Latest news with #LoudLight
Yahoo
5 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
Male legislators in Kansas use women as political pawns and defy the will of voters
Tina Hallenbeck, of Alma, rallies at the Statehouse in Topeka as part of the 50501 national day of action on May 1, 2025. (Sherman Smith/Kansas Reflector) Male legislators in Kansas use women as political pawns and defy the will of voters. In Kansas, the go-to move for some members of the Legislature is to ignore the will of the people and criticize, restrict or oppress the personal, legal behaviors of women. Even with their recent increase in pay, certain state House and Senate members still advocate for rushing through the session despite their own colleagues being critical of this action, or they promote bills contradictory to voters' wants and needs. In the most recent legislative session, women were used as political pawns by inexperienced legislator Sen. Patrick Schmidt, a Democrat, who gambled on women's health care rights because he viewed himself as some kind of political mastermind and champion for women. To be clear, most women do not view men who voluntarily attempt to make their lives harder as their champions. Other legislators, like Republican Rep. Pat Proctor, who recently announced his bid to oversee our state's elections, scrutinized the legal voting behavior of young women he claimed he was watching. Proctor is captured in a video Loud Light posted to Instagram stating: 'There's, like, all these, like, women, like 20- to 30-year-old women who, you know, that you never saw at the polls before.' He adds: 'They're stealing it far and square.' To be clear, it is your fundamental right to vote regardless of your gender or sex as long as you are registered appropriately, according to the laws of your state. If these women were not registered, they would not have been allowed to vote. They stole nothing. It is beyond concerning that Proctor, who also can be seen here discussing how he's chipping away at issues regarding voting rights, does not appear to respect the right to vote, particularly as for young women. These women were exercising their fundamental rights guaranteed in the U.S. Constitution. That legal activity alone does not merit the personal monitoring or the hysterical outcries of a state representative. In Kansas, women face extreme challenges that are unlikely to change without meaningful policy designed to promote the health and well-being of all women, especially women of color. The Status of Women in the States report paints a bleak picture for the women of Kansas. Research on the project's website indicates women in Kansas are not projected to see equal pay until 2074, 30% of women work in low-wage jobs, and women disproportionately experience mental health issues in comparison to their male counterparts. These numbers are even more staggering when we examine the effects on women of color. Where are the bills addressing these issues? Women endure so much, both publicly and privately, and Kansas women deserve legislators who view them as whole people, not dehumanized versions of an archetype produced by a patriarchy bent on subjugating women for their benefit. Women have held the hands of their sisters in the aftermath of rape by men who see us as objects for the taking. We have offered shelter and washed the blood off of our sisters when they've been beaten by men who claim to love them. We cook meals to nourish other women's families in times of illness or crisis. We work multiple jobs, we clean messes we didn't make, we appease, we follow orders, we submit out of fear or survival, we carry the emotional loads for our households and communities — a woman's walk is never to be understood until you walk it. The beautiful, innocent women of Kansas deserve better. Perhaps, moving forward, members of the Legislature should consider consulting with the women they are so hyper-focused on regulating in an inappropriate, terrifying way. What these legislators might find is that policies designed to burden women are unfair and unimaginable to most of the decent, good-hearted women and men Kansas is known for. That is, if legislators are truly interested in helping women. The forced positioning of women as pawns in elected officials' political games is wicked and vile. Either support us appropriately, or leave us alone. Amber Dickinson holds a Ph.D. in political science from the University of Kansas. 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.
