manufacturers, is poised to lose $2 million of the $5 million it has become accustomed to receiving from the state.

Those cuts also would pluck $2 million each in funding from cancer research at the University of Kansas and animal health research at Kansas State University.

Legislators also considered a proposal to cut $2 million from the National Institute for Aviation Research at Wichita State University, but decided against the cuts.

It’s too early to know whether lawmakers and Gov. Sam Brownback will ultimately reduce funding for higher education; a few more weeks of grueling debates will likely lead to big changes in budget proposals. Brownback included a full $5 million for each of the four programs in his proposed budget, and he has said higher education is key to the state. During his State of the State speech in January, he said that “This glide path to zero (income tax) will not cut funding for schools, higher education or essential safety net programs.”

But the prospect of less state aid has college administrators worried and politicians looking for solutions.

“Those projects are very important to the three major universities,” Senate President Susan Wagle, R-Wichita, said. “Our aircraft manufacturers are so delighted about the new facility. That facility is creating jobs in Wichita. So this is not the end game. We have it in the bill to talk about it to determine if that investment is what’s best for Kansans.”

Jim Walters, a senior vice president of human resources at Cessna and chairman of the Sedgwick County Technical Education and Training Authority, said NCAT and the closely tied National Institute for Aviation Research at WSU are essential to the aviation industry, and they represent a model that many parts of the country envy.

Walters acknowledged the struggles for aviation caused by the recession and the industry’s natural cyclical nature. But he said research and development is important to help the industry emerge from downturns and that the aging workforce at Wichita area companies means there are plenty of openings for trained workers.

“It’s a key element to workforce development and economic development in south-central Kansas,” he said. “I’m hoping they recognize the importance to the Kansas economy.”

The move to cut NCAT spending followed days of discussions by senators, including questions about the state’s return on investment by Sen. Jeff Melcher, R-Leawood.

Melcher said that when the state gives $15 million in taxpayer money to the three universities for research programs, it should be provided with better proof that the programs are creating jobs and should get a share of the profits created when research at the universities is sold for big returns.

“Taxpayers have extended their wallets to fund these things, and they should expect something to come back into the state’s fund as a result of that,” he said.

Melcher acknowledged job creation can boost state tax revenues, but he said the state should also benefit from the research it is funding.

Melcher initially sought to cut funding for all the programs, including NIAR. But he said Sen. Michael O’Donnell, R-Wichita, stressed the importance of NIAR and helped bring in advocates who persuaded the committee to fund the project.

But Melcher and Sen. Ty Masterson, R-Andover, said they didn’t hear the same validation of NCAT or the animal health program at Kansas State or cancer research at KU.

‘Three unique resources’Aviation companies and many local politicians see NCAT and NIAR as key to keeping Wichita competitive in an increasingly globalized industry.

Senate Minority Leader Anthony Hensley, D-Topeka, said Brownback’s tax cuts are forcing the state to cut essential programs by creating a self-inflicted budget problem.

House Minority Leader Paul Davis, D-Lawrence, said that the state’s investment in university research and training programs is precisely how economic development dollars should be spent.

“We have three unique resources and we have decided to make strategic investments in those resources that will attract economic development, more dollars for those institutions and job opportunities,” Davis said. “They have succeeded to date.”

But he said many Republicans favor tax cuts, hoping the cuts will stimulate the economy and prompt businesses to create jobs.

“The other theory,” he said, “is that everybody gets a little bit more money and we hope that something is going to happen as a result of it. It’s not proven to work.”

Affecting tuition ratesIn addition to cuts to research programs, the Legislature is considering overall cuts to higher education.

Democrats contend that the 4 percent university funding cuts proposed by the House budget panel and the 2 percent cuts backed by the Senate panel are likely to drive up tuition rates because the cuts follow years of funding reductions.

State money used to make up more of WSU’s budget, but that has changed. It has fallen from 37 percent in 2005 to about 24 percent in 2013.

A 4 percent cut, as proposed by the House, equates to a $2.6 million hit for WSU.

“President (John) Bardo said he plans to talk with various legislators about the budget on Monday, and then meet with his (university) team to discuss contingency plans,” said WSU spokesman Joe Kleinsasser. “He said he still believes the governor’s plan is the right plan for Kansas.”

For Kansas State, a 4 percent reduction would translate to a $6.7 million cut.

Tim Caboni, vice chancellor for public affairs at KU, said a 4 percent cut equates to more than $5 million at its Lawrence campus and $4 million at the medical center in Kansas City, Kan., resulting in the lowest funding since at least 2006.

Adjusted for inflation, that means per-student support from the state shrank 40 percent since 1999, he said.

“I think the conversation we’re now having in this state is this: Is higher education in Kansas a public good or an individual good?” he said.

If it is an individual good, then all the good that a university does goes to the individual student, he said.

But if it is a public good, then universities, by producing educated and trained people, are drivers of economic development, scientific discovery and attracting talent and business to the state, he said.

“If you look at past reductions, we at KU have become much more efficient,” Caboni said. “But the question is, at what point do reductions begin to affect the core mission of higher education?”

House Appropriations Chairman Marc Rhoades, R-Newton, said that it’s unclear how tax cut plans will come out and that he has to find reductions to deal with the potential impact.

“Frankly, we’re going to need to find ways to make reductions,” he said.

Rhoades said there’s more than $2 billion in the state budget for higher education.

“I’m a little bit bothered by this,” he said. “The numbers are staggering and then we get down in the weeds on $15 million or $5 million and everyone goes crazy. I just think it’s a little out of balance.”

There are plenty of places to cut state government without causing real problems, he said, and some groups are better than others at justifying their share of state money.

“It’s the nature of man to protect your turf,” he said.

Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2013/03/17/2720275/kansas-universities-brace-for.html#storylink=cpy

Moran disputes that he ever supported disabilities treaty

The Boston Globe did an autopsy of the U.S. Senate’s December vote failing to ratify

an international treaty on the rights of individuals with disabilities – a measure championed by former

Kansas Sen. Bob Dole, who appeared in the chamber in a wheelchair for the vote. “The deepest wound –

some considered it betrayal – came from a Republican senator from Dole’s home state of Kansas. That

senator, Jerry Moran (in photo), had announced he supported the treaty and would be ‘standing up for the

rights of those with disabilities,’” the Globe noted. Asked why he voted against it, Moran told the Globe: “I

tried to help (the treaty) come to the floor, and had never made a conclusion as to whether I was for or

against it, and concluded that it was a bad idea to have the United Nations involved in this.” Dole told the

Globe: “The home-schoolers thought the U.N. would be involved in how they dealt with their children. I

don’t know how they got there, but once the stampede starts, they notify their leaders to start ringing the

phones, sending the e-mails. It’s really effective.”

