Tag: Facebook

  • GetTheFactsKansas launched

    GetTheFactsKansas launched

    From Kansas Policy Institute and the Kansas Chamber of Commerce, a new website with facts about the Kansas budget, economy, and schools.

    GetTheFactsKansas.com aims to provide Kansans with factual information about our state. Sometimes this is in short supply, so this effort is welcome.

    get-the-facts-kansas-logoAs an example, when explaining school spending, the site notes: “At $13,124 per-pupil, 2015 marked the third consecutive year of record-setting funding according to the Kansas Department of Education (KSDE). And if the Department’s estimates hold, another new record will be set when the 2016 final results are reported. Record funding is not the result of accounting changes; emails from KSDE confirm that no accounting changes impacted state or district funding totals for more than ten years. There was a correction effective in 2015 when the state-mandated 20 mills of property tax began being properly recorded as State Aid instead of Local Aid, but there would have been an increase in State Aid without that change.”

    Information like this rebuts two arguments that Kansas progressives use. First, that the increase in school spending is due to a recent change in the way KPERS payments are reported. But, there has been no change in ten years. Second, that the shift in the reporting of local property taxes is used to falsely inflate state spending. As KPI notes, even after adjusting for this change, state funding of schools has risen.

    Access the website at GetTheFactsKansas.com and follow its Facebook page at Get The Facts Kansas.

  • A David Dennis half-truth

    Why would a candidate split sentences in order to create an untruthful claim about his opponent?

    In a Facebook post on the David Dennis campaign page, this claim is presented regarding Karl Peterjohn: “Claims to be anti-tax yet calls for RAISING sales taxes.”1

    David Dennis for Sedgwick County Commission, District 3 Facebook post
    David Dennis for Sedgwick County Commission, District 3 Facebook post
    For many years Karl Peterjohn has been calling for a raise in the county sales tax, yes. That’s the first part of the plan. The second part of the plan is to eliminate the county property tax.

    Peterjohn headline sales tax 2014-06-07These two parts of the plan are so closely intertwined, so closely dependent on each other, that usually they appear in the same sentence, as in a Wichita Eagle op-ed: “Currently, the county imposes a 29.3 mill property tax countywide. This mill levy could be eliminated with about a 1.5-cent increase in the sales tax on a revenue-neutral basis.” 2

    Why would a candidate split sentences in order to create an untruthful claim about his opponent? You’ll have to ask David Dennis.

    1. David Dennis for Sedgwick County Commission, District 3. Facebook. July 22, 2016. Available at www.facebook.com/vote4daviddennis/photos/a.885503861595816.1073741830.874272696052266/922554071224128/.
    2. Peterjohn, Karl. Swap sales tax for county property tax. Wichita Eagle, Jun3 7, 2014. Available here www.kansas.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/article1145426.html.
  • Say no to Kansas taxpayer-funded campaigning

    Say no to Kansas taxpayer-funded campaigning

    Kansas taxpayers should know their tax dollars are helping staff campaigns for political office.

    As reported by the Wichita Eagle, it is perfectly allowable for some Kansas state government employees to work on political campaigns.1

    Can you spot the taxpayer-paid state employees on the campaign trail? The Wichita Eagle says there are two. (Click for larger)
    Can you spot the taxpayer-paid state employees on the campaign trail? The Wichita Eagle says there are two. (Click for larger)
    Not all Kansas state government employees can work on campaigns while being paid by taxpayers. Only personal staff members of elected officials can. But this can be quite a large number of people. The Eagle reports that Governor Sam Brownback has 21 personal staff members.

    It’s not only the governor that has taxpayer-paid employees on the campaign trail. The Eagle also reports that a member of Senate President Susan Wagle‘s office has been on the campaign trail.

    That senate employee, along with an employee of the governor’s office, were spotted campaigning for Gene Suellentrop. His Facebook page seemed pleased with their participation, again according to Eagle reporting:

    Rep. Gene Suellentrop, R-Wichita, who is seeking the vacant seat in Senate District 27, posted a photo of himself and 10 campaign door walkers on Facebook last month with a message saying, “The Suellentrop for Senate crew! Coming soon to your door step.”

