Tag: Sam Brownback

  • ObamaCare chart updated

    obamacare-chart

    Republicans of the Joint Economic Committee of the U.S. Congress have released an update of a chart to help us navigate ObamaCare. (Click on it for a larger version.) From the July 2010 press release accompanying the original chart: “Four months after U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi famously declared ‘We have to pass the bill so you can find out what’s in it,’ a congressional panel has released the first chart illustrating the 2,801 page health care law President Obama signed into law in March. Developed by the Joint Economic Committee minority, led by U.S Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas and Rep. Kevin Brady of Texas, the detailed organization chart displays a bewildering array of new government agencies, regulations and mandates.”

    Read all about it at Health Care Chart — Updated Chart Shows Obamacare’s Bewildering Complexity.

  • Anderson, former Kansas budget director, speaks

    Last Friday former Kansas budget director Steve Anderson spoke to members and guests of the Wichita Pachyderm Club. Two videos are available, a highlights version and full version. View below, or to view on YouTube, click here for highlights or here for full version.

    Also, it was announced on Friday that Anderson would be joining Kansas Policy Institute in the role of senior adjunct fiscal policy fellow. For more on this from KPI, see Former state budget director Steve Anderson joins Kansas Policy Institute.

    Highlights video

    Full speech

  • In Kansas, politics may now cure its own harm

    I don’t care who does the electing so long as I do the nominating.
    — William “Boss” Tweed, political boss of Tammany Hall

    Critics of Kansas Governor Sam Brownback point to his nomination of a confidant to the Kansas Court of Appeals as evidence of politics trumping the — purportedly — merit-based selection process formerly in place.

    The previous process, however, was nothing if not political. Its defenders — the state’s legal profession — denied that, but they were in charge of the process.

    In fact, the reason that Caleb Stegall, the current nominee, is not already on the bench is politics.

    Stegall’s recommendation from Felita Kahrs, a member of the Supreme Court Nominating Commission, highlights both his judicial qualifications and the political challenge he may face as a nominee. Ms. Kahrs previously reviewed Stegall’s application for the Kansas Court of Appeals, and her recommendation says that she found that his “outstanding academic background, his excellent writing ability, and the experience he brings to this position, exceeded and in some cases far surpassed the other applicants.” Even though she believed that he “was one of the top candidates that appeared before the Commission,” she explained, “due to politics, his name was not submitted.”

    That’s from National Review Online’s Bench Memos.

    And if you’re wondering why so many will criticize this appointment and the new process, well, “hell hath no fury like a lawyer scorned.”

  • Wichita income is not keeping up

    Visioneering Wichita uses per capita income growth as one benchmark of economic progress. What do the numbers say about the city’s progress? The following video illustrates. View below, or click here to view in higher resolution at YouTube, which may work better for some people.

    For more in this, and to access the interactive visualization, see Wichita personal income growth benchmark.

  • Kansas school standards and other states

    Do those who call for more Kansas school spending defend the standards Kansas applies to these schools?

    Row of lockers in school hallway

    As Kansas attempts to position its economy for growth by reducing taxes, we’re told that Kansas risks letting its public schools decay. Consider the editorial Legislators, Brownback renege on promises to get done with session in the Hutchinson News: “And so Kansas continues down a path to fulfill Brownback’s vision of a no-income-tax state. Meanwhile, we also will accept mediocre public schools and universities and inadequate services to disadvantaged Kansans who at the same time will shoulder more of the tax burden.”

    This is typical of the defense of Kansas school spending: Kansas schools have been doing a good job compared to other states, and under difficult circumstances because we don’t spend near enough. We must spend more, we are told by the school spending interests, and soon the Kansas Supreme Court may add its voice.

    But before we decide to invest more in our state’s public schools, shouldn’t we learn whether Kansas has been holding its schools to high standards?

    Kansas school standards

    NAEP scale equivalents of state grade 4 reading standards for proficient performance, by state: 2009

    When talking about the quality of Kansas schools, the first thing to realize is that Kansas has set low standards for its schools, compared to other states. The nearby illustration (click for larger version) maps state test scores onto the National Assessment of Education Progress, a test that is the same in all states. Fourth grade reading is presented in this illustration. States on the right side of the chart have higher standards than those to their left. Note where Kansas appears: Only seven states appear to its left, meaning that Kansas has very low standards for fourth grade reading.

    In other subject areas and other grades, Kansas appears a little further to the right. But in no case does Kansas appear above the midpoint.

