​The challenges we face today in Kansas, while mostly self-imposed, are complex and will require strong, consensus-building leadership from state lawmakers to address. This is exactly why I’ve been so focused on the November 8th election in many of my recent blog posts. I truly believe that the more voters understand the key issues facing our state, the better informed their decisions will be at the ballot box. In politics and campaigning, framing a message in simple language and using words that fit well on a bumper sticker are effective with many voters, but does this always serve the best long-term interests of the voters or our future? “Cutting taxes,” for instance, has a better ring to it than raising taxes and trying to explain why. Now, this is by no means a shot at people’s capacity to understand the complexity of these issues. However, people today are busy, challenged by the many realities of our times, and pulling the facts from a very noisy, information-heavy environment is not always easy.

The point I want to make in this particular post is that deciding the level and methods for taxation is not at all simple and would be very difficult to fit on a bumper sticker, assuming most people don’t keep a spare magnifying glass in their glove box in order to check the fine print on each message as it zooms by. Although, if you did decide to bring that magnifying glass along with you on your next drive down the roads of Kansas, the fine print you’d read about “lower taxes,” might conflict with the original message. Because, in reality, “lower” is not automatically better...or even “lower” at all, when all the other factors are considered. When looking at taxes, our focus should be from an investment perspective. What brings us the best return can only be determined when all forms of taxation, and all the implications thereof, are considered.

For an example, with taxes for infrastructure, it makes no sense to assume that higher taxes are automatically bad. Lower taxes—or, in the case of Kansas, poor fiscal policy in general—often lead to delayed improvements and less maintenance. This short-sighted view will lead to much higher repair costs and taxes down the road, and much higher maintenance costs for “wear and tear” on your automobile or truck. Not to mention, a sound transportation system—which, for Kansas, primarily means our highways and bridges—is absolutely essential. Profitable commerce depends on it. This is important for supporting our urban areas, but it is absolutely critical to our rural areas. Think of all the grain, cattle, and milk that must be moved in order for our economy to prosper, and think of all the families who will have to travel those same roads to attain access to fresh food and other basic necessities.

So yes, we have cut income taxes, including totally eliminating them for a wealthy few, but yet, the 2015 legislative session delivered the largest tax increase in Kansas history. So, what’s in the fine print? The sales tax was raised (leading to higher prices for consumers on every purchase, including those who are struggling most in our state, who now pay a higher sales tax on their groceries than they would in almost any other state in the country), several excise taxes and other fees (including tuition) have been raised across the board, and most local governments have felt the impacts “trickle down” from the state level to put upward pressure on property taxes and local sales taxes.

​Now, I’m not here to push limitless taxation and spending, we must absolutely aim to maximize efficiency, but a sound tax system should have balance, fairness, and allow us to appropriately fund key government functions and invest wisely in our future. When you are still paying a lot in taxes and not getting a quality return on your investment, how is that a good deal for anyone?

​The results of Tuesday’s Primary are in, and the message is clear: Kansas voters are ready to get our state back on course. The opposition from Republicans against their party’s extremist legislators indicates that they’re ready for a change of direction. In the most visible and critical contests, new candidates won almost every race, adding more common sense and moderation to the Kansas Legislature and giving the state a new vision for the future. From Western Kansas to Johnson County, there will be new faces in the legislature and new problem solvers to begin the hard work of undoing the damage done by Governor Brownback and his legislative allies.

We knew August 2nd would be a critical benchmark day, and there are several important things to take away from it as we go forward. Obviously, this was one huge step toward returning Kansas to times of balance and sound decisions—under the consensus-building leadership of both Republicans and Democrats. Now the focus turns toward the November 8th General Election, where this coalition has the opportunity to build on the gains made in the Primary. With that in mind, now is an important time to mention that our friends with the Kansas Chamber of Commerce (etc.) and their wealthy backers will have had their reality check and will likely return—with more money and more misleading attempts to convince you that their experiment is working and “the sun is still shining in Kansas.” Fortunately, we now have proof that Kansas voters know better, but this makes the effort to continue reaching out and educating our fellow citizens even more important. It will be incumbent upon all the backers of quality candidates and real solutions to our challenges to double down and make the most of every campaign day. We have witnessed some dark days throughout the past few years, but with the help of many committed Kansans, the light of a new day can shine brightly all across our state.

The key contests in November will depend much more on the success of Democratic candidates in uniting people from across the political spectrum around this vision for a better future. In these races, there is a real opportunity to bring together the rational conservative voters, who value fiscal responsibility and support wise investments in our future, with Democratic and Independent voters, to reject the failed policies of the past, look beyond party labels, and bring change on behalf of the people of Kansas—not just the monied interests that got us where we are today in the first place. The quality of the candidates is certainly there, and I've been very impressed with their passion and commitment. The rest is up to us, the voters, to stay engaged and get involved.

