Dear Friends,

I wanted to highlight some legislation that I was personally involved with this session. These two issues are listed first, then followed by my responses to the voter survey mailed out in February. I included some commentary and actions taken on those issues. I look forward to your comments. I do like to have an open dialogue on issues before us in the Legislature.

Take Care,
Anthony

I helped compose a bill and was the chairman of a subcommittee on alternative energy fueled vehicles. In a condensed version, the bill would allow the tax payer to claim up to $4000 for a purchase of a new alternative fuel vehicle, restricted to these types, natural gas, hydrogen, plug-in hybrids, propane, and all electric. It would exclude conventional hybrids and flex-fuel vehicles. In an effort to make government more accessible to the taxpayer, we changed the E-85 requirement of keeping 500 gallons of receipts for income tax credit to 200 gallons or (this is the cool part) give the owner of the vehicle a gas card for $500 of E-85 fuel to be used at any gas station offering E-85. This bill is in conference committee.

$700,000 in Additional Child Support Annually

I hope many of you know that I am a strong supporter of child support collection. Kansas only collects about $0.55 of every dollar awarded to the child. This is a horrible problem for us. I proposed legislation this year in the House insurance committee that would alert the SRS of most any insurance claim issued by the insurance industry to delinquent child support payers. Twenty seven other states have similar legislation in place. Last year alone our neighboring state, Missouri, claimed nearly $1,000,000 in additional child support because of this legislation. Our best estimate is that Kansas will receive an additional $700,000 annually. There will be a one time upfront cost of $12,000 so the SRS can upgrade some I.T. issues. I think this is a great investment not only because it provides additional support, but because we know that parents who are current on child support are 8 times as likely to be involved in the raising of the child.

Voter Survey Response

Smoking in Public
The Kansas Senate considered this issue but it was not discussed in any great detail in the House. As of the last day of regular session the issue was dead, but anything can happen in the “wrap-up” session beginning the last week of April. Without any discussion or committee debate to analyze the issue I would have voted to allow local votes on this issue. I think some businesses could be hurt if the community is in a metropolitan area. I do, however, look for smoke-free establishments myself. I am not so sure we need to be making these business decisions in Topeka.

Cigarette Taxes
The House taxation committee did hold hearings and debated this issue and I am privileged to be a member of that committee. After two days of testimony about health risks associated with second hand smoke, which I believe to be true, the bill asked for increased taxes on tobacco products. During testimony it was discovered that the plan was NOT to eliminate smoking but just to raise money for the state general fund, not even restricted to health care programs. Other information was disclosed during testimony that we would have to raise taxes on a pack of cigarettes to over $7.00 to offset the health care costs are associated with treatment of heavy smokers. The proposed bill would have only raised the tax to just under $4.00 a pack. This is a regressive tax; the studies show a large majority people who use tobacco are more likely to have a lower standard of living, so we would be raising taxes on lower income Kansans. I would have voted no on the current bill as written. I would have supported an amendment to direct the dollars to health care costs.

Clean Air
I guess I did not word this sentence correctly on the survey. Of course everyone wants clean air…………. No brainier right? The issue is when the state of Kansas places more restrictions on industry. Kansas is struggling to maintain any manufacturing including aviation. I am concerned that even stronger regulation than the federal requirements would force additional businesses out of the state and in turn lose jobs. The loss of jobs in this economy is not something I wish to do. Our young people that are educated at our fine universities are leaving in staggering numbers to work and live in other states; I do not want to increase this already problematic situation. We need to retain a young work force so we can provide the government services we have come to expect. Kansas is growing older very fast compared to the nation and the wealth will be leaving the state as the older generation leave their wealth to their children who live outside the state. As this happens, it will erode our tax base even further and threaten the services we enjoy currently. I have voted to maintain regulatory certainty in the area of regulation on industry.

Energy Policy
This has been an odd session to say the least. I was visiting with a Sierra Club lobbyist (Funded by Billion Dollar Natural Gas) about the tenor of the session and he stated that in coal states like Wyoming and West Virginia the legislature talks about coal a great deal but not every day for 90 days like we have done in Topeka. Unfortunately, this has limited any good sweeping legislation from coming out of this session. Everything is up for trade. Every issue of any importance is tied to the Holcomb Coal Plant Expansion. I guess I still may be naïve that I want every issue to stand on its own merit not as a bargaining chip for the Holcomb Bill. It is no secret that I am in favor of building the energy plant. There are several reasons why I favor building the plant:

