First off, an apology for the long delay. University Daily Kansan political feature “Politically Correct” is back with its first two installments of the semester. I remain, along with conservative arch-nemesis Chet Compton, though our third talking head will now rotate depending on the subject.
The first installment of 2010 is about President Obama’s proposed spending freeze, and can be found here. The second, about the ethics of torture as military policy, is here. Due to scheduling problems, podcasts have not been recorded for these two yet, but those will hopefully be coming back soon.
On Sunday, March 7 our next governor, Tom Holland, spoke to a group at The Barn Bed and Breakfast Inn, Valley Falls. I think Sen. Holland is precisely who we need to lead our state through the difficult times we are in. Don’t write him off. That was the mistake made by the last two Republicans he ran against. Both were incumbents; first in a state House race, then a state Senate race. Both districts were conservative. Sen. Holland is a very pragmatic and formidable candidate who will pull no punches in the race against Sam Brownback.
I just received this note from the Sedgwick County Dems informing us of the death of such a wonderful leader in Kansas politics.
Sadly, former Kansas House Representative, Ruby Gilbert has passed away. Rep. Gilbert, who served from 1992 to 2004, was widely known as a staunch advocate for working people and families, a hard worker and wonderful representative for the 89th district.
She was a true example of a tough advocate who did her important work with grace and elegance. She will be deeply missed. Details for funeral arrangements are below.
If you would like to read Rep. Gilbert’s obituary, please click here. Funeral Service March 6th 11 am Tabernacle Bible Church in Wichita.
Kansas took a giant leap forward in accountability, accessibility, and transparency in our government. Thomas Witt, chair of the Kansas Equality Coalition, this morning, addressed the Senate State and Federal Affairs Committee asking for the introduction of a bill that would close the loopholes I think we can all agree have undermined our democracy.
After this morning’s committee meeting Republican Senator Steve Abrams was present and made the motion to accept introduction the bill. Democratic Senator Marci Francisco seconded.
The bill reads:
(A) Justice of the supreme court who is subject to election upon the question of retention pursuant to K.S.A. 25-111, and amendments thereto. (B) Judge of the court of appeals who is subject to election upon the question of retention pursuant to K.S.A. 25-3006, and amendments thereto. (C) District court judge who is subject to election upon the question of retention pursuant to either K.S.A. 20-2908 or 25-113, and amendments thereto. (D) District magistrate judge who is subject to election upon the question of retention pursuant to either K.S.A. 20-337 or 20-2908, and amendments thereto.
……
Sec. 2. K.S.A. 2009 Supp. 25-4143 is hereby amended to read as follows: 25-4143. As used in the campaign finance act, unless the context otherwise requires: (a) “Candidate” means an individual who: (1) Appoints a treasurer or a candidate committee; (2) makes a public announcement of intention to seek nomination or election to state or local office; (3) makes any expenditure or accepts any contribution for such person’s nomination or election to any state or local office; or (4) files a declaration or petition to become a candidate for state or local office; or (5) is an individual who is subject to an election for the purposes of retention in office and who is an incumbent: (A) Justice of the supreme court who is subject to election upon the question of retention pursuant to K.S.A. 25-111, and amendments thereto; (B) judge of the court of appeals who is subject to election upon the question of retention pursuant to K.S.A. 25-3006, and amendments thereto; (C) district court judge who is subject to election upon the question of retention pursuant to either K.S.A. 20-2908 or 25-113, and amendments thereto; and (D) district magistrate judge who is subject to election upon the question of retention pursuant to either K.S.A. 20-337 or 20-2908, and amendments thereto.
Last month, the Kansas Governmental Ethics Commission issued an opinion stating that Kansas Supreme Court justices are not subject to the state’s campaign finance limits or reporting requirements.
“The Equality Coalition frequently finds its issues being argued and decided in the highest courts in the land. It’s absolutely essential that we know who is contributing money to Supreme Court retention campaigns. Our justice is must not be for sale, and this process must be open and transparent,” Witt said in a telephone interview.
Last Friday, the Kansas Coalition for Workplace Safety held a rally in the old Supreme Court chambers at the Kansas State Capitol. The rally was well attended by many of us who want to see injured Kansas workers given a fair shake for a change. Rep. Paul Davis, the House Minority Leader and Sen. Anthony Hensley, the Senate Minority Leader gave a run down of Kansas’ failing public policy concerning the treatment of workers injured on the job by no fault of their own. Workers who have been victimized by our workers compensation system showed up to have their stories heard as those of us who attended saw real life examples why we need to ramp up this fight. We are among the worst in the nation, folks, and it is time we get this backwards mess straightened out.