    The photo, posted on June 14, a Tuesday, includes Ashley Moretti, a member of Brownback’s staff, and Eric Turek, who works for Senate President Susan Wagle, R-Wichita.

    “Those two showed up late that afternoon on their own, I have not requested any help from any leadership,” Suellentrop said in an e-mail. “They were sure happy to get into a picture of our winning campaign.”

    The first question the taxpayers of Kansas ought to ask is this: If these taxpayer-paid staff members have time to work on political campaigns, who is doing the work of the people of Kansas in their absence? What tasks are postponed so that these staff members can work on campaigns?

    The answer to this question, I’m afraid, is that there are too many staff members.

    The second question we should ask is this: Why is this practice allowed? There is a ruling from the ethics commission that allows this use of personal staff. Which leads to the third question: Why hasn’t the legislature passed a law to prohibit this practice?

    The answer to that last question, I’m afraid, is that the ruling class protects its own. For example, there is an organization known as the National Republican Senatorial Committee. Its job is to re-elect Republican senate incumbents. It doesn’t say this, but that is what it does. This is representative of the attitude of the political class. Once most officeholders have been in office a few years, they comfortably transition to the political class. Thereafter, their most important job is their re-election campaign, followed closely by the campaigns of their cronies.

    This is why you see Brownback and Wagle lending taxpayer-funded staff to the Suellentrop campaign. Should he be elected to the Kansas Senate, well, how can’t he be grateful?

    Here’s what needs to happen.

    First, this process must stop. Even though it is allowable, it is not right. We need leaders that recognize this. (Both Republicans and Democrats are guilty.)

    Second. The trio of Suellentrop, Brownback, and Wagle need to reimburse Kansas taxpayers for the salaries of these staff for the time spent working on campaigns. (We should not blame the staff members. It’s the bosses and rule makers that are the problem.)

    Third. Brownback and Wagle need to send staff to work for Suellentrop’s Republican challenger to the same degree they worked on the Suellentrop campaign. Either that, or make a contribution of the same value of the campaign services these taxpayer-funded Kansas state government workers supplied. Any other candidate in a similar situation — that of having taxpayer funds used to campaign against them — should receive the same compensation.

    Now, some may be wondering how is this different from the governor endorsing senate candidates in 2012. It’s one matter for an officeholder to endorse a candidate. It’s an entirely different matter to send taxpayer-paid staff to work on campaigns. I hope that didn’t happen in 2012.

    Fourth. Apologies to Kansas taxpayers are in order, as is a quick legislative fix. And, a reduction in personal staff members, as — obviously — there are too many.

    Finally, thanks to the Eagle’s Bryan Lowry for this reporting.


    Notes

    1. Lowry, Bryan. Taxpayer-funded campaign staff can knock at Kansans’ doors. Wichita Eagle, July 17, 2016. Available at www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/election/article90179637.html.
  • WichitaLiberty.TV: News media, hollow Kansas government, ideology vs. pragmatism

    WichitaLiberty.TV: News media, hollow Kansas government, ideology vs. pragmatism

    In this episode of WichitaLiberty.TV: New outlets for news, and criticism of the existing. Is Kansas government “hollowed out?” Ideology and pragmatism. View below, or click here to view at YouTube. Episode 124, broadcast July 17, 2016.

    Shownotes

  • In Wichita, Meitzner, Clendenin sow seeds of distrust

    In Wichita, Meitzner, Clendenin sow seeds of distrust

    Comments by two Wichita city council members give citizens more reasons to be cynical and distrusting of politicians.

    In a recent Facebook post that someone sent to me, Wichita City Council Member Pete Meitzner (district 2, east Wichita) wrote: “Hmmmm…..of note; Wichita is the only sizable city in Kansas that does not ADD any sales tax on top of the State and Sedgwick County sales tax rate.”

    Pete Meitzner sales tax Facebook 2016-07-06

    It is astonishing that council member Meitzner would brag of this — that Wichita has no city sales tax. That’s because Meitzner, along with all council members but one, voted to place the sales tax measure on the November 2014 ballot. Wichita voters rejected that sales tax, with 62 percent of voters voting “No.”1

    Meitzner is not the only council member to brag of no city sales tax in Wichita. Just a month after the November 2014 election in which Wichita voters rejected the sales tax, Wichita City Council Member James Clendenin (district 3, southeast and south Wichita) said, in a council meeting, “thanks to a vote we just had, [Wichita] has zero municipal sales tax.”2

    I wonder: If the Wichita city sales tax had passed, would Meitzner and Clendenin feel the same way?

