mikewaz (Mike Wasikowski)


Comment history

Editorial: Expand Medicaid now

I wholly support ensuring disabled individuals get coverage and access to appropriate health care under Medicaid. Expanding Medicaid would likely benefit those 4,600 individuals with disabilities waiting for services in addition to the hundreds of thousands of individuals without disabilities who would gain coverage. As the KFF notes, individuals with disabilities who fall below the 138% FPL benchmark could enroll immediately without waiting for a disability determination should we expand; that would likely encompass many of those 4,600 people you mentioned.


March 1, 2017 at 2:48 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Lawrence City Commission to elect new mayor

Considering you commented on the article I'm linking below, I'm surprised you don't know Mr. Farmer pled guilty to interstate transportation of stolen funds and is awaiting sentencing for that conviction.


January 9, 2017 at 3:48 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Editorial: Bad beginning for Congress

Robert Costa reported that most members of Congress told him the most important factor in getting them to change their tune was a "blizzard of angry constituent calls." Not only that, but as you noted by quoting his tweets, Donald called the organization "unfair" and merely objected to the timing of these changes to the OCE. You should give credit where credit is due and not where it isn't.


January 4, 2017 at 8:11 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Editorial: Revenue insult

Almost two years ago, you, meaning the J-W Editorial Staff, endorsed Governor Brownback for re-election in 2014, saying "Brownback should have learned from the mistakes he made in his first four years in office, and it seems reasonable to think that, if elected, he would adopt a more effective, productive agenda in his final four years, working with a Republican-controlled legislature." You further added that "It seems likely [he has] the experience and ability to serve and represent Kansas better than [his opponent], Paul Davis."

I have two questions for you, editorial staff:

1) Do you think Governor Brownback has learned from his mistakes?

2) Do you regret your endorsement of him?


October 6, 2016 at 8:24 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter to the editor: Sit-in support

The city commissioners discussed writing and publishing a letter of support for BLM at the August 16th city commission meeting during the city manager's report. Because the city wanted time to consider the contents of this letter, they wanted to draft the letter at the next available time. Because of state rules surrounding when and how city commissions can meet, and because the commission had approved a change in the regular meeting schedule back in June, the first available time was three weeks later, during the September 6th meeting. Drafting this letter and approving it for publication was part of the agenda for this meeting and would have happened regardless of the sit-in.

September 22, 2016 at 1:40 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Changes to Lawrence bus routes going into effect Aug. 1

When I discover a problem with something I've done, I search for the cause, develop a solution to that cause, implement it, and continue monitoring for future problems. Do you do something different? Ignore the problem entirely? Let it fester? Tear down the whole thing and never try again?

July 28, 2016 at 12:43 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Editorial: Local control

"Citizens want the right to vote because local elected officials have been dishonest about the huge increases imposed over the years."

I'd like to see a survey result that confirms this claim.

April 7, 2016 at 8:49 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Lawrence high school students create petition to ban Confederate flag districtwide

I would recommend that people who want to express pride in being a southerner find a way to express that pride that doesn't simultaneously express sympathy for a movement dedicated to preserving the legality of keeping black people as personal property.

January 30, 2016 at 2 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Editorial: Democrats’ dilemma

To say nothing of the number of signatures you'd have to collect to recall Governor Brownback (more than 400,000), recall elections in Kansas are constitutionally limited to a handful of grounds:

1) Felony conviction,
2) Misconduct in office, meaning "a violation of law by the officer that impacts the officer’s ability to perform the official duties of the office,"
3) Incompetence,
4) Failure to perform lawfully prescribed duties.

Further, the Secretary of State is the one who certifies that the grounds for a recall petition are valid. Can you see Kris Kobach certifying any grounds except for a felony conviction? I can't.

January 19, 2016 at 8:47 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Kansas to consider tightening limits on local property taxes

I respectfully disagree with your assertion that the analysis is simple. If analysis were easy, the military wouldn't have spent the greater part of a decade training me to be an analyst for them; they would have just programmed a computer to do my job for me and left me unemployed.

As you noted in an above comment, the numbers you used to develop your increase are aggregates. That destroys a lot of resolution that helps people figure out what caused the change in property tax revenues. Did the mill levies change over the timeframe? Did property values increase or decrease in that timeframe? Did people build more properties and expose themselves to more property taxes? Did people improve their properties in a deliberate attempt to increase the value of the property? Did plots of land get annexed at some point, leading to the property taxes for that land changing and being brought into the aggregate? Did the multiplication factor for a class of property change in that timeframe? Did certain properties get rezoned such that they changed the multiplication factor? Did some properties get a special property tax exemption and drag down the aggregates? Each of these factors (and probably some I didn't mention) has some impact on the aggregate property tax revenue for an area. Some of these factors are good things to see; some of them are bad; others are more ambiguous.

With regards to my specific question about your bias that you glossed over, I think it's important to consider that you are a proponent for the Association of Realtors. Based on your comment that "[P]roperty taxes have been a problem for a long time," it's safe to say that any analysis you would conduct might be framed in a manner to make increases in property taxes look as large as possible. A 240% increase in those seventeen years sounds pretty large to me! But if my property tax bill increased from $1800 to $1900 over that time, I'd say that's a pretty modest increase, and personally one I'd be more than able to pay.

I urge you and the association to look into hiring someone who is versed in the art of analysis. They could help you construct talking points that don't vaguely resemble propaganda.

January 11, 2016 at 6:26 p.m. ( | suggest removal )