Voice For Liberty

Tag: Politics

  • Tea party has nothing on Wisconsin union supporters

    While the political left likes to portray tea party protesters as racist neanderthals hell-bent on violent overthrow of the U.S. government, the tea party has nothing on government union members when it comes to protesting. Union leadership can’t bring itself to condemn even the worst excesses of the union protests.

    On Sunday’s episode of the NBC public affairs television program Meet the Press host David Gregory gave AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka a chance to condemn the very nasty tone of the pro-union demonstrators in Madison:

    MR. GREGORY: Richard Trumka, I want to ask you one thing, again, about the tone of the debate. You’re one of the leading labor voices in the country. Do you condemn the hyperbole, the overstatements, comparisons to Hitler and dictators? Do you think that’s wrong on the part of pro-union supporters?

    MR. TRUMKA: We want to–I–look, we ought to–pro, anti-union, it doesn’t matter.

    Trumka could have simply answered “yes.” But he didn’t. This is the same Richard Trumka that has said: “I’m at the White House a couple times a week. Two, three times a week. I have conversations everyday with someone in the White House or in the administration. Everyday.” It’s a mystery as to why President Obama would want to be associated with someone like this.

    Just after Trumka’s refusal to criticize vulgar behavior, Lawrence O’Donnell of MSNBC likened it to democracy, saying “And I don’t know why you fear democracy so much.”

    It’s quite a contrast between the union demonstrators in Wisconsin — and the gallery of the Kansas House of Representatives — and tea party protestors. After tea party events in Kansas, participants pick up their trash — or never throw it down in the first place. Tea party people are courteous to the news media, and even to counter-protesters who heckle them.

    Not so with the Wisconsin union protesters. Remember: some of these protesters are teachers, who demand to be treated as professionals.

    The behavior of union protesters in Wisconsin is so bad that even some Democrats are concerned about its effect on public opinion. As CBS News reported: “Democratic Party of Wisconsin Chairman Mike Tate is condemning signs carried by pro-labor protesters that compare Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker to Hitler, Benito Mussolini and Hosni Mubarak and showed the governor with a cross-hairs rifle sight over his face. In an interview with CNSNews.com, Democratic Party of Wisconsin Press Secretary Graeme Zielinski said that Tate and the party ‘absolutely’ condemn the inflammatory signs but says that they are not representative of the majority of the protesters who have taken to the streets in opposition to the Governor’s plan.”

    But it’s hard for the average person to make this comparison. The mainstream media’s least-underhanded criticism of tea party participants is to cast them as hapless pawns of some right-wing conspiracy. More radical leftists paint tea party attendees as ignorant racists, and their cameras look long and hard for the one protest sign out of many that provides the evidence they need to “prove” their preconceived ideas.

  • Public workers and their pay

    In the controversy over public sector unions and worker pay, the political left argues that government workers are not overpaid. Evidence from California, however, shows that when everything is considered, public sector employees are paid much more than similar private sector workers.

    Research by Andrew Biggs of American Enterprise Institute and Jason Richwine of Heritage Foundation was summarized in the Wall Street Journal. Some findings:

    • In terms of salary, the California study found that private and public sector workers earned salaries that were almost equal.
    • State and local governments often guarantee a certain level of return on workers’ retirement savings. The article cites eight percent in California. (In Kansas, workers who joined KPERS before 1993 are guaranteed eight percent interest on contributions. For those who joined later, the rate is four percent.)
    • Job security is a benefit. A private sector worker has a 20 percent chance of losing a job during a year. For state and local government workers, the rate is only six percent. The authors estimate this to be worth about a 15 percent boost in compensation, especially since public sector workers have been found to be more risk-averse than other workers and value job security highly.

    Adding it all together, the authors estimate that California government workers are paid 30 percent more than comparable workers workers in large private firms, a value thought to be similar to other states with powerful public worker unions.

    The full working paper by Biggs and Richwine is available at Are California Public Employees Overpaid?.

  • Koch critics examined

    Critics of Charles and David Koch allege that the philanthropists have tried to hide their political involvement and contributions over the years. While false, many uncritically believe it. And at the same time, the media gives Koch critics a pass on their lack of transparency.

