I think you misunderstood some of what I wrote, so I’m happy to answer your questions!

As you hopefully read above, the reason my map doesn’t show any donations from within House District 15 is because Mr. Tevis didn’t itemize any of his in district donations on his campaign finance report. All of the donations you see on the map are itemized in-state donations as reflected on his campaign finance report. This is the ONLY way to know who has given to his campaign.

What I mean by itemized is that he disclosed who gave him money, where they were from, and how much they gave. Any donation under $50 Mr. Tevis chose to make un-itemized on his report. Therefore, all I know is how much total was given. I know nothing about who gave it, where they’re from or how much they gave.

If you’d like to have the map corrected, then ask Mr. Tevis to itemize his contributors that gave less than $50 and submit it to the state Ethics Commission so that it is available to the public. As you see above, Mr. Tevis said that he would disclose his small donors to any voter that asked, but I have yet to see that happen.

While I personally believe you gave $25 to Mr. Tevis, how in the world would I know about it if he doesn’t disclose it to the public? He’s been asked to disclose his full donor list, but so far he hasn’t complied. What am I to do? All I can do is report what is public information. And according to the public documents, he’s received no in-district contributions, only just over 2% of all donations were from within Kansas and under 30% of all money received was itemized on his campaign finance report.

Now, the KNEA donation. Mr. Tevis said in his press release that he had taken “no special interest money.” It’s a blanket statement. He didn’t say he’d returned all PAC money taken, he said he’d not taken any. He DID take PAC money. Those are the facts. If you want to believe that returning the money over two months later means he never took it to begin with, then that’s okay, your choice. I see a statement of never taking something and then his first contribution being $500 from special interests. So, I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree on that one.

Now, on to energy company PAC money. If I’m understanding you correctly, the gist of your argument is that since Rep. Siegfreid took campaign contributions from energy companies he shouldn’t in any way vote for a bill that would benefit them.

So, let’s try that logic out on other situations. According to your logic, every legislator that took KNEA PAC money shouldn’t vote for increased teacher salaries because the KNEA is a teachers union, and teachers would benefit from that. Every legislator that took Pro-Kan-Do money shouldn’t vote for less restrictions on abortion. Every legislator that took Kansas City Chamber PAC money shouldn’t vote for tax cuts for Kansas City area businesses. And every legislator that took gambling money shouldn’t vote for more gambling in Kansas. I think you see my point. Candidates take special interest money from certain groups because they agree with their position. It would be silly to expect that legislator to then not vote or vote against the interests of that group. That’s why they gave the money in the first place. So, just like it’s Sunflower’s right to give political donations, it’s also your right to give donations to candidates that agree with your values. I think we can all agree that everyone should have the right to donate to whomever we want.

Look, I’ll hopefully make this argument clear for you. Mr. Tevis doesn’t consider the KNEA to be special interest money because he agrees with the group, it’s just that simple. That’s why he didn’t think twice about saying he’d taken “no special interest money” because in his mind he believed he hadn’t.

But that donation was PAC money because, contrary to what you or Mr. Tevis may believe, the KNEA is a teachers union which advocates for teachers. Now, they’d like you think that they advocate for “public education” but the fact of the matter is they are a union which, in theory, would advocate for their members, which are teachers. This is otherwise known as a special interest.

Thanks for stopping by and commenting. I think it’s only fair to answer your questions completely because you took the time to comment and show you care. I’m sure I didn’t change your mind, but if you thought this then I’m sure there are many others who think the same thing, and they deserve an explanation why that logic is wrong as well.

Thanks again.

I’m more than happy to answer your questions. Feel free to ask me anything, anytime. It’s a lot of work to write a long post like you have done and I think I might have saved you some time.

1) My wife no longer works for The Kansas City Star, FYI.
2) No one in my district donated more than $50, the legal limit required to list them on the official report. But so far as I can tell, I raised far more local money from more local contributors than my opponent. Of course, my opponent may have raised small donations, too, so I can’t be sure. Are you suggesting campaign finance reform where candidates can only spend local donations? There are no local lobbyists, so it would certainly change things. I think we could have a good, robust conversation about the merits and drawbacks of that sometime.
3) Kudos on making the donation map. That must have taken a lot of work on your part. Thanks!
4) We verified citizenship of anyone living abroad, many of whom are I.T. contractors working for firms such as Google or Microsoft. I know many of them personally. We refunded over $2,000 to people for whom we couldn’t verify citizenship. This is more rigorous, by the way, than what any other State Representative campaign does. There are non-U.S. citizens living everywhere in Kansas. Should all donations be certified somehow? It’s intriguing, and if you have any ideas I’d love to hear them.
5) The KNEA check was deposited and later refunded, as you noted, so that I can stay lobbyist-free. I think it would be disingenuous to believe that you can work to improve schools without the KNEA being part of the discussion. And I think we need a great deal of work to continue our move to improve Kansas schools.
6) I revealed my full list of donors – even those people who donated less than a dollar – to the first person who asked to see it – a reporter from The Kansas City Star. It’s not a secret. It’s just huge. Your assertion that there was a refusal involved is puzzling.

Your conclusions, unfortunately, are wrong. Really, really wrong. And calling me a liar is completely out of the bounds of propriety. Truth is more important than politics. But I forgive you.

I believe in open government and I think I’ve proven that our reporting processes need to be modernized. I wholeheartedly support this. I’d like to involve you as a partner in this process. Let me know and ideas or suggestions you may have to help improve Kansas. We’re all in this together. Thanks!