Tag: Kansas legislature

Articles about the Kansas legislature, both the House of Representatives and the Senate.

  • Kansas legislative scorecards, rankings

    Kansans need to know the true voting record of members of the legislature. Legislative scorecards or ratings can be a valuable resource for learning about the actions and record of legislators.

    These ratings are valuable because they record what a legislator actually does. Sometimes that’s different from what legislators say they do.

    Producing a meaningful rating is difficult. You need to find votes that discriminate between political positions, as including a bill where the vote was 115 to 3 provides little discriminative value. Sometimes there are procedural votes leading up to final passage, and it may be these somewhat obscure votes that provide the ability to meaningfully distinguish political positions.

    Through the 2008 legislative session, Karl Peterjohn of the Kansas Taxpayers Network produced scorecards. After Peterjohn was elected to the Sedgwick County Commission in 2008, KTN merged with the Kansas Chapter of Americans For Prosperity. AFP produced ratings for the 2009 and 2010 session. Also, the Kansas Economic Freedom Index produces legislative ratings.

    Following are the scorecards for recent sessions.

    Kansas Senate

    Kansas Senate Legislative Scorecard 2010
    Kansas Senate Legislative Scorecard 2009
    Kansas Senate Legislative Scorecard 2008
    Kansas Senate Legislative Scorecard 2007
    Kansas Senate Legislative Scorecard 2005
    Kansas Senate Legislative Scorecard 2004
    Kansas Senate Legislative Scorecard 2003
    Kansas Senate Legislative Scorecard 2002
    Kansas Senate Legislative Scorecard 2001
    Kansas Senate Legislative Scorecard 2000
    Kansas Senate Legislative Scorecard 1999
    Kansas Senate Legislative Scorecard 1998
    Kansas Senate Legislative Scorecard 1997
    Kansas Senate Legislative Scorecard 1996

    Kansas House of Representatives

    Kansas House Legislative Scorecard 2010
    Kansas House Legislative Scorecard 2009
    Kansas House Legislative Scorecard 2008
    Kansas House Legislative Scorecard 2007
    Kansas House Legislative Scorecard 2006
    Kansas House Legislative Scorecard 2005
    Kansas House Legislative Scorecard 2004
    Kansas House Legislative Scorecard 2003
    Kansas House Legislative Scorecard 2001
    Kansas House Legislative Scorecard 2000
    Kansas House Legislative Scorecard 1999
    Kansas House Legislative Scorecard 1998
    Kansas House Legislative Scorecard 1997
    Kansas House Legislative Scorecard 1996

  • Wichita school chief makes plea to Wichita-area legislators

    This afternoon, Wichita school superintendent John Allison appeared before the South-central Kansas legislative delegation, explaining Kansas school finance as it applies to the Wichita school district, and offering justification for deciding to join the lawsuit demanding the state spend more on schools.

    Referring to base state aid per pupil, which has been cut several times in the past year for a total of 9.5 percent (depending on who’s doing the arithmetic), Allison said that base aid is the funding with which the district funds regular education, and the represents funds with which the district has the greatest latitude. Other funds are restricted, and have fewer options.

    He said that unlike many businesses, the school district hasn’t lost customers during the recession, and in fact, enrollment is high now. At the same time, production standards increase each year (due to the No Child Left Behind law), and doesn’t vary because of budgetary reasons.

    Allison cited the rapid growth in math and reading scores on the Kansas assessment tests, and rising graduation rates. He said that efforts are paying dividends in achievement.

    An important measure to the Wichita district, he said, is the weighting for special populations. These weightings provide additional funding over base state aid. Weighting factors include non-English speaking students, and students coming from poor families. Allison said that the wealthier districts in the eastern part of Kansas may contest these weightings, but he said there is a “marked difference” in educating in an urban situation versus a suburban situation, and this funding is important.

    Allison said that making further progress “comes down to dollars.”

    He said the district is pursuing efficiency measures in purchasing, including cooperation with other school districts. Storage of large quantities is sometimes a problem.

    He asked that the legislature allow school districts to use a “request for proposal” procedure, instead of the current practice, where schools have to “craft a solution” before asking for bids. The selection of a vendor to install turf on Wichita school football fields last spring was an example where the RFP process was used, but found to be unlawful.

    On the issue of fund balances, Allison said that almost all are restricted funds, mentioning the contingency fund as one that could be used, but the fund’s balance would not even meet district payroll for one month. The Kansas Policy Institute has produced research demonstrating that Kansas schools have $700 million in funds that could be used to make it through a tight fiscal situation, with Kansas Deputy Commissioner of Education Dale Dennis agreeing.

