What's the Matter With Kansas?

Angry, defiant legislators say justices' school ruling went too far
By Chris Moon
The Capital-Journal

How serious are they?
Better yet, how many of them are there?
Those questions are being asked about Republicans who continue to talk in dire tones about responding to a unanimous Kansas Supreme Court ruling that ordered the Legislature to add $285 million to public schools.
One defiant lawmaker says the Legislature should ignore the justices and force the issue into the federal court system. Another suggested legislators boycott the upcoming special session.
Either option likely would force the Supreme Court to use some powerful tools at its disposal -- including shutting down the state school system until lawmakers bolster spending.
But some angry legislators are undaunted.
"I believe the Legislature's duty is to disregard this unconstitutional and unpermissive order of the court," said Rep. Eric Carter, R-Overland Park, a lawyer. "Either way, we are in a full-fledged constitutional crisis."
But others say there is more bluster than substance to those proposals.
"Legislators love to be interviewed by the press and love to have these kinds of dramatic things going on," said Rep. Marti Crow, D-Leavenworth. "But judges don't."
Also a lawyer, Crow was one of the leading critics of a plan passed by the 2005 Legislature that would add $142 million to public schools.
The Kansas Supreme Court on Friday said the measure wasn't enough to make the school finance system constitutional. Justices ordered lawmakers to double it -- to $285 million -- by July 1.
Gov. Kathleen Sebelius will convene a special session of the Legislature on June 22 to respond to the court order. Some legislative committees will return early, starting June 16.
But the dissenters, mostly conservative Republicans who supported the original plan, aren't ready to raise taxes, cut budgets or expand gambling just because the court told them to do so. They say the justices went beyond their authority to tell lawmakers how to do their job -- right down to the last dollar. The job of the courts, they say, is to judge the constitutionality of laws, not dictate precisely how to fix them.
Some of those lawmakers were gathering for a meeting Tuesday night in Wichita.
"We're just trying to look at all the options," said Rep. Brenda Landwehr, R-Wichita, who called the meeting. She wasn't sure how many would attend.
But saying the ruling represented a breach in the idea of separation of powers, Carter said Tuesday that lawmakers should pass nothing during the special session. He said the ruling showed the "nonelected judiciary's willingness to usurp the will of the people."
Carter said public school spending is a legislative question similar to how much the state should spend on roads or prisons.
But if the Legislature follows Carter's advice and ignores the court, justices could place a stop on education spending, which essentially would close schools. Carter said the attorney general's office then could sue in federal court, alleging the state courts were violating federal laws guaranteeing a free public education.
"If the judiciary sits on its high horse and says we're not going to educate these kids this year because we're a bunch of bullies, they will quickly find themselves embarrassed at the hands of a federal judge," Carter said.
Meanwhile, Rep. Frank Miller, R-Independence, distributed an e-mail to legislators offering a string of ideas about how to respond to the court.
Among them, he said lawmakers simply could boycott the special session. Or they could launch impeachment proceedings against the state's six Supreme Court justices.
"We need to put a stop into the activist agenda of our courts," he wrote.
Miller admits some of those ideas won't fly.
"They're more on the order of Rush Limbaugh humor," he said.
But he said he is serious about not moving just because the court said so.
"I don't know what they could do to us," he said, "throw us in jail or what?"
Miller said the only way he would support increasing school spending was if the Legislature offers $5,000-per-year vouchers to allow parents to send their children to private schools -- an idea often ridiculed by the education lobby.
Vouchers, Miller said, would inject competition into the education system to force public schools to be more accountable with their money.
"The schools very much need reform," he said. "I'm talking about major, major reform."
But others, even though forcefully opposed to the Supreme Court's action, are advocating a more measured approach.
It would be difficult to challenge the Supreme Court ruling in federal court, said Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman John Vratil, R-Leawood. What federal judge, he asked, would want to challenge the state Supreme Court over a state issue like school funding?
"If you were a federal judge, would you want to be in that position?" Vratil asked.
Vratil said he agreed the Supreme Court infringed on the Legislature's territory by not only declaring a law unconstitutional but also telling the Legislature exactly how to fix it.
"I think the Supreme Court has overstepped its proper role, and that balance has to be re-established," he said. But, he added, "Those may be issues to consider at another time."
House Judiciary Chairman Mike O'Neal, R-Hutchinson, an author of the school finance plan rejected by the court, said he was against "thumbing our noses at the court." But he said reaching a solution that could pass both the House and Senate may be impossible.
"There may be a consensus reached that we've gone as far as we can go," he said. "The court can't tell me how to vote."
************************************************************************************
The link doesn't work unless you're registered (I don't think), and people need to read this article. This is what psycho conservatives and no tax pledges do to states. Rarr - I'm pissed. States need to start valuing education more than they do big tax returns or they're going to have a bunch of idiots running the place. Wait...they already do.
Let's see if Bush comes in to save his precious conservatives from the WOMAN DEMOCRAT GOVERNOR. (I voted for her - thank God for the little bit of blue in the red state).
Everybody should write my governor a thank you note. Here's where you can do it.