The KRA Blog Rotating Header Image

State Spending

Review shows heightened media coverage of pro-tax study

Apr 26th, 2010
by admin.
No comments yet

A search of major statewide newspapers from January to April of 2010 shows favored treatment of a Wichita State University pro-sales tax study. A more comprehensive study was done and presented to a House tax committee in January 2010 by Dr. Art Hall of the University of Kansas.

A search for each author’s name was performed in Newsbank. Newsbank has current articles from the Emporia Gazette, the Hays Daily News, the Hutchinson News, the Manhattan Mercury, the Newton Kansan, the Ottawa Herald, the Southwest Daily Times, the Topeka Capital-Journal, and the Wichita Eagle. An additional search was performed for the Kansas City Star (which is headquartered in Kansas City, MO and not included in Kansas searches in Newsbank) and online with the Lawrence Journal-World. (The Journal-World keeps previous news coverage online, unlike other the other newspapers that take down their articles after a certain period of time.)

The search for “Art Hall” returned two relevant articles in 2010, one from the Wichita Eagle and another from the Hutchinson News. These articles covered Hall’s testimony to a Kansas House committee. A third article in the Kansas City Star mentioned Hall’s findings but his study wasn’t the focus of the article. A search of the Star’s and Eagle’s blogs returned no entries.

The search for “John Wong” returned many relevant articles. An April 20 article in the Wichita Eagle outlines the study’s findings, as well as a special blog entry on the 19th. The study was also highlighted in a budget piece in the Eagle’s regular section on the 19th. This was all followed up with a favorable editorial three days later.

Similarly, an April 20 article in the Hutchinson News highlights the pro-tax study, as well as an article in the Kansas City Star. The Lawrence Journal-World had an article online devoted to the study, however a search of ljworld.com revealed no such article for the KU study. The Topeka Capital-Journal also featured the Wong study, with no such balance provided to the Hall study.

Perhaps the slant in coverage is due to the study’s findings, or even it’s timing. It’s certainly too bad that the Kansas media can’t be bothered to examine the two studies and detail their differences. At the very least it should be worthwhile to note that the pro-tax study was done in a vacuum and only covers one year, while the KU study takes into account changes in spending habits and long term effects over a six year period.

The tale of these two studies may end up being a sad testimony to the state of the Kansas media rather than how badly a tax hike would be to our state’s economy.

State Rep. Hineman, not KEPC, requested pro-tax study

Apr 22nd, 2010
by admin.
No comments yet

A KansasWatchdog article this morning reveals that Kansas Representative Don Hineman (R-Dighton), and not the Kansas Economic Progress Council, requested the pro-sales tax study released Monday by Wichita State University.

The study concluded that a sales tax increase would cost private sector employment, but would fuel government jobs, thus saving close to 2,000 in the first year. The study confirmed a January study by Dr. Art Hall of the University of Kansas who ran a 6 year projection of over 26,000 private sector lost jobs. Monday’s study by Dr. John Wong of WSU only made one year projections.

Monday’s study received significant media coverage because of it’s pro-tax sympathies, while Hall’s January study received little attention.

Read more at:

Huelskamp first on the air

Apr 13th, 2010
by admin.
No comments yet

Sen. Tim Huelskamp announced the first TV ad in the first congressional district race with a positive message about his record on taxes. The ad, titled “Tax Day,” runs 30 seconds in length and is an issue-oriented profile of Senator Huelskamp and his record of fighting for lower taxes.

“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.

Is KDOT video press release taxpayer funded lobbying?

Apr 6th, 2010
by admin.
No comments yet

The Kansas Department of Transportation today released its first video press release advocating for a tax increase for another 10 year transportation plan. Besides the obvious questions of why a department so strapped for cash would put time and effort into producing a video to advocate for a tax increase, one should also question if the use of taxpayer resources to produce a video should be considered taxpayer funded lobbying.

There are multitudes of lobbyists in Topeka sent on the taxpayer dime. They vary from local governments like cities and counties to many local school districts and now apparently even state departments like KDOT. Contrary to common sense, taxpayer funded lobbying is not illegal.