For me, Tuesday’s results are a reflection of citizen concern about all the harmful decisions that have been coming from Topeka and, most importantly, a realization that concerned folks needed to do more than just complain. I see it reflected as well in the armies of grassroots support that many sound, moderate candidates have been able to assemble. The unified concern for restoring our constitutional commitment to public education, sustainably addressing the fiscal crisis, maintaining our infrastructure, securing the role of an independent judiciary, and rising to meet our many other challenges has been truly inspirational. Now, we just need more Kansans to join this cause. And, once again, I urge readers who are ready for a change of course to share this message and/or actively seek opportunities to prepare your friends and neighbors to vote for a continuation of the momentum we established in the Primary. What we do between now and November will decide the future of our state.

​​I think there is a growing understanding in Kansas that the current direction our state is headed is the wrong one, and something must be done. What is needed now is an appreciation of just how serious our situation is. Not making a significant turn now, towards restoring our historical image of wise conservative investing, will set us back for decades to come. Being more direct, how our August 2nd and November 8th elections turn out will go a long way in determining what our future is like. My focus here is for you to understand that there is a role for you to help.

So how can you help? The obvious ways are helping financially or volunteering to do what your candidate needs most. That might be going door-to-door, calling voters, doing outreach at public events, or putting up and managing signs around the district. Some of this can be done from home, like the calling or engagement on social media. And it’s also worth pointing out that even if there is no competitive race in your area for now, that doesn’t leave you out. This includes registered Democrats who can, and should, plug quality Republicans who can expand the moderate coalition. In terms of financial support, candidates take money for sure from outside their district. If you know people in the most competitive races, calling friends and relatives who do live there to make sure they have the facts and are voting is of real help. Personal interactions are often the most powerful. Many of these races will be really close and often decided by just a handful of votes. One person making a little effort can make all the difference.

I volunteer, along with three other former Governors of Kansas from both political parties, under the banner of the “Save Kansas Coalition.” For more information, check out the website, the key issues, and our coalition of eleven statewide organizations with like concerns and active members who are the backbone of this effort. Several of these groups are making specific candidate endorsements, including Game On For Kansas Schools. This might be helpful if you are not already plugged into helping good candidates who are ready to make a positive difference for Kansas.

Now, I share the cautionary note that must come with this message. For some of you, it is a reminder and for others, a warning. If not already, you will soon see and hear messages that make the wonderful, qualified candidate you are helping sound and look like some dreadful maniac. For some time now, certain interest groups with statewide influence, and a lot of money, have used false and exaggerated claims to attack quality candidates. This negative campaigning is done through various paid media to confuse voters and help elect candidates that will do their bidding come time to serve. It first had influence in Kansas Republican primaries in 2012 and was used again across the board in 2014. It is totally out of sync with Kansas values but can be effective if you and others don’t speak up when it happens by correctly defending quality candidates with honest records of solid public service.

Voting is underway all across the state for the Primary Election! If this message resonates with you, please consider sharing it as much as possible. Every vote will count.

​The recent referendum in Great Britain should be a wake up shock to all voters that elections do have consequences. In particular, this lesson should resonate with our young voters. Listen to the cries from the young following the British referendum vote, attacking older voters for doing them in. They should be looking at themselves for taking the vote for granted. With a stronger message from the young and a higher turnout, this likely would have been avoided. Now they are stuck with buyer's remorse in addition to the impacts on not just their economy but little things like movement and travel around Europe.

One of the main messages I share with young people is the importance of their involvement early on in the political processes that lead to the election of our government leaders at all levels. Why do I push this? Because they, the young, have the most at stake in most elections. When the electorate makes a good decision and good decisions follow, everyone, particularly the young, benefit. When bad decisions are made, it is the young who live with those mistakes the longest. Also, the older one gets, the list of voting issues for many diminish. That means key issues for the young, whether it be quality, affordable education or taking care of the infrastructure that we pass on to them, good results may depend on the young turning out to vote. Folks my age are more likely to have fewer and more focused priorities, and we do vote.

This of course leads to the elections we have in Kansas this year, starting with the August 2nd Primary, and the thought of what a powerful, positive influence young voters could have if they vote. I’m not suggesting older voters will not support wise-investing conservative to moderate candidates, but for some, their focus may be more short-sighted. Young voters wanting a strong Kansas, quality jobs, and a positive environment for raising a family, need to seek out candidates from either party that serve their interest. Voting records are available, and watching which organizations support which candidates can easily tell you the candidates who fit your interests. Be informed. Help quality candidates. Vote early, and get others to the polls. Share messages and information with your friends online and in your community. Elections do have consequences, and in case we needed another reminder of that, we can now simply look to our neighbors in Britain.

