Congressman Tim Huelskamp is about as conservative as they come. First elected in 1996 to represent folks from southwestern Kansas to Topeka, he swiftly became known as an unshakeable force on both the life and tax issues, compromising not an inch.

In the 14 years he served his senate district, Huelskamp served on various committees, including Ways & Means, Agriculture, Education, and Elections & Local Government, the last of which included being on the subcommittee in charge of redistricting in 2002. His expertise from past experience as a farmer, teacher, and statistical analyst contributed to his many decisions made in those committees.

In 2008, Tim prepared to run for Congress when Rep. Jerry Moran was rumored to be considering leaving his seat. This didn’t pan out, but laid the grassroots and fundraising groundwork for his successful 2010 bid for the same seat. On January 3, 2011, Tim took the oath of office, along with 83 other freshman Republicans elected in the November elections.

I first came to know Tim in 2000 when I interned for State Rep. Peggy (Long) Mast. She made a point to introduce us early in the session, telling me I had to know this young senator. Before I knew it, I was splitting my time between Peggy’s office and Tim’s. Two years later, I asked to intern for him again.

In the two sessions I worked for Tim, I came to regard him as one of the most stalwart persons I knew—and know. He’s challenged me to be a better conservative, a better Christian, and now a better wife and mother.

I’m so glad to call him friend. I hope you’ll join us for the 2011 Gala Banquet where you can have a chance to hear and meet this most honorable man.

Ticket for the 13th annual KRA Gala Banquet are now on sale! Click here to register for your tickets today! Click here to get driving directions to the banquet.

Our guest speaker this year is newly elected Congressman Tim Huelskamp from the Big First District.

Tim was raised in Kansas and following high school attended a seminary in Santa Fe, New Mexico and pursued his bachelor’s degree in social science education at the College of Santa Fe. After his undergraduate education, Tim accepted a scholarship to pursue doctoral studies at The American University in Washington, D.C. Studying political science with a specialization in agriculture policy, he completed his Ph.D. there in four years. During his time at American University, Tim met his wife Angela and together they were active in assisting women in crisis pregnancies. Additionally, Tim was busy as a college instructor teaching public policy and working as a statistical analyst.

Upon graduation, Tim and Angela turned down various job offers and decided to return home to farm, ranch and raise a family in Fowler, and since then have adopted four children: Natasha, Rebecca, Athan and Alexander. Both girls are from Haiti, while the two boys were already Americans. Together they’ve managed the farm that his grandparents started in 1925. Serving since 1997, Tim was one of the state legislature’s most conservative members, even opposing his GOP leaders in the state Senate on spending issues. He will now continue his conservative voting record in Washington, D.C.

Join us in welcoming home one of KRA’s own as we celebrate the victories of 2010 and look forward to the challenges ahead!

Candidate Rob Wasinger of Cottonwood Falls polled at only 12%, which is still within the margin of error of his showing in previous polls. Today’s results show what previous polls have illustrated for some time now, that if Rob Wasinger continues to be a candidate in this race, he may single-handedly split the conservative vote and give a win to liberal Jim Barnett or Tracey Mann.

In any other election year, Rob would more than likely be a perfectly acceptable candidate. But in today’s political environment of candidates saying one thing and then once elected doing another, it’s vital that voters in the First District elect a candidate with a proven track record of conservative values. Tim Huelskamp has a 16 year record as a state Senator where he has consistently fought for conservative principles, whether they be popular or not.

In light of Sen. Huelskamp’s outstanding record and superior position in the polls, conservative voters should rally around his candidacy immediately.

With only a week until election day, it has become clear that Rob cannot win this election; all he can do is hand the seat to a liberal Republican for years to come.

Rob Wasinger is a good man and candidate, but in this particular race the choice just couldn’t be more clear. Trusting that Rob values the conservative movement more than his personal political career, it would be prudent for him to end his campaign and immediately support Tim Huelskamp.

In fact, the ad is so new the campaign hasn’t even uploaded it to its YouTube channel yet. I’ll add the link here when it is online.

Goyle’s previous ads make no mention of his party affiliation or previous ties to the ACLU or other liberal groups. In expected liberal Kansas style, Goyle attempts to portray himself with the usual buzz words “independent” and “Kansas values.” In a bit of irony, Goyle’s own campaign website header proclaims, “Good ideas don’t come with a party label. All that matters is whether it’s right for Kansas.”

That is, of course, as long as you make it past your primary. When that’s in doubt, then a party label comes in pretty handy.

It looks like his election year make-over was a little too effective. The latest poll in the fourth district had Goyle 3 points behind his Democratic challenger, Robert Tillman. Tillman claims to have spent less than $5,000 on the race while Goyle has collected over $1 million in campaign funds.

As Bob Weeks at Wichita Liberty noted previously, this year Raj Goyle voted more conservatively than Jean Schodorf, who is running for the same seat. What an example of things politicians will do to convince a voter they’re something they’ve never been in the past.