    Regarding the board’s decision on Monday to join the attempt to reopen the Montoy case (the Kansas school funding lawsuit) in an effort to force the state to increase funding, Allison claimed the decision was not made easily. He said it is not a “sudden, magic solution” to the finance issue, and that legislators have to balance funding needs of the state, while keeping Kansas as a viable state for business growth. He mentioned examples of various units of government suing other government.

    Representative Steve Huebert, a Republican from Valley Center asked questions about the wisdom of a lawsuit at this time. He said that school funding will be restored after getting people back to work and restoring our economy. Huebert asked about schools’ emphasis on cuts made to base funding from the state, which is about one-third of total school spending in the case of the Wichita district. Additionally, for the Wichita school system, with its large number of special needs students and students eligible for free and reduced weightings, about two-thirds of the total budget comes from these weightings to the base state aid, and many of these weights do not have restrictions. Talking about only the base funding, Huebert said, is very misleading.

    Allison said he did not disagree, but when cuts have been made, they’ve been made to the base funding. Each time the district takes a reduction, fewer discretionary funds are available.

    Allison said that there are some special education students said that cost “hundreds of thousands per year to provide what’s being required.”

    Senator Susan Wagle, a Republican from east Wichita said that in order to fund Montoy it would require a very large tax increase, and asked if Allison was asking for a tax increase at a time when Kansas families and other Kansas state agencies have experienced larger cuts than schools have faced. Allison said that the question is not advocating a tax increase as much as asking what are the current revenue streams, and are “exemptions and other areas where they need to be in order to meet some of the other obligations of the state.”

    Wagle said we need a “reasonable discussion about how you squeeze blood out of a turnip.” Schools are asking way too much, she said, and animosity is developing because of the decision to sue. Most people when they want funding come to the legislature, and legislators make balanced decisions and fund what they can. We cannot fund Montoy “without an extravagant tax increase,” she said.

    Allison responded that the decision to sue has been made by a large number of elected officials, and “time will tell regarding animosity.” He said he hopes, from a superintendent’s perspective, that we find a way to bridge not only the current situation, but also to look at the long term.

    Coverage from the Wichita Eagle’s Dion Lefler is at Legislators, Wichita superintendent clash over school funding.

  • Wichita-area legislators hear a variety of issues

    Last night, members of the South-central Kansas legislative delegation heard from citizens in a meeting at the Sedgwick County Courthouse. The 2010 Kansas legislative session starts next week.

    Greg Dye of Wichita spoke on the Bank of North Dakota. He says that Kansas should have such a state bank, which would require an amendment to the Kansas Constitution. He also said that states should seek to remove themselves from the control of the Federal Reserve Bank.

    Several speakers, including Wichitan Mark Gietzen, who is president of the Kansas Coalition for Life, asked legislators to cut funding to Planned Parenthood. He thanked legislators for passing such a law, and said it was unfortunate that the governor vetoed that bill. He said that Planned Parenthood has plenty of funds, and taxpayer money should not be used to fund organizations that provide abortions.

    Allegations of problems with the child protection system in Kansas is usually an issue at these meetings. One speaker said he spent time in jail because of false accusations of a Sedgwick County family law judge. It’s driven by money, he said, in that when a child is judged to be a “child in need of care” the state gets money.

    Another speaker said that “every child is nothing but a dollar sign to the system” and made allegations of inappropriate postings on Facebook by SRS attorneys.

    Marlene Jones spoke on child issues, citing the Kansas Legislative Post Audit study of 2009 that found that “58 percent of the social workers in Sedgwick County were being pressured by the Sedgwick County DA’s office to include distorted, falsified facts to remove children.” She referenced recent hearings in Topeka where SRS Secretary Don Jordan stated that Kansas’ reunification rate of children with parents is 25 percent, which Jordan also said is the same as the national average. But Jones said that according to HHS statistics, the national average is in fact 52 percent, making Kansas’ average less than half that. Jones said that Sedgwick County’s rate of reunification is only 15 percent. Families of the other 85 percent, therefore, are emotionally and financially destroyed trying to attempt to get their children back, “not knowing that there was never any possibility of that happening.” She urged accountability. There is video of Jones’ testimony.