    The answer is “No.” If the sales tax had passed, I believe Wichita city council members Pete Meitzner and James Clendenin would be congratulating themselves on the wisdom and foresight that led them to allow Wichitans to vote on the tax. They would be boasting of their ability to gauge the sentiment of public opinion. They would be proud of the investment they are making in Wichita’s future.

    That’s important to remember. The city council, at its initiative, decided to place the sales tax on the ballot. Why would the council do this if it did not believe the tax was a good thing for the city?

    Because if the tax would not be good for Wichita, then we have to wonder: Why did the Wichita City Council — including Pete Meitzner and James Clendenin — decide that the people of Wichita should vote on a sales tax? Was it a whim? A flight of fancy? Just a poll to gauge public opinion, without binding meaning?

    Anyone can conduct a poll of public opinion. But when the Wichita city council places a measure on the ballot asking whether there should be a sales tax, the results have meaning. The results are binding. There will be a new tax, if a majority of voters agree.

    Say, what should we ask the city council to let us vote on this November?

    We have to ask: Why would Wichita city council members allow Wichitans to vote on a tax they didn’t — personally — believe in? There is no good answer to this question. So when we see city council members boasting of no city sales tax in Wichita, remember this was not their preference. This is especially important because the city told us we needed to spend $250 million of the tax on a new water supply. Now we know that we can satisfy our future needs by spending much less, at least $100 million less.3

    Lily Tomlin once said “No matter how cynical you become, it’s never enough to keep up.” Here we have two Wichita city council members illustrating and reinforcing the truth of Tomlin’s observation.


    Notes

    1. Sedgwick County Election Office. November 4th, 2014 General Election Official Results – Sedgwick County. Available at www.sedgwickcounty.org/elections/election_results/Gen14/index.html.
    2. City of Wichita. Minutes of city council meeting, December 2, 2014. Page 9.
    3. Weeks, Bob. In Wichita, the phased approach to water supply can save a bundle. wichitaliberty.org/wichita-government/wichita-phased-approach-water-supply-can-save-bundle/.
  • ‘Game on’ makes excuses for Kansas public schools

    ‘Game on’ makes excuses for Kansas public schools

    Even if NAEP “proficient” is a lofty goal, it illustrates the shortcomings of Kansas public schools, especially for minority students.

    “Game on for Kansas Schools,” a Facebook page, seeks to draw attention away from the performance of students in Kansas schools. In a post, it make the case that the standard of “proficient” on the National Assessment of Educational Progress is an unreasonably high expectation.1

    Game on for Kansas Schools Facebook 2016-06-13

    We can easily understand why GOFKS needs to make excuses. As can be seen in the nearby chart of NAEP scores for Kansas and national public schools for fourth grade reading, the Kansas public school establishment doesn’t have much to be proud of.

    Kansas students compared to national. Click for larger.
    Kansas students compared to national. Click for larger.
    More troubling than the absolute level of achievement is the gap in achievement between white students and minority students. For Kansas white students, 42 percent are proficient in reading at grade 4. For Kansas black students, only 15 percent are proficient, and 20 percent of Kansas Hispanic students. Similar gaps appear in reading at grade 8, and in math at grades 4 and 8.

    So even if “proficient” is an unrealistically high standard of performance, it still illustrates a gap.

    But if you’re not convinced that Kansas public schools are harmful to minority students, use performance at the “basic” level. Here, for fourth grade reading, 74 percent of Kansas white students are at basic or better level. For black students, 44 percent.2 Other subjects and grade levels have similar gaps.

    I’m sure GOFKS will say that we need to spend more on schools in order to overcome these problems. But what amount of money, poured into the present system, is likely to make any significant difference?


    Notes

    1. Game on for Kansas Schools. Facebook post, July 13, 2016. Available at www.facebook.com/gameonforksschools/posts/1012639852155750.
    2. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). This table available at http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/subject/publications/stt2015/pdf/2016008KS4.pdf.
  • A plea to a legislator regarding Kansas schools

    A plea to a legislator regarding Kansas schools

    On Facebook, a citizen makes an appeal to her cousin, who is a member of the Kansas Legislature.