Could Kansas be the next South Carolina? It certainly looks like the Goyle campaign thinks it might.

KRA endorsed Mike Pompeo is the conservative candidate in the fourth district. Unlike Goyle or Schodorf, he’s run an issues oriented, hard hitting campaign that shows why his military and business experience is what’s needed in Washington.

Kansas Senator and KS-04 Congressional candidate Jean Schodorf

When push came to shove, State Senator Jean Schodorf clung to her pro-abortion beliefs and was the deciding vote in downing HB 2115, a compromise abortion reporting law that fell one vote short of a veto override in the Senate.

Schodorf claims that she’ll be working on a “compromise” bill in the future, but I wouldn’t hold my breathe. Former Governor and abortion cheerleader Kathleen Sebelius vetoed a similar piece of legislation last year. If Schodorf was serious about passing something meaningful then she should have been working on it during this session rather than waiting for another inevitable veto from current pro-abortion Gov. Parkinson.

The Senator further claims that she sided with pro-abortion legislators because of the way the bill was brought forward in the, “dark of the night.” One wonders if this distaste for the process covers tax increases and budget bills. I’m willing to bet it doesn’t. Her “reasoning” is nothing more than a lie, and if Schodorf votes in favor of a tax package not thoroughly vetted in committee then she’s nothing more than a hypocrite.

Couple this with the fact that next year there will be a different Governor who’s veto pen legislator’s won’t need to worry about and her vote was absolutely pointless. Pointless unless her aim was to make her pro-abortion beliefs crystal clear for far left activists. If that was the point, then she’s performed quite well.

See also:

• Lone State Senator with Congressional Ambitions Kills KS Abortion Override

“During Senate action today, Sen. Schodorf announced she was emailing an invitation to Kansans for Life and Planned Parenthood to meet with her to create a ‘compromise bill. Sen. Schodorf’s 11th hour announcement was the height of hypocrisy as she has already supported this exact language in 2008 — prior to her re-election. After she was elected, she voted AGAINST the provisions of HB 2115 in 2009, as she did again today.”

• “Mainstreet Republican”

They are going to debate this on the Senate floor as early as Monday next week. I don’t have a bill number handy but they all know what you talking about if you refer to the budget and proposed taxes.

This has not been a good week for conservatives in the Senate. On Wednesday the Senate defeated a motion to pull a proposed constitutional amendment out of committee – one that would have let you vote on federal health care this fall – and voted down a community of defense act. That last one is an example of how some Senators tell you one thing in person (of course I’m for lower taxes or health care freedom) but then when their vote matters, they vote differently. The Senators had known for weeks the CDA would be voted on when they returned as it was debated the last day of the regular session, then delayed until a date certain, that date being April 28. And still we have one Senator who voted yes, until it was passing, then switched to no. And as aggravating as that is to watch, what’s even more appalling is when I hear Senators voting no on this because it would cost some jobs – yet those same people want to raise your taxes. I suppose that makes sense in their minds, people can’t pay taxes if they don’t have a job, so who are we to say it’s a job that’s not good for society. Decency and morals apparently don’t factor in, whether it’s in how we make money or how we tax the people.

I think most of you would like to know how your Senator voted on the above measure. Our friends at the National Coalition for the Protection of Children & Families created a spreadsheet (linked here) showing you their votes and their contact info. Please feel free to use this information to let your elected Senators know your thoughts this weekend. I also encourage you to share your thoughts here on this blog as well!

“Other candidates talk about opposing taxes, but Tim Huelskamp has a proven track record of fighting tax increases to prove it,” said Huelskamp spokesman David Ray. “That’s why he won numerous awards for keeping taxes low and why the Club for growth has endorsed him.”

In additional to high profile national endorsements, Sen. Huelskamp was one of only two candidates to gain a preference vote of the Kansas Republican Assembly Board of Directors. To gain a KRA Board Preference, candidates had to get a 4/5ths vote from board members. In addition to being a friend of the taxpayer, Sen. Huelskamp has been a friend of the pro-life and pro-marriage movement in Kansas and has proven to voters he is worthy of their vote.

The KRA encourages you to donate $25 to the Huelskamp campaign today to help keep this message on the air.

• Huelskamp launches television ad
• Air war begins in Kansas first district GOP primary
• Huelskamp Launches First TV Ad

Government run healthcare supporters gathered in Wichita Saturday to protest the Healthcare Freedom Amendment (HFA). The Amendment, sponsored by Reps. Brenda Landwehr, Peggy Mast and Sen. Mary Pilcher-Cook, would try to prevent the federal government from imposing fines, or even jail time, to Kansas citizens who choose not to have health insurance. Opponents of the HFA claim that it would opt Kansas out of any “public option” that passes in Washington. However, no where in the two page document are these provisions found.

