Rep. Pattersons Newsletter, March 9, 2004

Rep. Doug Patterson’s

You will recall that in past newsletters, I have advised you that my goal is to see to it that our party, and thereafter the legislature, will present an education package containing more funding for education than has ever been provided in any one year since the current school finance formula was adopted in 1992/1993. I believe that will still occur, while, at the same time (in keeping with my theme) "Keeping Our Tax Dollars in Our Schools" as much as possible.

This has been a difficult goal. In my Newsletters of February 5, 2004 and February 19, 2004: http://www.dougpatterson.org/newsletter/, I advised you that a very liberal and extreme left wing radical militant organization called Kansas Families United for Public Education (KFUPE) is doing everything they can to try to adopt the Governor’s Education tax plan.

You know KFUPE. They wear those T shirts and post those signs reading:"Support Candidates who Support Education". They send us threats, i.e., "WARNING"’s of what we as legislators must do to make them happy. Well, they do not support our schools in our local initiatives to assure us that Johnson County schools are as good as we can make them. In fact local initiatives are at the end of KFUPE’s priority, if there at all. In a newsletter recently, the cry of KFUPE was put this way:

"It takes a village to raise a child."

Sound familiar, as in Hilliary Clinton. No thanks KFUPE! It takes the citizens and parents of Blue Valley and Shawnee Mission School Districts to work together to support and fund our teachers adequately. Forget the Village.

The Kansas Association of School Boards (KASB) and the Kansas National Education Association (KNEA) take a similar approach, although I am pleased to tell you that while our local Blue Valley and Shawnee Mission School Boards maintain memberships and leadership roles in KASB, they do not embrace the attitudes of KASB which oppose local initiatives, such as the Local Option Budget, our 1/4 cent sales tax for education, etc.

The Governor and KFUPE wanted to raise property, sales and income taxes over the next five years. If implemented, the plan would have required sales tax to be increased from 5.3% to 5.7%, the property tax mill levy would have been increased 10%, and income tax would have been increased by 5%. Such massive tax increases would have taken $462.8 million away from Kansans each year after the plan was totally in place. In total, it would have generated $1.7 billion in total new revenue over the next five years. Of the $1.7 billion, only $1.303 billion would have been spent on education all over the state pursuant to a school finance formula a judge has declared as unconsitiutional because there is no rational basis upon which to justify certian ways taxes are distributed. The remaining $400 million was not used to balance the Governor’s budget.

This is the plan which will not yield our local schools in Johnson County a commensurate sum of money in return for the huge tax increase we will incur. Conservative estimates establish that for every $6.00 we would send to Topeka under the KFUPE tax increase (by far the largest tax increase ever imposed in Kansas) we would receive under $1.00 back. In addition, our ability to raise local money to stay in our schools would not be a priority, if allowed at all.

About three weeks ago, the Senate killed the KFUPE and Governor’s tax plan by a vote of 14 v. 25. An overwhelming number of our Johnson County senators, especially those who lead the Senate in education finance matters, voted against it. Then, less than two weeks ago, members of the House offered an amendment which would have represented the beginnings of the KFUPE TAX PLAN. I proudly supported a measure which ceased debate on that amendment. You no doubt read attacks on those of us in the legislature who thwarted this attempt by KFUPE.

As a conservative Republican, I sincerely believe in the warning in the statement: "Before Government can give it’s people all that they want, Government must take away from them all that they have"...that unless we are careful, all that Johnson County has to be proud of in our schools and all that we must fight for to raise more money for our local schools will be lost to Topeka and we will receive back much much less. That is exactly what KFUPE stands for. It’s all about sending your tax dollars to Topeka and keeping none of it here at home for our local schools.

Then, just today, March 9, 2004, another attempt at the Governor’s tax plan was run with a Local Option Budget which would have phased in a 5% increase in the LOB over 5 years, i.e., only 1% per year. That is absolutely ridiculous! The attempt was to "Make" Johnson County legislators vote for the Governor’s tax plan by throwing a 1% per year raise in the LOB. THAT IS SIMPLY NOT ENOUGH. Johnson County deserves more and if we hold out for more, we will get it! And why pass the Governor’s tax plan when everyone knows that it is D.O.A. in the Senate. The amendment passed a debate vote and it may pass final action tomorrow. I will oppose this, but will keep working with others on a plan to continue seeking funding for Kansas overall but not losing sight of our right to fund our local schools. One size does not fit all. Detractors will continue to oppose us and claim that we are not supportive of education, but with the above in mind, you now know what KASB, KNEA and KFUPE are up to.

When a lower court judge, Judge Bullock, from Topeka found the state school finance plan unconstitutional, he would not allow the suit to be appealed until after he made a final order on July 1, 2004. Although the House will look for ways to better improve the school finance system, legislators are eager to hear the Kansas Supreme Court’s opinion before completely rewriting the finance formula.

