On Tuesday the GOP plan was introduced in the House.  The bill was not available for the public or legislators to read until Wednesday morning, but the chairman of the House Tax committee scheduled the hearings on the bill for Wednesday afternoon.  He held the hearing open until Thursday afternoon to allow opponents of the bill to testify.  Even with the very short notice over 40 individuals and organizations submitted testimony in opposition to the plan.Most of the opposition to the bill came because the House GOP plan will adjust the percentage of general sales taxes that are sent to the Department of Transportation, essentially cutting $300 million from the Highway Fund over the next two years and perhaps more money over a longer period of time.  Also, most believe that the fund will never be repaid.

The Highway Fund is the revenue source for the comprehensive transportation plan that was signed into law in 2010, which was projected to create thousands of jobs and generate $6.4 billion to our state’s economy over the next ten years.

The transportation plan that passed the House in 2010 is the largest jobs package in Kansas history.  Just a few weeks ago the Governor joined a Democratic proposal to accelerate the plan by $50 million to help stimulate our economy and get people back to work sooner.

Although the GOP plan does not call for the elimination of the many credits and deductions proposed in the Governor’s plan, it still eliminates the Earned Income Tax Credit after two years and sharply cuts it in the first year.  It also contains a cap on state revenue of 2% but does not require a minimum ending balance like the Governor’s bill.

The fiscal analysis provided the committee only projected the impact over the next two years.  This is a very scant projection compared to other tax bills we consider.  At my request legislative research generated a projection going out 7 years.  This analysis indicates that when we start paying back to funds to the transportation program the state will not be able to balance its budget without hundreds of millions in spending cuts.  Part of the reason for this is the revenue cap that requires further cuts in taxes if revenue exceeds the cap.  Inflation rates have averaged at or above 2% over most of the last two decades.  This means spending will in effect be frozen at the 2012 level.

Gov. Brownback’s tax plan raised taxes on the lowest paid working families by over 1,500% while the House Republican plan eliminates thousands of jobs for middle class families.  Both plans make the gap between the rich and the poor wider while increasing the likelihood of increased property taxes on the middle class.

House Bill 2492 would require the use of E-Verify as a condition for any governmental contract to a business entity in excess of $5,000.  E-Verify is an internet-based system that ensures an individual’s legal ability to work in the United States.  Upon a first violation, the governmental entity may withhold from amounts due or recover up to 5% of the total amount of the contract in liquidated damages.  A subsequent violation may incur 10% of the total amount of the contract as well as a withholding on amounts due.
Proponents suggest this would ensure businesses are complying with employment laws (in other words, it would prevent businesses from hiring illegal aliens).  They say the program is extremely accurate and that Kansas has a clear legal authority in requiring the use of E-Verify.

Opponents, mainly business entities, argue this bill would create an undue burden on their companies, especially those with numerous governmental contracts.  They say it would force them to spend money to administer the program.  Also, they argue that the program would add administration costs to the cities.

The Legislature debates illegal immigration every year, but we never address the core of this problem.  Illegal immigrants come to Kansas for jobs that they are not legally entitled to.  Businesses that knowingly hire illegal workers do so in an effort to exploit them.  Both sides are breaking the law.  There isn’t much we can do about illegal immigration at the state level, but cutting off the incentive is a good place to start.  Also, any business entity that wins a taxpayer-funded contract should always be held to the highest legal standard.

The bill also requires government agencies to retain and share information relating to an individual’s immigration status for use in determining ones eligibility for public benefits, licenses, services, and residency.
Proponents suggest the bill would allow the state to enforce federal immigration laws that are being overlooked and help secure Kansas borders.  They also suggest the bill will help fight crime by monitoring who is in the state.  If you think this bill sounds an awful lot like the immigration laws in Arizona and Alabama, it’s because it was authored by the same person; Secretary of State Kris Kobach who testified in favor of the bill.

Opponents contend this bill would inhibit people from reporting crimes and cooperating with investigations.  They also suggest this will create an even greater burden and cost on already overworked law enforcement agencies.  Additionally, a fear about economic fallout similar to what was seen in Arizona and Georgia was expressed.

Just this week Speaker of the House Mike O’Neal stated he did not want the legislature to take up immigration legislation.  The state must be careful how it handles immigration as it is a federal issue, O’Neal said.

“I don’t want to do something just out of political expediency just so we can have a good vote,” he said. “Immigration is a big deal.”

Proponents argued that it would protect Kansans’ right to practice their religion.  They argued that this bill is needed to ensure that Kansans may be allowed to exercise their faith to the fullest extent in the public sphere.  Proponents included Lt.  Governor Jeff Colyer, Kansas Family Policy Council, Kansas Catholic Conference, and Alliance Defense Fund.

Opponents were fearful of the potential for increased discrimination against minority groups disguised as “religious freedom”, as well as concerns over preemption of local ordinances already prohibiting discrimination on the basis of religion.

There were many proponents to this bill, including the Kansas Association of Chiefs of Police, the Kansas Sheriff’s Association, the Kansas Peace Officers Association, the American Cancer Society, and the Tobacco Free Kansas Coalition.

