Category: Kansas state government
-
Reaction to Kansas State of the State Address, 2013
Reactions to Kansas Governor Sam Brownback’s State of the State Address for 2013.
-
Kansas budget solution overlooked
As Kansas prepares for a legislative session that must find ways to balance a budget in the face of declining revenues, not all solutions are being considered.
-
Kansas can improve its budget process
Kansas should improve its budgeting process.
-
Flight options from Wichita decline, compared to nation
A program designed to bring low air fares to Wichita appears to meet that goal, but the unintended and inevitable consequences of the program are not being recognized.
-
In Wichita, confusion over air traffic statistics
The Kansas Affordable Airfares program is promoted by Wichita and Sedgwick County government despite problems with the data and statistics used to evaluate the program.
-
Kansas property tax honesty is needed
Kansas property tax reform means reducing the rate of growth of property taxes, not merely repurposing other tax revenue.
-
Wichita-area legislators on government efficiency
Candidates say they are opposed to government waste and inefficiency, but don’t always vote that way when given the opportunity to take action.
-
Kansas unemployment, the credit or blame
The unemployment rate in Kansas dropped from 6.2 percent to 5.9 percent in September. Before figuring who to credit for this, we ought to take a look at the underlying trends.
-
Kansas population growth lags nation
Population in Kansas is not growing as fast as the rest of the country.
-
Charges of slashing Kansas school spending
In their campaigns, Kansas Democrats are charging that school spending has been slashed.
-
Kansas lawmakers, including judges, should be selected democratically
While many believe that judges should not “legislate from the bench,” the reality is that lawmaking is a judicial function. In a democracy, lawmakers should be elected under the principle of “one person, one vote.” But Kansas, which uses the Missouri Plan for judicial selection to its two highest courts, violates this principle.