Advertisement

LJWorld.com weblogs Statehouse Live

Group says a number of Kansas Republicans support legislation authorizing the arrest of federal officials who implement Obamacare

Advertisement

Twenty Republicans who are either already serving in the Kansas Legislature, or will be sworn into office in January, say they would support legislation to "nullify" the Affordable Care Act and authorize state and local law enforcement to arrest federal officials attempting to implement it, according to a survey compiled by a group called Campaign for Liberty.

The question from Campaign for Liberty, which was founded by U.S. Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, was "Will you support legislation to nullify ObamaCare and authorize state and local law enforcement to arrest federal officials attempting to implement the unconstitutional health care scheme known as ObamaCare?"

I started calling some of those who answered `Yes' to that question, and the first one I reached was state Rep. Jim Howell, R-Derby.

Howell said he is an ardent opponent of the federal Affordable Care Act and would do everything legislatively possible to prevent its implementation but he said he disagreed with the part of the question that dealt with authorizing state and local law enforcement to arrest federal officials to implement the law.

"That is not worded well," Howell said. He said during the course of the campaign, he did not remember responding to that particular survey.

State Rep.-elect Allan Rothlisberg, R-Junction City, also said he was vehemently opposed to the ACA, but the part of the question dealing with arresting federal officials was not something he would support. "Not arrest them but we are just not going to assist them," he said.

Comments

Robert Rauktis 1 year, 10 months ago

Where's Dwight Eisenhower when ya need 'em?

4

deec 1 year, 10 months ago

Just when you thought they couldn't get any sillier...

8

headdoctor 1 year, 10 months ago

I didn't figure the Republicans would actually tuck their tail after the election but thought they would knock off the crazy. Instead all they have done is ratchet up the crazy a few more notches. Nothing but a bunch of spoiled brats.

9

deec 1 year, 10 months ago

" to implement the unconstitutional health care scheme known as ObamaCare?""

That's my favorite part, because the only people whose opinion about the constitutionality of a law matters have already said it is constitutional.

9

headdoctor 1 year, 10 months ago

One can disagree with the Supreme Court decisions all you want. In the end it doesn't matter what you or anyone else thinks. They are part of the checks and balance of the Government and their decisions for the most part are final. Oh, and just so you know. Playing the Dred Scott decision card is pretty lame. There was a lot of stupidity before and during the civil war.

7

Greg Cooper 1 year, 10 months ago

Perhaps, if the Court mostly serves as a "seal of approval", it means that the federal government is, in all reality, pretty smart, after all, and serves its citizens well, wouldn't you agree?

0

somedude20 1 year, 10 months ago

Funny, as I was reading this article, NPR had a story on about how humans are getting dumber by the minute, just found some proof backing up that claim

1

Hooligan_016 1 year, 10 months ago

So, these representatives have not really given a substantive response as to why they are so "vehemently opposed to the ACA." I would be willing to listen to a factual/logical argument other than just hearing them yell it's BAD BAD BAD because of Democrats and Obama.

7

Larrytown 1 year, 10 months ago

Speaking of arrest....the 20 republicans may want to grab a dictionary and look up the word treason.

6

headdoctor 1 year, 10 months ago

Arresting the Feds? If it wasn't such an ignorant idea it would be comedy gold. There needs to be some arrests alright.......All 20 of the idiots. Probably couldn't get them for treason but a good dose of sedition will do just fine.

7

Boston_Corbett 1 year, 10 months ago

"Campaign for Liberty?"

"When fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in the flag and waving a cross” -(attributed to Sinclair Lewis or Huey Long, but may have earlier sources)

6

B0B 1 year, 10 months ago

sure it wasn't Huey Lewis?

4

oldbaldguy 1 year, 10 months ago

south carolina tried to do this under President Jackson and Lincoln. where do these people come from?

4

dd0031 1 year, 10 months ago

Someone should tell Kansas State Rep. Jim Howell, R-Derby that he has no power whatsoever to block any Federal legislation from taking effect in Kansas or anywhere else. Supremacy clause anyone?

7

Cait McKnelly 1 year, 10 months ago

This is how things work in your "Heads, I win, tails, you lose" universe, L1. if you don't like it, it's "unconstitutional". When it's pointed out to you that it's already been declared Constitutional, you bring up Dred Scott (totally ignoring the fact that the Constitution was changed and amended because of it). Must be really nice in that bubble you live in. Who's your decorator? Rush Limbaugh?