    Not everyone, however. Here Jennifer Rubin of The Washington Post takes a look at some of the figures that are attacking the Koch brothers. Here’s part:

    From our brief inquiry into some left-wing groups, we’ve learned a few things. First, they share many of the same donors. Second, they often pursue the same agenda (“Get the Koch brothers!”) And, while they talk an awful lot about “transparency” and the menace of “anonymous donors,” their own disclosure is limited, at best.

    Don’t get me wrong. Rich people and foundations have every right to operate in this fashion. But it’s rank hypocrisy for them to go after the Koch brothers for funding lots of conservative groups. Moreover, the mainstream media and Congress should stop pretending that these left-wing front groups are high-minded independent watch dogs. In fact, these groups are highly partisan and selective attack dogs.

    A mix of diverse ideological organizations conducting pitched battles on the political playing field is a vital part of our democratic system. Let’s just be honest about who the players are and who owns the teams.

  • Kansas judicial selection should be reformed

    By Karl Peterjohn.

    Removing politics from the Kansas judiciary is about as likely as removing the moo from a cow. In Kansas the there is no transparency and a great deal of discrimination in this back room judicial selection process. Judge Ricard D. Greene’s defense of appellate judge selection (February 24, 2011 Wichita Eagle) in Kansas neglected these odious features in his defense of this terribly flawed system.

    I write this as a second-class Kansan who has been disenfranchised in the process of selecting a majority of this powerful governmental committee that is dominated by the members of the Kansas bar and the group that picks who will become its appellate judges. There is no other government panel in Kansas that empowers one small class of special citizens at the expense of the rest of us. I recently asked the Secretary of State’s office for the election results for selecting this powerful state committee’s lawyer members. I was told that information is not available.

    Five of the nine members of this powerful committee are elected solely by the members of the Kansas bar. The other four are appointed by the governor. While this committee selection process is used in a number of other states, none of them provide for making a majority of its members are lawyers.

    This type of closed door selection process which occurs outside the public’s view is a reason why a few years ago, six of the seven members of the Kansas Supreme Court who had been selected using this process were members of one political party while the seventh who wasn’t, was a friend of the governor (see kansasmeadowlark.com). The latter was judicially reprimanded but that admonishment and the underlying egregious misbehavior that led to this punishment did not keep Lawton Nuss from his current promotion to be the Chief Justice of the Kansas Supreme Court.

    Yeah, there aren’t any politics here. Yeah, only the best and the brightest are being added to the court according to Judge Greene. I must note that none of the Eagle’s news coverage of Nuss during his retention election last year mentioned his reprimand or kept the Eagle’s editorial page from endorsing him despite his ex parte abuse with litigants in the Montoy case.

    Judicial selection is important and decisions will impact state policy. Must the state spend $853 million more for K-12 schooling to comply with the KS Constitution? Yes says the unanimous supreme court in overruling its own earlier decision. Are state owned casinos constitutional? Yes again, despite the fact that there never was a statewide vote on legalized casinos. Was the Kansas death penalty constitutional? The Kansas Supreme Court overruled itself from an earlier case and said no, but then Attorney General Kline took this case to the US Supreme Court. Kline won in Washington and that decision was reversed.

    Today, the politics of the Kansas judiciary are now occurring behind the closed door-back rooms of the bar association. Transparency is non existent when the meetings of the government committee occur behind closed doors and without any public records being recorded from these meetings.

    KU law professor Stephen J. Ware has written that this is an inequality that goes against the “one person, one vote” principle of democracies. The power of a vote of a member of the bar is “infinitely more powerful” than the votes of non-lawyers.

    When comparing the method of judicial selection in Kansas to other states, Ware said that “Kansas is the only state that gives its bar the power to select the majority of its supreme court nominating commission.”

