Senators came to the floor late today expecting to vote on a map called “Buffalo 30,” which creates districts friendly to moderate Republican incumbents who have been targeted for replacement by the conservative wing of their party.

But when he gaveled the Senate to order, Morris announced that he would be opening negotiations to try to develop a compromise map to bridge the chasm between the “traditional” Republicans and the more conservative elements.

He put off further discussion until 2 p.m. Wednesday at the earliest.

Following the meeting, Morris said he would probably put together a working group of three conservative Republicans, three moderate Republicans and a Democrat to try to hammer out a plan.

Morris delayed the vote after an angry caucus meeting, marked by complaints over his leadership and a walkout by the chairman of the Senate redistricting committee, who said he was sick of talking about politics.

Every 10 years, the Legislature is required to redraw House, Senate and congressional districts to account for population shifts in the Census. The makeup of districts is a key factor in who gets elected.

This year, the conservative faction in the Republican Party has been laying plans to try to unseat moderate Republican senators and add the Senate to its conservative strongholds in the House and the governor’s office.

In today’s contentious caucus meeting, Senate redistricting Chairman Tim Owens, R-Overland Park, walked out after saying he had become increasingly frustrated with the politics surrounding the issue.

“Does anybody else have any questions about the map?” he said. “If you don’t I’m out of here. I don’t need to sit and listen to this kind of garbage.”

Then he got up and left the meeting.

Sen. Pete Brungardt, R-Salina, said the conservatives had “poisoned” the redistricting process in the Senate by announcing “they were going to take eight to 10 of us out” in the August Republican primary election.

Few seemed to believe that the differences between moderates and conservatives will be smoothed out and both sides appeared to be positioning themselves for an eventual court fight on redistricting.

“I think we’re beyond resolution of this,” said Sen. Jeff King, R-Independence. “As unfortunate as it is for everyone involved … it’s going to end up in court. I don’t see the point of putting our caucus through this very divisive and painful discussion.”

The House has passed a Senate map that is a variant of the conservative-leaning map called “For the People,” first offered by conservative Sen. Steve Abrams, R-Arkansas City.

The Senate earlier passed a map called “Ad Astra Revised,” that favored moderate senators, but the deviations in population from district to district were larger than in the Abrams map.

Population deviations are usually a key factor courts consider because achieving equal representation is the purpose of redistricting.

The Buffalo 30 map would keep the advantage for moderates, but was an effort to narrow the deviations and get district populations closer to ideal numerical distribution of voters.

“The numbers in this are good numbers,” Owens said before walking out. “A court would accept these numbers, I am absolutely convinced of that.

Several of the conservative senators demanded that Morris and Majority Leader Jay Emler, R-Emporia, be called to the caucus meeting to explain themselves.

Morris said he and Emler were off by themselves “strategizing” over redistricting and the equally deadlocked issues of taxes and spending.

“If they weren’t bold enough to come talk to us about a map, it’s very disconcerting to me,” said Sen. Susan Wagle, R-Wichita. “And the fact that they were more willing to work with a Democrat vote than the majority of their own caucus bothers me.”

The Senate leaders need 13 of the 32 Republican votes – along with all eight Democrats – to pass a redistricting map.

The Ad Astra map passed with a bare majority, 21 votes, including seven of the eight Democrats.

The original Abrams map failed 19-21 when it came up for a floor vote in the Senate earlier this year.

House Bill 2318 would link the penalties for drug possession to the amount of drugs actually possessed.

Primarily, it would allow judges more discretion when sentencing low-level drug offenders who have a single prior conviction on their record, when they either possess small amounts of drugs for personal use or sell small quantities to support their own drug habit, said Rep. Pat Colloton, R-Leawood, who carried the bill on the floor of the House.

At present, the offenses are considered “presumptive prison” on the state drug-crime sentencing grid. That means a judge who wants to give a lesser sentence has to make and state specific findings to justify a departure from the prison terms in the grid, Colloton said.

Under HB 2318, the offenses would be a “border box” on the grid.

Colloton said that would give judges more of a choice on whether to order prison time for low level repeat drug offenders, or send them to a treatment program if they think that might be more effective in addressing the problem.

In addition to potentially lowering the penalties for minor offenders, the bill would create harsher penalties for large-scale manufacturers and dealers of illegal drugs.

However, Colloton said those sentences are unlikely to come into play since those types of prosecutions are far more likely to be handled at the federal level.

The final vote was 94-23.

Also at Colloton’s urging, the House approved a bill to delete employers’ names and addresses from a state sex-offender web site.

