Advertisement

Archive for Thursday, February 17, 2011

Statehouse Live: Committee advances proposed amendment to keep judiciary out of funding decisions

February 17, 2011

Advertisement

— A House committee on Thursday approved a proposed constitutional amendment that would prohibit the executive and judicial branches from ordering the Legislature to make any appropriation of money.

If the resolution is supported by two thirds of the House and Senate, the measure will be put on the November 2012 ballot for voters to decide.

The House Judiciary Committee approved House Concurrent Resolution 5006 on an 11-8 vote.

State Rep. Lance Kinzer, R-Olathe, said the measure was prompted by the 2005 Kansas Supreme Court decision that said the Legislature failed to abide by the Kansas Constitution and adequately fund schools. The court ordered the Legislature to increase school funding.

State Rep. Annie Kuether, D-Topeka, opposed the proposal saying the current separation of powers between the three branches of government is "working just fine."

Comments

Paul R Getto 3 years, 2 months ago

An unconstititional constitutional amendment? More eco-devo and yet another jobs program from our Republican friends. Should at least keep the litigators busy. Some forget the parents sued the state over school funding and the courts merely suggested the legislature fund the obligations they required by law using the numbers which resulted from their own studies. This is not as complex as some imagine.

0

jafs 3 years, 2 months ago

Any comments from the supporters?

How do you defend this blatant attempt to circumvent our system of checks and balances?

0

Floyd Craig 3 years, 2 months ago

freedon huh well dont look like it to me if they pass that then why is our men fighting in our countrys for thier freedom when ours is being taken away they need to take thier freedom from passing new laws to stop the old laws dont make sence but think about it folks its leading up to our freedom being taken away one step at a time

0

nekansan 3 years, 2 months ago

In other words; They still are not meeting our constitutional obligation (according to their own study) so the legislature want to change the constitution so that the court can't force them to do their job." Has there been any word on a whip count as to how likely this proposal is to even get 2/3 support?

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.