Read more here: http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2013/03/moran-disputes-that-he-ever-supported-disabilities-treaty/#storylink=cpy

Sen. Pat Roberts: We must cut food stamps to save them

By Lindsay Wise McClatchy Newspapers Published Thursday, March 21, 2013, at 5:18 p.m. Updated Friday, March 22, 2013, at 6:57 a.m.

WASHINGTON — Once hailed as the savior of food stamps, Kansas Sen. Pat Roberts has introduced a bill to cut $36 billion from the federal aid program over 10 years.

Up for re-election in 2014, the Republican says he’s trying to offer an alternative to both a budget proposal on the right that would effectively dismantle the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, and another on the left that offers no savings at all.

Roberts said in an interview that the program must reform now or face more drastic changes down the road. “We have a program that could self-implode if we’re not careful. I don’t want to see that happen,” he said.

But critics complain that Roberts’ legislation would reduce or eliminate benefits for millions of needy Americans at a time when many still struggle to make ends meet in a weakened economy.

“Every one of the provisions in the bill would have detrimental impact on those who need help,” said Joanna Sebelien, chief resource officer for Harvesters: Community Food Network, a Kansas City, Mo., food bank. “It’s just so, so frustrating.”

Administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the anti-hunger program spent $78 billion to deliver food assistance to 45 million Americans in an average month in fiscal year 2011, up from $33 billion spent on 26 million Americans in 2005.

To be eligible for food stamps, a household’s net income must be at or below 130 percent of the poverty line, or about $19,100 a year for a family of three.

Roberts acknowledges that his bill would cut benefits to some people, but he said some of the measures put in place in recent years to allow more people to receive food stamps ought to be rolled back. His legislation would repair the food stamp program’s bloated bureaucracy while ensuring that people who need benefits the most continue to receive them, the senator said. “I just want to restore integrity to the program,” he said. “. . . You’ve got a lot of situations where folks are really gaming the system, and that’s not right.”

In 1995, Roberts helped rescue food stamps when fellow Republicans in Congress tried to end the federal anti-hunger program. As chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, Roberts led a rebellion of like-minded GOP representatives who balked at a proposal by their party’s leadership that would have replaced the food stamp program with lump sum payments to the states.

Roberts helped push through changes the following year that reduced food stamp spending by $26 billion over six years by prohibiting non-citizens from receiving benefits and restricting able-bodied adults without dependents to three months of eligibility unless they were working at least half time.

Stacy Dean, vice president for food assistance policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a Washington think tank, called it disheartening to see a senator with a history of championing the food stamp program recommend such deep cuts in his new legislation. “It’s a sledgehammer solution to what I think is a hammer and nail problem,” Dean said.

Roberts argues that his bill is consistent with his lifetime of work battling hunger, not a departure from it. With everyone in Washington looking for ways to cut spending now, no program – not even food stamps – can be considered immune, he said.

“We have exploded the program to the degree that it becomes a target, and I just want to avoid that,” the senator said.

The Republican budget advanced by Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, and approved by the House of Representatives on Thursday, would slash $127 billion over the next decade by converting the food stamp program into a capped block grant to states. The Senate Democrats’ budget protects funding for food stamps while cutting $27.5 billion in farm subsidies.

Roberts’ plan keeps the federal program intact but proposes dramatic changes.

One major provision in his proposal would save $11.5 billion by limiting a federal option known as “categorical eligibility,” which allows states to raise or waive the requirement that households have less than $2,000 in assets in order to qualify for benefits.

Another would save $12 billion by closing a provision that allows low-income households that qualify for the federal assistance in paying energy bills to use standardized utility costs instead of actual utility costs in their application for food stamps, potentially qualifying them for higher benefits. The Congressional Budget Office estimated that this provision would reduce benefits by an average of $90 per month per household.

Roberts’ bill also would save $8.8 billion by doing away with employment and training programs to help enrollees find work, and nutrition education programs. Other savings come from eliminating inflation adjustments for emergency food assistance, terminating automatic increases in benefits, and ending bonuses paid to states for processing timely applications and for enrolling more people.

Overhauling food stamps won’t be easy, but it’s essential, said Leslie Paige, vice president for policy and communication with Citizens Against Government Waste, a nonprofit in Washington. The program is expanding too much with too little oversight, Paige said.

“This has to be done,” she said. “There is no possible way that you can continue on a trajectory that now has 48 million people and counting on (food stamps). You’re looking at 15 percent of the population and counting.”

Still, Roberts’ proposal to trim tens of billions of dollars from the food stamp program caught some people who serve the poor in his home state off guard.

“I don’t want to criticize Sen. Roberts – he does a lot of good for a lot of people – but we were just kind of surprised by this legislation,” said Brian Walker, president and CEO of Kansas Food Bank, a Wichita-based charity. “We hadn’t heard any rumblings of it, and he really has been a supporter of the food stamp program in the past.”

Food banks in Kansas, Missouri and elsewhere already are hard pressed to make sure the neediest people in their communities have enough to eat every day, Walker said. His organization feeds 37,000 people a week in 85 Kansas counties. If food stamp benefits are reduced, Walker said, the burden will fall on charities to feed even more families.

Walker said he sent an email and spoke to a member of Roberts’ staff about his concerns.

“We understand that you have to do something about federal spending and balanced budgets, but if one of the first things you take aim at is targeting a program that helps put food on the tables of the less fortunate, that’s not something we really like,” he said.

Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2013/03/21/2726748/kansas-sen-pat-roberts-we-must.html#storylink=cpy

Huelskamp making most of his outcast status

The Hill newspaper checked in with Rep. Tim Huelskamp, R-Fowler, and other

congressmen who were stripped of key committee assignments for not toeing the GOP leadership’s line.

How is Huelskamp doing three months later? “One of my colleagues put it interestingly. He said, ‘Well,

Tim, they’ve given you a platform that you’ve never had before,’” the Kansan told the Hill, noting he also

has been in demand on cable-news shows. Being stripped of committee assignments, he said, “had the

opposite effect (of) trying to silence myself and a few others. It’s actually enhanced our ability to speak out

and impact the process.” An unidentified lawmaker close to leadership told the Hill that Huelskamp “is just

not trustworthy, and if he wants to be up here and a lone wolf and cause problems, he’ll never have any

legislative accomplishments.”

Read more here: http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2013/03/huelskamp-making-most-of-his-outcast-status/#storylink=cpy

From the Kansas City Star

A con game in Kansas swipes budget integrity

March 25

Beware, Kansans. A band of pickpockets is roaming your state Capitol.

They are not easy to spot, blending easily into the crowd in their coats, ties and business dress. But if you stop to watch certain committee meetings or sessions of the House and Senate, you can see them at work.

They are your state legislators, desperately seeking cash after giving it away in the form of income tax cuts last session.

The disastrous tax move has stripped the Kansas Legislature of its integrity. There is no promise that can’t be broken, no pot of money in state government safe from plunder.