With the horrific tragedy in Dallas—on top of what happened in Baton Rouge, Minneapolis, and Orlando (and unfortunately the list could go on)—it seems as though we, as a country, are sitting on a powder keg just waiting for the next tragedy to take place. Peaceful protests, shared words of concern, and 24/7 news coverage is not enough. I lived through the sixties. It can get worse.

This is a time when real leadership needs to step up, not self-serving political rhetoric. Rather than just bounce from one tragedy to the next with similar reactions, concerns, and appropriate talking points, we need to hear more about real understanding of what is going on in this country. We need to talk about the legitimate concerns of all, not just the population that fits your political interests.

This Presidential campaign has brought out frustrations from coal country to the rust belt to the many minority populations in communities across the country. From young people to the concerned families of the middle class who see opportunities slipping away, there are reasons why Independents are growing in numbers, and that will not change until one or both political parties step up to the complex challenges we face.

We need leadership that will be totally honest with the American people, that will listen as much as anything, and will acknowledge that the ultimate answers are not going to be at either extreme of the spectrum. We need leaders from all segments of our population to put the country first, to be willing to listen to each other, to commit to working together, and to putting the people’s interest above party and political gain. I know, given the environment we have today, that this sounds far off, but something close to it is the only way to real solutions. The American people want answers and real change, continuing with the same thoughts and prayers from tragedy to tragedy is simply not enough.

Following the Legislature in Special Session last Friday certainly kept me busy with my Twitter account. For most of the day, it appeared it was going to take some time to solve the immediate challenge of funding schools in Kansas at an equitable level, as deemed by the Kansas Constitution. Then suddenly out of the blue, they not only got the votes needed but almost unanimous votes in both houses. They got done in two days what had to be done in the short term. It could have taken ten, and I would not have been surprised. Given the court's response today, it appears the immediate crisis has been momentarily satisfied. So does this mean sanity suddenly returned to the Legislature during the Special Session? Unfortunately, the short answer is "no," but nonetheless, there were some important things we can take away from the two days of turmoil we witnessed last week.

First, it’s important to remember that the Special Session was only convened to address the equity portion of the lawsuit, yet to come is a decision on whether the funding levels of Kansas schools are constitutionally adequate. This means that more important decisions loom next year, when a more sustainable fix will be required. So what did we learn from this Special Session about the incumbents who will be seeking the opportunity to make these crucial decisions for our state, and what kind of representation will be required in order to get it right?

To me, an obvious takeaway from the Special Session is that, for one of the very few times, the ideas and leadership of moderate Republicans and Democrats were taken seriously. The interesting question is: why? From what I have learned, the pro-education legislators had done their homework and were better prepared to propose something that would work. Helping this might have been the desire of the current leadership to avoid more bad publicity and get their folks home to raise money and campaign. In this case, confirming “why” is not as important as what we, as voters, should do as a result of this. It’s critical that we take this as further incentive to review carefully our choices in the coming elections, and that we see there is a better way forward—one that’s possible through the election of more consensus-building problem solvers to the legislature.
​
It’s also important that the legislature avoided, in the end, doing anything really outlandish during the Special Session. The only non-essential issue raised was the leadership’s constitutional amendment introduced to take the Supreme Court, (for now) an equal branch of government, out of any power to impact adequate and appropriate funding of public schools. Fortunately, for the sake of Kansas and public education, it failed by one vote to receive the ⅔ vote necessary for passage, going down to defeat in the State Senate. Along with eight Democrats, six Republican Senators stood up to the pressure of the Senate leadership and voted for public education. Come August 2nd and November 8th, if you live in any of these fourteen Senate districts and you want quality public schools, good judgment, and courage, you have your candidate to support. If you live in one of the other twenty-six Senate districts (or a House district held by someone who supports the direction of the current administration), electing different representation, regardless of party affiliation, will be needed in order to defend Kansas schools from further attacks, unconstitutional actions, and short-sighted policies.

​Truly restoring sanity will require many steps over the course of several election cycles and legislative sessions. But it's imperative that we make significant strides along that path during this election year and sustain that momentum in the years to come.

​Never in my lifetime have there been legislative races where more was at stake and also where the voters have such clear choices in most of the Kansas House and Senate districts. In most cases, it comes down to a choice between continuing the failed policies of the current administration or acknowledging openly that the current direction is not working. Turning the ship around will not be easy, nor can it be done in one legislative session. It will take years, but the cost of not starting that process in this election year is beyond the pale.

