Post by Merceditas on Jul 3, 2005 16:38:36 GMT -8
I'd appreciate some feedback on this case, for those of you interested. I'll supply some links and quotes in case you're not familiar with what's been going on in Kansas for the past few years......even longer, I think 10 if we go back to the original court interference with public school funds. LINK
TOPEKA, Kan. - The special legislative session to answer a Kansas Supreme Court mandate to provide more money for schools has been more about posturing than performing.
From the start, legislators, especially conservative Republicans, were hopping mad because the court ordered them to come up with an extra $143 million for public schools and gave them until July 1 to do it.
After 11 days, the House threw up its hands and went home until Wednesday, hoping a Fourth of July holiday would give members a chance to recharge their batteries. The Senate had no choice but to follow suit.
In their 11 days, many lawmakers spent their time - and more than $394,000 in taxpayers dollars - complaining about the judiciary encroaching on the Legislature's turf to appropriate money, rather than appropriating the money.
Separation of powers became the rallying cry, and calls to defy the court rang throughout the Statehouse. But dueling with the Supreme Court seemed a little like going to a gunfight with a knife.
Justices pulled a big gun Saturday, when they announced a hearing next Friday to consider arguments as to why the court shouldn't pull the plug on school funding, keeping schools closed.
The meltdown started in the House, where GOP leaders decided no additional school money would be appropriated without passage of proposed constitutional amendment to cut into the court's power. But there aren't enough Republicans to provide the required two-thirds majority and Democrats weren't budging.
The proposed amendment passed the Senate, which has more than enough Republicans to carry the day.
Faced with the prospect of the proposed amendment dying in the House, GOP leaders declared any school funding bill must have language voiding it if a proposed amendment didn't make it to the statewide ballot.
For many, concern about the court going too far was genuine.
But others saw the issue as a smokescreen to mask an unwillingness to face a constitutional duty to provide a suitable education for every child.
"It means they can campaign on separation of powers while not appearing to be anti-education. If they went out to campaign on not needing to provide a suitable education, that might be hard to sell," said Bill Rich, Washburn University Law School professor.
Bob Beatty, a Washburn political science professor, said the outcry against the court was loudest in the House because many members win election in Republican primaries "where there will be more conservatives angry at the courts."
But he questioned how well the issue might play statewide.
"It's dicey, because it comes across as not taking something seriously. Writing a constitutional amendment in two or three days - most Kansans see it as ludicrous to be dealing with this when they are supposed to be dealing with a financial issue," Beatty said.
The Senate had its share of setbacks. Conservative senators blocked passage of an expanded gambling bill that would have provided quick cash. Proposals to cut the state budget and increase sales and income taxes also died. But senators say at least they tried.
And their chamber did pass both the proposed amendment reining in the justices and two school finance plans.
All went down in the House, which had little to show for its 11 days except for one school finance plan falling short of the court's mark and a lot of tired, cranky members.
"It makes the state look really bad, because they aren't representing the entire state and this is a special session where the state's business needs to be done," Beatty said. "Special sessions aren't called to deal with philosophical issues. They are called to get something done and get out of there."
From the start, legislators, especially conservative Republicans, were hopping mad because the court ordered them to come up with an extra $143 million for public schools and gave them until July 1 to do it.
After 11 days, the House threw up its hands and went home until Wednesday, hoping a Fourth of July holiday would give members a chance to recharge their batteries. The Senate had no choice but to follow suit.
In their 11 days, many lawmakers spent their time - and more than $394,000 in taxpayers dollars - complaining about the judiciary encroaching on the Legislature's turf to appropriate money, rather than appropriating the money.
Separation of powers became the rallying cry, and calls to defy the court rang throughout the Statehouse. But dueling with the Supreme Court seemed a little like going to a gunfight with a knife.
Justices pulled a big gun Saturday, when they announced a hearing next Friday to consider arguments as to why the court shouldn't pull the plug on school funding, keeping schools closed.
The meltdown started in the House, where GOP leaders decided no additional school money would be appropriated without passage of proposed constitutional amendment to cut into the court's power. But there aren't enough Republicans to provide the required two-thirds majority and Democrats weren't budging.
The proposed amendment passed the Senate, which has more than enough Republicans to carry the day.
Faced with the prospect of the proposed amendment dying in the House, GOP leaders declared any school funding bill must have language voiding it if a proposed amendment didn't make it to the statewide ballot.
For many, concern about the court going too far was genuine.
But others saw the issue as a smokescreen to mask an unwillingness to face a constitutional duty to provide a suitable education for every child.
"It means they can campaign on separation of powers while not appearing to be anti-education. If they went out to campaign on not needing to provide a suitable education, that might be hard to sell," said Bill Rich, Washburn University Law School professor.
Bob Beatty, a Washburn political science professor, said the outcry against the court was loudest in the House because many members win election in Republican primaries "where there will be more conservatives angry at the courts."