1. Jobs will be created in a depressed area of the state. It is estimated over 3000 well paying construction jobs in excess of $15.00 an hour and 300 permanent jobs with insurance, good wages, and retirement benefits will be added.
2. In eastern Kansas we are hypocritical…….. We have two of the dirtiest coal fire plants in the state and only pay $0.05 a Kilowatt Hour, while the area where Holcomb would serve pays $0.12 a Kilowatt Hour. All Kansans are entitled to affordable energy
3. Coal will play a part of the nation’s energy policy in the next generation. Let’s put the best technology in place and take the older, dirty plants off line.
4. Alternative energy aspects of the bill includes:
   • Requires 20% RPS by 2020
   • Builds transmission lines to the “western grid” at $1 million a mile. If the lines relied solely on wind, the lines would not be built.
   • Wind is only available at BEST 38% of the time
   • The wind argument being funded by out of state billion dollar gas companies including Chesapeake
   • “Big Gas Industry” from out of state is trying to influence energy policy in Kansas. I am surprised Kansas citizens aren’t more concerned about this practice.
   • The algae cultured by “cooled” steam will make bio-diesel a viable reality
   • Provides resources for ethanol plant
   • Tied into bio-mass facility from local feed lots
   • Requires net-metering for solar

Concealed Carry
The law that was passed last session in 2007 was meant to restrict concealed carry in college facilities and those were identified. The legislative intent was clear. Parking lots and parking garages were never supposed to be included in the list of college facilities, but have been determined to be included by our state universities in direct conflict of legislative intent. The reason we excluded parking lots and garages was due to the testimony we heard in committee about the likelihood of rape taking place in these locations. Regardless of how a person feels about concealed carry, it is a dangerous practice to not comply with Kansas law because of a person’s political agenda. This is exactly what our universities have done. I have been a strong supporter of a person’s right to carry.

Abortion
The legislature passed one life bill this year. It makes provisions for sonograms, parental consent, and prohibits coerced abortions. I do think this is a good level handed attempt to protect the unborn without taking away a woman’s right to an abortion. I voted yes for this legislation, but unfortunately the Governor will surely veto it and I do not believe we have the votes to override it. I have been a strong supporter of pro-life issues and will continue to be so.

Illegal Immigration
According to emails and the survey, this is a very hot issue. I am pleased to say I am in agreement with about 90% of you that returned the survey. I do want to place more restrictions on illegal immigration and those who hire them for the purpose of hiring cheap labor. I was greatly involved in this legislation from the negotiations, to the committee debate, and the floor debate. I believe the side of favoring restrictions compromised a great deal with the business community, but ultimately we lost the battle. I was extremely disappointed with the Senate and the House passed that passed. It really does nothing. The bill is a toothless tiger, but those who voted for it will tell the public it is step in the right direction and it is real reform. Nothing could be further from the truth. I guess on this particular bill I alienated myself from the Republican majorities in both houses and from my normal political allies with the State Chamber of Commerce, but I am comfortable with standing up for views expressed by the voters of the 38th District. I have included my remarks I had read at the final vote on immigration. “After discussing what occurred last evening with my wife and expressing my disappointment, I resolved to vote yes for this weak immigration bill because this is the biggest issue with voters and I have to vote for something. After recalling the comments many of us made about surveys with our districts I changed my mind. I can’t go home and tell the voters something other than the truth on this “gutted” bill. I know this may cost me endorsements from special interest groups but I choose the people over special interest. Don’t turn your back on 80% of Kansas for a few endorsements, I vote no.”

All-Day Kindergarten
In the house we debated a school funding bill and this was an amendment to the bill. I typically do not like to vote for “floor” amendments because the ideas have not been through the committee process and both sides of an issue have not had time to make their comments heard. The survey came back split on this issue. I do see some benefit to having all-day kindergarten, but I am not certain it makes as much difference as the proponents tell us. I think they are citing best case scenarios. I am not convinced this makes a large enough difference in a child’s formation for $23 million annually. I voted no.

Tax Policy
Most all of the tax policy is tied up in conference committee and will be voted on when we return in late April. Nothing of monumental reform has taken place. Many of you know that I am an anti-tax person and will continue to be. I have talked personally with a great number of you that are concerned about rising property taxes. Again this year we did not consider any real relief on the issue although there was plenty of effort on my part as well as others on the tax committee. We did pass one property tax bill out of the House which is a deferment not relief. The difference is the homeowner is still required to satisfy the taxes but can defer them to a later date. It is a very complicated process. I voted against the legislation for a number of reasons:

1. It is not relief only deferment
2. Allows the state of Kansas to charge interest on the deferred taxes
3. The state would actually hold a lien on the property with an adjustable rate mortgage (ARM) for the homeowner
4. There is a free-market solution for this situation. It is a reverse mortgage
5. There is an income requirement, but there is no asset restriction on it. A person could have millions invested but not receiving personal income and still qualify. This is not directing the help where it needs to go
6. The state’s interest in the property will cause insurance problems. One large company stated that they would NOT insure the state’s interest. Others stated that both the state of Kansas and the homeowner would jointly be insured. In this circumstance when there is a complete loss, there is no problem. In a partial loss (roof, or partial fire) both parties would have to sign the check to the contractor. Who is responsible to verify if the work has been done in a satisfactory manner
7. The state of Kansas would now be allowed to OWN YOUR PERSONAL PROPERTY