Your 2025 Kansas Statehouse session: A belly flop into a swimming pool full of curdled milk
Statehouse scraps
Opinion editor Clay Wirestone's weekly roundup of legislative flotsam and jetsam. .
When do you call failure success?
When you have a supermajority of Republicans in the Kansas Legislature.
Whatever else you might have heard about the 2025 session, it was a disastrous bellyflop into a swimming pool full of curdled milk. Lawmakers wrapped up their work on Friday, leaving the state crueler, sicker, poorer and weaker. A bill mugging transgender kids made it into law. So did a bill promising tax cuts but threatening fiscal ruin. Public health officials' power to fight illness was restricted. Special education students were left out to dry.
It was, as I just wrote, a nauseating catastrophe.
But it's just what Republicans wanted. Boasting strengthened supermajorities in their respective chambers, House Speaker Dan Hawkins and Senate President Ty Masterson rode roughshod over Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly during the two-day veto session. Few backbench Republicans dared speak up or challenge leadership.
On the House side, members apparently met in secret nearly every day, giving and taking marching orders. Committees heard precious little actual debate. Bills speeded through and landed on the floor, where they passed with scant discussion. Meanwhile, the whole affair wrapped up in the middle of April, leaving little time for serious consideration or compromise.
You might expect Democrats to raise holy heck about this state of affairs, and some did. But others tried to model reasonableness, while their opponents modeled radicalism.
Since returning to Kansas in the summer of 2016, I've endured nine sessions of the Kansas Legislature. Never have I witnessed such a disconnect between what was actually achieved and what members believed they had done. Republican lawmakers gloried in their wins.
Everyone else was left in their dust, fearing what might come next.
You could witness a hint of unrest, however, in Secretary of State Scott Schwab's emergent campaign for governor.
The Republican announced early this year, and he could well face Masterson in the Republican primary. He blasted out a press release Friday that should leave the Senate president at least a bit concerned.
'Leadership repeatedly assured voters that cutting property taxes would be one of the first bills out of the chute in 2025,' the release reads. 'Kansans would receive a reprieve, and taxes would be kept in check. But when it came time to lead, both the governor and leadership came up short. Instead of giving Kansans a break, they gave them a bill backed by Senate leadership. The result? A paltry $25.88 tax break signed by the governor for someone owning a $150,000 home. Not enough to fill the gas tank or have the lawn mowed, let alone make life more affordable for families or seniors on fixed incomes.'
Let the man cook.
He continued, later in the release: 'Kansans expected better. Kansans expected leadership that would address runaway property tax increases, arrest out-of-control valuations, and restore confidence that they can afford the homes they live in — not rent them from the government.'
I've started asking questions aplenty in my Statehouse scraps columns this year, both for my own amusement and to cover further ground. Here's what came to mind over veto session.
Have Republicans finally lost their fear of being blamed for a Gov. Sam Brownback-styled fiscal disaster? Or have they just forgotten?
After all the drama surrounding Rep. Ford Carr's disciplinary hearings, isn't it interesting how the whole situation seemed to fade away once the panel had to settle on doing something?
Will Statehouse Democrats recalibrate before next session? If they have so little legislative power, what do they have to lose by attacking Republicans with a bit more glee?
Will Kelly call a special session of April revenue estimates come in under expectations? How much with leadership bellyache if she does so?
How on earth could next session be worse than this one? I ask a version of this question every year, and the Legislature seldom disappoints me. Still, how?
Hawkins never allowed journalists back into the press box on the House floor. Despite our coverage, and despite the many reporters just doing their jobs at the Statehouse, the speaker decided to put his animus toward facts ahead of serving the public.
Over in the Senate, Masterson continued a similar policy unfurled in 2022. More than three years on, he appears to have paid no price for limiting access.
Meanwhile, House Republicans met secretly. Reporters were ejected from caucus meetings on multiple occasions, all for the simple act of trying to inform members of the public about what their representatives were doing.
You might like what the 2025 Kansas Legislature did. You might, as I do, detest it.
At the very least, lawmakers and their leaders should have the courage to do it in the sunlight.
With this column, Statehouse scraps wraps its 2025 run. It will resume when the Kansas Legislature does, in January 2026.