The court would have to address two issues. The first issue before the court will be whether the school finance system is responsible for unfairly distributing money to school districts in such a way it causes a difference in how minority and at-risk students compare to others. The second issue will be whether the state is funding the school system at such a low level that teachers cannot provide a suitable education for our children.

In order to expedite the appeal process, Senate Bill 324 was passed out of the House on Tuesday. This measure was approved by the Senate earlier this session by a 40 to 0 vote. If it is signed by the Governor, it would essentially require the Kansas Supreme Court to hear the state’s school finance appeal as soon as possible, instead of waiting on the judge to enter his final order.

Alternative Education Plan - The Rooney Plan

An alternative finance plan, commonly referred to as the Rooney Plan, was passed out of the House Education Committee on Tuesday. This alternative was drafted in order to address some of the inadequacies in the current school finance formula a lower court Shawnee County Judge took issue with when he found the current formula unconstitutional. It is called the "Rooney Plan" for the author, Tim Rooney, the finance director of Shawnee Mission School District. Tim is by far the leading expert on school finance throughout the state.

Instead of having a complicated formula that has different weighting factors to help districts offset costs, the Rooney Plan attempts to simplify school finance by assessing local property taxes that fund schools. However, some legislators reject the idea of changing the formula because they want the constitutionality of the current finance formula to be ruled on by the Kansas Supreme Court. If this plan was enacted, it would make the current lawsuit moot, so it could not be heard. I find the Rooney Plan, by far, the best school finance plan on the table. This is the first time in years that a completely new alternative school finance plan has been seriously suggested. PLUS it maintains the ability local school districts to raise local funds to stay in the districts while addressing school finance throughout the state. The Rooney plan may be too much to be adopted this year. If so, it is my goal, as above described, to get more funding for education this year, then has ever been done in the past ten years and get the Rooney Plan passed next year. But just watch, the folks in KFUPE will attack the Rooney Plan too. Watch out Tim!

Tim has been briefing legislators during nightly meetings and we will debate the Rooney Plan on Thursday, March 11, 2004. I hope it passes the House, but do not be disappointed if it does not. Such comprehensive legislation often takes more than a year to get through the legislature. If we don’t get a comprehensive finance plan overall done this year, we will at least start this year what I hope to complete next year.

SAME SEX MARRIAGE AMENDMENT

On March 4, 2004 we debated a constitutional amendment which would provide that Kansas need recognize only the marriage of a man and a woman. This is important, not just from the conventional marriage point of view and the values we hold important, but the financial and legal transactional impact of Kansas being required to honor same-sex marriages form this sate and other states would be horrendous I supported this amendment and on March 5, 2005 the amendment passed by the required 2/3rds vote. If the Senate likewise approves the amendment by a 2/3rds vote, you will see it on the November ballot this year.

On March 3, 2004 we debated HB 2798, the concealed Carry of Firearms bill. I opposed this bill. On March 4, 2004 HB 2798 passed the House on a vote of 78 v. 45. True, it passed the House and may pass the Senate, but even if it does, the Governor has said she will veto HB 2798. It will take 83 voted in the House to override that veto. So if all those opposing HB 2798 hold to our commitment against concealed carry of firearms, the veto will not be overruled, but rather will be sustained and we will not have concealed carry of firearms in Kansas. I received many calls, e-mails and letters against this bill. Thank you for addressing your concerns for this very dangerous measure.

Compromise is going to be the name of the game concerning any transportation plan that will be passed in the 2004 legislative session. Due to the state’s budget deficit over the last couple of years, funds originally earmarked for the 1999 transportation plan were diverted to pay for regular budgetary items. Now that the time is coming near to the anticipated start of many highway projects throughout the state, many of the state’s leaders want to ensure the construction projects are completed. However, how exactly to fund the transportation budget is not in agreement.

The $12 billion 1999 Comprehensive Transportation Plan was funded by issuing a large amount of bonds and by earmarking other tax revenue for highways. Governor Sebelius has proposed a plan that would issue an additional $465 million in new bond money for the highway fund. This plan has been met with strong criticism from both sides of the aisle. Most legislators are concerned that if we bond more money out, the debt service on the bonds would exceed the annual cost of paying for road maintenance. They also believe that acquiring additional bond money is nothing more than continued deficit spending that creates too much debt for the state and negatively affects the states credit rating.

Chairman of the House Transportation Committee Gary Hayzlett has offered an alternative plan that would not call for the issuing of further bond indebtedness. His plan would incrementally add an additional 20% of the sales tax revenue generated from the sale of new and used vehicles to the highway plan each year. After five years, all of the vehicle sales tax would be allocated to highways. Some have criticized this plan because they do not believe it is feasible to direct that much money from the general fund to highways.