The Wichita protest was to target Rep. Landwehr for her support of the HFA and was a follow up to a rally in early November in Shawnee targeting Sen. Pilcher-Cook. At that protest, government healthcare supporters were met by a large group of freedom loving patriots.

The spin from the left was that they were all shipped in by Koch Industries, even though they were unable to produce any evidence of this assertion. One would think big buses with a whole bunch of people would be easy to document. Of course, they are unable to do so because it simply doesn’t exist. Any “busing” by Koch or AFP is pure fiction, a grand lie concocted by liberals to convince themselves only the left can produce an uncoordinated, spontaneous grassroots movement.

The Koch lie seems to be in line with previous attacks by the left, where even they admit they were wrong when challenged to provide evidence.

This morning, I received an e-mail from Melissa “Missy” Cohlmia, the Communications Director for Koch Companies Public Sector. In it, Ms. Cohlmia asked:

“Can you point me to the facts behind this statement? The astroturf movement is paid for by David Koch of Wichita-based Koch Industries to the tune of $20 million of his own treasure.”

Admittedly, I failed in my post yesterday to appropriately link that statement. Mostly, however, that failure was because it’s a commonly known fact that Koch Industries is behind Americans for Prosperity, widely reported by the traditional and non-traditional press.

In fact the truth is AFP now has over 700,000 individual donors. Koch donations now account for less than 5% of AFP’s donations.

But as liberals go, they just couldn’t stop themselves and had to go even further.

One way that’s ever so popular with liberals is parading the children around. We must do it for the children, don’t you know! Thus Kansas’ 58,000 uninsured children becomes the call for more government programs. Of course, never mind there’s already a program out there called Kansas Healthwave. To a common sense Kansan that’d be evidence of a government failure, but to a liberal, it’s a call to more government action.

In fact, it seems the lefties have gotten themselves so worked up, they’ve forgotten what exactly happened in Shawnee less than a month ago.

In a weekend update, the left says things never got out of hand.

Despite the tone of our local Fox affiliate, that morning never got ugly. Passions are high on both sides, but never did the event escalate over some shouting matches.

But just a few weeks later, an organizer with the same liberal blog told a very different story to the Wichita Eagle.

“We had a bunch of (tea party supporters) come out and get pretty much in everybody’s faces,” said Sarah Burris, a spokeswoman for Forward Kansas. “They just want to raise a ruckus.”

Could it be liberals change their story based on what they think will get them the most traction in the press?

It also looks as though it’s okay to come from out of town for the rally, just as long as you make the trek for the right side. Just before the Shawnee rally, liberals had this to say:

…none, I repeat none, of the pro-Reform rally members will be bused in from surrounding areas — like American’s for Prosperity and David Koch did in Washington DC yesterday.

But they boasted of all the out of town folks for yesterday’s gathering:

Many of the demonstrators drove to Wichita from cities all over Kansas. Colin Curtis, of Manhattan made the trip because he wanted to ensure his side was represented in the debate

And I guess when flip-flopping on your version of protest etiquette doesn’t yield the results you want, you can always just start calling names.

From Twitter:

• @sarahburris: If you use teabagger in a press release do we think they’ll use it? #fwks
• @sarahburris: @immunis the experts say only if its in a quote just FYI #fwks

From the Wichita Eagle:

“We had a bunch of (tea party supporters) come out and get pretty much in everybody’s faces,” said Sarah Burris, a spokeswoman for Forward Kansas.

Now that’s a term even the Wichita Eagle won’t publish, try as the liberals might.

I’m willing to make a decent bet (tea party supporters) was inserted because the liberal’s spokeswoman decided to use a derogatory term for their opponents rather than show a little class.

Unfortunately, facts don’t get in the way of liberals. Their perception is reality, no matter how skewed it is, no matter how little evidence they have to support their assertions.

It’s the kind of insinuations and lies we should expect from this group in the future.

Results of the KRA fourth district poll

Looks like a lot of fourth district campaigns “got out the voters” so to speak in the just closed KRA poll.

Dick Kelsey won 41% of the total votes with a record 5,110 votes. Jim Anderson was second with 34% of the vote and Mike Pompeo was third with 24%.

Results as of last Friday can be found here. Clearly a few campaigns motivated some folks to sit by the computer and vote their heart out. It’s always nice to have dedicated volunteers!

Tim Huelskamp was the previous run away winner in the first district poll. While here, take the time to vote in our new poll on how to fund additional highway improvements in Kansas. (Yes, you can vote AGAINST tax increases if your heart desires. I somehow figured out how to include that in the poll.)

You can vote for one or two options in the new poll on your right.

Results from the most recent KRA poll

The results are in from the first district and it looks like Sen. Tim Huelskamp is the run away winner.

Now you can look to your right and vote in our new poll for the fourth district. Click the links below for website information. I was unable to find website information for “Wink” Hartman or Jean Schodorf. If you are aware of one, email webmaster @ kansasra.org.

