From the Statehouse: Week 1

Democrats offer proposal to restore school funding, cut property taxes

Democrats in the House and Senate unveiled a plan this week that will begin restoring state funding to Kansas public schools in the next fiscal year. The proposal models a funding mechanism very similar to what House Republicans applied to Senate Bill 1 during the 2011 legislative session. Instead of applying 100 percent of excess revenue to corporate tax breaks, however, this proposal will direct 50 percent of that money to the restoration of public education funding.

I have always been a strong advocate for public education and I am committed to providing our children with safe, top quality schools. School funding cuts in recent years have gone way too far. Before new corporate tax breaks are signed into law, excess state revenue should be used to restore funding to our schools FIRST. 

Governor Brownback has argued that the problem facing public education is a broken funding formula. That simply is not true. The current formula has already gone through the legislative process and the legal review process. There is no reason to overhaul a school finance formula that has already withstood the muster of the Kansas Supreme Court. The problem facing public education is a lack of funding. Governor Brownback and the Legislature simply need to hold up their end of the bargain and fund the formula properly. 

The Democratic proposal unveiled this week will make an initial "down payment" of $45 million to Kansas schools in FY 2013 out of the current $351 million state surplus. This will help provide local districts some much needed relief in the 2012-2013 school year. Another $45 million investment will be applied in the 2013 - 2014 school year (FY 2014). Then, in FY 2015, 50 percent of any excess state revenue will be applied annually until the base is returned to the court-approved level of $4,492 per student. Based on current revenue estimates, this plan would restore all Kansas schools to their statutory level of aid within five years. It will also maintain the weightings of the current formula, ensuring that costly, legal battles are avoided in the future. 

Additionally, Kansas property taxpayers who have watched their property taxes skyrocket by 65 percent over the last decade will finally see some relief under this proposal. The estimated excess state revenue in FY 2015 is estimated to total $180 million. After applying 50 percent of that to public schools, Democrats propose transferring $45 million to cities and counties. This $45 million transfer would go into the Local Ad Valorem Tax Reduction Fund, which has existed since 1938, for the purpose of reducing local property taxes.  No such transfer has been made since 2004. 

Ultimately, this plan will leave $45 million in excess state revenue available in the ending balance for other critical state investments, such as the establishment of a rainy day fund or social services.

Secretary of State Kris Kobach proposes more changes to voting law

Secretary of State Kobach announced this week that he will introduce a proposal that will implement a  "proof-of-citizenship" requirement when voting on June 15, 2012.

The proof-of-citizenship requirement is a component of a larger voter ID bill that was signed into law in 2011. This proposal will enact the measure six months earlier than originally planned. It will require people who register to vote in the state for the first time and for people who re-register in Kansas after living outside the state to present a birth certificate (or other proof of citizenship) when registering to vote.

There are a variety of concerns with this change. The voter ID bill that was signed into law last year will fundamentally change the voting process in Kansas. The proof-of-citizenship requirement is a much more substantial law change than the identification requirement. Not many people carry their birth certificate or a passport on their person. This will require significant voter education, which is something that is not provided for in the budget. Even if it were, it would be difficult to educate voters between the time the law takes effect in June and the 2012 primary election in August.  

According to the Secretary of State's own data, there were only 41 reports of POTENTIAL voter fraud in 2010. To my knowledge none of those cases resulted in prosecution, in which case they were dismissed. There were no reports of illegal aliens attempting to vote. There were no reports of individuals voting under the name of a deceased person. There were no reports of individuals attempting to impersonate someone else. From the standpoint of election security, there is no reason - based on the Secretary of State's election data - to assume that there is a heightened risk of voter fraud in 2012 that would require us to rush this process.      

Also, the Legislature must redraw district lines this year, which hasn't been done in a decade. This is another significant change for voters who will get shuffled around to different districts. Between this and the new identification requirement, throwing proof-of-citizenship into the mix would further hinder an already confusing process.   

As an elected official, I want to do all I can to ensure that our elections are safe and secure. I am more concerned, however, about preserving my constituents' constitutional right to vote. It has been proven on multiple occasions that voter fraud is not a serious problem in Kansas, yet this proposal would impose burdensome restrictions that could block many voters from casting their ballot. It troubles me that Kansas' chief election officer is attempting to make it more difficult to exercise that right, instead of making it easier. 

Useful Numbers and Resources: