Voice For Liberty

Category: Kansas state government

  • Who will watch for Kansas minimum wage victims?

    Oops, there’s a mistake below. I’ve just been told the higher wage doesn’t take effect until January 1, 2010. So if this law is such a good deal for Kansas, I wonder what’s the reason for the delay until it takes effect?

    Today, the new Kansas minimum wage law takes effect. It’s likely that as employers are required to pay their workers more, some will lose their job.

    So now minimum wage supporters have a duty to perform. They need to watch for people who may lose their job and for companies that may close due to this law’s effect.

    It could be the case that everyone in Kansas is already paid more than the new, higher minimum wage. If so, we wouldn’t expect to see any job loss. But if this is the case, why need for the law?

    Higher minimum wage advocates need to be on the watch for workers who lose their jobs because of the effects of a law they agitated for. They are responsible for the plight of those who lose their job.

    These unfortunate workers, unfortunate first because they don’t have skills that allow them fill jobs that pay good wages; unfortunate again in their role as sacrificial lambs for those who see social injustice through the fog of social liberalism; unfortunate again to lose their jobs during a recession — what are they to do?

    Will the newspaper editorialists who supported the minimum wage seek out these people?

    Will newspaper and television reporters feature their stories? It’s easy for reporters to find the workers who will be paid more when the new wage takes effect. Finding the newly jobless is more difficult. But their story is more important.

    The unions who supported the higher minimum wage: will they help the newly jobless?

    Hopefully no one will lose their job and no firms will close because of the Kansas minimum wage law. This is not likely, and finding the victims of the law will not be easy.

    More background is at Kansas minimum wage and Kansas minimum wage at issue again. A collection of articles on this topic is at minimum wage.

  • Kansas’ tax system is broken, according to spending advocates

    According to Gary Brunk, executive director of Kansas Action for Children, the Kansas tax system is broken. It’s the same message you hear from other organizations that depend on state funding, such as the public school spending lobby. In their eyes, the problem that needs fixing is that Kansans aren’t taxed enough to support their spending goals.

    (State needs tax system that is efficient, fair, July 28, 2009 Wichita Eagle.)

    Brunk writes: “We all rely on services paid for in the state budget, so it’s common sense that we should all contribute fairly toward the costs of providing those services.” He then mentions the public school system as one such service. I wonder what parents who have decided they can’t use the product that Kansas public schools produce think about that statement. They pay doubly: once in tuition to a private or parochial school, and then again to support the public schools.

    Brunk complains that “sales-tax loopholes alone drain more than $4 billion from state revenues.” I think the Wichita Eagle needs to ask Brunk the basis for this claim. According to the Governor’s Budget Report, in fiscal year 2008 the state collected $1.7 billion in retail sales tax. For Brunk to claim that loopholes cost the state 2.4 times the amount of actual collections is absurd.

    Or, you can look at Brunk’s complaint another way: He wants to raise taxes by $4 billion. The state collected (in 2008) just short of $6 billion in taxes, so Brunk thinks taxes need to be raised by 50%. That’s what is necessary to fix the tax system, according to him.

    There’s also the perverse idea that letting people keep more of their money “costs” the state. I guess it depends on who you think has first claim on the money that Kansans earn. If you believe that it first belongs to the state, then yes, tax breaks are a cost to the state. I view taxes as a cost that we have to pay, and tax breaks help reduce that cost.

    Here’s another of Brunk’s complaints: “… the level of spending in Kansas has changed very little in comparison with personal income trends. In fact, in 1960, our taxes were equal to 10.5 percent of personal income. Nearly six decades later, taxes in Kansas are roughly 12 percent of personal income.”

    If you’re not thinking as you read this, you might be persuaded to believe that spending in Kansas has increased by only 1.5 percentage points over a long period of time. But he’s using a clever ruse of expressing taxes as a percent of income instead of in actual dollars.