    Kip Schroeder of Wichita acknowledged the difficult job the legislators perform. Over the past ten years, he said, Kansas has lost 17,200 private sector jobs. During the same time Kansas added 20,200 public sector employees, which he said makes it difficult to maintain a balanced budget. He asked that legislators not raise taxes under any circumstances.

    Judicial corruption was the topic of several speakers. A citizens’ grand jury, an ombudsman, or some type of outside entity is asked for as a way to investigate this alleged corruption. It’s requested that Jim Morrison, a Republican member of the Kansas House of Representatives from Colby and chair of the Government Efficiency and Fiscal Oversight Committee, be given subpoena power to compel testimony under oath.

    One speaker suggested a constitutional amendment that would require citizen election of supreme court judges, saying that would cause attorneys and judges to expose each others’ corruption as part of a campaign for election.

    Others allege that Blackwater contractors working for the CIA are in Wichita conducting illegal surveillance and killing people in Wichita hospitals, because they were fighting for justice.

    Dave Trabert of the Kansas Policy Institute presented testimony about how Kansas can make it through the current financial situation without raising taxes or cutting essential services. His remarks may be read by clicking on Solution to Kansas budget crisis offered.

    John Todd of Wichita asked legislators to forgo tax increases. “This is not a time to raise taxes on businesses and families that are struggling to pay their bills and trying to maintain their jobs. Economic recovery will come from the private sector, particularly small businesses that don’t need a rollback of hard-fought tax relief gained in previous legislative sessions.” He also recommended legislative approval of appointments to the Kansas Supreme Court, no seat belt requirements or smoking bans, and passage of the state sovereignty resolution (Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 1615).

    KCTU Television’s R.J. Dickens presented a colorful argument for a “real person law,” which would require companies to make it easier to talk to actual customer service persons on the telephone. “We have the right to contact with other human beings in a timely manner,” he said. He added that the Kansas Corporation Commission has fined Kansas utility companies for not answering telephones quickly enough.

    Kelly Wendeln spoke on the topic of wind power versus coal generation of electricity. He named all the area legislators who voted against the expansion of the Holcomb Station coal-fired electric plant in Western Kansas.

    Gordon Bakken asked legislators to legalize marijuana, saying that enforcement of the marijuana prohibition laws creates more problems than the drug itself.

    Joel Weihe of Wichita spoke on downtown Wichita development and revitalization. He asked that legislators turn down requests for tax credits as a Wichita downtown development tool. He said that only a small number of developers benefit from these subsidies. Also the subsidies let government pick winners and losers, and therefore creates an unlevel playing field.

    Other coverage is from the Wichita Eagle at Sedgwick Co. residents tell legislators not to raise taxes, Kansas Watchdog at Wichita-area Legislators Hear From Citizens Before Session Starts, State of the state Kansas at Kansas Legislators Hear Capitol Preview, KWCH at Kansas Lawmakers Hear From Citizens, and KAKE at Lawmakers Hear From Citizens Before Heading To Capitol.

    Analysis

    The attendance by legislators this year was noticeably lower than in recent years. There were some new voices in the audience this year, but many of the speakers are familiar to the legislators from previous appearances.

    Some speakers in these forums and other similar situations demand that legislators “do their jobs” and work for the people, or something similar to that. The problem, however, is that there is a great diversity of opinion on what it means to “work for the people.”

    The allegations of widespread corruption in Kansas state and local governments may contain a seed of merit. But sometimes people, after they’ve lost their cases in court or the legislature doesn’t agree with their positions or requests, declare corruption as the reason for their loss. Followers of this blog know that the city council, county commission, school board, Kansas legislature, and United States Congress rarely agree with the positions that I believe in and advocate. I believe that most of these politicians and officeholders are simply misinformed about issues, or that they don’t believe in freedom, liberty, and limited government as I do. It doesn’t mean they’re corrupt. They’re just wrong.

  • Open Records are an issue in Kansas

    Remarks delivered to a meeting of the South-central Kansas legislative delegation, January 5, 2010.

    I’d like to see to Kansas Open Records Act (KORA) strengthened in some way.

    Recently I asked three quasi-governmental organizations in Wichita for some records. They declined, stating that they are not subject to the records act. They believe that because their form of organization is non-profit — several different forms of 501c status — they do not have to follow the KORA.

    These organizations receive all or nearly all of their funds from taxes. The open records act defines a public agency as, in part, “any other entity receiving or expending and supported in whole or in part by the public funds appropriated by the state or by public funds of any political or taxing subdivision of the state.”