    The Kansas House majority supporting HB 2101 should be praised for eliminating this vestige of elite discrimination by one class of specially empowered citizens. The attorneys and their hand picked judges won’t like this bill, but the politics of judicial selection should be out in public where everyone has a say as well as a clear view, instead of hidden in back rooms. I hope that a majority of the Kansas senate as well as Governor Sam Brownback agree and HB 2101 becomes law as a first step in reforming appellate judicial selection in Kansas.

  • Kansas and Wichita quick takes: Sunday February 27, 2011

    Boeing tanker contract. While almost everyone in Kansas is celebrating the award of the air fueling tanker replacement contract to Boeing, there are a few reasons we shouldn’t over-celebrate. First, we bought an expensive war weapon. This is guns, not butter. President Dwight Eisenhower warned against the creation of a permanent armaments industry. Now our leaders celebrate defense spending as a jobs creation program, forgetting the opportunity costs of this spending. … In 2008, when the contract was awarded to the foreign company European Aeronautic Defence & Space Co. (EADS) and Boeing successfully protested the award, the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal correctly analyzed the politics: “What’s really going on is a familiar scrum for federal cash, with politicians from Washington and Kansas using nationalism as cover for their pork-barreling.” The article correctly stated the goal of the contract: “The Pentagon’s job is to defend the country, which means letting contracts that best serve American soldiers and taxpayers, not certain companies.” Noting the aging fleet of tankers the contract would replace, and that the protest by Boeing would delay receiving them, the Journal concluded “Protectionists in Congress want to make America’s soldiers wait even longer for this new equipment, all to score political points at home. There’s a word for that, but it’s not patriotism.” … Of the contract awarded this week, the Journal wrote: “The military and Capitol Hill proved so good at fouling up this decade-long contest through political meddling, fake patriotism and sheer incompetence that a clean resolution may be near impossible.” Noting the international nature of manufacturing, the article wrote: “Boeing and Airbus each would have employed about 50,000 Americans to build up to 179 aerial refueling tankers.” Concluding: “The law tells the Defense Department to buy the best hardware at the best price on the global marketplace, regardless of any impact on domestic job creation. The fuel tanker debacle has undermined a competitive and open market for defense purchases free of political pressure. The losers are American taxpayers and soldiers.”

    Kansas Economic Freedom Index. This week I produced the first version of the Kansas Economic Freedom Index: Who votes for and against economic freedom in Kansas? for the 2011 legislative session. Currently I have a version only for the House of Representatives, as the Senate hasn’t made many votes that affect economic freedom. The index now has its own site, kansaseconomicfreedom.com.

    Elections this week. On Tuesday voters across Kansas will vote in city and school board primary elections. Well, at least a few will vote, as it is thought that only nine percent of eligible voters will actually vote. Many of those may have already voted by now, as advance voting is popular. For those who haven’t yet decided, here’s the Wichita Eagle voter guide.

    Civility is lost on the Wisconsin protesters. Lost not only in Wisconsin, but across the country, writes Michelle Malkin in Washington Examiner. “President Obama’s new era of civility was over before it began. You wouldn’t know it from reading The New York Times, watching Katie Couric or listening to the Democratic manners police. But America has been overrun by foul-mouthed, fist-clenching wildebeests. Yes, the Tea Party Movement is responsible — for sending these liberal goons into an insane rage, that is. After enduring two years of false smears as sexist, racist, homophobic barbarians, it is grassroots conservatives and taxpayer advocates who have been ceaselessly subjected to rhetorical projectile vomit. It is Obama’s rank-and-file “community organizers” on the streets fomenting the hate against their political enemies. Not the other way around.” … Malkin details the viciousness of some of the political activity across the country, some of which is especially demeaning to minorities — and women, as we’ve seen in Kansas this week.

    Help Wisconsin Governor Walker. Tim Phillips of Americans for Prosperity explains what’s happening in Wisconsin: “Governor Walker is simply repairing the Wisconsin budget by reining in the overly generous pension and benefits packages that are far beyond what people in the private sector receive. He’s also ending the government union collective bargaining that has been the chief reason why union benefits and pensions have gotten so out of control.” … Phillips recommends supporting Walker by signing a petition stating: “Union dues should be voluntary, and the state should not be in the business of collecting them. Union certification should require a secret ballot. Collective bargaining should not be used to force extravagant pension and health benefits that cripple state budgets. These common-sense reforms have made the union bosses desperate to disrupt Wisconsin government and overturn an election. They must not be allowed to succeed. In fact, every state should adopt Governor Scott Walker’s common sense reforms.” Click on Stand With Walker to express your support.