-We need to increase our caps on temporary and permanent total disability, which haven’t been adjusted for inflation since 1987.
-People deserve the right to choose their own doctor; someone they can trust. NOT the company insurance doctor, as presently mandated, who presents a definite conflict of interest. “I would say if a criminal has the right to choose an attorney, an injured worker has the right to chose a doctor,” said Sen. Hensley.
Activists, geeks, business owners, all of us are lending our voices to one common cause: Bringing Google to Kansas. Today CNN picked up the story of all of the hard work everyone has been doing to ensure we rallied around Topeka as a center spot for the super fast 1GB internet that Google will bring to the city. The Mayor of Topeka has now gotten in on the action in efforts to develop more support and says we should change the name of Topeka to Google for the month of March!
“But Bunten believes so firmly that younger residents of Kansas’ capital city will benefit from faster Internet connections that he wants Topeka — which he describes as a place of many lakes and the site of a burgeoning market for animal-food research — to change its name for a month.
In a formal proclamation Monday, Bunten announced his city will be known as “Google” — Google, Kansas.
“It’s just fun. We’re having a good time of it,” he said of the unofficial name change, which will last through the end of March. “There’s a lot of good things that are going on in our city.” . . . .
. . . . The mayor believes that faster Internet connections would inspire young people to stay in the city and would encourage business development.
Kansas celebrated a progressive victory on Feb 25 with the passage of HB 2221, a comprehensive statewide indoor smoking ban. This same bill was passed almost a full year ago in the Senate, and is expected to be signed into law by Governor Mark Parkinson. This bill will give all working Kansans the right to breathe clean air in their workplaces. Local ordinances that are more stringent, such as the ban in Topeka, will remain in place. In areas that have not passed a smoking ban, or where the local law is more lenient, the state law will supersede. This law is not perfect – it does include exemptions for casino floors and private clubs – and clean-air advocates still have some work ahead to help make these changes. Kansas joins a majority of other states, including tobacco-centric North Carolina, that have already passed public indoor smoking bans.
Cities and states where smokefree workplace laws are in effect have seen an overall decrease in smoking, lower mortality from smoking-related illnesses such as heart attacks, and lower health-care spending. A particularly instructive case is Helena, Montana, where a smokefree workplace law resulted in a dramatically reduced incidence of acute myocardial infarction within just a few months. A judge later overturned the law, and heart attack rates quickly returned to pre-ban levels.
Air quality analyses demonstrate that a nonsmoking individual working within a smoky environment for an 8-hour shift inhales the equivalent of 16 cigarettes. One squirm-inducing moment in the House debate came when Dr. Dolores Furtado (D-Overland Park) noted the high prevalence of upper respiratory tract infections among her colleagues, and asked whether their health would be well-served by inhaling second-hand cigarette smoke all day long if it were allowed on the House floor. On the other side of the issue, Scott Schwab (R-Olathe) argued that a smoking ban would be BAD for the health of children because now parents will have no choice but to smoke at home.
For more information about the campaign that has resulted in this historic legislation, as well as the many citizens’ groups that have supported it, visit www.cleanairkansas.org. If your legislator was among those who helped win the day, please send him or her a thank-you note, and support your local smoke-free bars and restaurants.
By now I am sure you have heard that two weeks ago Google announced plans for testing its experiemental highspeed interenet somewhere in the US. The catch, communities must nominate themselves. They can do so via a simple link online. Google doesn’t give many specifics, just that they want communities to be and send in as many nominations as possible.
Topeka bit. Well I could say Topeka has been bitten. The response has been dramatic and overwhelming in a good way. Regular citizens, Media, and Elected officials have all done everything they can to move the effort forward. I am proud of my hometown. We are showing the world what we are made of.
If a month ago you had asked me what in Kansas would make the most aggressive effort I may have said it would be a toss up between Lawrence and Topeka. In the last year both communities have seen major growth in the world of social media. Using the new technology to grow and maintain communities that were never before possible.
So… where is Lawrence’s effort? Here.
Now maybe I am reaching here but you tell me. I would imagine in most the only folks opposed to bringing google to town are the folks who currently provide internet services. Cable companies, phone companies, you get the jist.
Who owns the cable company in Lawrence. The World Company. They also own the local news paper. I wonder if The Lawrence Journal World has run any stories on Topeka’s or Lawrence’s efforts?
