Wichitopekington

By Dion Lefler

Eagle Topeka Bureau

TOPEKA – Kansas universities and the National Center for Aviation Training in Wichita took a fiscal “haircut” in the final state budget that passed out of the Legislature on Sunday.

The $14.3 billion budget passed with a $56.1 million cut to public universities over the next two years and a $2 million cut in state support of NCAT, the aviation job training program at Col. James Jabara Airport.

The budget does protect several Wichita-area priorities, including $5 million a year each for low-cost airline service to Mid-Continent Airport and the National Institute for Aviation Research.

Those allocations are set for the next two years.

However, the budget trims state aid to regents universities by $23.3 million in 2014 and $32.8 million in 2015, including salary reductions and a 1.5 percent cut in general fund support.

In the Senate debate, Minority Leader Anthony Hensley, D-Topeka, said the cuts made a mockery of Gov. Sam Brownback’s university tour earlier this year.

While touring the state’s campuses, Brownback had said he would maintain current funding for higher education.

“Now we’re looking at a budget that I guess the governor’s going to sign, after he said he was going to hold higher education harmless,” Hensley said. “What are we to believe in this state when we have rhetoric that does not match the action?”

That drew a strong response from Ways and Means Chairman Ty Masterson, R-Andover, who said it’s incorrect to pan Brownback for statements he made on the college tour because he fully intended to keep university funding whole when he said that.

“I think anyone who knows the man knows he is sincere,” Masterson said.

The budget reduces NCAT’s state support from $5 million to $3 million.

Sen. Carolyn McGinn, R-Sedgwick, questioned whether that was a wise policy at a time when job creation is a high priority.

“It’s one of the very successful programs we have here in our state and across the nation,” McGinn said. “Lots of states come and look at this facility and try to figure out how to copy it … I just think it’s a bad time to be taking money from a facility that has a 98 percent placement rating.”

Masterson said it could have been worse.

“There was even discussion about taking it all at one point when they were looking for cuts, but we rejected that and we felt this would be more appropriate to hold them at three (million dollars),” he said.

Jason Watkins, the lobbyist for the Wichita Metro Chamber of Commerce and a former legislator, said it was disappointing that NCAT got cut, but that the appropriation was set for one year only and he thinks there’s a good chance the funding could go back up to $5 million next year.

He said the Chamber is pleased that NIAR and the affordable airfare program got full funding for two years.

In addition, the budget includes $750,000 in funding for the Judge James V. Riddel Boys Ranch, the juvenile correctional facility at Lake Afton that was threatened with closure last year during a Sedgwick County budget crunch.

It also includes a proviso prohibiting the University of Kansas from cutting back its medical resident program in Wichita.

Budget negotiators did drop a proviso that would have earmarked $87,000 to support two professional golf tournaments, the Air Capital Open in Wichita and the National Public Links Championship in Newton.

Budget negotiators removed that language after being criticized for supporting golf tournaments when priority state services were being cut.

However, that doesn’t mean the tournaments won’t get the money. It’s still in the budget and could be provided in the form of economic development grants because of the tournaments’ impact on community commerce.

The Senate vote was cliffhanger and the budget didn’t pass until about 2 a.m.

Initially, it came down at 19-16, two votes short of passage.

That triggered a “call” of the Senate, in which senators were required to stay in their seats and the doors to the chamber guarded while attempts were made to track down missing members.

Three of them were out of state, but Sen. Jim Denning, R-Overland Park, was located after about 20 minutes and cast the 20th “aye” vote.

Sen. Steve Fitzgerald, R-Leavenworth changed his vote, giving the measure the necessary majority and clearing the way to end the session.

The House passed the bill Saturday afternoon, also on a close vote that required a call.

After Fitzgerald voted, freshman Sen. Michael O’Donnell, R-Wichita, injected some levity into what had become a grueling process.

He told Senate President Susan Wagle he was going to switch his vote from yes to no, which would have prolonged the stalemate.

But then he added: “I wouldn’t do that to you. I just want out of here.”

TOPEKA – The Kansas House has decided that the Capitol will stay “dry,” at least for now.

Hours after the Senate approved a measure to allow alcohol under the dome under certain circumstances, the House sent the bill back to a committee for a rework.

The provision, part of Senate Substitute for House Bill 2199, was proposed to allow drinking in the Capitol during official functions, such as a planned party to celebrate completion of the renovation of the Capitol building.

But the House sent it back to a conference committee of Representatives and Senators after a ruling that an unrelated part of bill dealing with home beer brewers had been improperly added to the catch-all measure.