Just look at some of what has been proposed:

• Swipe $500,000 from the Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks’ cabin rental fund. The department, which is under orders to become financially self-sufficient, had been accruing the money to pay for maintenance projects.

• Dip into an oil and gas depletion trust fund, which uses a portion of the excise tax on oil and gas production to protect rural counties from harm to their property tax bases from those activities. Senators voted to take $5 million from that fund to pay for university building projects.

• Raid funds intended for highway projects.

• Use gaming money to pay the state’s contribution to the Kansas Public

Employees Retirement System, a move of questionable legality.

In fairness, most of these measures have been tried before, to balance budgets in recession years. But this budget deficit is self-inflicted, and Gov. Sam Brownback is willing to make it grow even larger with more income tax cuts.

The cuts are a gamble in the interest of “growth,” but at a cost to the state and its people.

Brownback wants to make permanent a portion of the one-cent sales tax that is supposed to expire in July. The Senate has agreed to do this. The House so far is holding out, but its alternative is to drain the state’s cash reserves.

Proposed cuts in spending would likely cause universities to raise tuition and force local governments to increase property taxes.

Also, lawmakers are ready to renege on a pledge to raise the salaries of low-paid state workers.

The Kansas Legislature has the feel of a powerful family whose members have been reduced to raiding their own estates and assets. Why in the world would neighboring Missouri want to make the same sorry mistakes?

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2013/03/25/4143442/a-con-game-in-kansas-swipes-budget.html#storylink=cpy

House speaker expects alternative to Brownback tax plan to pass March 21

TOPEKA — Kansas House Speaker Ray Merrick expects the chamber to approve a bill cutting sales and income taxes that’s an alternative to a tax plan from Republican Gov. Sam Brownback.

The House was scheduled to take final action Thursday on its measure. House members gave it first-round approval Wednesday on an 82-37 vote.

Brownback and most GOP legislators want to follow up on massive personal income tax cuts enacted last year with additional reductions in income tax rates.

The House plan promises rate reductions in years in which state revenues grow more than 2 percent. Brownback wants guaranteed rate cuts.

Brownback would cancel a sales tax decrease scheduled by law for July, and the House wouldn’t.

The Senate passed a tax bill in line with Brownback on those two points.

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2013/03/21/4134003/house-speaker-expects-alternative.html#storylink=rss#storylink=cpy

Cuts in Kansas affect citizens' quality of lifeLewis DiuguidTaxes are a collective commitment by a population of people to improve their overall living conditions now and in the future.

Cutting taxes abandons that commitment to ensure a better way of life. One day people in Kansas will awaken to the fact that the Brownback, tax-cutting revolution has been nothing but the theft of their American dream.

Kansas colleges and universities now could see the loss of millions of dollars in state funding as the state cuts spending to match the tax cuts pushed by Gov. Sam Brownback, The Kansas City Star reports. The Republican bet is that it will come back in new businesses and people moving to Kansas to take advantage of low taxes.

But Kansans alive today may not live long enough to enjoy the hoped-for turnaround, which could take decades. Today’s kids as tomorrow’s old-timers will be sitting on dusty, rundown front porches in the future, explaining to a new generation that their parents told them how Kansas used to be a state of Ozs because of its wonderful schools, college-educated electorate, services for mental illness and people with developmental disabilities and care for the poor.

Ah, those were the days. And Missouri wants to chase Kansas down that dusty, dream killing rat hole.

Read more here: http://voices.kansascity.com/entries/cuts-kansas-affect-citizens-quality-life/#storylink=cpy

Kansas Senate expects final vote on $14 billion budget bill March 21

TOPEKA — Legislators are one step from beginning negotiations over how Kansas will spend some $14 billion on government programs in the next fiscal year.

The Senate is scheduled to take final action Thursday on its version of the bill after debating the measure for nearly five hours Wednesday.

The House gave final approval to its version of the budget Wednesday.

Both bills generally follow spending recommendations laid out by Republican Gov. Sam Brownback. Each would spend some $6 billion in general state revenues and $8 billion from federal funds and other sources in each of the next two years.

Negotiator will try to forge a compromise on spending priorities before legislators are scheduled to take

a one-month break starting in early April.

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2013/03/21/4134009/kansas-senate-expects-final-vote.html#storylink=rss#storylink=cpy

Higher education cuts loom amid Kansas tax changes March 19BY BRAD COOPERThe Kansas City Star

TOPEKA — Kansas colleges and universities could lose millions in state funding as lawmakers struggle to balance state spending with tax cuts.

House and Senate budgets look to chop $25 million to $30 million from the state’s six major universities and its technical and community colleges.

Gov. Sam Brownback’s call to pay for tax cuts enacted last year, and for even deeper cuts in the future, looms in the talks over higher education budgeting.

“We say we pride ourselves on higher education, yet we’re cutting funding for (higher education) so that our students will have more difficulty getting to college,” said Rep. Ed Trimmer, a Winfield Democrat.

Yet Republican Sen. Ty Masterson, chairman of the budget-writing Ways and Means Committee, said lawmakers have few other places to find savings at a time when the Legislature looks to lower income taxes.

He said higher education is a better option than cutting spending on the medical services for the poor or

elementary and secondary education. He said tuition increases can be an option if universities want to spend more.

“You only have a limited number of pots to go to,” Masterson said.

The cuts could mean higher tuition, larger class sizes, a limited ability to recruit top-shelf faculty and programs being curtailed or eliminated.

“A budget reduction will eventually fall on the students,” Washburn University president Jerry Farley told legislators this week.

But from a much broader view, school officials told lawmakers, cuts in higher education will stymie efforts to foster a climate for economic growth and academic achievement that would make Kansas an ideal location for business.

“This is a signal to the marketplace that the state does not see higher education as an engine of economic development, innovation and discovery,” said Steven F. Warren, vice chancellor of research and graduate studies at the University of Kansas.

The $14.5 billion House budget that won tentative approval Tuesday would make its cuts with 4 percent across-the-board reductions.

Meanwhile, the Senate is looking at $25 million in higher education cuts it finds in a 2 percent across-the-board

reduction along with other, more specific spending reductions.

Among other things, the Senate has proposed eliminating $10 million for a health education building at the University of Kansas Medical Center and trimming $2.5 million from the University of Kansas Cancer Center.

The cuts proposed for higher education invoked an ongoing debate about income tax cuts enacted last year despite projections the move would blow holes in the state budget.

The Legislature is back this year looking for ways to pay for last year’s tax cut and finance even deeper cuts in the coming years.

Masterson conceded that the higher education cuts might stem from the tax cuts.

“If we had not cut taxes, yes, we could have continued to spend more money,” said Masterson, an Andover Republican. “But that puts us in a Catch-22: The higher (tax) burden you got, the slower your economy recovers.”

Consider a few examples of what the House budget might mean. The University of Kansas’ Lawrence campus would lose about $5.5 million, and the KU Medical Center would lose $4.2 million. Kansas State University would take a $6.7 million hit.