    Wichita city council. On Tuesday the Wichita City Council will take up these matters: First, the council will decide on a policy regarding soliciting charitable contributions at street intersections. Then, the council will decided whether to create a Community Improvement District for the Eastgate Shopping Center. While the council has enthusiastically granted other applicants this privilege of setting their own sales tax policy for their own benefit — and has voted against meaningful disclosure of this to potential shoppers — this CID may not pass. The Wichita Eagle has editorialized against this CID in particular — twice. Vice Mayor Jeff Longwell voted against accepting the petitions for this CID, although he did not explain his lone dissenting vote. … Then Chrome Plus, a manufacturer, seeks forgiveness from paying property taxes under the city’s Economic Development Exemption (EDX) Program. … In the consent agenda, the council will be asked to approve a payment of $235,000 to settle a lawsuit over “damages incurred in an accident between a Wichita Transit bus and a pedestrian in December 2008.”

  • Atlas Debrief: It’s only “planning,” not “secrecy”

    A short piece in Politico (Democrats to plot strategy at private conference) lets us know of an upcoming private meeting to be held by Democrats. The event, organized by the Atlas Project and titled Atlas Debrief: Putting 2010 into Perspective, is pitched by its organizers this way: “Join Atlas as we discuss the lessons of 2010 and start planning for 2012.” The meeting is closed to the press.

    It will be interesting to see how coverage of this event compares to coverage of last month’s meeting of conservatives in Palm Springs. When Democrats hold closed-door meetings, it will probably be described in the press — if it receives much coverage at all — as “planning.” When conservatives meet — especially if organized by Charles and David Koch — it’s sinisterly described with loaded terms like “political,” “shadowy,” “secrecy” — and worse.

    A coalition of left-wing advocacy groups protested the conservative meeting. Will there be a protest at this Washington meeting of liberal activists? I doubt it. Those who advocate for freedom are quite willing to let others meet as they choose.

    Washington Post continues to misinform

    Related to this, a recent opinion piece in the Washington Post by Katrina vanden Heuvel continues to misinform — or lie — about appearances by two United States Supreme Court Justices. In the piece, she writes “Scalia and Thomas have also come under fire for appearing at political retreats hosted by Tea Party financier Charles Koch before the Citizens United case came before the court. Even if the case was not pending, the justices showed poor judgment in attending an event that raised a troubling perception of conflict of interest.”

    In an oblique way complete with an “even if,” she’s raising a charge about Scalia and Thomas that has been thoroughly discredited by anyone who can read a calendar, as this Politico article reports.

    The charges vanden Heuvel raises have been shown to have all the gravity and credibility of a publicity stunt played out by the left-wing advocacy group Common Cause.

    It’s also not accurate to label Charles Koch a “Tea Party financier,” as shown here. And the meetings that are the subject of the Scalia and Thomas complaints were hosted by the Federalist Society, although they were held in conjunction with Koch-organized events. Also, it was the Federalist Society that reimbursed the justices’ expenses.

    It’s a wonder why a mainstream newspaper like the Washington Post prints articles like this. But as we’ve seen, the Washington Post doesn’t care much for accuracy.

  • Kansas and Wichita quick takes: Thursday February 3, 2011

    Wichita-area legislators to meet with public. From Rep. Jim Ward, South-Central Delegation Chair: “Public comment about the proposed state budget, health care reform, voter eligibility and other major issues will be heard by local legislators at 9:00 am Saturday, Feb. 5, at the Wichita State University Metroplex, 29th and Oliver. The forum is the first of the 2011 legislative session and is hosted by the South-Central State Legislative Delegation. … Delegation members will take written and spoken questions from the public during the two-hour session. ‘Legislators need to hear from the people who are affected by these important issues,’ said Rep. Jim Ward, delegation chair. ‘Better decisions are made when the public participates in the process.’ … For further information, contact Rep. Ward, delegation chairman at 316-210-3609 or jim.ward@house.ks.gov.”

