Political change came to many parts of the country and Kansas as well, but leadership elections in the Kansas Senate showed little change.
A blog post by Americans for Prosperity is getting quite a bit of attention on the political blogosphere. The post proposes probable votes of Republican Senators in the recent leadership elections.
It wasn’t the attention the post gathered that I found interesting, rather it was the lack of attention from any Kansas Senate member that I found interesting. Committee assignments left little doubt of who supported liberal leadership and who didn’t.
Julia Lynn was first elected by precinct leaders to replace former Sen. Kay O’Connor two years ago. This November was her first general election to the Kansas Senate.
Lynn’s campaign was infused with thousands of dollars from the Senate Leadership PAC. This is the same PAC that infused $45,000 into KTRM to fund their KKK press releases and their mailers against Sen. Mary Pilcher-Cook saying she didn’t want parents to be able to get help for their sick children.
Lynn describes herself as a conservative and has a pro-life voting record. So why Sen. Lynn has decided to associate herself with this crowd is a little confusing. Is power so greatly desired by some that they’re willing to do anything to get it?
When asked by Kansas Liberty why she cast her vote for liberals, Lynn just flat out lied.
“What I looked at was how much experience they had with the budget and their breadth of knowledge, and the current leadership obviously had a depth of operational knowledge.”
This is the same leadership team that refuses to rule out tax increases to fix the state’s budget crisis. This is the same leadership team that oversaw massive spending increases the past four years. This is the same leadership team that allowed the budget to get where it is in the first place!
Julia, just tell the truth. They bought your seat with Senate Leadership PAC money and now you have to pay them back. Politics would be so much nicer if people just told the truth.
Now, here’s the part I don’t understand.
“Contrary to popular belief, Derek Schmidt is an extremely capable, conservative Republican, and I think our current leadership team knows what we need to do.”
Huh? Schmidt a conservative? The leadership team knows what to do? They can’t rule out tax increases, but they know what to do?
Barnett was probably the biggest surprise. Conservative Susan Wagle was his running mate just two years ago but Barnett decided not to vote for her.
Unlike Lynn, Barnett has a record of leadership roles for conservative causes, most notably during the 2007 session when the now all-too-apparent-fatally-flawed gambling bill was passed.
It’s these outspoken roles and votes in the past that make his leadership vote so confusing. It doesn’t make sense why you would vote for a team that will use their power to stop legislation that you want passed. What good is a chairmanship if leadership won’t allow a floor vote?
Leadership votes will be hard to explain to conservative activists, especially if Barnett chooses to try for higher office again. This is especially true when you look at the quality of candidates conservatives have for Governor (Sam Brownback) and in the first congressional district (Tim Huelskamp.)
Loading ...