Democrat Rep. John Wilson and Republican Nick VanWyhe are campaigning to represent House District 10 in the Kansas Legislature.

The Journal-World asked the candidates to respond to a few of the issues dominating this election season. Below are their answers:

Tax policy: Should Kansas repeal some or all of the tax cuts enacted in 2012 and 2013; delay implementing future tax cuts; or, as Gov. Sam Brownback has suggested, “hit the accelerator?”

Wilson: We should hit the brakes on Governor Brownback’s tax plan, and follow that up with a thoughtful, inclusive, and evidence-based discussion about how we can strengthen our economy and fund our government in a way that is equitable and fair to all Kansans. I think an appropriate outcome would be a plan that balances property, sales and income taxes; ties tax cuts to specific and measurable outcomes; and ensures that all of us are contributing to a well-functioning, efficient and productive government.

VanWyhe: I don’t believe that Kansas should repeal its tax cuts. The tax cuts that Kansans have received have helped the lower and middle class. Kansans work hard for their money and shouldn’t have to give it up to the government to give them the ability to spend taxpayer dollars recklessly.

Education funding: Although the Kansas Supreme Court has addressed the issue of equity in the school finance formula, the question of adequacy – whether the state is making “suitable provision” overall for financing public schools — is still before a three-judge panel. If that panel rules that the state must increase spending, how do you think the Legislature should respond?

Wilson: The simple answer is that we should fund education at the level the Supreme Court indicates. The challenge lies in our ability to do so given our dire budget situation. Before any good policy idea — Medicaid expansion, funding our state water plan, investing early childhood programs — can move forward, we must address our revenue shortfall. If the past two years are any indication, conservatives in the Legislature may try to punish the judicial branch by attempting to change how Justices are selected or even change the Kansas Constitution so that the pesky phrase “suitable provision” is no longer an issue.

VanWyhe: Cuts of wasteful spending can be made and still need to be made to allow more money to be allocated for education.

What source of funding should be used to pay for any increased spending that may be ordered by the court?

Wilson: Unlike the federal government, Kansas cannot spend more money than it has. The Brownback administration is already doing the state government equivalent of scrounging through the couch cushions to find some extra change. All of the “easy” places to look have been tapped. Because education accounts for 63 percent of our state general fund budget, it’s the only place where cuts could create the savings needed to balance the state budget — but I will oppose any effort to do so. In order to increase spending on education, we’ll need to re-address Governor Brownback’s ruinous tax plan. While there is room for efficiency or modest cost-savings throughout our budget, that won’t be nearly enough.

VanWyhe: My opponent had a platform in 2012 that included increasing funding for education, but when he was given the chance to do so this past legislative session, he voted no against the education bill. This is a prime example of hypocritical politicians, and we don’t need them here in Kansas. The recent increase in funding is a step toward progress, however there is still room for improvement.

Higher education funding: Do you think the state of Kansas is providing enough funding for higher education in Kansas?

Wilson: State funding for higher education is not adequate. The situation is simultaneously jeopardizing our ability to stay competitive in a global economy and saddling students with mountains of student loan debt due to increased tuition costs. Investments in K-12 and higher education are among the best we can make.

VanWyhe: The economic downturn of a few years ago and the reduced state revenues as a result of the income tax reductions have exasperated a 20-year trend of the state providing a lower level of support to higher education. The result of lower state funding as a percentage of university operating budgets is higher tuition to pay for faculty salaries, laboratories, and computer centers necessary to provide a first-class higher education opportunity to Kansans. I support increasing state aid to students in tuition assistance and general aid to the universities, community colleges, and technical colleges.

What measures would you support to hold down the rate of tuition increases at state colleges and universities?

Wilson: We’ll need to get creative given the budget crisis we face. The major elements of higher education funding are appropriations (from the state), tuition, and student financial aid. All three of those should be considered in collaboration amongst policymakers and university officials. It might also be valuable to explore incentives or tuition based on strategic state goals, like growing our healthcare, bioscience or arts sectors.

VanWyhe: The solution to many of our funding problems is to cut wasteful spending. Legislators — especially my opponent — have lost the ability to differentiate between a “want” and a “need,” and there is still a lot of wasteful spending, more than one thinks.

Water resources: While groundwater resources are rapidly being depleted in some parts of western Kansas, eastern Kansas faces its own challenges as reservoirs used for public water supply are silting up. What measures would you support to sustain the state’s current water supplies for future generations?

Wilson: Any major operation to address existing water quality issues or silting issues will require significant amounts of money — which we won’t have if we stay on our current path. Like many things, prevention is key with water. There are some very tough political decisions that must be made regarding our agricultural practices. We as individuals also need to manage our water usage and adopt a habit and mindset of conservation.

VanWyhe: Existing state law states that the State will contribute $6 million per year into the state water plan. Governors and a majority of state legislators have not provided that funding for the past five years. I support such state general fund expenditures. We need to increase funding to reduce agriculture and urban run-off that contributes to siltation in our drinking water lakes. We also need to address the problem of blue-green algae in our drinking water supply lakes because it is a health hazard to humans and animals.

Health care: Do you support expanding the state’s Medicaid program as allowed under the federal Affordable Care Act?

Wilson: Yes, without a doubt. Providing health insurance to over 100,000 Kansans is the right thing to do morally and financially. Not only will it help individuals by allowing them to access preventative care, treat chronic disease, and avoid financial ruin should they get really sick, but it also will bring billions into our economy. The challenge is that because of our budget crisis, there is no money to even make this a reality.

VanWyhe: I will fight to limit the effect Obamacare will have on Kansans. In order to accomplish this, we must push our future governor and attorney general toward taking a public stance against the President’s detrimental legislation. we need to fight against the intrusive reach of the federal government into the lives of Kansas families.

What other measures would you support to reduce the number of Kansans who currently lack health insurance?

Wilson: I can’t think of a better way to drastically cut the number of uninsured Kansans than to expand Medicaid. We’ve already seen that happen in states with governors and leaders who made the right decision to expand Medicaid.

VanWyhe: The Obama Administration has crossed the line by intruding in the lives of Kansans at home, in the classroom, and at work with the many overreaching policies that are directly affecting our state and its citizens.

Energy policy: Do you support the state’s current Renewable Portfolio Standards which require utility companies to produce a certain percentage of their electricity from renewable sources, or do you believe as some have suggested that those standards should be repealed or phased out?

Wilson: Without question I support the RPS in Kansas, which is why I voted against repealing it. It’s good for our health, good for the environment, and good for business.

VanWyhe: I support retention of the Renewable Energy Portfolio requirement. The RPS has contributed to the Siemens Company locating a factory in Hutchinson and it places Kansas among the leaders nationally in producing electricity without carbon emissions.