Certainly heads of various state departments go to the capital and regularly advocate for more money. It has essentially become standard operating procedure to ask for more than you need. It is, however, a giant step in the wrong direction for the head of a department to use state resources to outright advocate for a tax increase to pad the departments pockets.

Using state resources in this way is disturbing. But in addition to that, watch the video below and ask yourself these questions:

  • Why does Secretary Miller never use the words “tax increase?”
  • If Kansas roads have improved so dramatically since the 1980′s, why is a “revenue increase” needed to “spur economic development across the state?” If more roads equals more economic activity, shouldn’t tax revenues have increased as well? Or does that perhaps lend evidence to the argument that more transportation funding does not equal more economic activity?
  • Why does KDOT note that new construction spending is less than in the 1970′s when they say a tax increase is needed for system “preservation?” Doesn’t preservation by definition mean there wouldn’t be new construction?

I certainly for one will not argue against more roads and better infrastructure. Preservation of the system should be a priority. However, the funds to do so must be found within the state’s current revenue stream.

Secretary Miller wants Kansans to believe that they should give more money to the government in the name of more economic activity. If that is the case, why not just go ahead and give the government everything you make and let them spend what they see fit first and then give you the rest? After all, if more money spent by the government is such a good thing, this strategy should quickly result in unprecedented state wealth.

Healthcare Freedom Amendment eight votes short; how did your Rep. vote?

Mar 22nd, 2010
by admin.
No comments yet

Today the Kansas House took it’s first vote on the proposed Healthcare Freedom Amendment. In light of last night’s stunning vote to essentially nationalize one sixth of our nation’s economy, this amendment is more important than ever to protect Kansans from unconstitutional federal mandates.

To pass, the amendment needs a two-thirds supermajority of 84 votes in the House. Today’s vote was 76-44. Listed below is how the votes came down according to party and yea or nay. Click the members name to get their contact information and call, fax and email them TODAY.

Republican Yeas: Aurand, Bethell, Bowers, Brookens, Brown A, Brunk, Burgess, Carlson, Colloton, Craft, Crum, DeGraaf, Donohoe, Faber, George, Goico, Gordon, Grange, Hayzlett, Hermanson, Hineman, Holmes C, Holmes M, Horst, Huebert, Jack, Kelley, Kerschen, Kiegerl, King, Kinzer, Kleeb, Knox, Landwehr, Light, Mast, McLeland, Merrick, Morrison, Moxley, Myers, Neufeld, O’Brien, O’Neal, Olson, Otto, Patton, Peck, Pottorff, Powell, Prescott, Proehl, Rhoades, Schroeder, Schwab, Schwartz, Seiwert, Shultz, Siegfreid, Spalding, Suellentrop, Swanson, Tafanelli, Vickrey, Whitham, Wolf B, Wolf K, Worley, Yoder.

Contact (preferably by phone) the Republicans below and ask them why they voted against limited government.

Republican NAYS: Nays: Bollier, Hill, Quigley, Roth, Sloan.

Contact (preferably by phone) the Democrats below and ask them to once again vote yea. They will be under pressure to change their vote.

Democrat YEAS: Lukert, Maloney, Meier, Palmer, Svaty, Wetta, Williams.

Contact (preferably by phone) the Democrats below and ask them why they voted nea and ask them to change their vote.

Democrat NAYS: Ballard, Barnes, Benlon, Brown T, Burroughs, Carlin, Crow, Davis, Dillmore, Feuerborn, Finney, Flaharty, Frownfelter, Furtado, Garcia, Gatewood D, Gatewood S, Goyle, Grant, Henry, Kuether, Lane, Loganbill, Long, Mah, McCray-Miller, Menghini, Neighbor, Pauls, Phelps, Rardin, Ruiz, Slattery, Swenson, Talia, Tietze, Trimmer, Ward, Winn.

These Representatives didn’t vote. Keep in mind that they may have not been able to vote due to illness. Contact (preferably by phone) the Representatives below and ask them to make an effort to vote for the Healthcare Freedom Amendment.

Didn’t Vote: Fund (most likely would have been a yea, is currently hospitalized according to fellow House members), Hawk, Henderson, Johnson, Peterson.

← Earlier Posts Newer Posts →