I urge each and every person reading this message to take seriously every opportunity they have to support the many quality moderate candidates of both parties who are seeking office in this critical and competitive election year. This can be done by either directly or indirectly motivating others to get involved. And it starts with many critical primary races to be settled on August 2nd. Priority here are key Republican-held districts where a challenger of high quality and commitment to problem solving is working hard, and with your help, these candidates can be part of the effort to restore sanity.

While the first benchmark will be in the Republican primary, I’d urge Democrats and Independents to understand that this is not a primary to sit out. I’m not encouraging changes to party registration, for which the deadline has already passed anyway. However, I’d remind you that—​regardless of where you live—​you know some of the Republican voters who will have the opportunity to send a message to the extremist members of their party. Make sure these voters know what is at stake and which Republican is on the side of restoring our state versus who will be a “rubber stamp” for the failed and damaging policies of the recent past. Many of these races will be close, where a handful of votes will make the difference, so don’t tell me you can’t have an impact.

For the incumbents seeking re-election, they have voting records which will clearly put them on one side or the other, and finding those specifics will be relatively easy, including the results of the Special Session. Given the number of incumbents not seeking re-election, a message in and of itself, those districts will require a little more work to educate voters on the decisions they’ll have in front of them. I suspect many of the candidates trying to replace an incumbent who was tied to the administration will work very hard to avoid being tagged with ties to the least popular governor in the United States. But, through public inquiry and engagement, it will be clear who believes in sustainably addressing the fiscal crisis, wisely investing in quality education and research, maintaining our infrastructure, and supporting the historical value of a nonpartisan, independent judiciary. This campaign season is off and running, and there are many problem solvers who will need your active support.

​Following Wednesday’s Sine Die activities at the Capitol on Twitter was a very disturbing experience. It was far from a "Red-Letter Day," unless you include the red ink from May's revenue numbers announced that morning. This urgent and growing problem, in addition to the total lack of responsibility or willingness to address it, is a recipe for disaster given the lack of sound leadership we have at the moment in Topeka. Reinforcing this were veteran legislators bailing at the last minute on re-election bids, several making it clear they wanted no part of the many years, at best, ahead of digging out of this mess. Combining this day of turmoil with the filing deadline for the 2016 election made for an interesting mix of both the challenges and opportunities facing our future.

Look at the financial challenge for a moment. It was bleak going in, and then an additional shortfall of approximately $76 million in May revenue was announced. Add to that the fact that the Supreme Court decision on school finance only addressed the equity side of the suit, which calls for roughly $40 million. This means a much bigger number could come later when the adequacy issue is resolved. This would mean, even after responsible action is required to address the fairness side by leveling the playing field consistent with the constitution, public schools will still be underfunded and require corrective action.

Several key legislators openly expressed total disrespect for the Justices of the Supreme Court and a long-standing interpretation of the state’s responsibility to fund public education. They charged the Justices with “playing politics”—an accusation that frankly seems a little ridiculous after several attempts on their part to inject politics into the, for now, separate and independent third branch of government. For me, all this is a far cry from the decades of responsible legislators from both political parties who worked out their disagreements and, in the end, did their job by appropriately funding public education and supporting the Kansas Constitution. What a difference we have today.

For now, the legislature has adjourned, but they will be back in special session soon at the calling of the Governor. Timing will be tight, for the solution must come in time for the court to act and hopefully clear the way for our schools to open come fall. But even with this done, we’ll likely still have many school districts implementing unprecedented measures to save money, at the expense of quality education for the students. All of this plays out as the August 2nd primary looms, with many key Republican races in both Houses that will have much to say about our state’s progress in righting the ship. For the many who are hoping to see a change of course, it will be the first opportunity to take strides along the road to recovery.

Learning about Governor Brownback’s recent decision to remove Kansas from the program that resettles refugees, I’m again reminded of how most of us do not understand how that program works or the damage we do to our country’s security in the process of not presenting a unified front. Given the recent events around the world, it is understandable that people would be concerned, particularly as it relates to the screening process for the refugees who will enter the United States. This concern is something I understand and accept. But flat out opposition will not only have us break from our traditional approach but will be counterproductive in our effort to fight ISIS.

When we say or do anything that suggests we are anti-Islam, or that we want to ban all Muslims from our country, we feed right into the recruiting strategy of the terrorists. They benefit from any action we take that gives them an opening to reinforce their narrative and justify their tactics to new (and future) recruits. I know, for example, when Governor Jeb Bush was running for President, he tried to choose words that reflect an appropriate approach while not offending his party base. Although, his idea to take in only Christians from Syria not only proved to be hard to explain in any follow-up questions but also sends the wrong message to those we are trying to defeat. Now is the time to engage our Muslim friends and partners, both in our communities and around the world, to help address this mutual threat—rather than further alienate the very people we need as allies in this global struggle.