    These organizations may be relying on faulty advice by the Wichita city attorney, who says that at least one of these organizations falls under the vendor exception to the KORA. That exception is there so that if, say, a car dealer sells a car to a city, the dealer isn’t subject to the KORA for that reason alone.

    But these organizations, generally, have only one client: government. They are performing a governmental function that some cities keep in-house instead of outsourcing as Wichita has. So this vendor exception should not apply in these cases.

    The Kansas Open Records Act contains language stating that the act should be construed liberally. Governments should be looking for ways to make more information available, not going out of the way to restrict access, as does the City of Wichita.

    I don’t know what would be the cure for this situation. I’ve asked the district attorney to look into these cases.

    Furthermore, I would like to call your attention to the Sedgwick County legislative platform, especially the provisions regarding the limitation of the use of eminent domain for economic development purposes and the requirement for sales and property tax increases to be put to a vote of the people. As you may be aware, Sedgwick County did not budget funds for a lobbyist this year, so we’re going to be counting on Sedgwick County legislators to press these initiatives.

    Finally, the Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice has compelling research showing that school choice programs save money. At a time we’re struggling to fund schools, we should look at school choice programs as a way to save money.

  • Solution to Kansas budget crisis offered

    At a meeting of the South-central Kansas legislative delegation on January 5, 2010, Dave Trabert, president of the Kansas Policy Institute spoke to legislators about ways that Kansas can make it through the upcoming legislative session without raising taxes or cutting essential services. Due to the relatively short time limit given to speakers he was not able to present all his remarks, but his complete remarks are presented here.

    Good evening. My name is Dave Trabert and I’m president of Kansas Policy Institute.

    I can’t imagine what it must be like to be in your positions as you head to Topeka next week, facing large budget shortfalls and being pressured to raise taxes.

    The situation has been framed as a choice between raising taxes or cutting essential services, neither of which are good choices.

    I’m here tonight to share some good news: our research strongly indicates that neither of those bad choices is necessary.

    State agencies are probably holding more than enough cash reserves to get us through the immediate crisis … and we can reduce spending without cutting services by making government operate more efficiently.

    I can’t cover everything in 3 minutes, but the highlights are in your packets.

    The first document is a list of unencumbered carryover cash balances held by each state agency. Not counting money set aside for unemployment, the billion in idle cash that belongs to local governments and several other funds, state agencies started this year with over $800 million in carryover cash reserves. Universities had another $300 million.

    Sure, some of it might not be readily available. But no audits have been conducted to prove that they need it. Should we just take their word?

    Next, tax increases. Revenues are down now because of the recession, but taxes increased 40% from 2001 to 2008 … more than double the rate of inflation.

    But what about that $billion in “cuts” and “exemptions”? The Kansas Department of Revenue’s list is the 3rd document … the top 5 amounts are property tax, car tax, EIC, single income rate reductions and food sales tax rebates.

    Do they really believe that these changes caused the budget crisis? Or could it be that spending grew faster than revenues in 4 of the last 5 years?

    And how can you deal with school districts suing taxpayers for more money?

    Well, they also have large cash reserves … not counting capital projects and debt service, they started this year with $700 million left over from prior years … and despite their protests, [Kansas Deputy Commissioner of Education] Dale Dennis says they can access that money … if they want to.

    Schools are also a great example of how government can operate more efficiently.

    We released a study today showing that per pupil expenditures in 2008 ranged from $9,017 to $25,240. If the high spenders had just been at median for similar sized districts, it would have saved $636 million. Legislative Post Audit also says many districts could save a lot of money, offering 80 recommendations last year.

    The State has many viable options to get through this crisis without raising taxes or cutting essential services. That is really good news!

    It won’t be easy, but we can come out of this recession in good shape and ready to take on the competition for jobs and economic growth.

    Kansas Policy Institute stands ready to help. Thanks for your time.

    The just-released study that Trabert referred to is A Kansas Primer on Education Funding, Volume III: Analysis of K-12 Spending in Kansas.

  • Kansas legislative delegation meetings set

    Following is information about two upcoming meetings of the South Central Kansas legislative delegation. The Tuesday evening meeting is for citizens, while the Thursday meeting is designed for government officials to present their case to the legislators, although at least some citizens are given preferential treatment in the case of the Northern Flyer Alliance.