10

uneekness 1 year, 10 months ago

Actually, if the Supreme Court declares in a ruling on the law in question that it is not in violation of the Constitution, then it is, in fact, constitutional. Until such time as the court agrees to hear another case on the same law and reverses its own decision (which generally is decades and decades after the original ruling), you can the call the ACA wrong, immoral, stupid, or any other pejorative you prefer. What you are utterly wrong to call it until such time as the court reverses itself, is unconstitutional.

3

Armored_One 1 year, 10 months ago

Not to stir the pot anymore than needed for humor value, could you kindly state your credentials as they pertain towards the dicernment of constitutional law, Liberty? I, for one, openly and gladly admit that I am no where close to being conversant on that particular point of law, and given that there are people, a great many of them I might add, that dedicate their lives to understanding it, I am sure you would have little to no trouble in producing said proof.

Granted, since I highly doubt that you have more than vague grasp on the broadest of topics involving constitutional law, you will have to excuse me for not holding my breath while I wait for your presentation. I never did look good in that particular shade of dead from lack of oxygen.

While you very well might know more than I do on this particular topic, I'll wager my life that you are nowhere close to being any kind of an expert in constitutional law. Generally, that requires a doctorate in law, with a specific concentration on this one aspect. Producing a legitimate doctoral degree from a recognized institution of higher learning, as well as corraborating evidence that you actually received that degree will suffice. Feel free to take your time, as I have a couple of decades to kill while you go get that degree.

Have a nice weekend.

2

Armored_One 1 year, 10 months ago

So you are admitting that you are not a legal expert in constitutional law, with the degree to prove it. Well, that's comforting to know. Would hate for laws to be judged one direction or another by an amateur.

Oh.

Wait.

You were already doing that.

0

Greg Cooper 1 year, 10 months ago

Liberty, your "I know you are but what am I" game is so stale. There was no "ad hominem" personal attack against you by anyone, but observations that you are not an expert in constitutional law until you can demonstrate that you have better than an layman's understanding of the law.

That said, it is quite clear that you have studied the constitution, and are to be lauded for that. It is also quite clear that you have a better understanding than the vast majority of Americans. Congratulations. What is also clear is that you make assertions about the constitutionality of statutes based upon your desire for Libertarian standards to be applied to all in the US and not on constitutional law.

Now, I am not attacking you personally, so don't even attempt to blow me off with another bromide. I, and the others here who doubt your conclusions, would, for once and all, like to hear from you the constitutional reasoning for your denying the lawfulness of those things against which you rail.

This request is in the spirit of education, of wanting to learn from anyone, including you, who can enlighten me. I sincerely want to be broadly informed in order to make a clear decision as to what to believe and whom to support.

Thanks, and I look forward to your reply.

1

Greg Cooper 1 year, 10 months ago

I agree with your base premise, that the federal government is delegated specific duties. However, going beyond that and saying that the founders' intentions were "clearly' for the states to retain most of their sovereignty is also true, but the granting of the states the sovereignty to join and leave the "federation" at a whim was also "clearly" not the intention of the Constitution, in my opinion.

I that were so, Liberty, then there would have been no United States of America, but the Sovereign States of North America. The distinction is clear to me: the amalgamation of the several states into a federation of the whole was clearly the intent. Too, without the express inclusion of the three branches of the new government, there would have been no clear intention to form a government beholden to the people, without recourse under law.

As to personal attacks, I believe it might be to all's advantage to grow a thicker skin and look at the arguments' merits rather than their "underlying messages". I find you to be abrasive at times, and you find me to be "stupid", as you have said in the past. I am not, and your personality is different than I would like, but, all that aside, I really am interested in a meeting of the minds on this issue.

Thanks.

0

Kontum1972 1 year, 10 months ago

what is totally ironic about all this crap....all these politicians get their health care for free and so do their family members because we as citizens pay for it........even after they leave office but the rest of us scumbags have to pay for this out of our own pockets, we don't get that sweet deal of having the best Doctors available as these political leeches do...we have too suffer ....here is a story...a good friend of mine was in Europe on a vacation....he came down with appendicitis....they took him to the hospital....in a ambulance and they operated on him and fixed him up, when they released him from the hospital it did not cost him anything it was free. So tell me if you think this is screwed up? This is socialized medicine... so how is it that this seems to work there? Go figure!