The rules decision came after an impassioned plea on the floor by Rep. Pete DeGraaf, R-Mulvane.

DeGraaf railed against another part of the bill, which would allow automatic wine-dispensing machines to be used under limited circumstances at state-owned casinos.

“Why is that?” DeGraaf said. “Because we profit from state-owned casinos.”

Moments later, he asked “What’s next? Fountains with flowing alcohol where you can just go in and drink it?”

A number of House members applauded that suggestion.

The bill had appeared to have sufficient support to pass, after a procedural motion to send it back to committee failed 67-50.

Earlier Friday, the Senate voted in favor of the bill 29-10.

The only issue that got much attention there was the provision on drinking at the Capitol, which touched off a lengthy debate about the role of the Capitol in public life.

Sen. Julia Lynn, R-Olathe, said she feels that the Capitol belongs to the people and should be available for public events such as art openings and concerts, where it would be appropriate to have alcoholic beverages in a controlled environment.

“We’re not opening up the Statehouse so we can stash flasks in our desks,” she said.

Others, however, balked at the idea, saying that allowing alcohol would diminish the gravitas of the center of the state’s government.

“This building is dedicated to the people’s business,” said Sen. Pat Apple, R-Louisburg. “It is not for rent, it is not for sale.”

Senate President Susan Wagle said the only event currently proposed to be alcohol-optional would be a celebration of completion of the long-running renovation of the Capitol.

She said she and Gov. Sam Brownback are hoping to use the rededication party as a fund-raiser to benefit a Kansas charity. “We want to open it (the Capitol) up and show it off,” she said.

The Capitol renovation project is in its final stages and expected to be completed this year.

The bill would allow alcohol to be served at Capitol events with the approval of the Legislative Coordinating Council, a group of House and Senate leaders.

The bill also would make several other changes in alcoholic beverage laws, primarily in allowing some liquor licensees to provide free samples or coupons for free drinks.

The bill will go to the House for final consideration.

You can still get busted for possession of pot in Kansas, even if you got it legally in another state, the Kansas Court of Appeals ruled Friday.

The court took up the question of whether out-of-state marijuana can be legally possessed here because it’s likely to come up more and more often, now that 18 states and the District of Columbia have legalized it for medicinal use.

Voters in two states, Colorado and Washington, passed initiatives in November legalizing pot for recreational use as well.

The ruling comes in response to a case in which a Colorado man was acquitted of possession of marijuana because he had obtained the pot legally under a doctor’s prescription, which has been allowed in Colorado since 2000.

The defendant, Troy James Cooper – who lawfully used marijuana under a doctor’s prescription in his home state – was acquitted of a possession charge after he was arrested in Ellsworth County. Cooper was visiting family and friends and the marijuana was found during a routine traffic stop.

The trial court acquitted Cooper on the grounds that the prosecution violated his constitutional protections under the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the 14th Amendment and impermissibly infringed on his right to travel from state to state.

The state Attorney General’s office took the case to the Court of Appeals as a “question reserved.” The process is used as a way to get a higher court to rule on a legal question of broad statewide interest to offer guidance for future arrests and prosecutions.

It doesn’t affect the outcome of the trial case, so Cooper is still off the hook as far as his charges go. Lawyers from the Attorney General’s office were the only ones to file briefs in the Appeals Court case.

Based on their argument, the appellate court ruled: “The Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment does not bar the enforcement of Kansas criminal statutes prohibiting possession of marijuana against someone traveling through or staying temporarily in this state even though that individual possesses marijuana in conformity with another state’s law allowing its use and possession for medical purposes.

“In those circumstances, the right to lawfully possess the marijuana rests on state law and therefore is outside the scope of the (federal) clause.”

However, the Appeals Court did caution that its ruling was narrowly applied to the 14th Amendment question.

“We … express no opinion on other constitutional rights or protections that conceivably might afford a defense to a person prosecuted under the Kansas Criminal Code for possessing marijuana legally through another state’s laws permitting its use as a medication,” said the opinion written by Judge G. Gordon Atcheson.

Kansas will lose at least $79 million in funding for the state’s military bases and face about $10.8 million in cuts to education if Congress and the president can’t reach agreement to head off automatic budget cuts scheduled to begin Friday, according to a new White House report.

Those and other Kansas-specific cuts –- part of the national “sequestration” debate –- are detailed in a state-by-state report released by the White House Sunday evening.

Staffs for Kansas’ two senators and Wichita’s House representative were reviewing the numbers Monday and said they think there may be less painful ways to implement cuts than what the White House has described.

