Kansas editorials

By The Associated Press

Here are excerpts from recent editorials in Kansas newspapers:

------

Nov. 21.

The Garden City Telegram on an IRS oversight:

As quickly as the dollars came, some may be disappearing.

That's the unfortunate news for many Americans who now may owe the federal government $250 or more because of how the Internal Revenue Service set up a tax break designed to inject dollars into a crashing economy.

The tax credit, which was supposed to pay individuals up to $400 and couples up to $800, was President Obama's signature tax break in the massive stimulus package enacted earlier this year.

The credit has increased weekly paychecks for 95 percent of working families, giving them cash to help boost consumer spending during the worst economic recession in decades.

But the new tax withholding tables issued by the IRS didn't take into account several common categories of taxpayers. That could force some to repay what the government gave them.

Republicans, naturally, were quick to pounce on the error as an example of the unsavory fallout that occurs when legislation is pushed through without due deliberation.

It's a fair charge. Most anyone on the receiving end of the deal will be miffed to learn they're going to have to give back at least part of the money.

Although we have to wonder: Would those who disagreed with putting those dollars in Americans' hands to stimulate the economy be more understanding about returning some of what they received? Not likely.

When considering the magnitude of the economic meltdown, quick action by Congress under Obama, and President Bush before him, was warranted. Jobs were disappearing and people's life savings were evaporating at an alarming rate.

Moving with urgency made sense, but rushing also can lead to mistakes. And acting too slowly only would have allowed things to spiral more out of control.

Signs show the nation slowly emerging from its economic funk. Still, more patience coupled with a determined, bipartisan effort might have produced even better results for the economy. We'll never know since that didn't happen.

It's high time legislators acknowledge as much, and pledge to cooperate moving forward on solutions that help Americans stay on a path to prosperity. Anything less only makes that goal more elusive.

----

Nov. 22

The Lawrence Journal World on tax priorities:

The Kansas Board of Regents and K-12 school administrators across the state should be steaming at the willingness of Kansas legislators to consider a tax increase to fund a new multiyear transportation plan for the state.

The state has had to cut millions of dollars from higher education and public school funding while legislators flatly refuse to even consider any tax increases or even eliminating some tax exemptions to help bolster those budgets. Now comes a group of legislators who says the state may need to find a way to increase revenue perhaps through higher motor fuels taxes or vehicle registration fees to help fund a new transportation plan, a multiyear plan that could cost the state as much as $10 billion.

Why are legislators willing to consider such an expenditure in the current economic climate?

"This is an investment in our state and our local districts," said Sen. Dwayne Umbarger, R-Thayer, "and with that, there is going to be a cost."

Just for clarification, he is referring to legislative districts, not school districts. It's more important to bring home highways than to adequately fund public schools.

What Umbarger and others seem not to understand is that education also "is an investment in our state." Highway construction creates jobs, but so does education. When the state is trying to fight its way out of the current economic slump, it may need some transportation improvements, but it will certainly need a well-trained work force. If legislators are willing to tack on a tax here or there to fund a transportation plan, it only makes sense for them to apply the same principle to education funding.

Cutting taxes is far more enjoyable than raising them, but it might be argued that legislators went too far in the last 15 years in granting tax exemptions. At a forum at Washburn University last week, Kansas Secretary of Revenue Joan Wagnon estimated that tax exemptions granted by the state since 1995 have cost Kansas $10.9 billion in tax revenue. Before looking at new taxes to pay for highways or anything else, legislators owe it to Kansans to thoroughly review these tax exemptions to see if they still make sense and are fairly distributed.

If Kansas legislators decide to keep all of the exemptions, their options for funding any new projects will be extremely limited, but they need to understand that a strong K-12 and higher education system is every bit as important to the long-term economic health of Kansas as new and improved highways.

We have nothing against highways, but if legislators can find the revenue for a new transportation plan, they certainly should be able to find the money to adequately fund education.

----

Nov. 22

The Topeka Capital-Journal on Gov. Parkinson:

In light of the recent announcement that retired pharmaceutical executive Tom Wiggans would run for governor as a Democrat, it now seems all but certain that Gov. Mark Parkinson will stick to his pledge not to seek the office.

With all due respect to Wiggans, that's too bad.