Closer to home, Johnson County Community College would lose about $886,000 while Kansas City Kansas Community College would be out about $430,000.

The House proposal is a marked departure from Brownback’s proposed budget. It would have kept funding for the regents system essentially flat with some enhancements, such as the money for the medical building at the medical center.

If the Legislature ultimately agrees to cut higher education, it will represent a continuing trend of reducing money for the state’s colleges and universities since 2008.

Overall state funding for higher education has fallen to $763.4 million this year from $829.1 million in 2008 — a reduction of about 8 percent.

The proposed 4 percent cut puts more pressure on universities to look at tuition increases, officials said.

“That 4 percent hits us right in the gut in regard to our ability to keep tuition down,” said Larry Gould, provost and chief academic officer at Fort Hays State University.

But it’s not just tuition.

Johnson County Community College president Terry Calaway said the college would need to look at eliminating some career and technical

programs that tend to require more pricey equipment.

Washburn’s president predicted that his school would lose eight teaching positions, which could mean larger class sizes and the offering of some courses only every other year.

Kansas State spokesman Jeff Morris said the cuts “certainly would affect our tuition discussions and make for some difficult decisions.”

Republican Rep. Marc Rhoades of Newton, the House appropriations committee chairman, believes that the higher education spending needs to be reined in, especially in the context of rising tuition.

“Why are they increasing tuition by $48 million?” Rhoades asked. “I would submit to you that higher ed is out of control. … The system needs to change.”

Rhoades said lawmakers should ignore any warnings from colleges that they will seek tuition increases because of cuts in state funding.

“Don’t talk to me about me about the fact they’re … going to raise tuition,” Rhoades said. “They do that anyway.”

State data show that tuition has increased 37 percent at the University of Kansas from 2008 to 2013. Kansas State tuition rose about 30 percent.

But Tim Caboni, the vice chancellor for public affairs at KU, noted that spending per pupil at the university is down about 40 percent since 1999 when adjusted for inflation.

As per-student funding drops, he said, tuition increases.

And because KU’s instructional budget is made up of tuition and state tax dollars, there aren’t a lot of places to go to raise money, Caboni said.

“As one decreases, almost necessarily the other one will grow,” Caboni said. “What does that mean for people’s ability to afford a world-class higher education in the state of Kansas?”

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2013/03/19/4131346/higher-education-cuts-loom-amid.html#storylink=cpy

Kansas House tax plan could delay road projects March 18BY JOHN HANNAAssociated Press

TOPEKA — A key part of legislation to lower sales and income taxes will force Kansas to delay highway projects, possibly starting this summer, the state’s top transportation official said Monday.

Transportation Secretary Mike King issued the warning over a bill before the state House to decrease sales and income taxes. King didn’t weigh in on the tax proposals but on a provision to divert $382 million from highway projects over two years to stabilize the rest of the state budget. The diversion would start in July.

Gov. Sam Brownback and many fellow Republicans in the GOP-dominated Legislature want to follow up on massive individual income tax cuts enacted last year with further rate reductions. But last year’s cuts created a budget shortfall, and Brownback has said he wants to protect aid to public schools and other core services and programs.

Brownback has proposed canceling a decrease in the state’s sales tax scheduled by law, also for July. The bill before the House, drafted by the Republican chairman of its Taxation Committee, would permit the sales tax to decline as scheduled and divert funds destined for road projects.

King said such a decision would have serious consequences for the state’s 10-year transportation program. Kansas embarked on the program in 2010 to ensure that it continues to have a highway system that’s regarded as one of the best of any state and to finance major improvements.

“Highway projects will be cut or delayed,” King said in his statement. “At this time, we haven’t analyzed which projects may be affected, but we will consider all categories of projects.”

Taxation Committee Chairman Richard Carlson, a St. Marys Republican, said he isn’t surprised by King’s statement but would prefer delaying highway projects to cutting spending on schools,

social services and public safety. Rep. Scott Schwab, an Olathe Republican, said he and other backers of the House plan believe it will stimulate the state’s economy.

“What’s the point of having a good highway if we don’t grow our economy and have people to drive on it?” Schwab said.

King’s statement also is another sign that Brownback’s administration is intensifying pressure on legislators to keep the sales tax at its current 6.3 percent rate, rather than letting it drop to 5.7 percent in July. The House expects to debate its tax bill this week.

Brownback spokeswoman Sherriene Jones-Sontag said the governor welcomes all ideas for stabilizing the budget while still positioning the state to phase out income taxes. But he also sees the transportation program as “a core responsibility,” she said.

Legislators boosted the sales tax in 2010 at the urging of Brownback’s predecessor, then-Democratic Gov. Mark Parkinson, to balance the budget. Parkinson and lawmakers promised that most of the increase would be temporary, and legislators in both parties don’t want to break the pledge now.

Schwab dismissed King’s statement on diverting highway funds as “posturing.”

“If the governor proposed it, they could do it,” Schwab said. “The House proposed it, and they can’t.”

But Rep. Julie Menghini, a Pittsburg Democrat, said it’s logical that a diversion of highway funds would delay projects and slow the transportation program. She argued against the move as a member of the House Taxation Committee.

“You don’t have to be a genius to figure that one out,” she said.

Brownback is proposing to phase in further reductions in individual income tax rates over four years, dropping the top rate to 3.5 percent from 4.9 percent for 2017. The Senate has approved a bill that embraces those reductions, as well as Brownback’s proposal to keep the sales tax at its current rate.

The House plan is less aggressive in cutting income tax rates, dropping Brownback’s proposed guarantee that rates would decline over the next four years. Instead, the House plan says that rates would drop each year if overall state revenues grow by more than 2 percent.

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2013/03/18/4129091/kansas-house-tax-plan-could-delay.html#storylink=cpy

Truce declared in Kansas ‘war' on teacher bargaining

March 21BY JOHN HANNAThe Associated Press

TOPEKA — Kansas legislators have dropped their pursuit of a proposal to narrow contract negotiations between teachers and school districts to give education groups a chance to work out a compromise.

Chairman Marvin Kleeb confirmed Thursday that the House Commerce, Labor and Economic Development Committee won't vote this year on a bill dealing with teachers' bargaining rights. Kleeb said groups representing teachers, school superintendents and local boards of education will work for the rest of the year on a new version.

“We decided to give them a chance to actually work together,” said Kleeb, an Overland Park Republican. “Hopefully, some good can come out of this.”

The bill would limit the issues that must be negotiated between teacher groups and school boards to pay, holidays, sick leave, personal leave and the hours that teachers work outside their classes. School boards could still opt to negotiate over other issues affecting teachers' duties, but that list would not include how teachers are evaluated or how many classes they must teach each day.

Kansas has about 34,400 full-time teachers in its public schools, according to the state Department of Education. Teachers are not allowed to strike under Kansas law.