    The truth is that since 1960, personal income has grown rapidly, even after adjusting for inflation. That’s a good thing. Government, according to Brunk’s analysis, has grown even faster, consuming a larger portion of what the people of Kansas produce. That’s not good. Then, according to Brunk, Kansans need to pay more, because the tax system is broken.

    At the start of this piece, Brunk complained of “rhetoric and half-truths,” presumably referring to claims made by taxpayer advocates. He wants a “fiscally responsible, commonsense approach.” After reading this piece — full of its own brand of nonsense and doubletalk — I wish that Brunk and other state spending advocates would just say what they really want: more taxes and more spending. Then we could at least have an honest discussion.

  • Kansas alternative media discussed on Kansas Week

    Bob Weeks discusses the difficulty of alternative media obtaining press credentials at the Kansas Legislature. From the KPTS public affairs television program Kansas Week on June 26, 2009. Tim Brown is the host. Randy Brown, Senior Fellow in the Elliott School of Communication at Wichita State University also appears.

    Read the story behind this by clicking on Kansas alternative media shut out of legislative access.

  • Kansas alternative media shut out of legislative access

    Earlier this year, during the Kansas legislative session, I became interested in receiving press credentials from the Kansas Legislature. This, I thought, would make covering news made in the statehouse easier.

    The issuance of legislative press credentials is handled, in alternating years, by the Senate President and the Speaker of the House. This year is the Senate President’s year. So in March I stopped by the office of the President of the Senate, and upon making my inquiry I was told by a staff member that my request would not be considered. The reason for that, I was told, is that my publication isn’t printed on paper.

    Not satisfied with that, I made inquiry to Michael White, who is chief of staff for Senate President Stephen Morris.

    In a recent telephone conversation with White, I was told that I’m not the only person who has inquired about press credentials. As a result, White hopes to develop a policy for the issuance of press credentials by this fall.

    White said that for now, the primary reason for not allowing bloggers like me press credentials is lack of space on the Senate floor.

    Mentioning my blog and the Kansas Jackass (a widely read “progressive” blog) specifically, he also said that the floor of the Senate has never been opened to, in his words, “partisan media.”

    He also wondered what the impetus is for wanting floor access. Gallery access is available to bloggers and alternative media, just as it is to the public.

    In an email I had sent to White (see below) I had wondered how a distinction could be made between Hawver’s Capitol Report (which has press credentials) and Kansas Liberty, which was turned down it its request for credentials. White said that partisanship is the key distinction. An additional factor is the ability of readers to post comments to articles on Kansas Liberty. Commenting is a consideration for blogs, too, according to White.

    As a result, the Senate President’s Office is “not inclined” to issue credentials at this time.

    We need to ask this question: Are the issues raised by White valid and legitimate concerns?

    Is there a lack of space on the senate floor? Speaking with one Kansas statehouse reporter and several senators, I learned that sometimes the chairs in the press area on the Senate floor are full. But mostly, they’re not.

    The issue of partisanship is a non-issue, too. When White said the Senate floor has not been open to partisan media, I should have asked if he meant overtly partisan media, as many in Kansas feel — correctly or not — that some newspapers in Kansas display a distinct bias towards one end of the political spectrum.

    Whether or not you agree with that, here’s this fact: opinion writers in traditional media have been granted credentials. I spoke with Phillip Brownlee, opinion editor for the Wichita Eagle. He doesn’t currently hold a press credential at the statehouse, but editorialists at the Eagle have in the past. Being editorial writers, they, of course, express opinions.

    Another thing that doesn’t make sense is the ability to post comments to stories or blog posts as a distinguishing factor. Most major newspapers in Kansas allow reader comments to stories and opinion pieces. Some have blogs whose major reason for existence is to gather reader opinion.

    As for why I want press credentials: Several legislators told me that being on the floor of the Senate and House would be a big advantage in news reporting. It’s a factor that would let alternative media better serve their readers.