    At 7:00 p.m., on Tuesday, January 5, 2010, the Sedgwick County/South Central Kansas legislative delegation will be hosting a public hearing and inviting public input in the Jury Room of the Sedgwick County Court House, 525 N. Main, Wichita, Kansas. This is your opportunity to address your concerns to area legislators prior to the convening of the 2010 legislative session that begins in Topeka on January 11, 2010. Entry to the Court House will be through security on the north side of the building. In past years speakers have been given approximately 3 minutes to speak depending on the number of people wanting to speak.

    From 1:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m. on Thursday, January 7, 2010, the Sedgwick County/South Central Kansas legislative delegation will be holding their annual meeting at the Wichita State University Marcus Center located at 4205 E. 21st Street, Wichita, Kansas, just east of the WSU baseball stadium. The public is invited but will not be allowed to formally address the delegation. This is your opportunity to listen and find out about the legislative agendas of local governmental units like the City of Wichita, Sedgwick County, USD-259, Wichita State University, and private sector groups like the Wichita Chamber of Commerce, Wichita Independent Business Association, and others. Below is the tentative schedule for the meeting.

    1:00 Call to Order and Welcome, Representative McCray-Miller
    1:10 State General Fund Overview, Alan Conroy
    1:50 Wichita State University
    2:10 Wichita Independent Business Association
    2:25 Wichita Public Schools
    2:45 Wichita Metro Chamber of Commerce
    3:00 Break
    3:15 18th Judicial District, Judge Fleetwood
    3:25 Northern Flyer Alliance, Debra Fischer Stout
    3:35 Prevent Child Abuse, Vicky Roper
    3:45 City of Wichita
    4:05 Sedgwick County
    4:25 REAP
    4:40 Announcements and Adjournment, Representative McCray-Miller

  • Visioneering Wichita should not receive public funds

    Remarks to be delivered to the December 16, 2009 meeting of the Sedgwick County Commission.

    Mr. Chairman, members of the commission,

    I’m here today to recommend that this body not give taxpayer funds to Visioneering Wichita.

    My reason is simple: Many of the items that Visioneering is in favor of require government spending. Mr. Rolph told me that Visioneering doesn’t advocate for higher taxes. But any government spending — at least by governmental bodies other than the federal government — requires taxation or borrowing, which is simply deferred taxation.

    For example, the items on Visioneering’s unified legislative agenda all involve funding from the state. Mr. Rolph told me, correctly, that we’re in a battle with other parts of the state to see who gets funding, and that we need to make sure we in south central Kansas get our fair share. There’s some truth in that. But the better battle we need to fight is to control state spending in all areas, so that there’s not this regional battle every year.

    If the county is inclined to spend money on legislative matters, I might suggest that restoring funding for a contract lobbyist — that was about $29,000 if memory serves — plus some expense money for commissioners to spend some time at the statehouse might be a better expenditure. This is especially true this year as this commission has proposed some legislative initiatives that deserve advocacy in Topeka.

    In another area, Visioneering supports the planning effort for the revitalization of downtown Wichita. Besides being an expenditure of taxpayer money to pay for the plan, it’s certain that the ambitious plans for downtown will require a massive infusion of taxpayer funds. The sales tax used in Oklahoma City, for example, has been cited as something that should be “of interest” to Wichita.

    Funding Visionering with taxpayer funds, therefore, amounts to taxpayer-funded lobbying for more government spending funded by taxation. This leads to a loss of economic freedom for the people of Wichita and Kansas. I am reminded of the words of Milton Friedman, who wrote in his book Capitalism and Freedom: “Freedom in economic arrangements is itself a component of freedom broadly understood, so economic freedom is an end in itself … Economic freedom is also an indispensable means toward the achievement of political freedom.”

    So no, we don’t need to do anything that encourages more government spending and taxation.

    If this commission should decide to fund Visioneering, I make this suggestion: As a condition of funding, the county should require that Visioneering agree, in writing, that it and its parent or affiliated organizations meet the definition of a “public agency” as defined in KSA 45-217 (f)(1), and are therefore subject to the provisions of the Kansas Open Records Act and the Kansas Open Meeting Act.

    By doing this, citizens may request documents without having to confront disagreements over the definition of a public agency.

  • Senator Steve Abrams to present topics in Kansas education

    At this Friday’s meeting of the Wichita Pachyderm Club, Kansas Senator Dr. Steve Abrams, Republican from Arkansas City, will speak on Kansas education. Abrams served 14 years on the Kansas State Board of Education. In 2008 he was elected to the Kansas Senate from the 32nd district, which covers all of Cowley and Sumner counties, and a small portion of Sedgwick County around and including the city of Mulvane.