    What should we do regarding the school funding “crisis” in Kansas? One citizen made an appeal to her cousin — a member of the Kansas Legislature — through Facebook. I’ll omit names to respect the privacy of both parties.

    The writer stated, “The children of our state are on the line here. We need our public schools.” Well, children need education, but it doesn’t have to be delivered through public schools.

    She also wrote, “This isn’t about politics anymore, it’s about our kids. Kids who have NO chance at attending private schools.” Examining this statement — that there are kids who have no chance at attending a private school — is illuminating. Let’s look at some figures.

    For the school year ending in 2015, Kansas State Department of Education reports that Kansas schools spent a total of $13,124 per student. Of that, $8,567 was state aid, $1,101 was federal aid, and $3,469 was from local revenue.1

    Now, what does a private school cost? Considering schools not affiliated with a church — although some of these provide a classical Christian education — there are some that cost less than total spending, and even less than just the Kansas state aid per pupil.2

    So the writer might be surprised to learn that the taxpayers of the State of Kansas are already paying more than some private school prices. If the state would be willing to let parents spend these funds at schools of their choice, then any Kansas child would be able to afford a private school education. This could be accomplished through tax credit scholarships, vouchers, or education savings accounts. Kansas does, in fact, have a tax credit scholarship program, but it is limited — crippled, I would say — and the Kansas public school establishment fights against it.

    Kansas students compared to national. Click for larger.
    Kansas students compared to national. Click for larger.
    The writer pleaded this: “Needy kids who have the RIGHT to a free and good public education.” I would refer the writer to my article Kansas NAEP scores for 2015 and ask her to take note of the performance of black and Hispanic students in Kansas. For example, 42 percent of Kansas white students are proficient in reading at grade 4. For black students, it’s 15 percent. Are these black students receiving a “good” public education? Of course not. And is there any amount of additional spending that will correct this? If the money is spent through the existing school system the answer is: No, probably not. At least considering any additional sums that are within the realm of political possibility.

    There are school reforms available in other states that have found to be very helpful to black and Hispanic students. The Kansas public school establishment fights to keep these reforms out of Kansas.

    In making her plea for additional school spending, the writer pleads to her legislator cousin, “I know you have a wonderful, giving heart.” But when legislators vote to spend funds for any purpose, they aren’t giving from their heart. They’re simply using the power of government to transfer money from one person to another. There’s nothing wonderful about that.


    Notes

    1. Kansas State Department of Education. Total Expenditures by District, Entire State. Available at www.ksde.org/Portals/0/School%20Finance/data_warehouse/total_expenditures/d0Stateexp.pdf.
    2. For example, see Classical School of Wichita at around $6,000 per year, Cair Paravel Latin School in Topeka at around $7,000 to $8,000 per year, and the Independent School in Wichita from $10,000 to $10,600 per year.
  • Wichita has cut waste, officials say

    Wichita has cut waste, officials say

    Wichita city officials say they have worked hard to eliminate waste. Well, except for this.

    Looking south on Topeka from Broadway, May 29, 2015 at 11:25 am. Four burning street lights are seen here. There were dozens more further south.
    Looking south on Topeka from Broadway, May 29, 2015 at 11:25 am. Four burning street lights are seen here. There were dozens more further south.
    It’s been an ongoing problem in downtown Wichita. Not only are bench lights apparently permanently switched on, we find the tall street lights also burning in the middle of the day.

    This is especially problematic given these two Fridays — with street lights switched on near noon — were Riverfest Fridays. Many visitors, both natives and tourists, may have been downtown to see the waste on display. It doesn’t promote a good image for our city and its leaders.

    A Downtown Wichita street light struggles to compete with the midday sun. June 5, 2015.
    A Downtown Wichita street light struggles to compete with the midday sun. June 5, 2015.
    The wasteful spending on illuminating street lights in the middle of the day is an indication of the attitude of the city as explained in Forget the vampires. Let’s tackle the real monsters. Through public service announcements on television and Facebook, Wichita city officials have urged citizens to do things like unplugging microwave ovens when not in use. This saves a very small — vanishingly small — amount of electricity at a huge cost of inconvenience.