• Mike Pompeo
• Dick Kelsey
• Jim Anderson

Queen Kathleen and Democratic Senator Arlen Specter attended a town hall meeting in Philadelphia where the two were trying to convince a large audience that they knew what was best for the nations health care system. Imagine their surprise when the audience insisted they read legislation before they pass it and stop and think about what exactly they’re doing before they vote. Sounds reasonable, right? Not for Queen Kathleen.

Now, isn’t Kathleen Sebelius the one who was Governor of Kansas when they passed legislation, which, by the way, no Representative or Senator had read, that allowed the state to become the first in the nation to own casinos. And since that time, hasn’t the state only broken ground on one casino when four were planned and has had to bid and rebid casinos across the state because company after company passes on building in Kansas? Now, wasn’t gambling supposed to solve all of our state’s financial problems forever and ever Kathleen?

So, how did that bill that nobody read work out anyway???

So with that in mind, get a load of the explanation she tries to pass off to the crowd.

“I’ve never been in Congress.”

I love it! But you had no problem signing a bill as Governor that you knew full well no one had read. And look what it’s gotten us!

Oh, and isn’t Arlen Specter one of three “Republican” Senators who voted for a “Stimulus” bill that none of them had read?

That crowd had every right to boo not only Specter, but Sebelius right off the stage. Both have a clear history of endorsing the kind of behavior that has gotten us into this mess and they both deserve to be told exactly what they heard yesterday in Pennsylvania.

Unfortunately, the labels and platitudes have confused what should be a simple charge. Elected Republicans should govern by the principles they profess in campaign rallies and advertisements. Those principles were once the difference between the parties. The Democratic Party has always been an amalgam of special interests and constituencies with specific needs and wants cobbled together with government programs and spending. The Republican Party, at its best, is a party of broad ideas and principles. For example, those who tend to vote Republican believe in limiting the size and scope of government and respect the guarantees of individual freedom and liberty of our Constitution; they respect life and its diversity; and they understand that free market capitalism, the glue that holds the Republican party, and our Nation, together, is both the most efficient and most moral economic system.

Elected Republicans, particularly in Congress, have expanded government; ignored the Constitution; bailed out failed big businesses with taxes collected from successful small businesses; and spent, and spent, and spent. The Republican Congressional network of wasteful earmarks, corporate welfare and politically motivated subsidies simply recast the Democratic model of purchasing votes (ethanol anyone?). Now, Republican leaders express surprise that in a fiscal arms race to decide which party can spend the most, the Democrats have won.

Republicans can only govern creatively and effectively when the deeds and actions of their candidates match their words.

A TEE Party activist displays his T-shirt

Around 80 citizens attended AFP’s TEE Party in the capital. Activists stood outside the House chambers to greet legislators as they entered and then moved to the viewing balcony to see our government at work. One activist had a campaign flyer from her Senator stating that she had worked to remove the franchise tax, eliminate the estate tax and make Kansas a more tax friendly state. She planned to remind her Senator what she said on the campaign trail.

At noon activist regrouped for a quick lunch. A few legislators joined the group including Sens. Susan Wagle, Dick Kelsey, Mike Petersen and Rep. Steve Brunk. A few organizers quickly addressed the group, including FairTax from Kansas City, Sedgwick County Commissioner Karl Peterjohn and grassroots activist and TEA Party organizer Amanda Grosserode.

FairTax activists have plan in place to bring the FairTax to Kansas. A bill is currently working its way through the Missouri Senate. Advocates noted the devastating effects that could happen here in Kansas if Missouri becomes much more business and tax friendly than Kansas.

Karl Peterjohn gave some tips on effective lobbying. He spoke about the important impact citizens can have on their government.

Amanda Grosserode mention another protest for Congressman Dennis Moore. Details will be announced on their website soon.

Participants were encouraged to visit legislators in the Docking State Office building and in the capital. Some plan to stay and hear the Governor’s address at 4pm if possible. Buses leaving for Johnson County and Wichita will still leave on time at 4pm however.

Reactions from citizens vary. A common theme seems to be the amount of taxpayer funded lobbying that is occuring under the dome. A group from invisiblekansas.com was also under the dome urging no cuts to their taxpayer funded activities. There seems to be every constituency imaginable under the dome lobbying legislators right now except taxpayer citizens.

AFP member Vonda Wiedmer displays her T-shirt message

There’s a TEE Party in the statehouse today. Americans for Prosperity – Kansas has organized grassroots activists to come and encourage lawmakers to not tax their way out of their spending problem. Citizens met this morning at 10am and are now spread throughout the statehouse speaking with legislators about what needs to be done to fix their budget problem. Here’s what AFP Director Derrick Sontag had to say this morning.