    Despite these facts, last year Kansas school superintendents claimed in an editorial that “Historically, our state has had high-performing schools, which make Kansas a great place to live, raise a family and run a business.” Most newspaper editorial writers believe that without looking at the actual situation. See Despite superintendents’ claim, Kansas schools have low standards for more on this topic.

    National test scores

    It’s often expressed that Kansas ranks well on the National Assessment of Education Progress, a test that is the same in all states. Kansas school administrators take pride in mentioning this.

    Consider fourth grading reading, an important benchmark. Kansas ranks 17th among the states, with eight performing significantly better than Kansas, and 21 with no significant difference from Kansas. If you stopped looking at this point, you might conclude, as do most Kansas newspaper editorial writers, that Kansas has good schools.

    But consider white students alone. In this case, Kansas ranks 25th among the states, with 11 performing significantly better than Kansas, and 24 not significantly different.

    If we look at black students alone, Kansas ranks 26th among the states, with six performing significantly better than Kansas, and 37 not significantly different.

    Considering Hispanic students alone, Kansas ranks 17th among the states, with six performing significantly better than Kansas, and 34 not significantly different.

    Because different ethnic groups tend to perform at different levels on the NAEP test, and because states have different mixes of ethnic groups, aggregated statistics can hide an important underlying story. In this case, we see that Kansas schools don’t rank as high as naive supporters believe.

    Kansas and National NAEP Scores, 2011, by Ethnicity and Race

    For another look at how aggregated data can mask important stories, see Kansas school test scores, in perspective, were the statistics show that Kansas students score better than Texas students, as most Kansans probably believe. But, Texas white students score better than Kansas white students, Texas black students score better than Kansas black students, and Texas Hispanic students score better than or tie Kansas Hispanic students. The same pattern holds true for other ethnic subgroups.

  • Kansas tax changes

    TaxWhat are the changes to Kansas tax law that have been passed by the legislature and await the governor’s signature?

    The nearby table presents estimated changes in tax revenue based on changes to the law that was current at the time of the estimate. (The source is Kansas Legislative Research Department.) The largest factor in that law was that if the legislature did nothing, the sales tax rate would change from 6.3 percent to 5.7 percent on July 1, 2013. The legislature decided to change the rate to 6.15 percent on July 1. The estimated increase in revenue is estimated to be $193.2 million in fiscal year 2014, and $1,118.5 million total over the next five years.

    Kansas tax changes, June 2013

    Other changes to the law presented along with the estimated change in revenue.

    The most important number to notice is the five-year total: $777.1 million. This is the additional tax revenue that Kansas is expected to collect based on the action of the legislature this year. For the year starting July 1, the number is $307.9 million, which is 40 percent of the five-year total.

    Someone asked me whether the tax bill increases taxes on the middle class. It’s hard to answer that question, as several changes were made. Here’s what each change means:

    Sales tax: On July the sales tax rate will be less than it has been for the last three years, but more than if the legislature had done nothing. Whether this counts as a tax increase or not is solely in the eye of the beholder. The new tax law, as the chart shows, brings in more sales tax revenue than the law we’ve been living under, so I think that’s a tax increase.

    Sales taxes are commonly thought of as regressive, meaning the burden falls disproportionally on the poor or low income. To help with this, the legislature partially restored the food sales tax credit program. This is estimated to refund a little more than $20 million to low-income Kansans to compensate for the sales tax on food.

    The mechanism of the food sales tax credit is clunky. One has to file an income tax return to receive it. Further, the credit is now non-refundable, meaning that it can only be used to offset an income tax liability. In tax year 2010, when it was refundable, this credit was worth $59 million to Kansans, but is estimated to provide only $20 million in relief next year.

    Itemized deductions: Except for charitable deductions, the value of itemized deductions is being reduced. It’s called a “haircut,” and the amount is 30 percent next year, and increasing after that.

    For example, if a taxpayer has a deduction of $1,000, the value of that deduction is either $30 or $49, depending on whether the taxpayer is in the 3.0 percent or 4.9 percent marginal tax brackets. After the haircut, the deduction is reduced to $700, meaning the value of that deduction is either $21 or $34.30. This change to the law is estimated to bring in an additional $114.6 million next year, and $663.8 million over five years.

    Not everyone itemizes deductions. At the federal level, only about 30 percent of returns use itemized deductions. So for 70 percent of filers, the value of the standard deduction is greater than their itemized deductions. For these, this tax law change has no impact.