As we all work to be more understanding of all this, there are a couple of facts we need to keep in mind. One, there is an established screening process in place with successful experience that takes from one to three years to clear any refugee for entrance into the United States. They will not be shortly coming on boats, arriving at our shores, and casually entering our country. Secondly, a large degree of the threat—and some of the most recent attacks—in the United States have come from “homegrown” terrorists. That doesn’t mean this can’t change, but shifting our position on refugees will not only fail to prevent these types of attacks within our borders but will more than likely be counterproductive to the cause at large. However, it would make good sense for the Congress to review our current program for screening refugees seeking asylum, make any sound changes, and most importantly, make sure it is funded to the level needed to do the job correctly.

“What the Hell is Wrong With Kansas” was the title of a joint presentation that Governor Mike Hayden and I made in Wichita on Saturday, at a forum sponsored by Women for Kansas. The effort highlighted some of the serious issues facing our state and, in the process, made the point that the concern wasn’t just coming from one political party. Kansans of all political stripes—​Republican, Democratic, and Independent—​have real policy differences with the Governor and those in the legislature who made his agenda a reality in our state. This is what prompted Governor Hayden—​a conservative—​and myself to speak out together on the desperate need to change directions in Kansas.

In our presentation, we discussed just how much has changed in the political environment in the years since we each left office—​from the decline in civility, to the increased impact of special interest money, and the viciousness and extremism of our politics. Of course there were very strong differences when each of us served in the legislature and the governor’s office. But the fight then was always over how best to serve Kansas, knowing that we had to wisely invest in education, take care of our infrastructure, and provide help to our citizens most in need. Throughout our history, our approach to solving problems has been straightforward: we listened to each other, clarified our differences, and reached compromises that wisely served the people of Kansas.

Fortunately, the proud past I just described isn’t ancient history—in fact, it’s far from it. This August and November, the people of Kansas have an opportunity to restore this common sense approach by electing more problem solvers to the legislature. And that spirit of collaboration and compromise for the common good is alive and well among the many courageous individuals—both citizens and public servants—who are working (or will join the effort) to turn things around. It’s critical that voters understand the importance of being informed on the challenges we face and that they know which candidates would serve their real interests. In order to accomplish this, volunteers and supporters will need to work purposefully every day to make sure that their personal networks—and their neighbors—are ready to vote for a change of course.

The first benchmark day will be August 2nd, where the Primary Election will decide a number of key seats in both the House and Senate. That will be the first opportunity to send a clear message—​around the state and to the nation—​that we’re getting back on track, that the failed tax experiment will be brought to an end, and that the long tradition of sane, forward-thinking policy is on its way back to Kansas.

​In the 2004 Kansas legislative session, the Republican-controlled legislature—​led by Representative Kenny Wilk and Senator Nick Jordan, working with Democratic Governor Kathleen Sebelius and her Secretary of Revenue Joan Wagnon—​created the Kansas Bioscience Authority (KBA). For six years, it enjoyed across-the-board support from the Kansas Legislature, the Bioscience community, and communities and research institutions across the state. Funding came from income tax paid by the existing bioscience companies already employing people and doing business in Kansas.

KBA’s success was based on some really sound thinking that made good sense both for the private sector and the State of Kansas. The vision was to build on the already existing bioscience success in the state through strong public-private partnerships. Common sense indicated that much potential remained. In time, our dependence on agriculture, manufacturing, and the oil and gas sectors would have another partner. The genius of the plan was to take the existing revenue stream and put it into an Authority established by law. The Authority would be governed by appointments from the Governor and Legislative leaders to hire the talent to wisely invest and partner with projects in the best interests of the state. They would be able to work with outside investors, making commitments for periods longer than one fiscal year, and not dependent on annual appropriations from the Legislature—​a key for private sector involvement.   

Successes included providing key leadership and timely resources for Kansas to be awarded with the NBAF selection (National Bio and Agro Defense Facility) now being constructed in Manhattan. NBAF will do the highest level research on zoonotic diseases, the ones that can move from animals to humans. Also, the National Cancer Designation for the the KU Medical Center allows area citizens access to new drugs on trial. KBA resources were key for funding nationally-recognized consultants, hiring nationally respected cancer researchers, buying much needed support equipment, and securing key infrastructure improvements necessary to compete. Both projects required strong leadership from Kansas State University and the University of Kansas, as well as full support from our Congressional Delegation and the Kansas Legislature. These two projects alone will have broad positive impacts on the state of Kansas for decades to come, but it's likely that neither would have happened without the KBA's support and engagement.