• “This is not just your regular veto session. We’ve been spending too much money in this building since day one.”
• Spending has increased by 48% since 2004. “Those are the real numbers folks.”
• “The budget that they are proposing to finish off this year leaves $39, $40 million in the bank.” That’s significantly less than what is required by statute. But then again, statutes can always be changed to suit the situation.
• “If they had just spent what they took in, they’d have a billion in the bank.” 22 months ago the state of Kansas had $1 billion in the bank. Now the state is still trying to fix a $1 billion plus problem
• Legislators knew the problem was coming and yet did ignored their own staff. “They were warned by their own staff two years ago”, that they’d have a negative balance.
• By law the legislative session must be wrapped up in 90 days. “They have nine more days to go.” A tax increase is certainly not outside the realm of possibility. “They’ll get creative and do whatever they have to do at the end of the day.”
• K-12 education is being asked to cut less than one percent of their budget. Yet K-12 spending has increased by 53% since 2003. “It’s simply not sustainable.”

Flint Hills Center investiative reporter Paul Soutar spoke briefly about his newest report on how much money K-12 education is sitting on.

Citizens are now spread throughout the capital speaking to legislators, encouraging them to not raise taxes and hurt the Kansas economy even more. More later in the day.

How many times have you heard the words “nonpartisan” or “bipartisan” or “nonpolitical” uttered by politicians right before they do something that is clearly political?

My guess is we’d all be rich if we have a $1 for each time that happens. It’s as if labeling something nonpolitical somehow makes it so, even if what they are about to do is clearly political.

That’s how we were introduced to a Senate bill dictating how redistricting would happen after the 2010 census.

Those on the left in leadership in Topeka are pushing this bill: Sens. Steve Morris and Derek Schmidt (Republicans), along with Sen. Anthony Hensley and Rep. Paul Davis (Democrats).

The bill, SB 291, is just eight pages long, so I’d encourage you to take a look at it.

If you do, have some strong coffee first because the details the description starts with are enough to resolve most cases of insomnia. But, as they say, the devil is in the details, and if you read far enough, you find them.

You see, this plan they’ve dreamed up would require the Senate majority leader (Schmidt), the House majority leader (Ray Merrick), the Senate minority leader (Hensley), and the House minority leader (Davis) to each name one person to a “temporary redistricting advisory commission.”

The list of persons not eligible to be appointed is long. Are you a city council person or township trustee elected in a partisan race? Ineligible. Are you a party officer? Ineligible. Do you work for the state? Ineligible. Is your cousin a state or federal office holder? Ineligible.

We wouldn’t want anyone with a potential bias or experience in politics or government on this commission. Never mind that very political persons are appointing these people, and that no specific expertise is required to be appointed (I don’t see a best friend or business partner ruled out, by the way) and the commission is required to rely on state employees with legislative research for their data.

Those backing this bill claim that removing this responsibility from the Legislature would make the process non-political and therefore leads to a better outcome.
Under this bill, we’ll have a new commission, not directly accountable to the voters, deciding what district you will live in for the next 10 years.

Now you have four political appointees. Who’s going to lead? Well, that’s up to them. They pick a fifth person to chair their temporary commission. So, we have a new commission, not directly accountable to the voters, deciding what district you will live in for the next 10 years.

Don’t like what they decide? There’s not much your representative or senator can do, even if they listen to your concerns, other than voting no time after time. It’s not until they’ve voted down proposed bills twice and are voting on a third bill that they are allowed to make anything but technical amendments.

Can you imagine the political fallout from voting down the plan twice and then amending the third one in an election year? Even the bravest of politicians probably won’t want to take that on!

The closest the public would come to being able to hold the commission accountable for the plans they present is to hold their representative and senator accountable in 2012 for whom they elected as majority or minority leader in their chamber in 2008 (for the Senate) or 2010 (for the House).

Perhaps the most important vote they make is for these leadership positions, but explaining that to the public and then making it a campaign issue is challenging at best.

And can you see the games for 2020 now? Promise me my friend will be appointed by you to the redistricting commission and I’ll vote for you for majority (or minority) leader. Suddenly the “nonpolitical” commission is tied to some very real political actions in a way that the public rarely sees.

Many of the rules for the commission to follow that are spelled out in this bill are similar to how redistricting was handled the last time around – without special legislation to make it happen. The one big change? Public hearings happen after a plan is finalized.

But there is more in this bill and it’s this part that is the most troubling: the commission isn’t allowed to reveal any of the details they are working on to the public or the Legislature until after they’ve finalized them.

This reminds me of the Ethics Commission or the Supreme Court nominating commission, both of which deliberate and come to conclusions in secret executive sessions and then make an announcement.
Say what you will about politicians making political decisions, at least they do their deliberations in public with input from citizens.

Say what you will about politicians making political decisions, at least when senators and representatives made up the committee the last time around, public hearings and committee meetings and decision making was done in full view and with the participation of the public, with much input from citizens around the state.