    Fairness issue. A letter in the Topeka Capital-Journal: “The Capital-Journal recently published a lengthy feature, headlined ‘Cuts to arts hit sour note,’ about the Kansas Arts Commission. Abolition of the commission may be a legitimate policy move for budgetary reason. However, there is a caveat. If it’s eliminated for budgetary considerations, all comparable departments, agencies, services, programs, etc., must too be abolished or separated from the state into a nonprofit or for-profit corporation — unfunded by Kansas taxpayers, either directly or indirectly.” After running through a number of agencies, the writer concludes: “Thus, artists pay for their own canvasses, hunters fund their own preserves, tourists find the Flint Hills on their own, students come to college to study, farmers show off their fancy ears of corn in their own barns and concert-goers go to New York for entertainment. Honor dictates that all be treated the same, be it sports or tourism or the arts.” … While the tone of the entire letter is sarcasm, the writer almost has everything correct, if taken literally. But it’s not honor that dictates all the treated the same, it’s morality that requires such treatment.

    Twenty regulations to eliminate. From the Heritage Foundation: “As the new Congress assembles, many legislators are considering how to lessen the regulatory burden on Americans. President Obama, too, now says that he wants to root out unnecessary government rules. With regulatory costs at record levels, relief is sorely needed. But it is not enough to talk about fewer regulations. Policymakers must critically review specific rules and identify those that should be abolished. This paper details 20 unnecessary and harmful regulations that should be eliminated now. … At every level, government intrudes into citizens’ lives with a torrent of do’s and don’ts that place an unsustainable burden on the economy and erode Americans’ most fundamental freedoms. In fiscal year (FY) 2010 alone, the Obama Administration unleashed regulations that will cost more than $26.5 billion annually, and many more are on the way.” The report is available at Rolling Back Red Tape: 20 Regulations to Eliminate.

    Kansas considers major change in state pension plans. “Kansas legislators looking for ways to close a nearly $8 billion gap in state pension plan funding heard how Utah plans to heal its pension wounds by switching to a plan similar to one that most private businesses offer. … Utah state Sens. Dan Liljenquist, of Bountiful, and Curt Bramble, of Provo, both Republicans, outlined to the Kansas House Pensions and Benefits Committee how Utah intends to close a somewhat smaller gap than Kansas’ by switching its traditional defined benefits pension plan to a modified version of a defined contribution 401(k) plan, the predominant retirement savings plan offered by U.S. businesses.” More from Kansas Reporter.

    Politics and city managers to be topic. This Friday (February 4) the Wichita Pachyderm Club features as its speaker H. Edward Flentje, Professor at the Hugo Wall School of Urban and Public Affairs, Wichita State University. His topic will be “The Political Roots of City Managers in Kansas.” The public is welcome and encouraged to attend Wichita Pachyderm meetings. For more information click on Wichita Pachyderm Club.

    Funny campaign websites. Steve Harris, a candidate for Wichita City Council district 2, has a post on his website extolling the virtues of government funding for the arts, invoking the words of George Washington, Franklin Roosevelt, and Lyndon Johnson. What’s funny is where he quotes John Adams. The blog post states “John Adams said: ‘Diversity is a good man’s shining time.’ I would argue that we need to reflect on the thoughts of great leaders from the past who faced diversity we can’t even imagine today.” … When Harris quotes Adams, I think he meant to say adversity rather than diversity. Diversity is not something we have to “face” and struggle against. Adversity is. But even then, he gets the quote incorrect. The first word in the quotation from Adams is “Affliction.” … Plus, I don’t think he’s going to get a lot of agreement on LBJ being a great leader.

  • Charles and David Koch v. George Soros: Free markets or not

    Perhaps the best commentary on the recent conference sponsored by Charles and David Koch in California comes from Timothy P. Carney of the Washington Examiner. Titled The Kochs vs. Soros: Free markets vs. state coercion, it explains the difference between advocates of free enterprise and those who believe in using the force of government to achieve their goals.