The progress in that short six year window led to national recognition for Kansas and its growing bioscience sector and jealousy from surrounding states that didn’t have this engine for economic development.

Then came the election in November 2010 and a new Governor. Although nothing about the KBA was raised during the campaign, within 60 days of this new administration, that all changed. Concerns were raised that we were picking winners and losers (we did invest in proposals with the best potential), that we weren’t distributing the money across the state, and that the administration had evidence of criminal activity within the Authority and demanded a forensic audit.

No evidence of criminal activity was ever brought forward and a year later (and well over a million tax dollars wasted), they had found nothing of substance going back to the very beginning of the Authority. Oh yes, there were the drummed up charges against our CEO with the only findings tied to actions after the audit began.
​
The eventual death has been long and painful in coming. A tragedy for the state to be sure but only possible because enough legislators went along with the Governor’s actions and bought into a growing mentality that ignores the value of research and the need to wisely invest in the economic future of Kansas. For years, our state has been reaping the benefits of these important investments, but now I fear the only impacts we’ll feel will be the sighs of relief coming from the east, as economic developers in Missouri now see an opportunity to compete.

In the “good old days,” it was often said that when the legislature finally adjourned, everyone felt safer. Well, they have adjourned, but I know there are good people all across our state who feel anything but safe as a result of the most recent late-night governing session by the Kansas Legislature. I also know there were many who wanted them to try longer and harder to get the budget more acceptable. Some had hoped, for example, that delaying state transfers to KPERS could be avoided, worrying that the delay would lead to the transfer never taking place—​which, frankly, is a legitimate fear. But, from my experience, if they had failed Sunday night (Monday morning) to get the necessary votes in one house or the other on the budget, the follow-up product would very likely have been worse. Why? Because the leadership would have found ways to get the attention of key legislators who didn’t support what they, the majority leadership, had put together and that would have led to taking away, not adding, to the budget.

They are already letting the Governor finish the cutting and running the risk of their negative balance budget being declared unconstitutional. Included now is punishing research universities with a higher percentage cut than the other Regent institutions. Sure, the dollar cut being larger for our larger institutions might seem to make sense for some. But the specific way it was done, penalizing institutions for bringing federal research dollars to Kansas, boggles any sane person's mind. The lack of understanding for the value of the research itself, much less the economic value of such dollars to the state, is hard to comprehend and certainly hard to defend. Now, as always, there were those who fought against all this, but in the end, the majority ruled—​a majority we have a chance to address in this election year.

In the big picture, one key thing to understand is that there will only be one really good chance to get this done right, and for now, the votes are just not there to do what is best for Kansas. Half measures will not get it done. That is why the defeat of restoring some of the LLC tax cuts on Saturday was fine with me. Getting it right starts now—​with the hard work to achieve the positive results we need in the August primary and then in the November general election.  At that point, there can be some real positive expectations. We should be able to at least stop the digging and the passage of additional acts of ignorance, and who knows, there might be some other areas where positive consensus emerges. But not even then will there be the power to begin the real restoration of Kansas Government. For only in 2018 will we have the opportunity to bring back positive leadership to the second floor of the capitol, and then in January 2019, we have the chance to really start moving in a positive direction. That is a long wait and it’s unfortunate that rolling back all the damage done in the past few years will take so long, but it is the only realistic path we have towards restoring Kansas to its proud past.

For several years now, we’ve had seemingly endless actions from the Capitol that made little or no sense, and despite opposition from many legislators from both sides of the aisle (not to mention hours of testimony from subject matter experts), the actions passed into law. While this trend is likely to continue in some form or fashion throughout the remainder of this legislative session, it has given rise to a new momentum that I hope will be a glimpse into our future as we look towards the final weeks of the session, the August primary, and the 2016 general elections. What I saw leading up to first adjournment was the public raising more hell, and it got the response we needed.

A great example where hell-raising stopped the stampede was the legislation designed to move supervision of the state’s education finances from the Kansas Department of Education to the executive branch under the Office of Administration, a power grab of major proportions. Whether the fact that it’s an election year helped or not, the point is: the public, the press, and the experts spoke loud and clear. And this will be critical in the many important battles to come.