Clay Wirestone is Kansas Reflector opinion editor. Through its opinion section, Kansas Reflector works to amplify the voices of people who are affected by public policies or excluded from public debate. Find information, including how to submit your own commentary, here.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
28 minutes ago
- New York Post
Trump is right about border and criminals, but he's losing voters with mass deportations
President Donald Trump delivered on his key campaign promise: Securing the border. Yet the only thing falling faster than illegal crossings has been his approval rating on immigration. The problem: Instead of building on his win at the border with more popular arrests of criminal threats inside the country, the administration is going after migrants indiscriminately. Democrats can't deny it: The border crisis is over. Border Patrol arrests have fallen nearly 90% since December to near-record lows. Nonetheless, only 40% of voters approved of the president's handling of immigration in a July Quinnipiac poll, while 55% disapproved. The 15-point approval deficit contrasts with a +1 rating in the January Q-poll. Other polls show similarly dramatic declines. Of course, people don't actually want more illegal immigration. Polls consistently show that the president is the most trusted on the border. Instead, it's the deportations from within the United States driving the discontent. Quinnipiac's July poll found that only 38% approve of how the administration is handling deportations. That doesn't mean voters back the other side — 84% of disagree with Democrats who want to suspend deportations completely, according to a March Pew Research Center poll. But Trump emphasized that he would prioritize ending 'sanctuary and protection for dangerous criminals' — the position of 81% of voters. Unfortunately, most voters don't believe the president is doing that right now. Even as late as June, voters told CBS News they thought that the president was prioritizing 'dangerous criminals' over peaceful immigrants 53%-47%. By mid-July, it was 44%-56% the other way — an 18-point swing in a month. What happened? Voters started to see how the priorities shifted. According to The Post's reporting, agents were instructed in late May to focus on 'quantity over quality' to meet a 3,000-per-day 'goal' set by the White House. ICE was advised to target people looking for work at Home Depot and to raid businesses in industries likely to employ illegal workers. Rather than scooping up violent criminals recklessly sent back to the streets by New York City or even cleaning out the homeless shelters costing New York taxpayers a fortune, ICE is arresting immigrants who are helping power the Trump economy. Since the White House ordered the change, there has been a dramatic escalation in arrests of people without criminal records. In June, the number of immigrants arrested without criminal convictions was 1,100% higher than it was even in 2017 during the first Trump term: nearly 6,000 per week. Yet there are still half a million illegal immigrants with criminal convictions out there to remove — and ICE should locate them before spending its time and resources on workers. It's common sense: ICE agents told The Post that the policy was 'leading them to leave some dangerous criminal illegal migrants on the streets.' Setting aside politics and crime, Trump has already publicly acknowledged there's an economic downside to these non-criminal deportations. 'Our aggressive policy on immigration is taking very good, long-time workers away from them, with those jobs being almost impossible to replace,' he said in June, referencing farms, hotels, and leisure businesses. The president is correct. Besides the border, the president's other primary election issue was inflation. And immigrants reduce inflation — not, as critics claim, by depressing wages for American workers, but by increasing production of goods and services. When supply decreases, prices go up for consumers, as we painfully saw throughout the pandemic. Immigrant workers also benefit their American counterparts: Companies invest more when there is enough labor to quickly construct and fully man facilities, and Americans end up in better jobs as managers and supervisors when immigrant workers fill lesser-skilled jobs. Booting the nearly 2 million illegal-immigrant construction workers will pull Americans out of those better-paying jobs, not into the labor force. Whatever the immigration politics are, Trump's midterm success will ultimately depend most on his economic outcomes. Americans re-elected him because they remember his first term before the pandemic as a period of stable wage and job growth — but random mass deportations are both politically unpopular and economically destabilizing. Although the president has promised 'changes are coming' on deportations, none have yet occurred. In April, Trump floated the idea that employers might be able to sponsor their illegal workers for visas if the workers leave the country and return legally. That's a great starting point: If no employer is willing to vouch for them, deportation likely won't have much economic downside. The president has diagnosed the problem. He's come up with a viable solution. And the One Big Beautiful Bill shows he's capable of navigating controversial legislation across the finish line. With the economy slowing and midterms looming, there's no reason to wait. David J. Bier is Director of Immigration Studies at the Cato Institute.
Epoch Times
30 minutes ago
- Epoch Times
Judge Expands Texas AG's Restraining Order Over Texas Democrats' Fundraising
A judge on Saturday ruled to expand a restraining order against former congressman Robert Francis 'Beto' O'Rourke (D-Texas) and his political organization over its fundraising efforts for Democratic lawmakers who left Texas amid a state House battle over redistricting. In the order, Judge Megan Fahey wrote that O'Rourke, also a presidential candidate in the 2020 election, cannot send money out of Texas. She ruled in favor of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, a Republican, after Paxton sought to remove the charter of Powered by People, the organization headed by O'Rourke.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Texas Gov. Abbott blasted for special session on gerrymandering failing again
In Texas on Friday, a special session to vote on new redistricted maps by state Republicans failed after not enough Democrats showed up to vote. There is another special session scheduled for Monday. Texas State Rep. John Bucy III (D) joins Alex Witt to discuss the issue.