That’s one reason the lines for Congress were drawn as they were in 2002, as many wanted certain institutions or military bases to be in the same district and their elected representatives listened to their concerns. Moving this very important decision-making process to a closed-door, small, unaccountable-to-the-public commission is a step backwards for open transparency in government.

Will this bill see the light of day? It remains to be seen. Right now it’s sitting in the Senate Federal and State Committee – but if leadership wants it out, they can quickly call for a hearing and a vote and have it on the Senate floor in less than a day.

Assuming it passes the Senate, it still has to get through the House, and so far House leaders have been cool to the idea. As Speaker Mike O’Neal said recently about redistricting, “I think that is uniquely a legislative function.”

Let’s hope others realize this as well and this feel-good bill dies a well-deserved death.

Properly follow the rules in filing evidence of campaign finance violations. Magically see the accused “fix” the errors before Ethics investigates or holds a hearing. Ethics concludes no intentional violation happened but because a complaint was filed, the accuser cannot speak on the issue. Something doesn’t seem right and a reporter or two looks into the story so they can do their own investigation. Reporters, doing their job, report on what appears to be a whitewashing of campaign finance violations. Suddenly Ethics sees a violation and investigates a private citizen and fines him $7500 (click here to read more on that story). So much for protecting free speech, whistleblowers, or the freedom of the press. Oh, but one reporter who is absolutely certain the original charges were dismissed has never had to reveal his source for that information even though there is no way to know if no one has commented and violated the law, at least according to Ethics. Why has that source never been investigated? Perhaps because it “clears” the person they protected when they allowed him to “fix” his errors and then claimed he didn’t intentionally break the rules?

Meanwhile, in a Senate Committee meeting on this same day, a bill to protect a reporter’s source is shot down. (You can read more on that here.) I wonder what those Senators who voted against this are afraid might get said if sources could be protected from legislative inquiry?

So, here’s what you should take from this: if you have proof of violations of campaign finance law, don’t turn it in to Ethics, go public with it. And if you can’t risk being found out as the source of information, don’t tell a reporter when you see violations of the law.

Anyone else see a problem here?

Having said that, I’m going to take a risk and publicly ask – how is it that Carol Williams, Executive Director for Kansas Ethics, could acknowledge that an investigation of a private citizen was under way when acknowledging such a thing violated the law according to what she was saying the private citizen did wrong? Will we now see the Ethics Commission fine her?

Carol Williams, executive director of the ethics commission, said the board privately reviews all complaints. These preliminary assessments of evidence aren’t open to the public, she said. Neither the complainant nor the target of an allegation is permitted to comment publicly about the contents of a complaint, she said.If evidence points to a significant problem, Williams said, the commission could convene disciplinary hearings. Those are open to the public. Williams said Van Meteren might have committed a crime by speaking with The Topeka Capital-Journal about his case. A commission investigator in Topeka is looking into a possible counter complaint against Van Meteren.

As you can see above, unless the reporter made it up, Carol Williams said Kris Van Meteren was being investigated but didn’t yet know if they had probable cause to prove he violated the statute, which means she wasn’t allowed to comment! I can’t be the only person in Kansas who sees the inconsistently here, can I?

I believe it’s KSA 46-256 that they claim Van Meteren violated, but that’s also where I read that Williams can’t comment on the allegations against Van Meteren until after a hearing has been set, which I don’t believe was the case back in October.

I wonder, will anyone investigate if she broke the law? Will the legislature look into the secret goings on inside Ethics or are they more concerned with who writes $50 checks to organizations that make their actions public?

The Kansas Governmental Ethics Commission today fined a private citizen $7,500 for speaking to the media about a complaint he filed against state Sen. Dwayne Umbarger for misuse of campaign funds.

As far as the public knows, no hearing was conducted regarding the charges against state Sen. Umbarger. The commission has never publicly addressed the complaints or even acknoledged an investigation, but several news sources in Kansas have previously reported that the Ethics Commission is no longer investigating Sen. Umbarger and no fines against the Senator are on record.

When emailed for comment, Van Meteren still had nothing to say.

I would love to talk to you about this issue, (but) my attorney advises me that until a higher legal authority lifts the gag order the Ethics Commission has imposed on me, I really can’t.

Is that what our state has come to? Senators can funnel campaign cash and report such violations to the Ethics Commission, essentially proving a law violation, but as long as they amend their reports to be in compliance with the law, no action is taken.

And yet when a private citizen takes the initiative to root out corruption, wherever it may be, he is fined for his efforts by the very government commission that is supposed to be holding our politicians accountable.

For more in depth coverage, see today’s Kansas Meadowlark story.