Hmmm, nope. In fact some eager do gooder over at lawrence.com sent out a tweet about the facebook group that must not have been cleared with management. It has since been removed.
Here’s the thing. No one should stand in the way of economic progress for a community. Why so many communities are excited about this prospect is that it could change a city or town forever. Broader tax base, infrastructure improvements and a pretty big carrot to attract new companies to set up shop.
I repeat no one should stand in the way of this.
I realize I am biased here because I really do want my home community to succeed, but I lay this challenge to all of my friends. Join the facebook group for Lawrence. Show how much support can be created without the permission of the cable companies. Tonight the Lawrence City Commission is hearing a resolution about the Google Fiber Experiment. Show up and support the cause. City Commissioner have indicated that they will make their decision to submit an application based on public support.
So show up tonight. Show up in droves. Lawrencians are known for their independent spirit.
If enough people show up tonight and The Lawrence Journal World still doesn’t do a story on this then I’m right, if they do end up doing a story then maybe I’m wrong.
There seem to be two issues you can always count on for some serious debate in Topeka: the budget, and abortion.
The same legislators who tout themselves as pro-life and usually vote for the bills that would restrict access to abortion also seem to spend a lot of time voting against children and health care coverage. While this is a running joke on the pro-choice side of things, it’s a terrifying reality for many families in Kansas. According to the KS Dept of Health and Environment (KDHE), in 2006 11,221 abortions were performed in Kansas, of which 5,836 were in-state residents.
With a state that has 25% of it’s residents under 18, and a total population of 2.8 million, that’s an estimated 700, 533 children statewide. In 2006 Kansas spent $424 million to provide care to 204,900 children. At $2069 per child, it’s one of the best dollar-impact state programs. In addition, in the 2006-2007 school year, the per-pupil public school cost was $8,998.
Combining just public health and school costs, the $11,067 each year is state support annually per child. If the state average of about 40% in poverty would hold true with the number of abortions in the state, 2,159 children of those aborted would be living in poverty. The $11k each year doesn’t include the free or reduced lunch that those children would be on, the cost of subsidized child care, food stamps, and all the other support children in poverty receive (and must receive in order to have a barely-equal playing field to other children).
The $11,067 minimal state support, times 2,159 children, = $23,893,653.
$23 million bucks isn’t a small amount of money. A large portion of that money would come from federal sources, but if you did that math for all 50 states (and the few territories), the number would be even bigger. Also, that $23m is just for kids from one year.
None of this is meant to say that abortion should be legal because we can’t afford children. Republicans love to vote for “pro-life” measures, but cut school funding, medical services for children, subsidized childcare, promote marriage initiatives (so that mothers can’t sue for child support, even if the father of the child is providing nothing). In an ideal world, contraception would be perfect, all children would be born into emotionally and economically stable situations, public education would be good no matter your geographic location – but we all know this isn’t reality.
Reality is that abortion must always exist as an option. In the real world, contraception is never more than 99%, schools are being cut and teachers laid off, geography has a lot to do with your educational opportunities, families change, and even the best laid plans sometimes go awry. Unless Republicans want to start funding opportunities for children, and taking real, substantial initiatives to help all children, and for comprehensive sex ed and pregnancy prevention (that doesn’t rely on abstinence-until-marriage and slut shaming), they have to right to moral-high-ground themselves. Women face reality, but apparently many legislators in the statehouse don’t.
During the Kansas House debate on Friday on HB 2538 (PEAK Act Amendments), Kansans were given a good opportunity to view who those Kansas Legislator’s are that are fine with using state tax dollars and state finance authority to give out-of-state workers jobs over Kansans. The Tietze Amendment to the HB 2538, which failed 56-59, read:
“A qualified employer or contractor of a qualified employer when hiring persons to work on public works projects and any project financed b state funds, tax increment financing or state tax and revenue bonds shall employ available Kansas resident workers before hiring non-Kansas workers.”
Here’s those who voted against the amendment guaranteeing Kansas jobs first:
If any of these legislators are your Representative in the House, be sure to contact them. Here’s a complete listing of the members. Let them know you don’t want your tax dollars funding out-of-state jobs before Kansas jobs.
Also included for your convenience is the House Journal from Friday, Feb. 26. See the top of page 1022 for the vote in question.
Sadly, former Kansas House Representative, Ruby Gilbert has passed away. Rep. Gilbert, who served from 1992 to 2004, was widely known as a staunch advocate for working people and families, a hard worker and wonderful representative for the 89th district.
Loading ...