    Standard deduction: Most taxpayers use the standard deduction. Last year, Kansas increased the amount of this deduction, meaning that everyone paid less tax. Currently, it is set at $9,000. The new lax law changes that to $7,500 for married taxpayers filing jointly and to $5,500 for single heads-of-household. This means taxes will rise for most people. A family will pay tax on an additional $1,500 of income, which is an extra $45 or $103.50 in taxes. This change is estimated to raise an additional $56.3 million next year, and $311.1 million over five years.

    Tax rate reduction: The new tax bill reduces tax rates. For tax year 2013, the two marginal income tax rates are 3.0 percent and 4.9 percent. The law calls for these to be reduced slowly over the next five years. This change in tax law is estimated reduce revenue by $35.2 million next year, and by $1,195.5 million over five years.

    Rural Opportunity Zones: This program provides income tax relief to those who move to eligible counties. Its expansion is estimated to reduce tax revenue by $10.3 million over five years.

    Food sales tax rebate: As explained above, this program is expected to reduce revenue to the state by $110.5 million over five years.

    So whose taxes went up, and whose went down? The law changes several provisions, and in different directions. None of the changes are particularly large in magnitude, unless you spend a lot or earn a lot. Most people will be paying a different mix of taxes, which will influence their behavior.

    The bottom line, though is this: Tax revenue flowing to the state of Kansas is rising.

  • Spending and taxing in the states

    TaxIn the current policy debate in Kansas, we often compare our state with Texas. The prevailing themes sounded by Democrats and other spenders include that because Texas has no income tax, its other taxes (sales and property) are higher. We also hear that Texas is “atop a sea of oil” from which the state collects a gusher of tax revenue.

    But what are the facts? Regarding taxation: In 2011 Kansas state government collected $2,378 in taxes for each person. Texas collected $1,682. We see that Texas collects far less tax per person than does Kansas. Texas may have higher sales or property taxes than Kansas, but the total tax burden in Texas is lower.

    Spending follows the same pattern. In 2011 Kansas state government spent $5,115 per person in total, with $1,974 in general fund spending and $130 in bond spending. For Texas the total was $3,718 spent per person in total, with $1,654 in general fund spending and $50 in bond spending.

    The lower level of spending means Texas has a less burdensome state government, which allows more money to remain in the productive private sector. In Kansas, we spend more on government.

    The “sea of oil” and bountiful severance tax revenue: In 2011 Kansas, which has a severance tax of its own, collected $42.54 in this form of tax for each person. How much did Texas collect from its severance tax? $104.29 per person. The difference between the two — $61.75 per person per year — is only a small portion of the difference between Kansas and Texas taxation.

    To see how your state compares with others in spending, use the interactive visualization below. To use the visualization, click the check boxes to add or remove states and years from the chart. Use the visualization below, or click here to open it in a new window. Data is from National Association of State Budget Officers and U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA); visualization created by myself using Tableau Public.


    (alternate link to the above table)


    (alternate link to the above table)

  • Kansas looks better in Rich States, Poor States report

    A new edition of Rich States, Poor States signals a brighter future for Kansas.

    Rich States, Poor States, sixth edition

    Last week American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) released the sixth edition of Rich States, Poor States: ALEC-Laffer State Economic Competitiveness Index.

    ALEC is a nationwide organization of state legislators, the center-right counterpart of the center-left National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL).

    In the forward-looking economic outlook ranking, Kansas moves up to eleventh place. That’s ahead of Texas (12), Colorado (16), Oklahoma (19), Missouri (23), Iowa (25), and Nebraska (37).

    The report praises tax reform legislation Kansas passed in 2012. In a section headed “The Kansas Uprising”:

    Gov. Sam Brownback campaigned in 2010 promising a tax cut to make the Kansas economy more competitive. But his plan to reduce tax rates and close loopholes ran into trouble in the Senate, which had been controlled by opponents of tax reform. The governor managed to pass his tax cut, but the Left-leaning Senate coalition refused to cut loopholes and pork spending projects. … The most outside of the box section of the plan is the “Small Business Accelerator,” which exempts all non-wage income from taxation for all pass-through entities. This means that the vast majority of small businesses in Kansas are now not subject to an income tax on their business earnings. This includes all sole proprietorships, partnerships, S corporations, and limited liability companies (LLCs). … While the Kansas tax reform plan has received criticism from both sides of the political spectrum, the resulting economic growth in Kansas speaks for itself. The plan is not perfect, but it is a bold step toward pro-growth tax reform that will certainly continue to unlock more of Kansas’ economic potential.