    So while the city advises you to unplug alarm clocks and cell phone chargers when not using them, note that the city cares nothing about running the street lights in the middle of the day.

    The lights illustrated in these photographs are, undoubtedly, a small portion of the city’s spending. But you don’t have to look very hard to find waste like this, and we know that small examples of waste are multiplied many times. So when city leaders tell us that there is nowhere left to cut in the budget, that everything that can be done to trim the fat has already been done, and that the only thing we can do is raise taxes — well, think of this photograph and others illustrated in Wichita advances in the field of cost savings, Another Friday lunch, and even more lights are on, To compensate, Wichita switched on the street lights, In Wichita, the streetside seating is illuminated very well, In Wichita, the rooftops are well-lit and On a sunny day in downtown Wichita you can see the street lights.

    City of Wichita official Facebook page.
    City of Wichita official Facebook page.
    This is not to say that waste like this does not occur in the private sector. Of course it does. But businesses and individuals have a powerful incentive to avoid waste that isn’t present in government: Businesses and people are spending their own money. And even if they waste money, it’s their money, not ours.

  • Did Jeff Longwell dodge a tough city council vote?

    Did Jeff Longwell dodge a tough city council vote?

    On election day, Wichita city council member and mayoral candidate Jeff Longwell appears to have ducked an inconvenient vote and would not say why.

    At his Wichita mayoral campaign announcement last November, then-council member Jeff Longwell called for a moratorium on the use of forgivable loans until a new policy is implemented. 1

    Jeff Longwell, now Wichita mayor
    Jeff Longwell, now Wichita mayor

    At other times he called for the end to traditional cash incentives, telling the Wichita Eagle “I think that we have to get away from the traditional cash incentives that we’ve been using and look for better ways to grow jobs in this community.” 2

    In the Wichita Eagle voter guide, for the question “What is your philosophy or practice regarding public incentives for companies and developers?” Longwell started his response with this: “I believe there is a better way to promote economic growth.” 3

    Wichita voters can be excused for believing Jeff Longwell wants to pursue economic development in a different way. It was a good strategy for the candidate to employ, as the rejection of the sales tax last year by Wichita voters is widely thought to be grounded in voter distrust of the economic development package.

    Summary of benefits for Figeac AeroOn election day this April, an economic development incentive package was under consideration by the Wichita city council. The deal contained a common mix of incentives from city, county and state. Details on the amounts of the incentives were sketchy, so I estimated the benefit to the company at $2,315,000 up front cash and credits equivalent to cash, and $605,000 in ongoing annual benefits for at least five years. 4

    This was an example of the traditional way Wichita and other cities do economic development, that is, targeted incentives for specific companies. It’s something that Longwell said we need to get away from, especially the forgivable loans part, having called for a moratorium on their use.

    This matter provided a perfect opportunity for Longwell to cast a vote aligned with his new perspectives on economic development. So when this matter came before the city council, how did Longwell vote?

    The answer is: We don’t know. Longwell didn’t vote. At about 10:27 am, shortly before the council took up this economic development incentives agenda item, Longwell left the council chambers. He did not return before the meeting ended. When asked why he left the meeting, Longwell would not provide an answer. He provided several contradictory explanations. He said he would explain at his campaign watch party on election night the reason for leaving, but would not say that afternoon why he left the meeting. (See Twitter and Facebook dialogs following.)

    In a profile during the campaign, Longwell told the Wichita Eagle “I certainly can appreciate and understand the need to not vote on items, but sometimes you just simply, as tough as it is, you have to take a position,” he said. “I don’t know any better way to explain it. It’s part of the responsibility of being elected to do a job. 5

    Here was a tough vote for Longwell. It was an opportunity for citizens to see him cast a vote in alignment with his campaign rhetoric. But he didn’t vote. He didn’t take a position, and he wouldn’t say why.

    This isn’t the first time Longwell has dodged questions he doesn’t want to answer. He canceled an appearance on The Joseph Ashby Show and would not reschedule. Ashby, for those who haven’t listened, asks tough questions.