What made this particular example personal for me was the action taken to remove long-time expert on school finance, Dale Dennis, from participation on K-12 funding. Working out of the Department of Education, Dale has been—​for many decades—​the objective idea man and a supporter of constitutionally-solid school finance actions. I’ve known Dale starting with my legislative career in the 70’s and then through eight years as Governor working on school finance. He is clearly one of our all-time great career public servants whose talents have benefited public education in Kansas for many years. Though most Kansans would probably agree that his voice would be a valuable one to have in the conversation, he and other expert voices—​such as the educators and administrators themselves—​are often precisely the ones who are left out (or simply ignored) when considering how the state should proceed on these complex issues. From my point of view, this is where an informed and active citizenry can come into play. If elected officials don’t heed the many credible voices calling for a change of course, it’s up to the people of Kansas to raise the volume and raise the heat on those elected officials.

In order for it to translate to real change, an active response from the grassroots—​the hell raising—​has to be the beginning of a sustained, organized effort to make fundamental change in our Kansas Government. With the entire legislature up for election—​and the voting records clearly identifying those who backed the administration’s plans openly available—​there is no excuse for the 70% plus of Kansans who are upset with the Governor not to throw out his partners in crime. Consistent with our founding and the power of We the People, it will take the support of citizens who are working hard to educate their neighbors and get them out to vote for quality candidates committed to leading us out of the wilderness and “To the Stars through Difficulties.”

The ongoing financial crisis here in Kansas, which has apparently come as a surprise to some, is becoming much more real to others who are directly impacted. Though some are quick to either blame the Revenue Estimators or point to low commodity and livestock market prices and the plunge of oil and gas values to explain how we got into this mess, in reality, these economic factors are tied to cyclical ups and downs that we should have the capacity to weather if we managed well and made good fiscal policy decisions. Instead, one only has to go back a few years to the Governor’s great experiment to blow up what had been for decades a very successful tax policy.

Unfortunately, this experiment was nothing new. Trickle down economics has been tried, and has failed, many times before. So you wonder, if that is the case, then why would we implement something with a failed track record? I, along with many others, am beginning to believe that it was never intended to work—​that the silent objective was to slowly starve state government and use the complaints about government not delivering to cut government even more. There is no discussion from the far right Republican leadership in Topeka about corrective action being on the table. They are getting what I fear they wanted.

The March $17 million cut to public higher education in Kansas was tied directly to the February decline in revenue of about 50 million dollars. We now have less than four months to go in the 2016 fiscal year, meaning with each passing month there is less and less time to make adjustments to end the year in the black. As I mention in a previous blog post, the period after a major tax policy change is typically a challenging time to accurately predict revenue. So (as Duane Goossen of the Kansas Center for Economic Growth accurately points out), rather than blaming the Consensus Revenue Estimators, one must look at the tax policy itself and ask the following questions: What if there are further declines in revenue? What about the next fiscal year? When is the leadership in Topeka going to be honest with the people of Kansas, accept responsibility for making mistakes, and start us on the road back towards sanity?
​
These monthly financial shortfalls will likely continue, forcing more and more cuts to public education. And why do I say that? Financial management of the budget in recent years has ignored the value of following the law and having a reasonable surplus to deal with monthly declines in revenue that happen, even in good times. If the current administration had followed the law on carry-over, there would be no immediate crisis from declining February receipts. We would have budgeted something in the neighborhood of $750 million for such a purpose, and the $50 million decline would not have made headlines—​let alone resulted in the robbing of our state’s future in order to pay for the same old mistakes of the past.

I was scrolling through Twitter midday yesterday, mostly to see if anything was happening of interest with the five Presidential primaries, when I started seeing some interesting tweets from our Capitol in Topeka. President of the Senate, Republican Senator Susan Wagle, was attending the Senate Democratic Caucus, lobbying apparently for their votes to override the Governor on his two recent vetoes dealing with Star Bonds and his plans for demolishing the Docking Office Building. This doesn’t routinely happen, in fact it may be a first, which suggests that it is not just nationally that the Republican Party is showing signs of splitting apart. If the President of the Senate with a huge Republican majority has to come to the eight Democrats for help, something is happening.

But that was just a starter, for a few minutes later I discovered an implosion of both decorum and sanity had occurred in the House. Keep in mind that chamber had already just absorbed the Speaker’s dismissal of three Republican members of the House Health and Human Services Committee, all three health care professionals, for apparently daring to share their intelligence and experience. But then yesterday, on the floor of the House, Republican Representative John Rubin refused to follow the Speaker’s order to move to pull a bill from committee, and the House Rules Chair ruled the concept out of order, leaving the bill in committee and getting both fired from their chairmanships. In response, Rubin announced his resignation from the Legislature effective midnight last night. Rep. Rubin later withdrew that threat, promising to serve out his term, but not without taking time to, rightfully, express his displeasure with Speaker Merrick. It’s not just that the policy decisions being made all too often are not consistent with what the state needs, but such management practices only add to our lack of confidence in the leadership in Topeka.