6

Kendall Simmons 1 year, 10 months ago

Good grief. How long must we listen to the nonsense about politicians getting their health care for free from now and forever more? IT'S NOT TRUE!!!

1

headdoctor 1 year, 10 months ago

It may not be totally free but almost and in some cases yes it is free and better coverage than citizens can afford. It doesn't extend to their families. The Government picks up at least 70 some percent of their premiums. They can fork over $500 annually and be seen by the Capital Dr. for many types of medical ailments and all they have to pay above the Annual fee is for prescriptions. If they are in Washington they can hit up Walter Reed or the Navel Center for free. Even what little they have to pay, where do you think that money comes from?

In Kansas the State pays 95% for them and 45% of their family coverage

1

Kontum1972 1 year, 10 months ago

folks they want us to be like Feral pigs.....remember that story?

3

Kontum1972 1 year, 10 months ago

drive by your doctors home sometime.....check it out....!

0

Greg Cooper 1 year, 10 months ago

Drive by your newspaper owner's home, your builder's home, your grocery store owner's home, blah, blah, blah.

The mistake you make is in having a problem with those who have money or are smart enough to take advantage of the people who do.

We, the people, are responsible for the perks the legislature and the Congrell enjoy. Don't just rail against them, but tell your politicians what you believe, and work to have injustices and inequities changed. That works a lot better, and creates a lot less "class" animosity.

Just my thought. And I am incensed by the health insurance costs borne by the politicians, too, jsut so you know.

0

Cait McKnelly 1 year, 10 months ago

Really? A "state's rights" supporter bashing Obama for NOT going up against state laws? I'm gobsmacked.

8

jonas_opines 1 year, 10 months ago

Why ask questions to which you already know the answer?

0

tomatogrower 1 year, 10 months ago

What scares me is while we are keeping our eyes out for foreign terrorists, when will one of the crazies blow up another federal building. Tim McVeigh would be so proud.

6

blindrabbit 1 year, 10 months ago

Kansas continues is slide to Dingbatism as we become Brownbackistan. Keep up this B.S. and the progressive Democrat deciders (to borrow Dubya's terninology) will not be kind to Kansas as the Teabaggers slip further into obscurity in the coming years. Remember the old adage "To the Victor Goes the Spoils" and Kansas will inherit the spoiled leftovers. God bless us, one and all.

3

Richard Heckler 1 year, 10 months ago

Are all of these idiots medical insurance shareholders aka profiteers?

Obviously these idiots did not share these positions with voters which means they should be arrested for fraud.

1

Richard Heckler 1 year, 10 months ago

Has the republican agenda changed since the recent election or in the past 30 years? I say no.

The democrats have their work cut out for them. The republican agenda has not changed in spite of their after election rhetoric. Their anti American agenda stinks.

Face it neither WOMEN nor Republicans nor Democrats nor the Middle class will ever be able to afford those posing as the Republican Party!

-- Women will be getting more republican big government in there lives? It is on the way! http://www.kansascity.com/2012/10/05/3849961/joel-brinkley-gop-would-impose.html

--- Public Education is a strong player in new Economic Growth yet republicans starve the system of funding which starves our teachers of resources. Which starves the desired level of education = stealing from our children’s future. Why kill public education?

--- "Rebuilding America's Defences," openly advocates for total global military domination” (Very dangerous position which threatens OUR freedoms and the nations security) http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Project_for_the_New_American_Century

--- Round two underway = The repub party declared the day Obama was elected their primary function would be to sink the democratic party. Consequently their millions of NO votes became the disastrous campaign against women,The USA and jobs for Americans. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jun/09/did-republicans-deliberately-crash-us-economy

--- Republicans still want to kill PBS and NPR - NO I want my tax dollars to support PBS and NPR

--- Publicopoly Exposed frankly is a threat to Democracy - ALEC http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/11603/publicopoly_exposed/ http://www.justice.org/cps/rde//justice/hs.xsl/15044.htm

--- Killing Social Security Insurance Is Not An Option. http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/2010/0111orr.html

--- Killing Medicare Insurance is simply not an option. http://www.thenation.com/article/159769/paul-ryans-plan-destroy-medicare

2

Michael LoBurgio 1 year, 10 months ago

Legislators' KPERS calculation a 'perk'

A state pension formula exclusive to Kansas legislators assumes they work every day - all 372 days of the year.