    At the conference, protests were arranged by the left-wing advocacy group Common Cause. That organization recently launched an attack on Charles Koch, David Koch, and two U.S. Supreme Court Justices that has been found to be baseless and nothing more than a publicity stunt.

    After tracing the source of funding for Common Cause, Carney concluded: “In other words, money from billionaire George Soros and anonymous, well-heeled liberals was funding a protest against rich people’s influence on politics.”

    Liberals, of course, contend that their political donates are good because their causes are the correct causes: “Conservative money is bad, and linked to greed, while liberal money is self-evidently philanthropic.”

    While I don’t want to repeat Carney’s entire piece here — there’s a link to it below — here’s the crux of his argument: “… while Soros money and Koch money are superficially equivalent, there’s a crucial distinction. If we take both sides at their word, Soros and other liberal donors spend in order to impose their preferences on others while the Kochs and other free-market donors spend in an effort to be left alone to buy and sell with willing parties. The moral difference is this: Only one side is trying to compel others to conform to its preferences.”

    Carney has written before about the political left’s presumption — that big business is evil and is always seeking to restrain government interference — being incorrect. In his 2006 book The Big Ripoff: How Big Business and Big Government Steal Your Money , Carney explains:

    The standard assumption seems to be that government action protects ordinary people by restraining big business, which, in turn, wants to be left alone. The facts point in an entirely different direction:

    • Enron was a tireless advocate of strict global energy regulations supported by environmentalists. Enron also used its influence in Washington to keep laissez-faire bureaucrats off the federal commissions that regulate the energy industry.
    • Philip Morris has aggressively supported heightened federal regulation over tobacco and tobacco advertising. Meanwhile, the state governments that sued Big Tobacco are now working to protect those same large cigarette companies from competition and lawsuits.
    • A recent tax increase in Virginia passed because of the tireless support of the state’s business leaders, and big business has a long history of supporting tax hikes.
    • General Motors provided critical support for new stricter clean air rules that boosted the company’s bottom line.

    Most important, in these and hundreds of similar cases, the government action that helps big business hurts consumers, taxpayers, less established businesses, and smaller competitors. Following closely what big business does in Washington reveals a very different story from conventional wisdom.

    While critics of Charles Koch, David Koch, and Koch Industries use the “big business” criticism — Koch Industries is a very large company, after all — there is a difference the critics can’t — or don’t want to — grasp, as Carney explains in the Washington Examiner article: “First off — and this was the point of a talk I gave Sunday at the Koch conference — many of the industrialists in the audience could profit more through regulations and subsidies than they could through the free market. Some oil executives, for example, have supported California’s strict refinery regulations because they kept out competitors. Natural gas companies like Enron have backed cap and trade because it hurt oil and coal. As for bankers — the Wall Street bailouts made it clear that big government is their mother’s milk.” (emphasis added)

    Carney’s book The Big Ripoff is blunt and detailed in its criticism of companies that use government to obtain special favor to enrich themselves. Yet, he spoke at the Koch conference, and has spoken at other similar events in the past.

    The Kochs vs. Soros: Free markets vs. state coercion

    By Timothy P. Carney

    Palm Springs, California — At the front gates of the Rancho Las Palmas resort, a few hundred liberals rallied Sunday against “corporate greed” and polluters. They chanted for the arrest of billionaires Charles and David Koch, and their ire was also directed at the other free market-oriented businessmen invited here by the Koch brothers to discuss free markets and electoral strategies.

    Billionaires poisoning our politics was the central theme of the protests. But nothing is quite as it seems in modern politics: The protest’s organizer, the nonprofit Common Cause, is funded by billionaire George Soros.

    Common Cause has received $2 million from Soros’s Open Society Institute in the past eight years, according to grant data provided by Capital Research Center. Two panelists at Common Cause’s rival conference nearby — President Obama’s former green jobs czar, Van Jones, and blogger Lee Fang — work at the Center for American Progress, which was started and funded by Soros but, as a 501(c)4 nonprofit “think tank,” legally conceals the names of its donors.