There were no opponents in committee, but there was some debate about the bill on the House floor.  The Chair of the House Health and Human Services Committee said that there were studies that indicated that nicotine did not have negative health effects.  Rather, carcinogens from smoke are the health risk.  Since electronic cigarettes contain no carcinogens, they felt that this legislation was unnecessary and “was a solution looking for a problem.” Others countered this claim, saying that even though electronic cigarettes do not expose children to carcinogens, nicotine is very addictive.  Access to electronic cigarettes will encourage use of real cigarettes when they become of age.

The House advanced the bill out of committee of the whole on a voice vote and was passed 112-6 on final action Friday.

Proponents of the bill told the committee that implementation would not be difficult. Currently schools are required to teach financial literacy standards in all grades infusing those standards into mathematics and social studies classes.  In addition, financial literacy standards are tested on the state mathematics assessments.  Proponents argued that this is insufficient.

Opponents argued that in a typical six period high school, a student has 48 semester courses.  Currently, eight of those are English language arts, twelve are mathematics and science, six are social sciences, one is PE, and one is fine arts.  They said that an additional mandated class is just not feasible.

Budget cuts to schools across the state have squeezed local districts and have necessitated many cuts to programs like drivers education.  I am not sure of the wisdom of creating additional mandates if we are not going to fund them sufficiently.  Financial literacy is an important part of becoming a responsible consumer and citizen.  What I don’t see is the political will to fund our schools at the level needed for the current curriculum.  The committee did not take action on the bill this week.

This controversial bill has been the subject of debate for several years.  It provides strict limitations on the use of physical restraint of students, the use of seclusion rooms for those students, the design of seclusion rooms, and reporting to parents on the use of seclusion and/or restraint.

Further, no teacher may use restraint or place a student in seclusion unless that teacher has completed a training session designed by the State Department of Education.

HB 2444 encompasses the current voluntary guidelines crafted as a compromise by educators, advocates and parents.  Enacting these guidelines into law ensures that they will be applied consistently across the state and will ensure an end to the improper and unnecessary uses of seclusion and restraint which are documented in testimony from parents.  Kansas is among a minority of 13 states with voluntary guidelines.

The bill passed out of committee and now awaits consideration on the House floor.

The 92^nd district needed to grow by 1,100 people to stay within the required margin for representation.  As result, our district added some new areas and lost a little.  The map below illustrates the old and new boundaries for the district.  The dash lines indicate where the old boundaries changed; the red line indicates the new areas brought into the district.  For more complete information regarding the process you can go to:  http://redistricting.ks.gov/index.html.

When a teenage girl Tweets some disparaging remarks and the Governor’s office tries to get her in trouble, the Governor blamed his staff for being overzealous in their reaction.  He said they over-reacted.  But, he did not take responsibility.

When his Secretary of Agriculture proposed applying for a waiver to allow business to re illegal workers he quickly sidestepped the issue by saying that he didn’t approve of that action.  Either he doesn’t know what is going on in his administration or his immediate reaction is to throw his subordinates under the bus.

This tendency showed up again this week when a budget committee attempted to deduct the amount the taxpayers had to pay to bring in a consultant who came to the legislature to promote his soon to be released book.  They took $75,000 out of the Governors’ office budget and justified it by stating that we have better uses for that money than to reward cronies of the administration.  The Governor complained that the money was not spent from his budget, it was spent from the Department of Revenue budget and that is where we should deduct the funds.  I thought it was all taxpayer money and as head of his administration he should take responsibility for the expenditure.  I was wrong!  Instead he threw his Secretary of Revenue under the bus and denied responsibility for the contract.

I know the Governor is new to the State of Kansas, he has been away in Washington DC politics and K-Street ethics for many years, but I believe that we here in Kansas still honor those old fashion leadership values of knowing where the buck stops.

On Tuesday, while working through the KCVA’s budget, Democrats offered an amendment that would have made 40 new beds available to Kansas veterans at Triplett Hall in South Central Kansas.  This would have doubled the number of Alzheimer’s/dementia beds from 25 to 50 and increased long-term care beds from 75 to 90.  In South Central Kansas alone, there are an estimated 1,200 veterans who qualify for these services.

The Governor denied this request of the KCVA when he put together his budget proposal.  House Republicans followed suit, voting against the amendment on a party line vote.

A second amendment was offered that increased funding for Veterans’ Claims Assistance Program (VCAP).  The American Legion and the VFW rely upon this funding to conduct their statewide Veterans Affairs Program, and to operate their offices at VA Medical Centers.  Each service representative in Kansas is responsible for 5,923 Kansas veterans.  Nationally, Kansas ranks 49 out of 50 in this regard.  The second amendment also failed on a party line vote, with all House Republicans voting no.

Standing up for veterans means much more than giving speeches on July 4th and at Veterans Day. Our aging veterans will need greater access and capacity for treatment in the coming years.  The state budget development in committee is where our support really counts.  Once the budget reaches the House Floor the rules governing debate dictate that additional funding cannot be amended in without taking the same amount from some other appropriation.  This was KCVA and our veteran’s last chance to receive the recognition and service they deserve.