Members of the 40-seat Senate and the 125-seat House fall under the same pay scale. A legislator's pay is not a set sum but is built from three parts: daily rate, subsistence and non-session allowance.

A legislator receives a daily rate of $88.66 during the session. That includes payment for Saturday and Sunday, unless the Legislature takes a break. Last year, the Legislature reduced the $88.66 daily rate to $84.23 a day for six pay periods, in response to a tight economy and budget. This year, the daily rate is back at $88.66, according to LaVonne Mumert, payroll administrator in Legislative Administrative Services.

Accompanying the $88.66 is a subsistence payment of $123 a day. The subsistence rate is tied to a federal rate, which is why the Kansas rate climbed from $116 to $123 in October 2010, when the new federal fiscal year began, Mumert explained.

In addition, legislators receive a taxable allowance of $7,083. This is meted out in 20 biweekly installments of $354.15, enabling legislators to receive checks throughout the year.

Annualized pay To determine a legislator's KPERS benefit, his pay is annualized, treated as if the job entailed full-time employment and full-time pay.

"Even though they only really earn that for several months of the year, they get credit for earning it all year long," Basso said.

For the legislator listing all income - the daily rate, subsistence and allowance - this is how annualization is calculated:

  • $88.66 (daily rate) x 31 (days) x 12 (months) = $32,981.52

  • $123 (subsistence) x 31 (days) x 12 (months) = $45,756

  • $7,083 non-session allowance.

Altogether, that equals $85,820.52, and that's the pay figure that would be used for that legislator retiring now.

Comparing pensions

A legislator retiring with an annualized pay of $85,820.52, and with 10 years' service, would have an annual KPERS benefit of $15,018.60, for a monthly benefit of $1,251.55, according to KPERS. If the retiring legislator had 20 years' service, the annual benefit would be $30,037.20, and monthly, $2,503.10.

The News asked some KPERS retirees about their pension benefits. Their answers varied widely.

A state employee who was a supervisor for juveniles on probation retired after 34 years with an annual benefit of about $25,000. A municipal wastewater treatment plant superintendent, with 24 years' service, estimated the earned benefit at $2,300 to $2,400 monthly.

A state social services worker in a supervisory role retired in 1995 after 15 years and draws a monthly KPERS benefit of $524. That is equal to the monthly benefit for a county-level commercial appraiser who retired at 65, vested at nine years with KPERS.

http://hutchnews.com/Todaystop/kpers-and-leg-2--2

4

Scoutshonor 1 year, 10 months ago

What's wrong with you democrats? The government has not even passed a budget in 4 years. We are running trillion dollar deficits every year. You can't point to one government run program that is financially solvent, much less one that isn't riddled with massive fraud.

What makes you believe this is a good idea? We can't pay for it plain and simple! Take a second from your childish little remarks about how stupid republicans are and how smart you elite liberals are and explain a couple things.

Will just one of you snide democrat/liberals on this forum explain to me why you think government should be providing these services for us and please tell me what is Obama's plan to fix this countries financial statement???? Make your little comments but Obama has no plan, which in my book is the dumbest thing going right now. So continue your fashionable bashing of republicans but don't forget to look in the mirror because you blindly follow this president that has no clue how to get the economy going. Face the facts, it's been over 4 years.

0

deec 1 year, 10 months ago

Everyone old is new again.

0

JJE007 1 year, 10 months ago

So... What's your plan? What's the Republican plan? Will the Republicans reduce military spending? Will they reduce gridlock? Is it all "My way or the highway!", with no compromise? Is it that damnable, yellow trickle down effect, from gray faced old men with prostates the size of the deficit, that we should expect and embrace? The bad news is that what we can expect is to be lied to by both entrenched parties and that no new parties or ideas are welcome by those in charge (government) and in power (those holding all wealth). We are in survival mode, due to "beliefs" on both side of the aisle. The new world order is kicking our ass, yet there is no way this plutocracy can win or buy anything but our destruction. Enjoy the ride. So it is written... So let it end...one way or the other. I'm sick of the torture.

0

mcallaigh 1 year, 10 months ago

Obama’s current debt reduction proposal would save 4 trillion over 10 years by (1) letting the Bush Tax Cuts expire for those making over $250,000, (2) closing loopholes that largely benefit the rich, (3) enact a new minimum tax, (4) end wars, and (5) additional Medicare savings. #1 to #3 generate 1.6 trillion over 10 years.