The measure had the support of some key Republican legislators, school superintendents and local boards of education. But the bill prompted the 25,000-member Kansas National

Education Association, the state's largest teachers' union to warn of a “war” on educators.

The KNEA, the Kansas Association of School Boards and the Kansas School Superintendents Association issued a joint statement Thursday saying they had agreed “it was time to start anew.” They said they intend to produce a compromise proposal by December, so that legislators can consider it next year.

“It's good news. It should have been done this way in the first place,” said Sen. Laura Kelly, a Topeka Democrat. “It would have created a lot less angst.”

Republicans who supported the bill said they wanted to encourage innovation in public schools by giving local districts more operational flexibility. Also, a task force appointed by Republican Gov. Sam Brownback recommended changes in January, saying rewriting the law would help local boards “determine what works best locally to drive efficiencies.”

But critics of the measure saw it as an attempt to weaken the KNEA, which has a long history of supporting Democrats and moderate Republicans and has been a vocal critic of the conservative Republican governor.

The bargaining bill is Sub for HB 2027. Kansas Legislature:http://www.kslegislature.org

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2013/03/21/4135913/truce-declared-in-kansas-war-on.html#storylink=cpy

Merriam mom walks to Topeka to protest school cuts March 18BY MARÁ ROSE WILLIAMSThe Kansas City Star

A Merriam mother who says she is fed up with state cuts to education put her feet down this weekend and walked 60 miles from her home to Topeka.

Heather Ousley, a 35-year-old mother of three, started walking Saturday morning and arrived in the state capital Monday night. A member of Game On for Kansas Schools, Ousley used Facebook and Twitter during her three-day hike to gain support from teachers and other parents, some of whom joined her for short distances on the route.

Ousley, who some Shawnee Mission schoolteachers described as an active and outspoken parent in the district, said shrinking state support threatens her children’s educational future.

“I’d walk to the ends of the earth for my kids. In the grand scheme of things, Topeka ain’t that far,” Ousley wrote in a blog post this weekend.

“I walk to raise awareness. I walk for my kids. I walk for our teachers. I walk for our schools. … This is how I do March Madness. I’m Mad. It’s March. I’ll march.”

Ousley drove home to Merriam on Monday night.Today, she will drive back to Topeka, where she expects to

join members of the Kansas National Education Association from the Shawnee Mission district to talk with lawmakers about cuts to education, a push to privatize public education and other legislative proposals. She also is concerned about a bill that would change the rules on teachers’ collective bargaining and another that would amend the state constitution to bar courts from ruling on public school funding.

“I think that it is a great thing that she is doing. We appreciate her efforts,” Mark Desetti, a spokesman for KNEA, said of Ousley.

Lawmakers are struggling to fill a $500 million hole in the state budget after tax cuts were enacted last year. The state is appealing a January ruling by a three-judge panel to increase funding to school districts. The court ruled that the current level violates the state constitution by failing to provide suitable financing for education.

That prompted an ongoing battle to amend the constitution to put such matters beyond the reach of the courts. Legislators who support the change say that policy matters such as school funding should be left to elected officials.

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2013/03/18/4129111/merriam-mom-walks-to-topeka-to.html#storylink=rss#storylink=cpy

Kansas House defeats school choice measure March 25BY JOHN MILBURNThe Associated Press

TOPEKA — The Kansas House defeated legislation on Monday that would create a school choice scholarship program funded by corporate donations.

House members voted 63-56 against advancing the bill to final action, dealing a blow to supporters who saw the measure as a means to give parents of poor or special needs students a choice in where to send their children to school.

House Education Committee Chairwoman Kasha Kelley said the measure wasn't about the parents' party affiliation. It was about giving the students an opportunity they otherwise might not receive, she said.

“We are sacrificing their future because we are protecting a system,” said Kelley, an Arkansas City Republican.

The measure would have let parents of low-income or special needs children in elementary or secondary grades apply for scholarships to send their children to private or parochial schools.

Corporations would receive tax credits for contributions to a qualifying scholarship-granting organization. The program would have been capped at $10 million annually and would have awarded scholarships to students for up to $8,000 annually.

Public school districts would not be penalized if any students who received a scholarship left for a private or parochial school. The districts would continue to receive state funding for one year.

Opponents argued there were too many questions about the tax credit provisions and whether schools accepting the scholarships would be accredited and students enrolled could enter college without having to seek additional paperwork. They also said it was a step toward creating vouchers for parents to take outside the public school system, including home schools.

“What we're really talking about is diverting public funds to private or parochial schools,” said Rep. Nile Dillmore, a Wichita Democrat opposed to the measure.

But Rep. Lance Kinzer, an Olathe Republican and supporter of the bill, said rejecting the measure preserves the status quo in public schools and denies parents the chance to give their children a better education.

“We must move beyond being system-focused,” Kinzer said.

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2013/03/25/4143450/kansas-house-defeats-school-choice.html#storylink=cpy

Changes proposed in citizen grand jury law in Kansas

March 24BY BRAD COOPERThe Kansas City Star

TOPEKA — Phillip Cosby couldn’t have been more infuriated.

It took a Johnson County grand jury less than a day to decide not to hand down an indictment for a bare-breasted sculpture at Overland Park’s arboretum.

To Cosby, it was nothing less than a hijacking — a grand jury directed by the district attorney without a single witness called to testify.

Now Cosby is back, joining forces with abortion opponents at the statehouse to change the state’s controversial citizen grand jury law to ensure that aggrieved voters are fully heard.

Cosby and others want to preserve what’s been called the “jewel of the common people,” a provocative and rarely used tool that has mostly been directed at abortion clinics and supposed pornography.

They say the law has been neutered by prosecutors who manipulate grand juries without letting petitioners pursue what they see as threats to a community.

“It’s a watchdog. It’s supposed to be the people’s court,” said Cosby, who has been involved in seven grand jury petitions over the years. “We’ve lost that.”

A bill swiftly moving through the Kansas Legislature seeks to empower voters by changing the law, although

critics say it makes the justice system more vulnerable to politics.

Among other things, the bill would require the person filing a petition to be the first to address the subsequent grand jury. Currently, witnesses don’t have to be called.

Under the terms of the bill, anybody could file a written request with prosecutors or the grand jury foreman to testify before the grand jury. A request would need to include a summary of the witness’s testimony.

The bill has passed the House on a 100-24 vote and is awaiting Senate action.

The citizen grand jury was created to give people outside traditional power structures a way to pursue wrongdoing overlooked by prosecutors. Unlike other grand juries, they don’t require a prosecutor’s action to convene. But over time, Cosby and others say, the power of citizen grand juries to work for the people has been weakened.

“The grand jury is one of the oldest institutions in our legal system,” said Secretary of State Kris Kobach, an advocate for changing the current law.

Used for centuries as an alternative to the king’s prosecutor, the grand jury over time has “gradually been emasculated and turned into a tool of the government prosecutor,” Kobach said.