    There is one important issue that White didn’t mention, but Tim Carpenter of the Topeka Capital-Journal did. That is, some advocacy groups that lobby the legislature also do news reporting and have blogs. If the floor of the House and Senate were open to them, they could lobby legislators right on the floor as votes are taken. This isn’t possible now, as lobbyists are prohibited from being on the floor of either chamber.

    I believe that if we think about it, we could overcome this problem.

    As shown in reporting by Paul Soutar and an editorial by Dave Trabert, both of the Flint Hills Center for Public Policy, Kansas lags badly in government openness and transparency. A notable exception Kansans can be proud of is KanView.

    While the denial of press credentials by the office of the Senate President is not an open records issue, it is another way in which our state government makes it clear that citizen input and scrutiny is not welcome.

    —

    Here’s the email I sent to White, making the case for press credentials for alternative media:

    As traditional media face declining resources and readership, alternative media are stepping in to help provide news and information to Kansans. Blogs like mine (Voice For Liberty in Wichita) and others such as The Kansas Jackass, Kansas Supreme Court Blog, Kansas Progress, and Kansas Meadowlark may have tens of thousands of readers each month.

    Then, there are the new online sites that aren’t blogs, but provide valuable news services that are changing journalism in Kansas. Kansas Liberty is the most prominent example. Now, the Flint Hills Center for Public Policy in Wichita has hired an investigative journalist.

    Alternative media in Kansas is growing. We need the type of access that is granted to traditional media.

    In a previous email to me, you expressed this concern: “What would stop anyone from starting a blog site to get access to Senate floor?”

    The answer is that it’s a lot of work to have a blog or news site. The sites listed above, plus maybe a handful of others, represent all the serious political bloggers in Kansas, meaning those who post on a regular basis. Some of these are operated by people who have full-time jobs and can’t spend a lot of time at the statehouse.

    But the real consideration is this: Isn’t more news and information a good thing? I think it would be great if there was such interest in Kansas government that the press area was full of reporters, instead of being mostly empty, as I am told.

    There’s also a consideration of equity. It is difficult for me to distinguish between KansasLiberty.com (whose request for press credentials was turned down) and Hawver’s Capitol Report. Both are publications that are available online only. Both have subscribers who pay substantial fees, $100 annually for KansasLiberty.com; $200 annually for Hawver’s. Why is it that one has press credentials and the other doesn’t?

    It’s time to give Kansas alternative media the access and privileges they’ve earned.

  • Kansas Action for Children calls for tax increase

    Reporting by Paul Soutar of the Flint Hills Center for Public Policy shows Kansas Action for Children (KAC) calling for higher taxes on Kansans.

    Soutar cites a KAC report: “The long-term solution to avoid increasing budget gaps is to update and modernize the Kansas tax system in a way that accurately reflects the current economy and generates sufficient revenues for state funding needs.”

    This guarded language is similar to that issued by the Kansas National Education Association (KNEA, the teachers union). A recent communique to its members contained this: “You see, the Kansas revenue system has something that tax folks call a ‘structural deficit.’ Structural deficits result when spending increases outpace revenue collections. … When the revenue system is not structured to keep up with the cost drivers, you get a structural deficit. You can cut your way out of it temporarily but unless you address the revenue system, eventually the deficit will return. … To get Kansas out of this mess, the legislature simply must modernize the Kansas tax system! … It is long past time to overhaul the Kansas tax system.”

    Modernize. It’s something everyone can agree on — until you realize that the goal of this modernization is to increase the revenue flowing to the state. Rarely is cutting spending or programs considered. Instead, more tax revenue is the solution.

    According to Soutar’s reporting, Gary Brunk, president of Kansas Action for Children, said that there are programs that are “ineffective and should be defunded.” But not his program, of course: “I don’t think that process would reduce our need for funding though.”

    I’ll bet the heads of all programs in Kansas feel that way.