    No praise, however, for public pension reform. Commenting on lack of progress in converting to defined-contribution plan and a proposal to borrow additional money for fund KPERS, the report concludes:

    The result was a double loss for pension reform advocates in Kansas. There would be no structural reform, and the Kansas retirement system and taxpayers would take on $1.5 billion in additional debt. While the proposal for fundamental pension reform failed this session, fiscally conservative legislators and Gov. Brownback are optimistic that real reform will have a good chance of passing in the future.

    The bill to issue the KPERS bonds is still pending in the legislature.

    An important chapter in this year’s report is titled “There They Go Again: A New Dose of Junk Economics.” This chapter addresses critics of Rich States, Poor States. In particular, this chapter explains the caution required when using per-capita statistics.

    Kansas among the states

    Rich States, Poor States evaluates state economies two ways. The “Economic Outlook Ranking” is a forecast looking forward. It is based on factors that are under control of the states. The “Economic Performance Ranking” is a backward-looking rating that measures state performance, again using variables under control of each state.

    The Economic Performance Rank considers a state’s gross domestic product, absolute domestic migration, and nonfarm payroll employment. This ranking details states’ individual performances over the past ten years based on the economic data.

    For Economic Performance Ranking, Kansas is ranked 35th among the states. In previous years, Kansas was ranked 39th, 40th, and 34th. Kansas has made some progress in this area.

    The second measure, the Economic Outlook Rank, is a “forecast based on a state’s current standing in 15 state policy variables. Each of these factors is influenced directly by state lawmakers through the legislative process. Generally speaking, states that spend less — especially on income transfer programs, and states that tax less — particularly on productive activities such as working or investing — experience higher growth rates than states that tax and spend more.”

    It’s in this ranking that Kansas made most progress. Kansas is ranked 11th, up from 26th the year before. In previous years, Kansas averaged around 26th place.

    Notable areas where Kansas ranks better than average in Top Marginal Personal Income Tax Rate (15), Recently Legislated Tax Changes (6), State Liability System Survey (5), State Minimum Wage (1), and being a right-to-work states.

    Kansas scores low in Property Tax Burden (29), Sales Tax Burden (35), Debt Service as a Share of Tax Revenue (41), Public Employees Per 10,000 of Population (48), and having a low number of tax expenditure limitations.

    Read the report at Rich States, Poor States: ALEC-Laffer State Economic Competitiveness Index.

  • Wichita mayor said to be ‘under lockdown’

    When Wichita ABC affiliate KAKE Television ran a news story critical of Wichita Mayor Carl Brewer, reporter Jared Cerullo wasn’t able to interview Brewer to get his reaction to his critics. The mayor refused to talk to Cerullo.

    [powerpress url=”http://wichitaliberty.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/jeff-herndon-2013-05-17-excerpt1.mp3″]Jeff Herndon, KAKE Television news anchor, speaking at Wichita Pachyderm Club, May 17, 2013. Herndon is speaking for himself, and not on behalf of KAKE.

    Speaking last week at the Wichita Pachyderm Club, KAKE news anchor Jeff Herndon said that KAKE has “repeatedly” tried to get an on-camera interview with Brewer. But the mayor is always busy, Herndon said: “They’ve got him on lockdown. He’s not going to answer that.”

    Herndon was speaking for himself, and not for his employer. In his talk to the Pachyderms, he was critical of Wichita news media — both television and print — for not covering city government rigorously, telling the audience: “We need more reporters on that city government beat, and not just on decisions they make. We need to hold them accountable for the decision. We don’t do that.”

    Brewer is sometimes mentioned as a candidate for higher office, perhaps challenging Kansas Governor Sam Brownback next year. Brewer’s term as mayor ends in April 2015. He is not eligible for election to another term as mayor because of Wichita’s term limits law.

    KAKE Television news story: Controversy over hotel sales tax vote

    Notes:

    • The KAKE news story referred to is Wichita Mayor Scrutinized For Controversial Vote. Both text and video are available.
    • On his radio program, Joseph Ashby had an interesting take on Herndon’s remarks and Wichita new media.
    • Video of the city council meeting that was the subject of the KAKE news story is here.
    • Explanation of the public policy angle that drove citizens to testify at the April 16 city council meeting is here.
    • The original article that identified the problem and to solutions is Pay-to-play laws are needed in Wichita and Kansas. In that article I wrote: “When one looks at the candidates these people contribute to, you notice that often there’s no commonality to the political goals and ideals of the candidates. Some people contribute equally to liberal and conservative council members. Then, when these people appear in the news after having received money from the Wichita City Council, it snaps into place: These campaign donors are not donating to those whose ideals they agree with. They’re donating so they can line their own pockets.”