Related Articles:

KRA Blog: Ethically Challenged Commission ‘clears’ Umbarger
KRA Blog: “Ethics” Commission targets private citizen
KRA Blog: First amendment case postponed one month
KRA Blog: Freedom of Speech defended at Ethics Hearing
Kansas Meadowlark: “Free Speech” May Cost Kansas Citizen $7500
Kansas Meadowlark: First Amendment Defense Thorny Issue for Ethics Commission
Kansas Meadowlark: Fines and other actions by the Ethics Commission at their December meeting
Kansas Meadowlark: 1st Amendment Constitutional Right may become issue in Kansas Ethics Commission Hearing in January. Silence the accuser?
Kansas Meadowlark: Ethics Commission Fines Candidate $500 and PAC $2500
Kansas Meadowlark: Did Senator Umbarger violate ethics rules buying a carport with campaign money? Umbarger clairvoyant?
Kansas Liberty: Talking to press attracts Ethics Commission ire
Kansas Liberty: New campaign finance charges leveled against Umbarger
Kansas Liberty: Primary opponent says Umbarger violated campaign finance law
Kansas Liberty: Umbarger yields to ethics pressure, repays fund

But one big thing was happening last week and the results of it have exploded in the Kansas news this week, dwarfing anything else I need to share with you. The Kansas Senate & House managed to pass a compromise bill dealing with the 2009 budget shortfall. All that’s needed as of this afternoon is the Governor’s signature and the current financial crisis is averted. Of course this means cutting spending, which the Governor had the power to do herself last November and still has the power to do today.

You’ve probably heard the dire warnings: Tax Refunds delayed, state employees won’t get paid on time, schools won’t be funded… none of which has to happen if the Governor just does her job. The sky is falling and it’s not my fault, those bad legislators won’t borrow money like I asked! They know they can do this, it’s no big deal, and we do it all the time!

Really, could that be true? As I looked into it, I found myself even angrier than I had been last week watching the circus in DC. You see, the Governor has at her disposal procedures she can take to cut non-essential spending, allowing the government to pay it’s essential bills on time. Has she done it? NO. Instead she’s out there scaring state employees by using taxpayer-funded-email lists to tell them that she cares about them but those bad legislators aren’t doing what I want so you might not get paid on time.

And meanwhile, I’m getting reports of what’s going on with our taxpayer-funded schools. Yes, that would be the schools that reaped a windfall in 2005 thanks to the State Supreme Court legislating funding. Kids are being told to tell their parents that they must call their legislators and beg them not to cut funding or class sizes will double, music and art will be cut from curriculums, and on and on it goes. I have in my hands a letter from a local high school principal, sent to parents with taxpayer funds, reminding them “it’s less expensive to educate children than incarcerate them!”

Honestly, as a homeschool mom who successfully graduated 5 children into community-involved adults without one penny of help from the state, I can assure you I’m quite aware of that little fact, that’s why I didn’t send my children to be incarcerated day after day in government-funded schools. What? You think this means I hate public schools and want them de-funded? Hogwash. See, I can use outlandish rhetoric and hyperbole, too. How about we discuss things rationally and try the truth in regards to funding and the state budget.

The fact is school funding makes up a HUGE percentage of the state budget. We can’t cut spending as much as we must without having the schools share in the cut – unless we are willing to make draconian cuts in other areas like social services and health care to those who can’t care for themselves, the mentally disabled, the elderly with no family, the orphans in foster care. We have a moral obligation to take care of those who cannot care for themselves and if that means a school district can’t build a nice new building this year or must cut a few administrators to make ends meet, well, that’s what’s it going to take. Face it, we can’t just print money and buy everything we want the day we want it. We must budget for it, plan ahead, make do when we can, and be practical in our spending. That’s what families do and that’s what government at all levels needs to do as well. Spending by government will not save us and taxing the people more will not magically bring the state increased revenues if the people cannot pay the bill!

Folks, it’s time you take action. Usually we suggest you call your legislators and tell them what you think – and of course that’s still a good idea now as well. But this time we need something more from you. We need you to make your voices heard in your local paper, on the radio talk shows in your area, and in your communities at town hall meetings, school activities, wherever you are, you need to speak up and say enough is enough, stop the madness, it’s time we live within our means as a society.

There are a number of places you can get talking points and more details. I’m going to list a few of them below. I’m also going to link to the pages on our website that will help you find your local paper, talk radio and elected officials. Please speak up now while we can still make a difference in Kansas.

Charlotte Esau
KRA Executive Director

Links For More Info & Talking Points:

Go to the mainpage of the KRA website and click on your county on the map for local information regarding local papers, talk radio & elected officials. Or follow these links:

Who will blink first? House Speaker Mike O’Neal, R-Hutchinson, and Senate President Steve Morris, R-Hugoton, said it would have been illegal for the State Finance Council to have authorized additional short-term debt because state officials couldn’t honestly declare the state could pay the obligation by the end of the fiscal year.
 
House leadership responds to Sebelius lies  Statement from House Leadership regarding the Governor’s continued efforts to misrepresent her role in the events of the State Finance Council meeting and her responsibility to address a revised 2009 budget.

Governor’s Letter to State Employees – Caution! This link is full of the Governor’s spin!