Yahoo
06-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Lawsuit challenges ‘unconstitutional' Kansas law cutting grace period for mail-in ballots
Yahoo is using AI to generate takeaways from this article. This means the info may not always match what's in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience. Yahoo is using AI to generate takeaways from this article. This means the info may not always match what's in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience. Yahoo is using AI to generate takeaways from this article. This means the info may not always match what's in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience. Generate Key Takeaways A lawsuit filed May 5, 2025, is challenging a Senate Bill 4 that eliminated the 3-day grace period for mail-in ballots. (Maya Smith for Kansas Reflector) TOPEKA — Three advocacy organizations filed a lawsuit Monday in Douglas County District Court challenging the Kansas Legislature's attempt to 'arbitrarily' reject advance ballots of voters if the mail system fails to deliver them by Election Day. Kansas Appleseed, Loud Light and Disability Rights Center of Kansas are asking the court to find Senate Bill 4 unconstitutional. Defendants are Kansas Secretary of State Scott Schwab and Douglas County Clerk Jamie Shew. SB 4, which the Legislature passed this year, disqualifies any mail-in ballots not received by 7 p.m. on Election Day. Previously, mail-in ballots were counted if they were postmarked by Election Day and arrived within three days later. Gov. Laura Kelly vetoed SB4 but that veto was overturned in both chambers, with votes falling along party lines. In a statement, the three advocacy organizations called SB 4 a 'deliberate and unconstitutional assault on Kansans' fundamental right to vote.' 'This reckless law carelessly disregards the realities of postal delivery delays, which will disproportionately harm rural, elderly, and disabled voters,' the statement said. 'Furthermore, this law deliberately undermines the will of Kansas voters who have increasingly chosen to vote by mail in recent election cycles.' In the lawsuit, the advocacy organizations make a point that Kansans have been voting by mail ever since the Civil War. In 2017, the Legislature recognized that mail-in ballots arriving late deprived voters of their right to vote, and they instituted the three-day grace period. During legislative debate on SB4, former Rep. Ann Mah, a Topeka Democrat, called the bill 'pure partisan politics.' Statistics show far more Democrats than Republicans use mail-in ballots, and she noted the bill's lack of funding for an education program that would inform citizens of the change. More Democratic votes would be rejected than Republican votes, Mah said. 'If you make this change and do not fund an education program, you're intentionally causing thousands of votes to be thrown out,' she said. 'That's voter suppression.' The lawsuit said 32,000 mail-in ballots were received after Election Day in the 2020 general election during the COVID-19 pandemic. In the 2024 general election, 2,110 ballots arrived during the grace period. In Douglas County, Shew said he rejected more than 200 ballots in the Aug. 6, 2024, primary for arriving after the grace period, even though they were postmarked in July, the lawsuit said. 'SB 4's threat of disenfranchisement is particularly acute for some of Kansas's most vulnerable populations,' the lawsuit said. 'The elderly and Kansans with disabilities often have little to no choice but to vote by mail. And rural voters and voters who are temporarily out-of-state, such as many college students, will also be disproportionately affected because their mail is less likely to be delivered in a timely manner.' The lawsuit said the state of Kansas mails its ballots just 20 days before elections, unlike other states that send them out 30-45 days in advance. Kansas ties with Iowa as the two states with the shortest turnaround time, the filing said. SB4 is unconstitutional because it violates the equal protection clause that bans the state from arbitrarily rejecting voters' ballots based on their geography and whether the post office did its job effectively, the lawsuit said. 'Its due process clause requires that Kansas establish adequate procedures to ensure that voters have a reliable, fair, and effective method to cast their ballots,' it said.
