To the editor:

On May 3, the Lawrence Journal-World reported that I didn’t vote on the House Substitute for Senate Bill 357, the omnibus budget bill. In the Senate Journal, another senator is listed as “absent or not voting” whereas I was “present and passing.” The Journal-World headline acknowledged “spending worries some” and the story mentioned that some spending will be financed from the state’s cash reserves. Nothing was reported on the concerns raised during the debate regarding the 20 provisos included in the bill (three of which were listed under “Key Budget Items”).

Sen. John Vratil noted that the provisos make the bill unconstitutional; having two or more subjects in a single bill is in violation of Article 2, section 16 of the Kansas Constitution. A protest was filed against the action of the Legislature in amending a state statute in the previous appropriation bill for this very reason. The provisos are substantive law that should not be passed in budget bills.

Without the provisos, I would have voted for the bill; I appreciate the work of the Senate Ways and Means Committee and especially the Senate conferees, Sens. Umbarger, Emler and Kelly, in arriving at what I believe is a reasonable compromise between the House and Senate positions. Because of the provisos, I passed and joined Sen. Vratil in his explanation of vote.

Since the Legislature has failed to do its job in upholding the Constitution, I hope the governor will help us by vetoing the provisos included in this bill.

Sen. Marci Francisco,

Lawrence