It has drawn opposition from the Kansas County & District Attorneys Association, which argues that the bill would allow special-interest groups to “micromanage” and politicize the grand jury process by letting petitioners impose themselves on the grand jury.

Speaking on behalf of the association, Johnson County District Attorney Steve Howe said the grand jury proceedings are premised on jurors making informed and objective decisions on whether a crime was committed. The bill, he said, compromises that ethic.

“We feel there are provisions within this bill that allow individuals or groups of people to influence the grand jury, which we think is inappropriate,” Howe said. “You’re taking away the authority of the grand jury to make its own decision.”

Kansas is one of six states that allow grand juries by petition. Decades old, the law had rarely been employed until about 10 years ago. In recent years, citizen grand juries have been used to investigate the Overland Park statue as well as Planned Parenthood in Johnson County and the late Wichita abortion provider George Tiller.

In one case in Wyandotte County, a citizen grand jury produced indictments stemming from a probe of the Board of Public Utilities. The investigation led to felony theft charges against a lawyer

accused of bilking the BPU out of nearly $400,000 with phony legal bills.

The case is still being played out at the Kansas Supreme Court after a district court threw out the indictment, although it was later reinstated by an appeals court.

Cosby and others think prosecutors can too easily commandeer proceedings. Other critics think it’s far too simple to seat a grand jury because it requires so few signatures — equal to 2 percent of the votes cast in a county in the last gubernatorial election plus 100. That’s 3,771 voters in Johnson County.

Some critics also contend that the 15-member panels have far too much power and that the prosecutor’s role is too subjective.

An effort to tighten up the law three years ago by increasing the number of signatures required to petition a grand jury failed. Among its supporters were Wyandotte County District Attorney Jerome Gorman, the Kansas Association of Counties and the League of Kansas Municipalities. The bill never got out of committee.

In written testimony, Gorman argued at that time that “no tool, a grand jury otherwise, should be used to harass or abuse any person, business or government entity.”

Expanding an already controversial law carries risks, warns House Minority

Leader Paul Davis, a Lawrence Democrat.

“We start getting to a point where you have prosecution by petition,” Davis said. “We need to trust our prosecutors.”

Legislators moved to change North Dakota’s law this year after a group of residents tried to seat a grand jury to investigate the state’s Republican governor for campaign contributions from the oil industry.

But on the other side, petitioners have been unhappy with the results of investigations.

Kansans for Life says citizen grand juries have been the last resort for abortion opponents angry with the government turning its back on “government corruption on the abortion issue.”

They say past state leaders — the governor, the attorney general and the Board of Healing of Arts — did not respond to complaints about Tiller conducting late-term abortions and a death at his clinic.

Twice since 2006, citizens petitioned to seat a grand jury to investigate Tiller. Both times, a grand jury was convened in Wichita, but no indictments were returned. That left abortion opponents angry.

“Our members have been dismayed at not only the results, but the way the

process was manipulated,” said Kathy Ostrowski, legislative director for Kansans for Life.

In the case of the Johnson County statue, Cosby filed an ethics complaint against Howe. He contended the district attorney tried to influence witnesses before they testified. The complaint was dismissed. Howe said he did nothing outside the law.

“We did no directing or steering,” Howe said

Cosby finds the district attorneys’ response predictable because the citizen grand jury challenges their authority.

“The grand jury process is really not theirs in the first place,” he said. “It belongs to the people. It always has. But it has been usurped by entrenched institutions, and the people have been shut out.”

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2013/03/24/4142205/changes-proposed-in-citizen-grand.html#storylink=cpy

Kansas lawmakers end push for 401(k)-style public pension plan March 21BY JOHN HANNAThe Associated Press

TOPEKA — A proposal for issuing $1.5 billion in bonds to boost the long-term health of Kansas' public pension system advanced Thursday in the state Legislature, but Republican lawmakers who want to put new

government employees into a 401(k)-style plan abandoned an effort to pass such a bill this year.

The GOP-controlled House Pensions and Benefits Committee approved a bill authorizing the bonds on a 7-6 vote, sending it to the entire House for debate. But on a voice vote, it tabled a separate measure to start the 401(k)-style plan for state and local government workers hired after 2014, as well as a separate, non-traditional plan for new teachers.

The measures followed two years' worth of legislation overhauling the retirement system for teachers and state and local government employees. The committee faced skepticism from retiree groups and public employee unions that lawmakers needed to consider additional changes this year.

The Kansas Public Employees Retirement System projects that previous changes – which include boosting state contributions and setting aside state casino profits to pensions – would eliminate a projected $9.3 billion gap between revenues and benefits promised to workers by 2033. But many GOP lawmakers believe such a gap will occur again if the state isn't more aggressive in moving away from traditional plans that guarantee benefits upfront, based on a worker's salary and years of service.

“They look at it and say, `Why would you ever want to put the state in that position?“’ said committee Chairman Steve Johnson, an Assaria Republican.

The bill authorizing bonds is designed to give KPERS a quick infusion of cash, so that the percentage of its obligations

covered by its assets, now 53 percent, would jump to 61 percent in 2015 and grow more quickly than it would under current law. Also, the state wouldn't have to boost its annual contributions to KPERS as aggressively.

Both Republicans and Democrats were split over how much financial risk the move involves and whether it does enough to improve the retirement system's financial footing.

Putting new government workers into a 401(k)-style plan would base their retirement benefits on investment earnings. In their new plan, teachers would contribute part of their salaries to tax-free annuities paying out once they retired, with multiple options for the riskiness and potential benefits from their investments.

Public employee and retiree groups believe all of the potential options will result in less secure pensions because of the potential volatility of financial markets.

Lisa Ochs, president of the Kansas chapter of the American Federation of Teachers, said legislators have studied such changes in depth and concluded previously that they come with costs while sacrificing benefits.

“We have an obligation to each other in a civilized society to make sure that we're doing what we can to make sure that our public servants have a retirement they can depend on, have a

dignified retirement and that we're not creating generations of indigent elderly,” she said.

Most committee members said they needed more time to consider the bill. Lawmakers expect to wrap up most of their work for the year on April 5, and tabling the pensions measure means they won't consider it until next year.

“We just don't have the time to really spend another month, basically, to come up with the best plan,” said Rep. Jim Howell, a Derby Republican and the committee's vice chairman. “I do agree that this is the right thing to do today, but we've got to get back into it.”

Republican legislators and GOP Gov. Sam Brownback's administration worked quietly for weeks on the measure for a 401(k)-style plan. They unveiled it with a big splash this week in a hearing featuring Nobel Prize winner Robert Merton and Bill Bradley, the former Democratic presidential candidate and U.S. senator from New Jersey who also used to be a New York Knicks standout.

Both Bradley and Merton, a finance professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, advise an Austin, Texas, company that manages private-sector 401(k) plans. The measure called for having private companies manage the new plans.

