|
|
The following was taken from Senator Tim Huelskamp's newsletter. I hope you enjoy it as much as I did. ACLU Loses BIG in Kansas In the court, the ACLU actually offered three nearly-unbelievable arguments: that the Legislature has no right to use morality to set law, that the Legislature has no right to condemn pedophilia, and the Legislature doesn’t have the right to dictate laws of marriage. On all three counts, the Courts told the ACLU to get lost – but we know they will be back on appeal. Here are the facts of the case: Matthew Limon (“Defendant”) was convicted for sodomizing a 14-year-old developmentally disabled boy. The Defendant, who had twice been convicted of sodomizing minors, was a Registered Sex Offender. In Kansas, there are two laws addressing sex between adults and minors. The law under which the Defendant was convicted criminalizes sex between an adult and a child. A separate law criminalizes voluntary sexual relations between any person less than 19 years of age with another person between the ages of 14 and 16, if the persons are of the opposite sex, and if the child and the offender are the only parties involved. This second law carries a lesser penalty in the event that the two parties choose to marry. The second law is sometimes referred to as the “Romeo and Juliet” law. The Defendant was charged with the statute that banned sodomy between adults and minors of the same sex, because that is the law which specifically applied to his crime. The ACLU argued the law was unconstitutional in light of last year’s Supreme Court ruling in Lawrence v. Texas, which struck down a law that criminalized adult same-sex sodomy. In rejecting the ACLU’s argument, the court stated, “[T]raditional sexual mores concerning marriage and procreation have been important to the very survival of the human race…. Throughout history, governments have extolled the virtues of procreation as a way to furnish new workers, soldiers, and other useful members of society. The survival of society requires a continuous replenishment of its members.” As a legislator, I joined in the case in a brief filed on my behalf (and 24 other legislators) by the Liberty Counsel, a nationwide public interest law firm. I thank the Lord that common sense and justice prevailed in this case. An appeal by the ACLU is expected. Protection of Marriage Progress That is absolutely unacceptable and I need your help immediately to force the Legislature into action on this issue. I am leading the charge in the Senate, along with some very committed colleagues, but we need your pressure on the Senate and House. We are proposing a constitutional amendment to be placed on the August Ballot that would add a clear definition of marriage to the Kansas Constitution. While the language is not finalized, one acceptable definition reads as follows: "The marriage contract is to be considered in law as a civil contract between two persons who are of opposite sex. All other marriages are declared to be contrary to the public policy of this state and are void." This resolution requires a two-thirds majority vote of both the House and the Senate. If both houses pass the resolution, it would then be submitted to voters of Kansas in the next election for their approval. What I need you to do: Please call your state Representative and Senator and ask them to support
the constitutional amendment to protect marriage. Your effects are critical in this area. Thank you for your willingness to take a stand for MARRIAGE. One Billion? A billion seconds ago, it was 1959. A billion minutes ago, Jesus was alive. A billion dollars ago was only 27 days and 11 hours at the rate Topeka spends it. A billion dollars ago was only 8 hours and 20 minutes at the rate Washington spends it. We’re Out of Money (sort of) The drive from west Topeka to the Capitol, where the Legislature faces a budget trauma, takes us past the manicured sprawl of the Topeka School District’s new $17.5 million, six-station sports complex. There is the 6,000-seat football stadium with facilities for track and field events, a separate and radiant soccer stadium, and two fields and two stadiums for baseball and softball, and the gleaming expanse of a showcase $6.8 million natatorium for indoor swimming and diving competition. Arriving downtown, to our left is the new five-story, $6 million headquarters for the local welfare office. Then, a moment later, we cruise past the newly-remodeled, 14-story, $35 million headquarters for the state Department of Transportation. Parking, even at $2 an hour, is hard to find because the Capitol grounds are sealed off for construction of a $15 million underground parking garage for legislators and staff. The garage, which is open in April, is part of a nine-year, $300 million Capitol area renovation project. Another part, recently finished, is the new six-story, $60 million state office building and garage southeast of the Statehouse. We head into the Capitol, a place pregnant with warnings of budget desolation and red ink floods. The schools are out of money; the poor are out of money; the rich have no money; the Legislature is out of money. These warnings are delivered frequently and loudly, in order that they may be heard above the din of the remodeling crews hard at their tasks, inside and out. Sebelius Plan has Some Republicans changing tune on Tax