    Twitter and Facebook transcripts, April 7, 2015

    Bob Weeks @bob_weeks Apr 7
    Does anyone know why Jeff Longwell left the city council meeting early? @jefflongwellict #ictcouncil @CityofWichita

    Jeff Longwell @jefflongwellict Apr 7
    @bob_weeks I had a prior appointment. I had to see a man about a horse. I know you miss me when I’m not there. @CityofWichita

    Bob Weeks @bob_weeks Apr 7
    @jefflongwellict @CityofWichita May I ask why you made an appointment during city council hours?

    Jeff Longwell @jefflongwellict Apr 7
    @bob_weeks Bob, I’m touched. Thank you for being concerned that my voice is being heard on the council and I’m there to help guide our city.

    Jeff Longwell @jefflongwellict Apr 7
    @bob_weeks Also, this was unplanned and was of a personal nature. But thank you for your concern. It means a lot, Bob.

    Bob Weeks @bob_weeks Apr 7
    @jefflongwellict @CityofWichita Would you please answer why you made an appointment during city council hours?

    Bob Weeks @bob_weeks Apr 7
    @jefflongwellict @CityofWichita Which was it? A prior appointment or unplanned?

    Jeff Longwell @jefflongwellict Apr 7
    @bob_weeks An appointment I had to schedule this morning. Priorly unplanned to making it. Don’t worry, I’m fine. @CityofWichita

    Bob Weeks @bob_weeks Apr 7
    @jefflongwellict @CityofWichita Could you please tell us some details? Why did it have to be done during a city council meeting?

    Bob Weeks @bob_weeks Apr 7
    @jefflongwellict @CityofWichita When a council member and mayoral candidate misses an important vote, the public has a right to know why.

    Jeff Longwell @jefflongwellict Apr 7
    @bob_weeks City council members leave meetings periodically. It’s a personal matter, not a conspiracy, Bob. @CityofWichita

    Jeff Longwell @jefflongwellict Apr 7
    @bob_weeks if you’d like to stop by my watch party tonight we can chat about it all you want. @CityofWichita

    Bob Weeks @bob_weeks Apr 7
    @jefflongwellict @CityofWichita You will not tell voters why you scheduled this appointment, is that your response?

    Bob Weeks @bob_weeks Apr 7
    @jefflongwellict @CityofWichita It’s not me who deserves to know. It’s the people of Wichita who need to know why a council member left.

    Jeff Longwell @jefflongwellict Apr 7
    @bob_weeks Nothing would have changed with my vote today, Bob. Council members miss on occasion. @CityofWichita

    Bob Weeks @bob_weeks Apr 7
    @jefflongwellict @CityofWichita If you had a legitimate reason for missing a vote, I would think you’d be willing to tell voters details.

    Later, on Facebook:

    Mayor Jeff Longwell: As I said, while I appreciate your concern and the fact that you feel my presence is crucial to city council meetings, I had to leave for a personal matter. Council members leave meetings on occasion, and nothing would have changed with the addition of my vote. But it really means a lot to me that you feel I’m a vital part of the council and miss me when I’m gone, Bob.
    April 7 at 3:02pm

    Bob Weeks: Dodging the question again. You said that you would tell me tonight why you left the meeting, so why won’t you say now?
    April 7 at 3:05pm


    Notes

    1. Wichita Eagle, 2015. Economic Development Among Mayoral Candidate Jeff Longwell’s Priorities For Wichita. Accessed April 16 2015. Available at www.kansas.com/news/local/article393829.
    2. Wichita Eagle, 2015. Jeff Longwell, Sam Williams Advance In Race For Wichita Mayor. Accessed April 16 2015. Available at www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/election/article12332810.html.
    3. C3.thevoterguide.org, 2015. Wichita Mayor — The Wichita Eagle Voter Guide. Accessed April 16 2015. Available at c3.thevoterguide.org/v/wichita15/race-detail.do?id=14013125.
    4. Weeks, Bob. 2015. Figeac Aero Economic Development Incentives. Voice For Liberty In Wichita. Accessed April 16 2015. Available at wichitaliberty.org/wichita-government/figeac-aero-economic-development-incentives/.
    5. Wichita Eagle, 2015. Council Member Jeff Longwell Touts Experience In Mayoral Race. Accessed April 16 2015. Available at www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/election/article15627836.html.