The pension bonding bill is HB 2403. Kansas

Legislature:http://www.kslegislature.org.

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2013/03/21/4135779/kansas-lawmakers-end-push-for.html#storylink=cpy

Kansas abortion bill is cruel overreach March 20

With the passage of an anti-abortion bill on Wednesday, Kansas House members revealed themselves as callous and backward-thinking.

Along with imposing new restrictions on patients and providers, the House rejected an amendment to change current law and allow abortions after 22 weeks if the pregnancy was a result of rape or incest. In rejecting pleas to allow those exceptions, the bill’s supporters displayed a shocking lack of empathy for women.

Young girls, especially, may not understand or acknowledge the physical changes resulting from a pregnancy until that pregnancy is well underway. By removing the option of abortion, legislators are imposing their will and beliefs on people in desperate situations.

The bill contains several overbearing and offensive requirements for doctors. The worst is a requirement that physicians must falsely inform patients that abortion may increase the risk of breast cancer.

An abortion-breast cancer link is wishful thinking on the part of anti-abortion crusaders, buoyed by a few small, early studies. Later, more comprehensive research found no

connection. In the early 2000s, the National Cancer Institute convened more than 100 leading experts to review the research. They concluded that neither abortion nor miscarriage increases a woman’s chances of developing breast cancer.

But Kansas Rep. Lance Kinzer, an Olathe Republican who is the driver of the Legislature’s anti-abortion legislation, asserted in debate that the Legislature has the authority to tell doctors what to tell patients, even in the face of doubt or conflicting studies.

Kinzer’s thinking is arrogant and harmful. Why would a talented young doctor want to practice in a state that requires physicians to perpetuate a discredited scare tactic?

The 70-page House bill’s overreaching effort to deny women the right to a private medical decision even prohibits a woman from deducting the cost of an abortion as a medical expense on her income tax form. Abortion providers could no longer claim an exemption from state sales taxes for medical supplies, as other medical providers do.

In testimony to the triumph of zealotry, the House voted 92-31 for the abortion restrictions. We hope the Senate will show some compassion for young women facing the anguish of an unwanted, late-term pregnancy, and understand the negative consequences of promoting a blatant falsehood.

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2013/03/20/4133089/kansas-abortion-bill-is-cruel.html#storylink=cpy

Conservatives haven’t been the juggernaut expected in Kansas Legislature

March 18

The Kansas City Star

It was a given that ultraconservative Republicans would tightly control the Kansas Legislature this year. An overwhelming number of their candidates swept to victory in the 2012 election. Right-wing GOPGov. Sam Brownback, who lent a hand to the campaign, stood by ready to sign into law the new majority’s agenda.Yet, as the 2013 session heads down the home stretch, the juggernaut has not been quite the force that was anticipated. Its vulnerability so far: The capability to push two key proposed constitutional amendments through both houses.

It appears that, of all places, the House of Representatives is the stopper. That is a 180-degree switch from recent sessions when the lower chamber kept the pot boiling with a spate of far-right legislation. At that time, the Senate, with a slim majority of moderate Republicans, deterred a good bit of the conservative-generated measures.

No longer.

“The Senate is more conservative than the House” this year, said Rep. Paul Davis, a Lawrence Democrat and House minority leader, in an interview about voting blocs.

Davis, with a delegation of only 33 Democrats in the 125-member House, is woefully lacking in troops in partisan battles. But Davis identifies about 20 moderate Republicans who have emerged as a critical factor in challenging conservatives on the resolutions to amend the Kansas Constitution.

Admittedly this combination lacks the power to reject legislation that can be passed on a simple majority. Constitutional amendments are another matter. They require a two-thirds vote for adoption.

The combination of Democrats and GOP moderates is the stumbling block for the ultraconservatives on the two significant pieces of legislation, Davis pointed out.One is the ultraconservatives’ attempt to redefine the state’s obligation on K-12 school funding. They want to set aside the constitutional requirement that the state “suitably’’ fund the schools. That provision was an important factor when the Kansas Supreme Court ruled in the last decade that state funding was inadequate.

The other proposal involves Kansas’ nonpartisan court plan. Brownback and his fellow conservatives want to abolish the highly regarded system and allow the governor to appoint Supreme Court justices, subject to confirmation by the Kansas Senate.

The Senate approved both misguided proposals and sent them to the House earlier in the session. They have not been brought up for floor debate by the ultraconservative GOP leadership, Davis pointed out.“They know they are short of votes,’’ he added.

That assessment is shared by two moderate Republicans, Reps. Barbara Bollier of Mission Hills and Don Hill or Emporia.

“I am sure there are 20 moderates who will vote against” the proposed constitutional amendments, Bollier asserted. Those votes, plus the votes of the Democrats, would block the two-thirds majority needed for approval.

That would be a major accomplishment, similar to the way a coalition of moderate Republicans and Democrats merged in recent sessions to stifle right-wing legislation or to act on constructive bills. In 2010, the coalition was instrumental in passing a sales tax increase that helped finance essential state programs, including education.

At this point in the 2013 session, the two groups are not a formal coalition, Bollier said.

“It’s not quite like it was (in the past) when we wrote a bill together,” she recalled.

But in the current session there are conversations and email exchanges throughout the House that include Democrats.

Hill said the more than 50 new House members, Republicans and Democrats, add uncertainty in building bipartisanship this year.

“It is an outstanding class, the most centrist group I’ve seen,’’ said Hill, who is in his sixth House term.

Moderates tend to be pragmatic and open to collaboration, he said.

The meeting of the minds on the two resolutions, along with Hill’s observations, bodes well.

Stopping the school funding and judicial resolutions could be a building block for bipartisan trust down the road.

Freelance columnist Bob Sigman, a former member of The Star editorial board, writes in this space once a month.

Read more here: http://joco913.com/news/conservatives-havent-been-the-juggernaut-expected-in-kansas-legislature/#storylink=cpy

Kansas House approves bill on union pay deductions March 19

TOPEKA — Kansas legislators today gave final approval to a bill barring public employee unions from deducting money from members’ paychecks to help finance political activities.

A 68-54 vote in the House sent the measure to Republican Gov. Sam Brownback, who’s expected to sign it. The Senate approved the measure last week.

Proponents argued the bill would protect members of public employee unions from having part of their pay funneled to candidates or causes they oppose. Supporters also said state and local government agencies processing payrolls shouldn’t be entangled in such transactions.

But critics see the measure as an attempt to hinder fundraising by public

employee unions, which generally are strong supporters of Democrats.

Opponents also note that union members typically sign off on any deductions from their paychecks.

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2013/03/19/4131088/kansas-house-approves-bill-on.html#storylink=rss#storylink=cpy

Costs of prison spur Kansas to take new look at probation system March 19BY TONY RIZZOThe Kansas City Star

The prison doors keep revolving and the taxpayers of Kansas keep paying.