    Abrams said his presentation will cover three main points: First, we need an education funding formula in Kansas that is not incomprehensible to most people. Second, we need to more closely align those who are responsible for the academics with those who are responsible for the funding. Finally, we must change the funding formula so that it will accommodate and encourage students that want to graduate from high school and also want to receive career and technical education certificates.

    All are welcome to attend Pachyderm club meetings. The program costs $10, which includes a delicious buffet lunch including salad, soup, two main dishes, and ice tea and coffee. The meeting starts at noon, although it’s recommended to arrive fifteen minutes early to get your lunch before the program starts.

    The Wichita Petroleum Club is on the ninth floor of the Bank of America Building at 100 N. Broadway (north side of Douglas between Topeka and Broadway) in Wichita, Kansas (click for a map and directions). Park in the garage just across Broadway and use the sky walk to enter the Bank of America building. Bring your parking garage ticket to be stamped and your parking fee will be only $1.00. There is usually some metered and free street parking nearby.

  • DeGraaf delivers update on Kansas budget, other matters

    Last Friday Kansas State Representative Pete DeGraaf, a Republican from Mulvane, updated members and guests of the Wichita Pachyderm Club on the status of the Kansas budget and other legislative matters. He appeared with Representative Don Myers, a Republican from Derby.

    DeGraaf was appointed to the legislature at the end of the 2008 session to fill the vacancy created when Ted Powers died. DeGraaf was elected to a full term in November 2008. He serves on the important House Appropriations Committee.

    “Americans are awaking up, and they’re not liking the shift to the left,” DeGraaf told the audience. Even in Washington, politicians are recognizing that people are upset.

    Locally, he said that the budgetary problems in Kansas provide an opportunity to cut government, “not only in scope, but in real funding and numbers.” Government has grown rapidly in Kansas, and the current situation provides an opportunity to evaluate our priorities, to decide what’s critical and what isn’t.

    Speaking about the current budget, DeGraaf said that K through12 education was cut 4.7%, when considering base state aid per pupil. But when considering overall funding, school budgets were not cut at all due to the impact of federal and local funding.

    Furthermore, he said that schools put millions into savings accounts — the unencumbered funds that the Kansas Watchdog has uncovered.

    Since K through 12 school spending — which is about half the state’s general fund spending — was cut so little, large cuts were made in other areas. Some social service agencies such as Comcare were cut by 52%, he said. Facilities like state hospitals and juvenile detention centers may be closed, potentially releasing predatory offenders back on the streets.

    From a legislative perspective, he said the pressure comes from a “highly-paid, energetic lobby, K through 12.” He described the high-pressure, nasty emails — complete with misspelled words — he receives from school administrators.

    DeGraaf said he appreciated the Sedgwick County legislative platform with its positions advocating for state hospital beds and funding for developmentally disabled people. There are 2,000 people on a waiting list in Sedgwick County alone, he said.

    DeGraaf recommended using KansasVotes.org to keep up with the voting record of members of the Kansas House and Senate.

    For the upcoming Kansas legislative session, DeGraaf said that the budget deficit that legislators will have to overcome could be as much as $500 million.

    The affordable airfares program — the subsidy paid to AirTran Airways to provide cheap air service in Wichita — is important, he said, and we in Wichita and south-central Kansas need to make sure that legislators from northeast Kansas realize that.

    DeGraaf said the tea party movement is an encouragement.

    Analysis

    DeGraaf’s assessment of the state’s fiscal troubles as an opportunity to re-examine the role we want Kansas state government to play is spot-on. Other legislators — even Democrats such as Kansas Senator Chris Steineger with his ideas for redesigning Kansas government — have also recognized this window of opportunity. Unfortunately, the naked self-interest of the school spending lobby, particularly the Kansas National Education Association or KNEA, the teachers union) and the Kansas Association of School Boards (KASB), makes it very difficult to rationally discuss state spending.

    Even such basic reforms such as zero-based budgeting are difficult to achieve. Answering a question from the audience, DeGraaf described how an amendment requiring this never went anywhere in the last session. DeGraaf said that he’s concerned that there is not enough manpower (legislative staff) to do zero-based budgeting.

    Readers of this blog will recognize that I don’t agree with everything DeGraaf supports. His support of what he termed the “manipulated competition” that the AirTran subsidy brings to the Wichita airport is something that I have opposed, and will continue to oppose.