Also at issue will be approximately $180 million in highway funds the state is anticipating from the federal government. That money will have to be spent on either maintenance or new highway projects. However, it could also be used to pay off the debts on existing bonds.

At any rate, what will most likely end up happening will be a compromise between the two because both sides seem to be dedicated to passing a plan that keeps the state’s word by adequately funding highway projects.

The media has been claiming that Governor Sebelius is on U.S. Senator John Kerry’s short list for potential vice-presidential running mates. John Kerry is the Democratic presidential frontrunner. This attention is not limited to the local news agencies. She has gained national attention from a New York Times and a Des Moines Register article.

According to the press, Governor Sebelius has several characteristics that make her a viable vice-presidential nominee. One, she would be viewed as an outsider. As a state governor, she does not have the strong ties to Washington that most other Democratic hopefuls possess. Two, her gender would make her appealable to the ever sought after women vote. Three, she is a Democrat that has won three statewide elections in a very Republican state.

Governor Sebelius also has close ties to John Kerry and his campaign. Governor Sebelius and Jill Docking, former U.S. senatorial candidate, are good friends. Ms. Docking, who like Kerry is from Massachusetts, is also a close friend to John Kerry. In fact, Ms. Docking was a very big supporter of Michael Dukakis when he ran for president against then Vice-President George Bush in 1988. At the time, Dukakis was the Governor of Massachusetts. His Lieutenant Governor was none other than John Kerry. Additionally, Governor Sebelius’ son, Ned, works on the Kerry campaign.

Further fueling speculation that Governor Sebelius has an eye on a run for the White House are her recent comments criticizing President Bush. In her latest newsletter, she talked down the President on a federal transportation issue. Political experts believe these comments are designed to give her more national exposure to better her chances of becoming Vice President.

House Bill 2731 passed the House on Wednesday by a vote of 122 to 2. This legislation will make it possible for hunters to donate $2 or more to Kansas Farmers and Hunters Feeding the Hungry when they purchase a hunting license. A Feed the Hungry Fund would be established in the state treasury. Money collected in this fund will be disbursed quarterly to Kansas Farmers and Hunters Feeding the Hungry to support its various programs.

There are approximately 120,000 licenses sold a year. If this legislation is passed, this program could raise a substantial amount of funds to feed hungry Kansans. Many hunters have expressed their willingness to volunteer money to the fund if they had the opportunity to do so.

The Kansas Supreme Court ruled in State v. McAdam that because of an ambiguity in the law, somebody that illegally makes methamphetamine in a clandestine lab, under some circumstances, would actually be convicted of a lesser crime than Manufacturing of Methamphetamine. In order to correct the court’s misinterpretation of Kansas statute, the House approved House Bill 2777 by a unanimous vote.

This bill would effectively overturn the court’s decision in McAdams as well as create a provision that would make the amendment in the statute retroactive. Now that it has been passed by the House, the Senate will have the opportunity to address the issue.

The Kansas Economic Development Act (KEGA) has been debated in committees in the House and the Senate. This week, the House passed a section of KEGA that would create a Kansas Bioscience Authority, which would oversee the growth of Kansas’ bioscience infrastructure by attracting new bioscience ventures and expanding upon existing industry.

The only real controversy about the bill was an amendment in committee that prohibited any funds received from KEGA to be used to facilitate stem-cell research. Stem-cells are taken from aborted babies and used to research different experiments, most of which are focused on certain neurological diseases such as Parkinson’s or Alzheimer’s.

Now that the bioscience portion of KEGA has passed the House, the Senate will have the opportunity to review the legislation and vote on it. Likewise, the House will have the opportunity to review the Entrepreneurial Initiative portion of KEGA that the Senate has been holding hearings on. The Entrepreneurial Initiative establishes the Center for Entrepreneurship, which would provide grants to local and regional community economic development agencies who would then disperse funds to individuals trying to create new businesses.

As I have done in the past, I maintain a record on bills we consider and my voting record on those bills as well as substantive amendments. For this year’s voting record, click:

http://www.dougpatterson.org/newsletter/2004/2004session.html

I am proud to maintain a 100% voting record on all final action votes for the last 3 ½ years. Check out: http://www.dougpatterson.org/newsletter/ for past years voting records.

******************************************************************************

As I have done in the past, I hope to get you a report on a regular basis. Please e-mail me (at Patter@ink.org) or call at 785-296-7604 if you have questions.

ALSO, if you have others who you believe would find these legislative reports of use, Please e-mail me their e-mail addresses and I will add them to my e-mail address book.

Respectfully,

Rep, Doug Patterson

| Home  | Biography  | Legislature  | Newsletter  | Media  | Register  | Links  | Contact |

Paid for by the Committee to Elect Doug Patterson, Dave Imhoff, Treasurer