Once again, Parkinson has done something to suggest he's worthy of a four-year term.

This time, Parkinson said the threat of a lawsuit over funding for K-12 public education wouldn't influence how he'd contend with the state's crippling budget shortfall.

Good for him.

The threat is an outrage at a time when the state is making cuts across the board, not just to public schools.

Parkinson, to his credit, recently asked recipients of state funds for patience and understanding as he and other lawmakers go about the agonizing task of cutting the budget to deal with a revenue shortfall in excess of $250 million.

But Schools For Fair Funding, a group of 30 public school districts and counting, apparently isn't listening.

SFFF claims a lack of funding for schools is leaving the state short of meeting its constitutional requirement to provide students with a "suitable" education.

It's the same contention the group made in a 1999 lawsuit, which ended earlier this decade with the Kansas Supreme Court ordering lawmakers to approve more funding for public schools. In response, lawmakers approved a plan to phase in nearly $1 billion in additional funding.

Now, as the state deals with declining revenue, schools have lost $130 million this year.

Of course, many other programs have faced cutbacks, too, as the economic downturn ravaged Kansas taxpayers.

But SFFF still isn't backing off of its threat to take the state to court. The group will not acknowledge that, as the president of one local school board put it, suing the state right now is like trying to squeeze blood out of a turnip.

Fortunately for Kansans, Parkinson has refused to be bullied.

It is unfortunate that schools are having to make do with less. But the same goes for other state-funded entities and programs, and Parkinson appears to understand that it also goes for taxpayers. Let's not forget that many have been forced to take pay cuts or unpaid furloughs. Far too many more have lost their jobs.

Lawmakers face enough difficulty in dealing with the budget without SFFF's threat. By not bowing to pressure from the group, Parkinson has shown a commitment to cutting across the board and not making concessions in any one area.

His leadership on the matter has been evenhanded, much like when he broke the stalemate earlier this year on the Sunflower power plant expansion project.

Parkinson has only been in office since last spring, but he continues to create a memorable legacy.

----

Nov. 20

The Hays Daily News on the race for Sen. Brownback's seat:

The race for Sen. Sam Brownback's soon-to-be-vacated seat in Congress is, well, a long way away.

With a primary in August, congressmen Jerry Moran and Todd Tiahrt are vying for the six-year promotion to the Senate and all the perks and esteem that come with sitting in America's version of the House of Lords.

It's no surprise that campaigning is hot and heavy already. There's no viable Democratic candidate for the November general election, and the primary promises to be a costly affair for both Moran and Tiahrt.

What's surprising is how ugly the campaigning has been to this point -- nearly 10 months before the first ballot is cast.

Case in point: Did you know Jerry Moran was a communist? No?

We weren't aware of it, either, until a Kansans for Tiahrt release pointed out that Moran, a Hays resident and Plainville native, has been endorsed by the Communist Party USA. Sort of.

It's not like politicians to tout the endorsements of their opponents, unless there's an ulterior motive.

The intention of the Tiahrt camp is clear: Paint Moran as "not conservative enough," feeding on the socialism/communism paranoia that's running rampant since Barack Obama took the reins.

Tiahrt's camp conveniently lists his own endorsements: stalwart conservatives Bill Bennett, Rick Santorum and John Ashcroft, the Family Research Council, Kansans for Life, and Phyllis Schlafly of Eagle Forum. Nothing pink about that bunch.

We would like to remind those running Rep. Tiahrt's campaign that voters in northwest Kansas are not amused by the McCarthy-esque red-baiting.

By the way, in case facts matter, the Communist Party USA has not endorsed Moran. It simply offered thanks to a handful of Republican members of Congress who co-sponsored a bill lifting the travel ban to Cuba. The wisdom of that decision can be debated, but the false connection between Moran and American communists is a non-issue -- despite the Tiahrt camp's wink-wink, nod-nod, say-no-more insinuation.

How are we ever to expect bipartisan -- or, gasp, nonpartisan -- politics to rule the day in this nation if candidates in the same party play so dirty?

Of course, the most poignant part of the Tiahrt announcement is the method it was delivered to this newspaper.

The liberal machine Media Matters distributed the carefully worded message on its listserv.