Yahoo
24-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Kansas governor vetoes legislation that would disqualify slow-arriving mail-in ballots
Gov. Laura Kelly said Monday she would refuse to "sign legislation that deprives Kansans from having their vote counted." (Anna Kaminski/Kansas Reflector) TOPEKA — Gov. Laura Kelly on Monday vetoed legislation that would eliminate a three-day grace period for advance mail-in ballots to arrive after Election Day. The proposal would result in thousands of ballots from lawfully registered voters being thrown in the trash during high-turnout elections. Under current law, ballots are counted if they are postmarked by Election Day and received by the following Friday. Senate Bill 4 would require ballots to be returned instead by 7 p.m. on Election Day. 'Not only will removing the three-day grace period for mail ballots disenfranchise thousands of Kansas voters, but it also shows a lack of understanding of our elections in Kansas,' Kelly said. 'Implementing this will create confusion among county election officials.' House Republican leadership promised to override the governor's 'reckless' veto. 'We eagerly anticipate overriding the governor's misguided veto to safeguard our elections and ensure quick, reliable outcomes,' the House GOP leaders said in a joint statement. 'By setting a firm Election Day deadline, we reaffirm Kansans' trust in our elections.' Republican claims about 'reliable outcomes' being available on the night of the election are rooted in widespread lies about the 2020 presidential election, in which Joe Biden defeated Donald Trump in a safe and secure election. Rep. Pat Proctor, a Leavenworth Republican who chairs the election committee, told Republicans in a private meeting in February 2024 that he intended to end the three-day grace period because he doesn't support advance voting and because he wanted to punish Democrats and advocacy groups who wouldn't accept a compromise he had offered. 'I had a deal, and then Loud Light and Appleseed, which are the kind of bomb throwers in the election debate, they blew it up,' Proctor said in a leaked video clip. 'And I told all of them — and you know, please don't put this on Facebook or in the news — I told them all, this is your year for a deal. You can either negotiate and we can get a deal, or next year I'm ramming the thing through the way I want it to look.' 'If it was up to me, Election Day would be Election Day,' Proctor added. 'There wouldn't be early voting. Mail-in ballots would only be for military or severely disabled. But I got to bring 84 people with me, so I'm trying to chip away at it.' The House passed SB 4 80-39 on Feb. 27 and the Senate passed it 30-10 on March 6. In her veto message, the governor said the bill is an attack on rural Kansans who are more vulnerable to delays in processing of mail. 'I will not sign legislation that deprives Kansans from having their vote counted,' Kelly said. Loud Light advocacy director Melissa Stiehler said the three-day grace period is 'a common sense solution' to ongoing mail delays. She also said the bill to repeal it 'was born from the conspiracy theories during the 2020 election.' 'The reality is that the only thing this bill does is throw out our Kansans votes for no good reason,' Stiehler said. 'We are thankful that the governor stood up for democracy today and encourage the Legislature to do the same by voting to sustain the veto.' The Legislature could vote at any time this week to override the governor's veto, which would require support from two-thirds of the members of both the House and Senate.
Yahoo
14-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Should child support begin before or after birth? KS Lawmakers argue both sides
TOPEKA (KSNT) – Lawmakers are pushing for a bill that would include unborn children in child support cases, however, a recent amendment is receiving major pushback. House Bill 2062 is making progress after passing overwhelmingly in both chambers. Anti-abortion advocates like Kansans For Life (KFL) say many women in this situation believe this bill is a crucial way to support them during pregnancy. 'If they had the financial support or the emotional support that they wanted, they would have preferred their babies rather than have an abortion,' KFL government relations director Jeanne Gawdun said. 'This is a way to help relieve some of that financial burden so that she feels more confident about choosing life for her baby.' EXCLUSIVE: Satanic leader breaks silence on 'Black Mass' at Kansas statehouse Abortion rights advocates say it attacks a woman's right to an abortion. They say Kansas courts can already consider pregnancy expenses in child support agreements. 'The only new thing that this bill is doing is it's adding fetal personhood language into child support law,' Loud Light advocacy director Melissa Stiehler said. 'Using that logic, you couldn't possibly have a legal abortion.' In a move that got lots of blowback from Democrats, Kansas Senator Patrick Schmidt, (D), Topeka, proposed an amendment, which the Republican controlled legislature adopted. It would change the tax code, giving unborn children a taxpayer ID number which gives families a tax break for these children. 'It forces the house and the senate to vote on the bill again. They will have to determine if they want to take it out,' Schmidt said. 'If that doesn't work, then it provides the best grounds to challenge the bills constitutionality and defeat it.' Because of the amendment, the bill heads back to the house and senate committees. For more Capitol Bureau news, click here. Keep up with the latest breaking news in northeast Kansas by downloading our mobile app and by signing up for our news email alerts. Sign up for our Storm Track Weather app by clicking here. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