    (This is a Scribd document. Click on the rectangle at the right of the document’s title bar to get a full-screen view.)
    Kansas Action for Children Calls for Tax Increase – Paul Soutar – Flint Hills Center

  • Kansas loses private sector jobs as government grows

    Today the Flint Hills Center for Public Policy reports on the rapid growth in government jobs in Kansas. This is taking place at a time when the private sector is rapidly shedding jobs.

    Kansas continues to lose jobs in the private sector as the number of government employees grows. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), Kansas lost another 10,500 private sector jobs in April but added 800 state and local government jobs.

    Over the past 12 months Kansas added 2,300 local and 100 state government jobs; during the same period the state lost 26,500 private sector jobs. BLS includes public school administrators in local government totals. Teachers are included in private sector totals.

    The complete report is at Kansas loses private sector jobs as government grows, or it may be read below.

    The shift of job growth from the private sector to government has been a problem in Kansas for some time. See the posts Kansas Continues to Suffer from Job Growth Deficit and Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius and Kansas Jobs.

    (This is a Scribd document. Click on the rectangle at the right of the document’s title bar to get a full-screen view.)

  • Flint Hills Center expands staff

    The Flint Hills Center for Public Policy in Wichita announces that it has hired a person to assume the role of Vice President of Advancement and Marketing.

    This is the second major expansion of staff this year at the Flint Hills Center. In April, it added investigative journalist Paul Soutar to its staff. That has already paid off with several investigations.

    Here’s more information from the press release:

    (Wichita) – Gretchen Colón has been named Vice President of Advancement and Marketing at the Flint Hills Center for Public Policy. Colón will lead fundraising efforts and will develop and implement a comprehensive marketing plan to make the organization’s research available to more Kansans.

    Colón assumed the newly created position May 26.

    In her past position, Colón raised over $700,000 through grants and individual gifts for the Lakeside Chautauqua Foundation. Colón also collaborated to develop an internship program. In addition to her work at non-profit organizations, Colón taught macroeconomics and microeconomics at Terra Community College, engaging young professionals by bringing current events to the forefront during class discussions. Colón received her Bachelor’s degree in public relations and business from Heidelberg College and her M.B.A. from Tiffin University in Ohio.

  • Kansas historic tax credits should end

    The Wichita Business Journal reports that without historic tax credits, some redevelopment projects might stop.

    In other words — the Business Journal isn’t quite so blunt — if taxpayers don’t give developers money, some of their projects might not be economically feasible. Or so the developers say.

    Spotlighted in Wichita Business Journal reporting is Dave Burk, a well-known developer in Wichita who specializes in getting the taxpayer to fund portions of his developments.

    Often the funding comes in the form of TIF district financing or special assessment financing used in ways it’s not normally used.

    These complicated financial arrangements serve to hide what’s really happening. Developers like Burk say that these financing schemes don’t cost government or the taxpayer anything. But they go to great lengths to secure them. In the case of Burk, he makes sure to make plenty of campaign contributions.

    But tax credits are pretty easy to understand. They excuse someone from paying taxes. If they’re refundable tax credits, the government will even send you a check.

    This is a lot different from a tax deduction, in which case you get to reduce your income. That usually leads to a reduced tax liability, but by a much smaller amount. Maybe even nothing, if your business has a loss for the year.

    Instead, tax credits reduce your tax liability on a dollar-for-dollar basis. And unless government reduces its spending by an equal amount, the rest of the taxpayers have to make up the difference.

    The Kansas Legislature recognizes this, and in an effort to save from losing some revenue in a tough budget year, placed a cap on the amount of tax credits that could be issued over the next two budget years.

    That’s what has Burk concerned. Without his gift from the taxpayers, he doesn’t know if he can complete his project.

    Tomorrow, though, something might happen to change his prospects. That’s when the legislature meets for its ceremonial closing. Sometimes actual business is done, and there’s some talk, according to Hawver’s Capitol Report, that legislative action could be taken to help subsidized developers like Burk.

    Let’s hope that the legislature decides in favor of free markets. If people want to live in historic buildings, let them pay the full cost of what it costs to produce these properties. Anything else means that the taxpayers at large pay for a privileged few like Burk and his tenants.