Ten months away from ballots being cast, and already this race has become like so many others: A pitiful attempt to spread half-truths in a further attempt to earn fundraising cash from those who fear, well, everything.

Kansas voters deserve more than condescension of this sort.

----

Nov. 20

The Hutchinson News on legislating against a new form of synthetic marijuana:

A new form of synthetic marijuana has hit the market, and even before the legislative session has begun, there is talk that state lawmakers will move to ban the substance, known as K2, and attach criminal penalties similar to other controlled drugs.

The intent for such laws is good -- to protect children from exposure to the substance and restrict its use among the adult population.

The truth, however, is that such legislation will just add to an already bulky list of controlled substances that law enforcement officials are impossibly expected to enforce.

And about as soon as the ink dries on legislation to make K2 a controlled substance, another unregulated variation of some drug will enter the marketplace, until lawmakers can move to ban it, too.

Already, K2 is controlled in the youth population, since any form of drug -- legal or not -- is considered contraband at public schools. Even the legal forms of cough medicines, such as Nyquil or Coricidin, are considered controlled substances at schools.

People with an insatiable desire to alter their minds will always work to find new substances with which to carry out their goals. Some will commit crimes to feed their addictions and some, through their irresponsible behavior and substance abuse, will pose a risk to the population at large. That is where our efforts ought to be concentrated instead of spending time and energy on those who want to smoke an herbal concoction to find some sort of temporary high.

Furthermore, resources are better spent trying to teach kids about the dangers of addiction and the ill effects of frittering away an otherwise productive life on drug use.

Banning any potentially mind-altering substance is certain to be a never-ending process. But teaching kids throughout their lives about the dangers of drugs and removing the most dangerous drug users and dealers from the streets is a strategy that would prove successful.

----

Nov. 18

The Wichita Eagle on fearmongering and health care reform:

In the absence of formal legislation on health care for much of the year, members of Congress and others could itemize grievances about the reform effort freely, without regard to any facts.

The House vote earlier this month finally gave reform a working framework not only for the purposes of Senate consideration but also public debate.

Yet critics, including Republicans in Kansas' congressional delegation, continue to claim things about the legislation that are contradicted by independent sources such as the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

For example, Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., fretted in Lawrence last week about "rationing of Medicare" and the endangering of the rural health care delivery system (though Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius recently said "the biggest winners of health care reform will be rural Americans").

Rep. Jerry Moran, R-Hays, has contended that the bill will "diminish health care for Kansans," as it "explodes the deficit," "eliminates jobs with an employer mandate, and enables bureaucrats to define what form of health coverage is acceptable for Americans."

Rep. Todd Tiahrt, R-Goddard, has said the bill would push people into a public-funded option and eliminate "5.5 million American jobs." At the Capitol rally on Nov. 5, he suggested it would "take away your freedom to choose your doctor," decide "how much you're going to pay for your insurance, where you can get your health care."

There are problems with such statements when measured against analyses by nonpartisan Web sites:

--Rather than constitute a government takeover of health care, the "public option" could cover just 6 million Americans by 2019, and at premiums "somewhat higher" than the average private plan (FactCheck.org).

--According to the CBO, "the plan is in the black through 2014, dips briefly into the red in 2015 and 2016, and then pays for itself again in 2017, 2018 and 2019. Over 10 years, the bill reduces the deficit by $104 billion" (PolitiFact.com).

--The proposed cuts to Medicare Advantage would affect only the enhanced (and publicly subsidized) benefits now enjoyed by 22 percent of those on Medicare. "Under no circumstances would any senior receive less in benefits than the other 78 percent of the Medicare population" (FactCheck.org).

--The new Center for Comparative Effectiveness Research would not mandate coverage or tell insurers what they must or must not cover. The House bill outlines basic coverage and creates a new committee to recommend the coverage specifics, but it's false to say the committee would dictate the plans to be purchased (PolitiFact.com).

--"The truth is the House legislation would likely have a 'small' effect on jobs, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office" (FactCheck.org).

The Kansans in Congress have some well-founded concerns, including whether the proposed reform actually will lower health care costs. But going forward and especially with many of the decreasing numbers of Kansans who still have health insurance facing 2010 premium hikes it would be nice if the state's well-insured lawmakers would go easy on the hyperbole and focus their criticism of the health reform on the facts.