All of this of course is of high interest to me, not just because I very much want Kansas to get its act together, but also—​having served as Speaker of the House myself—​I have memories of a much more professional and positive operating process. I do understand that our system gives the Speaker huge powers over committee membership, chairs, and the House calendar. Having had that power, I also know the importance of using that power in a responsible way. In addition to never dumping an appointed committee chair, my appointed House Rules Chair was Representative Phil Martin of Larned—​a lawyer who’s still practicing there, very bright, and honorable to the core. I must admit, on occasion, I may not have been 100% thrilled with his ruling, but I never considered doing anything but accepting it and moving on.
​
Apparently, the current leadership is used to an environment where pushing people around—​including their fellow Republicans—​is seen as an acceptable way to do the people’s business. All of this discussion is just another reminder of how important our legislative races are this year and how each and every one of us has a responsibility to do our part to reject these tactics and move Kansas back to common sense and civility.

The caucuses last Saturday in Kansas provided some very interesting results in both parties. The numbers and the enthusiasm were particularly strong, giving a couple of candidates a clear boost not only in delegate numbers but additional national attention that can influence momentum going forward.

In the Republican caucus, what was most interesting was the lack of influence the endorsements coming from prominent Kansas Republican elected officials had on the outcomes. Senator Rubio got almost all and finished third. Although Donald Trump received an endorsement from Secretary of State Kobach, it was Senator Ted Cruz who won the most delegates, with help from probably the best ground game—​which is very important in any and all caucus states.

On the Democratic side, it was a big win for Senator Sanders and a close up look at his capacity to turn out young voters. As a Hillary supporter myself, I came away very impressed and encouraged by Bernie’s ability to bring new energy and attention to the political process. One thing I often share, particularly when I have a chance to reach students here at the university, is how much more they and their generation have at stake in the decisions being made today. More than any other age group in the electorate, they will have to live with the direction we take as a result of this election.

The key going forward will be maintaining the involvement and participation of the young voters and those who may have voted for the first time. If voters truly value Senator Sanders’ message about a progressive “political revolution,” it is important to recognize what this really means. I hope he would be the first to acknowledge that the president can accomplish very little of this agenda on his or her own. Instead, it will take the political will in Congress and in state capitals all over the country to truly bring change on many of these issues. And this will require continued engagement beyond any one candidacy or elected office. Though it largely remains to be seen, my personal hope is that, after this primary season is through, those who are currently “feeling the Bern” will be able to keep the fire going for other candidates who will carry the progressive banner in elections at all levels—​in 2016 and beyond.
​
When the stories are written about this election, I want to read and hear about the significant impact that young voters had on the results. We’ve had far too many stories about their low turnout over the years.

For the Republicans, the Trump freight train has at least been slowed. But the anti-establishment wing of Cruz, Trump, and Carson, together, still dominate. Huckabee is out and I assume Santorum will follow. New Hampshire, historically, has been hard to predict. We'll see how the polls shift after last night. As a side note of probably little value, I would rank the speeches of the top three candidates in reverse order of the caucus results. Rubio was smart to go on early, catching the largest national audience and with a speech that was well-prepared and very well delivered. Trump had the challenge of speaking having lost when all the polls had him winning, but he wisely came on quickly, was for him short, calm, polite, and didn’t hurt himself anymore. Then the weakest, for me, was the winner Cruz, who spoke slowly, without passion, and with little crowd excitement, especially given that he won. I don’t know if that means anything, but just keep that in mind as we go forward.

For the Democrats, it is certainly accurate to say it was close and not surprising that both Clinton and Sanders were claiming victory. Bernie turned out a lot of new young voters, which may be valuable for the Democratic Party in general going forward this year and beyond, regardless how this race finishes. For Clinton, she did much better than eight years ago (which bodes well for her, especially given the high turnout at the caucus), and she was tested and seriously challenged, which certainly won’t hurt her going forward. Having eked out a victory, she avoids the historical fact that losing both Iowa and New Hampshire has usually been difficult to overcome.

So where are we? For the Republicans, it comes down to which lane, the anti or the remaining establishment, can sort more quickly to having just one candidate in the race. Either side continuing to split amongst as many as three candidates, when the other consolidates around one, will probably determine the outcome. For the Democrats, with O’Malley out, it is now one-on-one and a choice between the very well-known, experienced, battle scarred Hillary and the acknowledged socialist Bernie, who has never been a Democrat but who has certainly built a following that will be valuable for the Democratic nominee winning in November. The Democratic base in the first two states are liberal and white. Going south and west will bring a much more diverse electorate and likely different results.