    In other words, money from billionaire George Soros and anonymous, well-heeled liberals was funding a protest against rich people’s influence on politics.

    When Politico reporter Ken Vogel pointed out that Soros hosts similar “secret” confabs, CAP’s Fang responded on Twitter: “don’t you think there’s a very serious difference between donors who help the poor vs. donors who fund people to kill government, taxes on rich?”

    In less than 140 characters, Fang had epitomized the myopic liberal view of money in politics: Conservative money is bad, and linked to greed, while liberal money is self-evidently philanthropic.

    Continue reading at the Washington Examiner

  • Kansas and Wichita quick takes: Wednesday January 26, 2011

    Kansas legislature website. The Kansas legislature’s website is improving. Today the calendar is available for today’s session of the House, although yesterday’s journal is not. The Senate is better, with both today’s calendar and yesterday’s journal available. These documents are now presented in the preferred pdf format, although the unconventional and inconvenient viewing window is still being used. … Contact information for members seems to be fairly complete, even for the newest member who was elected just last week. … Bills seem to be more up-to-date, with history available for some. But so far I’ve not seen any bill’s fiscal note. … The search feature, which uses a Google site search, seems to be able to include recent material. … Too much to ask for? The website doesn’t have a mobile version, at least not for the Iphone.

    Warden to speak. This Friday’s meeting (January 28th) of the Wichita Pachyderm Club features Sam Cline, Warden of the Hutchinson Correctional Facility. His topic will be “An Overview of the Programs Offered at the Hutchinson Correctional Facility.” The public is welcome and encouraged to attend Wichita Pachyderm meetings. For more information click on Wichita Pachyderm Club.

    The plain truth about who owns the Democratic Party. The Washington Examiner is in the midst of a series of articles comprising a special report about the Democratic Party and who it serves. Writes editor Mark Tapscott: “The lawyers and three other special interests — Big Labor union leaders, Big Green environmentalists, and Big Insiders with billions of dollars in personal wealth and foundation grants — together essentially dictate what Democrats can and cannot support on many key public policy issues. Call them the Four Horsemen of the coming Democratic apocalypse.” The “home page” for the series is The plain truth about who owns the Democratic Party.

    Why have your own state if you’re not special? Mike Hall in the Topeka Capital-Journal: “What makes Kansans different from people living in the other states? There must be some differences, or why mark us off inside our own boundaries? I have been intrigued with that question for years and have amassed a collection of observations by other Kansans also trying to describe the uniqueness of the geography and people of Kansas.” Hall goes on to list a few examples of “You Know You Grew Up in Kansas When.” Such as: “You know that the halves of the state are based on US-81 highway.” Actually, I had thought the dividing line between eastern and western Kansas was Wanamaker Road in west Topeka.

    Kansas repealer. Kansas now has a repealer, according to Kansas Reporter: The job of repealing burdensome regulations and laws will fall to Secretary of Administration Dennis Taylor. … He’ll be tasked with establishing a system that allows Kansans to point out laws that might be eligible for repeal, investigating Kansas laws to determine which ones aren’t needed, and making recommendations of repeal to the authority that has the power to do away with the regulation.” Hopefully this office will produce tangible results soon.

    School choice in Kansas. “At some point in most school funding debates, someone will justify their position by saying ‘it’s all about doing what’s best for the kids.’ It’s not a partisan thing; I’ve heard it from people with opposite opinions on whether schools need more money. And that’s what should drive every education discussion — doing what’s best for kids, not the adults in the system. This week is National School Choice Week and there’s no better way to show that it really is about the kids than to support school choice. That’s not an attack on public schools. Public schools work very well for many students, but not all. Granted, that may be a subjective position, but who should decide whether a particular school or district is best for a child — the government or a parent?” More from Kansas Policy Institute President Dave Trabert at Zip Code Shouldn’t Matter — Delivering An Effective Education For Every Child.

    Kansas Days this week. This weekend marks the annual Kansas Days event, a gathering of Republicans in Topeka. More information is at Kansas Days Club.