But he questioned how well the issue might play statewide.
"It's dicey, because it comes across as not taking something seriously. Writing a constitutional amendment in two or three days - most Kansans see it as ludicrous to be dealing with this when they are supposed to be dealing with a financial issue," Beatty said.
The Senate had its share of setbacks. Conservative senators blocked passage of an expanded gambling bill that would have provided quick cash. Proposals to cut the state budget and increase sales and income taxes also died. But senators say at least they tried.
And their chamber did pass both the proposed amendment reining in the justices and two school finance plans.
All went down in the House, which had little to show for its 11 days except for one school finance plan falling short of the court's mark and a lot of tired, cranky members.
"It makes the state look really bad, because they aren't representing the entire state and this is a special session where the state's business needs to be done," Beatty said. "Special sessions aren't called to deal with philosophical issues. They are called to get something done and get out of there."
LINK
TOPEKA, KANSAS -- The Kansas Supreme Court said Saturday that it will consider keeping schools closed because state legislators have failed to comply with the court's demand that they spend more money on public schools.
Students are on summer break in Kansas and are not scheduled to return until August. If the Legislature does not resolve the funding issue, the court could keep 445,000 students and 64,000 teachers and staff out when the new school year starts.
Saturday marked the 11th day of a legislative special session called by Gov. Kathleen Sebelius to try to answer the court's demand to provide an additional $143 million in spending. Lawmakers worked through the day but adjourned for the holiday weekend without a solution
Students are on summer break in Kansas and are not scheduled to return until August. If the Legislature does not resolve the funding issue, the court could keep 445,000 students and 64,000 teachers and staff out when the new school year starts.
Saturday marked the 11th day of a legislative special session called by Gov. Kathleen Sebelius to try to answer the court's demand to provide an additional $143 million in spending. Lawmakers worked through the day but adjourned for the holiday weekend without a solution
LINK
KU law prof helping legislators on constitutional issues
By Scott Rothschild (Contact)
Friday, July 1, 2005
TOPEKA — Kansas University law professor Richard Levy trolled the Statehouse today to provide assistance to lawmakers trying to figure out whether the State Constitution needed to be changed because of the recent school finance court order.
“I’m willing to talk to anybody,” Levy said after being invited to the House Democratic caucus.
On June 3, the Kansas Supreme Court ruled the school finance system unconstitutionally inadequate and ordered the Legislature to increase school funding by $143 million.
After 10 days of a special legislative session, lawmakers fought over the issue with a number of Republicans wanting to adopt a proposed constitutional amendment that would prevent the court from ordering lawmakers to appropiate funds.
Conservatives, including House Speaker Doug Mays, R-Topeka, have said the judicial decision represents an unprecedented power grab by the court.
To change the Kansas Constitution, a measure must receive two-thirds majorities in both the House and Senate, and then a majority of Kansas voters in a statewide election.
Levy said his goal is to provide neutral advice to lawmakers on the issue.
He said the Kansas Constitution gives the Legislature the authority to appropriate funds, but added that he doesn’t believe the state Supreme Court has violated that authority.
“My feeling is we have not gotten to the point where the Supreme Court has harmed the power of the Legislature to appropriate funds,” Levy said.
He said he doesn’t believe the court will try to appropriate funds if it rules the Legislature has failed to comply with its order. “They’d have to find some other kind of remedy to enforce their order,” he said.
By Scott Rothschild (Contact)
Friday, July 1, 2005
TOPEKA — Kansas University law professor Richard Levy trolled the Statehouse today to provide assistance to lawmakers trying to figure out whether the State Constitution needed to be changed because of the recent school finance court order.
“I’m willing to talk to anybody,” Levy said after being invited to the House Democratic caucus.
On June 3, the Kansas Supreme Court ruled the school finance system unconstitutionally inadequate and ordered the Legislature to increase school funding by $143 million.
After 10 days of a special legislative session, lawmakers fought over the issue with a number of Republicans wanting to adopt a proposed constitutional amendment that would prevent the court from ordering lawmakers to appropiate funds.
Conservatives, including House Speaker Doug Mays, R-Topeka, have said the judicial decision represents an unprecedented power grab by the court.
To change the Kansas Constitution, a measure must receive two-thirds majorities in both the House and Senate, and then a majority of Kansas voters in a statewide election.
Levy said his goal is to provide neutral advice to lawmakers on the issue.
He said the Kansas Constitution gives the Legislature the authority to appropriate funds, but added that he doesn’t believe the state Supreme Court has violated that authority.
“My feeling is we have not gotten to the point where the Supreme Court has harmed the power of the Legislature to appropriate funds,” Levy said.
He said he doesn’t believe the court will try to appropriate funds if it rules the Legislature has failed to comply with its order. “They’d have to find some other kind of remedy to enforce their order,” he said.