    Sources tell me that Burk continually has his hand out a city hall, looking for whatever subsidy he can get — even to the point of annoying former city manger Chris Cherches.

    It’s time to let free markets work. If Dave Burk has an idea he can sell to the public and make a heap of money, more power to him. But let’s stop the taxpayer-subsidized gravy train.

  • Budget battles in Topeka

    The following analysis by Flint Hills Center for Public Policy Fellow Jonathan Williams provides a useful summary of the past legislative session in Kansas regarding the budget.

    Now that lawmakers have left Topeka after adjourning the 2009 legislative session, we have some time to reflect on their actions. As usual, there is both good news and bad news to report for Kansas taxpayers.

    Being an eternal optimist, I think it is appropriate to start with the good news. There were no major tax increases in the recent budget that closed a projected $328 million budget deficit for fiscal 2010, which starts on July 1, 2009. There were, however, unsuccessful attempts by former Gov. Sebelius’ administration and some legislators to stop the phase out of recent pro-growth tax reductions. Thankfully the majority realized it would be pure economic folly to increase taxes on Kansans attempting to navigate the current economic downturn.

    The American Legislative Exchange Council’s recent study, Rich States, Poor States ranks Kansas’ economic outlook at a mediocre 24th nationally. The study reminds policymakers that budget deficits are not a justification to increase taxes. For now, the scheduled phase down of the corporate income tax and the phase out of the franchise and death taxes will continue as planned. Over time, these actions will enhance Kansas’s business climate and make the Sunflower State a more attractive place for business development in the future — and that is indeed good news.

    While the budget was at least temporarily balanced for the start of fiscal year 2010, many in the legislature have grave concerns that additional budget restraints were not adopted. The current plan leaves the state a token ending balance of $17,000. House Speaker Mike O’Neal, R-Hutchinson said “That will last us about a day, and then we’ll be under water.” Unfortunately the Speaker’s projection is likely to be correct. Few economists remain hopeful that state coffers will recover anytime soon, since the worst state budget deficits generally follow national economic downturns. (Editor’s note: Since this piece was written last week, we’ve already learned that state revenues have declined quickly, and spending adjustments mist be made.)

    Another common complaint from conservatives in the legislature is how the budget relies on one-time federal stimulus money to balance the budget. Stalwart conservative Sen. Susan Wagle said, “We’re leaving the problem on the table. We are not fixing one darn thing. This is one-time money.” National observers have warned states that federal dollars are accompanied by numerous strings that could increase state obligations far into the future. When the federal dollars dry up in the next 18-24 months, states that have relied too heavily on stimulus funds could face some very difficult decisions. As the great Milton Friedman would point out, there is no such thing as a free lunch.

    One crucial point, which has received for too little ink, is how Kansas’ budget shortfall could have been entirely prevented. There would be no talk of budget problems if lawmakers would have simply allowed government to grow at a sustainable rate of growth — similar to the private sector. If lawmakers would have restrained spending growth beginning in fiscal year 1992, by limiting the growth of government to the rate of increase of population plus inflation, this spending restraint would have cumulatively saved Kansas over $15 billion. That’s right, if lawmakers would have resisted the urge to overspend, the debate over tax increases and budget cuts would be completely irrelevant.

    With a projected ending balance of merely $17,000 for the next fiscal year, lawmakers will clearly be forced to revisit the budget battles in the near future. Let’s hope they remember that no state has ever taxed its way to prosperity. Maybe the next time state revenues pick up, more legislators will be receptive to the idea of saving for a rainy day.

    Jonathan Williams is a Fiscal Policy Fellow with the Kansas-based Flint Hills Center for Public Policy and Director of Tax and Fiscal Policy at the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). A complete bio on Mr. Williams can be found at www.flinthills.org/content/view/24/39/, and he can be reached at jwilliams@alec.org. To learn more about the Flint Hills Center, please visit www.flinthills.org.