“Washington should be more than capable of cutting less than three percent of its nearly four trillion dollar budget,” Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Dodge City said in an e-mail. “In fact, considering our staggering national debt and the dramatic increase in federal spending under President Obama, we should be able to cut more. However, these savings won’t be achieved through bully pulpit scare tactics and localized threats via White House press release.”

Rep Mike Pompeo, R-Wichita, who also responded to Eagle questions via e-mail, had a similar reaction to the White House report.

“This small dose of fiscal discipline will need not result in the calamities President Obama is suggesting,” Pompeo said. “It simply requires leadership. Every day, Kansas’ small businesses have to figure out how to survive with lower revenues and drops in sales and, goodness knows, higher costs because of this president’s regulations.”

The Kansas-specific cuts detailed in the White House report include:

· Military spending – A $78 million reduction in operating funds for the state’s Army bases plus $1 million for Air Force operations. The report said 8,000 civilian employees would be given unpaid furloughs, reducing gross pay by $36.7 million. The report was not clear on whether the furloughs would be included in the base operations cuts or in addition to them and the White House press office was not immediately able to clarify that. If the furloughs are in addition to the base operations reduction, the military spending cut in the state would total $115.7 million.

· Schools – Kansas would lose $5.5 million in funding for elementary and secondary schools, which the White House said would put about 80 teacher and aide jobs at risk. The state would also lose about $5.3 million in funding for an additional 60 teachers, aides and staff who provide services to children with disabilities.

· Head Start and child care – Cuts would eliminate funding for approximately 500 children who attend early education programs and another 400 children of low-income working parents who receive assistance in paying for child care.

· Higher education – About 310 fewer Kansas students would receive financial aid for college and 140 fewer students would be offered work-study jobs to help pay for their education.

· Senior nutrition – The state would lose $209,000 that helps provide meals for elderly residents.

· Environment – Kansas would lose about $1.8 million in funding for programs to ensure clean air and water and to prevent pollution from pesticides and hazardous waste. In addition, the state would lose $772,000 in grants for fish and wildlife protection.

· Job search and training – Kansas would lose about $322,000 for job assistance, meaning about 11,130 fewer people would receive training and assistance in finding work.

· Public health – Kansas would not receive more than $1 million in grants, including $610,000 for substance abuse prevention and treatment, $273,000 to prepare for responses to threats such as infectious disease outbreaks, bioterrorism, nuclear or chemical accidents; $85,000 for childhood vaccinations and $65,000 for HIV testing.

· Law enforcement – The state would lose $149,000 in justice administration grants supporting various programs for police, courts, corrections, drug treatment and victim and witness assistance.

· Domestic violence – Kansas would lose about $61,000 in funds, resulting in as many as 200 domestic-violence victims not receiving services.

Kansas would also be affected by nationwide cuts in federal services such as aviation safety and security, emergency response, immigration enforcement, food safety, small-business loans and mental-health treatment, the White House said. Kansas-specific amounts were not detailed in the report.

The automatic budget cuts, called the “sequester,” total about $85 billion nationwide for the rest of 2013.

The sequester was part of a deal struck in August between the president and Congress that averted going over the so-called “fiscal cliff.”

The compromise plan raised the national debt ceiling so the country didn’t have to default on its debts. At the same time it dictated massive spending cuts to reduce the federal debt. The cuts are about evenly split between the defense and domestic budgets.

At the time, the cuts contained in the sequester were designed to be politically painful, to put pressure on Congress and the president to compromise on a deficit-reduction plan.

That hasn’t happened and it appears unlikely a deal will be struck before the cuts begin to take effect Friday.

Republicans have accused President Obama of attempting to inflate the level of crisis the sequester would cause to rally the public to his side. They say the cuts would amount to less than percent of federal spending and could be accomplished without major disruption.

Pompeo said he doesn’t think the sequester cuts enough.

“This bill isn’t perfect,” Pompeo said. “For instance, it only cuts $85 billion and doesn’t begin to address our long-term fiscal problems. It also impacts national security in ways that simply do not make sense by tying the hands of our military leaders needlessly. The House has twice passed legislation to address this concern.”

Added Roberts: “The President should be working with Congress to find more responsible alternatives to the sequester like eliminating waste, fraud and abuse and making sensible cuts to auto-pilot spending, rather than scaring the American people while demanding higher taxes.”

Obama and his Democratic supporters accuse the Republicans of obstructing progress to protect their wealthy supporters.

The president has advocated for solving the sequester through what he calls a “balanced” package of some spending cuts and closure of tax loopholes that primarily benefit the richest Americans.