A growing prison population fueled by people on probation and parole being returned to incarceration is forecast to outstrip the number of available beds within a few years.

If left unchecked, officials say, the trend will prompt a pair of equally unpalatable options: Build new prisons at enormous cost or allow the courts to release inmates early to avoid overcrowding.

Rather than wait, state officials hope a proposed law can reverse that trend and save millions of dollars while also reducing crime.

It focuses on strategies to better supervise and assist probationers and parolees in their communities to keep them out of trouble and out of prison.

“Public safety is at the core of this initiative,” said Kansas Secretary of Corrections Ray Roberts.

Some law enforcement officials, however, think parts of the bill afford probation violators too many chances at the expense of public safety.

“How many cracks at probation do you get?” asked Johnson County District Attorney Steve Howe.

Though the number of prison admissions for new crimes has been going down, the number of admissions for probation and parole violations has increased 25 percent since 2009, Roberts said.

Parolees are people who were sentenced to prison and then released for a period of supervision. Some people are initially granted probation at sentencing, but if they violate conditions of that probation, they have an underlying prison sentence that must be served.

More than a third of last year’s admissions were probation violators, according to Roberts. And they were sent to prison not for new crimes, but for violations like failing a drug test, missing meetings with probation officers or not following through on treatment or counseling.

Once returned, their average stint behind bars is 11 months. At more than

$24,000 per inmate per year, those incaraceration costs add up.

In Johnson County alone last year, prosecutors handled 241 felony probation revocation cases. Of those, 216 offenders were then sent to prison to serve all or part of their original sentence.

The proposed law would provide judges and probation officers with more options to punish such technical violations short of long-term imprisonment.

“Right now we have a one-size-fits-all answer,” said Kansas state Rep. John Rubin, a bill proponent and chairman of the House Corrections and Juvenile Justice Committee. “We send them right back to the slammer.”

If passed, the new law would give judges the option of imposing consecutive or concurrent sentences for some people who commit new felony crimes while on probation or parole.

The law would implement a series of “graduated sanctions” that may start with a weekend in the county jail and increase in severity with additional violations that could land repeat violators back in prison. The "graduated sanctions" portion of the bill would not apply to those charged with committing new crimes while on probation or parole.

“We can get their attention for a shorter period of time,” Roberts said. “If they need to be locked up because they are a threat to public safety, then they should be locked up.”

Law enforcement officials are concerned that the proposal has too many graduated steps before a repeat violator faces serious prison time, Howe said.

Another provision that would allow judges to reduce the sentence of an offender sent to prison for a violation also is troubling, Howe said.

“This rewards bad behavior, and sends a confusing message to the probationer,” Howe said.

A significant percentage of people on probation and parole struggle with mental health or substance abuse problems, and they tend to be those who historically pose the greatest risk of being returned to prison both for technical violations and committing new crimes.

Roberts said part of the new strategy will be investing in community-based programs to better address those behavioral issues. Several million dollars for those efforts is included in upcoming budgets proposed by the governor.

“If we focus resources on high-risk offenders, we can help to reduce crime

and the number of crime victims,” he said.

The law also would address a shortcoming in the current system.

Each year, about 900 inmates are released from prison without any kind of post-release supervision, and they are more likely to commit new crimes than those with supervision. The new law will require supervision for everyone being released.

“With no supervision there is no effective opportunity for successful transition,” Roberts said.

Such reforms in how states deal with people on probation and parole are being adopted in a number of other states.

Missouri passed similar legislation last year. It lets probation officers impose “swift and sure” sanctions for violations as an alternative to prison for low-level, non-violent felony offenders.

Former state Rep. Gary Fuhr, who helped sponsor the Missouri bill, said the law that took effect in August was based on evidence gleaned from national research.

“It will take a little time to determine the financial impact and rewards,” Fuhr said.

The Kansas bill has been passed by the House and is being considered by the Senate. It also is rooted in research and

an analysis of projections from the Kansas Sentencing Commission.

State officials worked with the Council of State Governments Justice Center to craft the legislation.

Roberts said that the approach is estimated to save $53 million over five years.

“It can reduce the need for 840 beds in a very safe manner,” he said.

Rubin, a Shawnee Republican, emphasized that the bill does not affect probationers who commit new crimes, those who abscond while on probation or parole or those currently serving a prison sentence.

Though he believes overall the proposal can reduce recidivism, Howe said it shouldn’t sacrifice public safety to achieve that goal.

“Bed space does not trump public safety,” he said.

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2013/03/19/4129465/costs-of-prison-spur-kansas-to.html#storylink=cpy

Food stamp ‘solution’ smells like same old blame March 24BY MARY SANCHEZThe Kansas City Star

U.S. Sen. Pat Roberts wants to “restore integrity” to America’s food stamp program.

How about restoring some dignity to the people who receive the aid?

They’re a battered lot. The Kansas senator’s plan to slash $36 billion from the program bears some markings of a harmful attitude.

In too many circles, it’s become reflexive to view those who receive the food help as lazy, a cause of the runaway federal budget.

“Solutions” then fall along these lines: Cut the freeloaders.

The number of people receiving help from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) has increased. But politicians would accomplish more by examining why more people meet the poverty guidelines, instead of concluding that it’s because people are gaming the system.

As the number of unemployed people increased by 94 percent from 2007 to 2011, SNAP participation increased by 70 percent, according to the advocacy group Feeding America.

Also, 76 percent of the households getting the help include a child, an elderly person or a disabled person. The average length of time spent on SNAP is eight to 10 months.

There have been changes to how states are allowed to qualify people in recent years. But those avenues, called categorical eligibility, have not been the main reason for the expanding rolls

of the $74 billion food assistance program. It’s the economy.

It is also true that many people don’t wind up poor enough to qualify for food stamps through one bad stroke of luck or one poor decision. It can happen because of a series, even a lifetime, of choices. Yet gaining the skills to find long-term stable work isn’t likely to occur by the pressure of a penalty, losing benefits alone.

Cutting a single mother’s food stamps won’t magically raise her ability to navigate short- and long-term goals, afford retraining for a high-paying job or suddenly form a family with a highly-educated man who makes four times her own salary.

SNAP will likely continue to suffer from the unfair image that its users are a bunch of low-lifes looking for a permanent handout.

Roberts, to his credit, has never fallen into this camp. Which is why his more hard-line approach is troubling. He’s buffering against more drastic cuts by his GOP peers.

In a statement, Roberts noted, “certainly we can find savings by eliminating waste, fraud and abuse.” As if waste, fraud and abuse are the biggest issues, rather than the economy.

The Congressional Budget Office predicts that unemployment will remain

high through 2015. But it also expects SNAP to shrink back to pre-recession levels of participation as the unemployed find work.

Wonder who will be blamed then?

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2013/03/24/4141337/food-stamp-solution-smells-like.html#storylink=cpy