What You Need to Know About the Kansas Budget Crisis

House Speaker Mike O’Neal, R-Hutchinson, and Senate President Steve Morris, R-Hugoton, said it would have been illegal for the State Finance Council to have authorized additional short-term debt because state officials couldn’t honestly declare the state could pay the obligation by the end of the fiscal year.

The speaker and president said the Democratic governor must first deal with the $326 million deficit-reduction bill adopted by both chambers last week. Once action is taken on Senate Bill 25, O’Neal and Morris said expenditures and revenues would likely be brought in line sufficiently to approve more debt.

From Kansas Liberty:

When combined with previous requests, this would create a total loan of $775 for fiscal year 2009, the largest certificate of indebtedness ever issued in Kansas history.

This has understandably angered Democrats and liberals in general.

For the legislative branch to hold the executive branch over a barrel like this, to actually prevent payroll and tax returns from being made, is unprecedented and inexcusable. It is wholly unaccepted for the the Republicans to extort the Governor in this manner, and it comes awfully close to an out-and-out constitutional crisis. Separation of powers guarantees the governor’s power to sign or veto a bill, and if the House and Senate doesn’t like her action, they can always override her veto.

Absolutely true. Gov. Sebelius is free to veto the budget reduction act and continue to pretend the state has money to pay its bills. And legislative leaders are free to refuse to borrow more money that can’t be paid back. So, I guess everyone is free to do as they choose.

I would note however, that I heard not one Democrat complain about the 2005 Supreme Court Decision mandating a set amount of money be spent on K-12 education. Separation of powers only seems to be relevant when you’re on the loosing side.

State Treasurer Dennis McKinney had another take on the situation:

By failing to act on the recommendation of the state budget director to shore up balances in the general fund, legislative leaders put our reputation as a reliable bill payer and our credit rating at risk.

Wrong. Unprecedented spending on the part of liberal Democrats, including McKinney and Sebelius, has put our state’s fiscal reputation on the line.

Republican’s refusing to approve more debt that no one is sure would be able to be repaid, is simply the symptom of years of overspending by legislators and out of control court mandated spending sprees.

It is high time Sebelius and liberal Democrats face reality and address the disease rather than the symptoms.

The Johnson County bloggers at Red County have a nice list posted of what our children and grandchildren will be paying for in the years to come.

I’ll share some of my favorites:

• $1 billion for NASA
• $2 billion to develop advanced batteries for hybrid cars
• $650 million for the digital TV converter box coupon program (because reality TV spurs the economy)
• $3.7 billion to conduct “green” renovations on military bases (I thought they already wore camo?)
• $1 billion for the 2010 Census (to count just over 305 million people)
• $3.4 billion for fossil energy research (Remember folks, it’s the green Democrats that voted for that…)
• $98 million earmarked for a polar icebreaker (this one just puzzles me, couldn’t we just wait for ‘em to melt?)
• $500 million for forest health and wildfire prevention
• $25 million for the Smithsonian Institution
• $50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts

Finally, my ultimate favorite two:

• $10 million for urban canals
• $290 million for flood prevention

If I have to explain why that’s funny, we’re in real trouble.

Nostimulus.com surpassed half a million signatures in the waning hours of the spendulus debate, but it made no difference to the Democrats or three “moderate” Republican Senators. The site is still up if you just feel a need to sign it. I’m sure AFP will keep ownership of the domain name. I have a feeling this won’t be the last “stimulus.”

During the House and Senate debate I had a nightmarish flashback to the last time a legislative body voted on a massive piece of legislation without reading it.

Of course, everyone by now knows what a cash cow state-owned casinos turned out to be for Kansas. And not allowing legislative oversight in the bill, that was an excellent idea. I can only imagine what American citizens will learn about this spending bill over the next year or two.

U.S. House rules state that all conference committee reports must be made available for 3 calendar days before a vote to allow Representatives to read the bill. The Democrat controlled House passed a special resolution to waive that rule so a vote on the 1100 page bill could be taken not even 24 hours after it’s final draft was made available.

Democrat Reps and Senators must be very fast readers.

I can think of a few high points though. Every Representative and all but three Republican Senators voted against the bill. What a dramatic return to conservative principles. It’s certainly refreshing to see that most of our Republican officials intimately understand what lost them the election and what they need to do to begin to win again.

Imagine if Republicans had acted like Republicans several years ago.

Other Kansas spendulus blog posts:

Kansas Meadowlark – “‘Yes We Can’ Pass $787 Billion ‘Stimulus’ Without Anyone in Congress Reading the Bill”
Red County JoCo – The short list of your grandchildren’s debt
Wichita Liberty – NoStimulus.com Effort Crosses 200,000 Petitions
Wichita Liberty – Tim Phillips of AFP explains NoStimulus.com
StimulusWatch.org – Lists all Kansas Stimulus projects