4 trillion over 10 years, or 400 billion a year is half our deficit. You may not like it, but that is in fact a plan sir.

What's the GOP's plan??? Shut down the Federal Government and magic?

1

deec 1 year, 10 months ago

If they didn't agree with it, why did they go on record as supporting it?

0

FlintHawk 1 year, 10 months ago

"Everyone"???? I count two (2) interviewed. Math much?

0

TheREALCrankie1 1 year, 10 months ago

Scoutshonor, I don't know if I'm snide enough for you, but I'll tell you a good plan if you'll show me that republicans have an agenda that differs from "Absolutely no new taxes." and "we are against anything the Dems are for".
Doesn't matter what The President's (oh I bet that REALLY infuriates you!) plan is, if the "opposition's" plan is to never agree on anything. If Romney had won, I'd be saying similar thing to Senate Dems. Your platform CANNOT be "We are for whatever they are against, and against whatever they are for." If a rep is NOT prepared to compromise, then his or her constituents are ID10T's for electing that rep.
Can't you see what 4 years of this crud has reaped on our nation? All I'm asking for is rational thought, which it seems the extreme forces on both sides are incapable of. Ron Paul just happens to represent that for Republicans and to suggest the arrest of Federal officials for enacting law deemed constitutional by our Supreme Court (that's how our system works whether you like it or not) is ludicrous.

4

blindrabbit 1 year, 10 months ago

It's called McConnellism. The daffy, imbred white skinned Southern bigot who because the State of Kentucky apparently has no one better to elect has allowed him to gain the Senate seniority to create this mess. There is a cure, two years out, elect Ashley Judd and let the Mitch join Mitt on the unemployment line. Better yet, let him assume leadership at one of the two enlightened tourist attractions in Kentucky that attract like minded bigots: The Creation Museum and The Noah's Ark Replica museum, where he can also serve as the second Jackass on the ark.

3

verity 1 year, 10 months ago

I'm almost speechless---and that doesn't happen often. Our elected officials championing lawlessness? Really? I knew we had a colossal amount of stupidity in Kansas government, but this beats all.

What is it that has emboldened these people to do stuff like this? Has colossal stupidity become the new normal? If these people were educated in the Kansas public school system, then we do have a really, really big problem.

2

FlintHawk 1 year, 10 months ago

They feel safe because they're in Brownbackistan. I wonder how many of these clowns also signed the secession petition? I'm confident that these "elected officials" will continue to "legislate" in this manner as long as Brownback or another Klone rules our state.

0

verity 1 year, 10 months ago

Can we sue our state government for wasting money on crap like this?

Are they really so stupid as to think this might happen? Or just posturing for effect? Not sure which is worse.

2

mcallaigh 1 year, 10 months ago

its a toxic combination of stupidity and posturing! which IS worse.

0

msezdsit 1 year, 10 months ago

The republicans lost the election which by definition makes them "losers" and their childish behavior doubles down on these "losers". It is amusing to see how stupid they are willing to make themselves look. Or, wait, how stupid they are. LOSERS

0

Cait McKnelly 1 year, 10 months ago

Hey, Kansas Legislature, keep it up. Pass this kind of resolution and you'll meet not just my friends "sedition" and "treason", you'll meet their big brother; "sanctions". That last bruiser will REALLY hurt, given that Kansas takes in more money from the Feds than what they pay out in taxes. Your state of "makers" is, in fact, a state of "takers".
Man, I can't WAIT for the piggie squeal that will happen when farm subsidies are cut off.

2

scarlett 1 year, 10 months ago

I see that the delusional kansas conservatives missed the writing on the wall of this election. We will not be returning to the fifties so get over it.

0

msezdsit 1 year, 10 months ago

how about arresting these 20 republicans for breaking the law know as the affordable care act. I would suggest to these f ing idiots that that is much more likely.

1

texburgh 1 year, 10 months ago

So when an insurance company denies coverage to a premature infant because that respiratory issue or cardiac issue is a pre-existing condition, and a federal official intervenes to force them to cover the child thanks to the ACA, these republicans will intervene by arresting that federal official.

Explain to me again how that is "pro-life?"

2

Commenting has been disabled for this item.