Increases House Speaker Doug Mays believes the higher taxes proposed by Gov. Kathleen Sebelius in her $304 million education plan would drop the Kansas economy into a “downward death spiral.” But Mays apparently saw no similar peril in 2002, when he voted for the final version of a bill increasing taxes by $253 million. Senate President Dave Kerr, who also has criticized Sebelius’ tax proposal, helped shepherd the 2002 measure through the Legislature. Mays, R-Topeka, Kerr, R-Hutchinson, and some other GOP legislators argue the circumstances this year and in 2002 are different enough that opposing the Sebelius plan is justified. But the most obvious difference makes their position tricky. In 2004 the governor is a Democrat. In 2002, the governor Bill Graves was a Republican. This year, the House and Senate floors are likely to resemble the decks of trawlers after big catches have dropped from the nets. Fish of both partisan tripes are likely to flip and flop on taxes, with majority Republicans taking especially tortured tumbles. “It is extremely inconsistent for anyone to say we can’t increase taxes now when they voted to increased taxes then, said Senate Minority Leader Anthony Hensley, D-Topeka. Hensley and some fellow Democrats have a different problem. Having voted against the 2002 tax bill and complained that it would hurt working Kansans, they face supporting higher taxes to advance their governor’s agenda. But Mays, Kerr and their fellow Republicans enjoyed substantial majorities in both chambers in 2002 and still do. GOP leaders automatically were, and remain, partners in governing. That greater responsibility brings with it heightened scrutiny. In 2002, Graves argued that higher taxes would prevent damage to public schools. Sebelius argued in her State of the State address last week that her plan will keep teachers from leaving the classroom and poor and minority children from being left behind educationally. She would phase in $304 million in sales, property and personal income tax increases over three years, raising the state’s annual spending on schools from $2.6 billion to $2.9 billion. Senator John Vratil, R-Leawood, said that while circumstances now are significantly different than they were in 2002, Sebelius has a compelling argument. “We’ve underfunded our schools for years, and every legislator, just as the governor has said, knows it,” he said. Of course, two legislative camps appear safe bets to vote this year as they did in 2002. The first comprises conservative Republicans who voted no in 2002, eight in the Senate and 17 in the House. They’re likely to vote no again. The second group covers Democrats who voted for the final version of the 2002 tax increase. Two remain in the Senate and six in the House, including Minority Leader Dennis McKinney, of Greensburg. It’s hard to imagine them saying no to a governor from their own party. But the Senate still has 19 Republicans, including Kerr, who supported the final version of the 2002 tax increase, as well as four Democrats who voted no. The current roster in the House includes 45 Republicans who voted for the 2002 tax increase and 27 Democrats who voted against it. Many in those camps are likely to vote differently this year, for varying reasons. In 2002, the Legislature convened just four months after the terrorist attacks that drove the aviation industry to slump and hurt state revenues. Kerr and Mays say the tax increase that year was necessary to prevent a deficit and avoid big cuts in education and other programs. “We were in a situation of total desperation and complete deadlock,” Mays said. “We basically had no choice. Now, we have a choice.” House Taxation Committee Chairman John Edmonds, R-Great Bend, also supported the 2002 tax increase, which he said preserved existing spending. Sebelius is proposing new spending, he said. Kerr also hearkens back to th3 2002 campaign for governor. He lost the GOP primary after defending higher taxes as necessary. Sebelius ducked the question of what she would have done, said she would make government more efficient, and generally sounded fiscally conservative. “No one is talking about a tax increase,” candidate Sebelius said in October 2202. “We need to do more with less.” Kerr recalled such statements after Sebelius shared her 2004 tax plan with legislators. “Part of it is that she campaigned on a pledge of no increase in taxes, or at least that’s what she led us all to believe she was saying,” Kerr said. But Republican leaders’ assertion this year that increasing taxes would slow economic growth rings hollow. Two years ago, the economy was more fragile, making the very argument Kerr and Mays use now more potent against a tax increase they supported. In 2002, many Democrats objected to the tax plan because it relied heavily on increases in cigarette and sales taxes to raise money. They said those taxes hit the poor hardest. The biggest component in Sebelius’ plan is a 5 percent personal income tax surcharge, which makes higher taxes more palatable to Democrats. Two years ago, GOP leaders like Kerr avoided an income tax increase because too many Republicans loathed the idea. After the legislative session ends, Kansans are likely to hear plenty of talk about how 2002 and 2004 on taxes are compared. Why America is Great? Ronald Reagan Country Wisdom
|
Sincerely, Kay O'Connor |