The measure was part of House Bill 2568, written to eliminate unintended consequences from last year’s passage of the Kansas version of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act.

The act, named for the murdered son of America’s Most Wanted host John Walsh, mandates strict reporting requirements for sex offenders and that the information from the reports be published by the state in an online database.

Colloton said including work addresses created a problem for businesses that hire ex offenders who have served their time in prison. She said the business people told her they were reluctant to hire those who had committed sexually related crimes, because they did not want their companies and/or addresses listed on the offender database.

The work addresses of sex offenders would still be public information and available on request, she said.

In addition, the bill also removes hospitals from a list of treatment facilities that must report to the state when they admit a registered sex offender.

Colloton said the Via Christi health system in Wichita was among those who requested the change, because as written, the law would require hospitals to background-check all incoming patients for prior sex offenses.

The law was actually aimed at reporting offenders in institutions such as drug- and mental-health treatment facilities and was not intended to burden general hospitals, Colloton said.

She said the attorney general’s office has decided not to enforce the requirement on hospitals for the time being, to give the Legislature time to clarify the law.

The bill passed the House 114-2.

Both bills will now proceed to the governor’s desk.

Gov. Brownback chats with a lawmaker and a lobbyist in the Statehouse this morning.

UPDATE: Republican Rep. Richard Carlson said that House and Senate negotiators will not meet at their planned time and that the meeting is delayed until further notice.

TOPEKA — House and Senate negotiators plan to meet today to tweak an agreement they reached about a week ago in hopes of sending Gov. Sam Brownback a more palatable bill.

Heading toward Brownback’s desk is a tax-cutting bill that would eliminate nonwage income taxes on 191,000 businesses in the state and lower individual income tax rates. But projections show it could put the state in a $2 billion or more deficit by 2017. Brownback has said he can make it work and that he is prepared to sign it. But he also said he would prefer a bill negotiated by a House-Senate conference committee.

Wichita Republican Sen. Les Donovan said today that the tax conference committee will meet again and make some changes to the proposal that Republican negotiators agreed on. That plan calls for more modest tax cuts: phased in cuts for nonwage business income tax, slightly lower individual income tax cuts and property tax relief. The proposal already shows it would leave a budget surplus through 2017.

Last week, the Senate was about to vote on the negotiated tax plan. But House leaders heard the Senate would kill the bill and quickly approved the larger tax cut bill that senators said they had approved only to allow for negotiations on a tax plan.

House Speaker Mike O’Neal, R-Hutchinson, this morning told House Republicans that he, Senate President Steve Morris and Brownback met this morning and that Morris asked Brownback to veto the tax cut bill awaiting a signature and that, if Brownback vetoes it, the Senate would take up the negotiated tax plan. Brownback reportedly declined.

Brownback today said he wouldn’t comment on private discussions. But he said he wants to lower the top individual income tax bracket below 5 percent and eliminate nonwage income taxes for most businesses.

Brownback’s spokeswoman, Sherriene Jones-Sontag, confirmed that Brownback does not intend to veto the bill.

Among the changes are moves to allow happy hour specials, allow micro-distilleries of liquor to sell and serve their products similar to microbreweries and let liquor stores give consumer samples of beer, wine and booze.

The House approved the package of bills today in a 97-24 vote.

Among other things, the bill would allow bars to offer happy hour specials. Currently, bars can only offer special drink prices if they charge the same rate all day.

During the legislative session, some lawmakers voiced concern that happy hours encourage binge drinking to take advantage of short-term price reductions. But others argued it helps make Kansas competitive with neighboring states, such as Missouri, that allow temporary specials and give bars more freedom over their business models.

It also allows liquor stores to offer free tastings to consumers (a half-ounce of spirits or two ounces of beer or wine). There’s no limit on the number of samples a store can provide.

Wichita got one of its initiatives approved in the package of bills. The city had sought an extended-length special event permit so that organizers of the Wichita River Festival wouldn’t have to keep getting license extensions for the festival’s beer garden. Rep. Virgil Peck, R-Tyro, voiced concerns that the extended permit would open the door to boozy county fairs. But the extended permits don’t change any regulations or other parts of the permitting process, making it unlikely to lead to a big uptick alcohol at fairs, said Bel Aire Republican Rep. Steve Brunk.

Part of the bill would allow micro-distilleries to manufacture alcohol products, provide samples to consumers and sell their products on site. That’s similar to laws that allow microbreweries to give serve samples and sell bottles of beer.

Another bill tucked into the package opens the door for farm wineries where people could grow grapes, produce wine and sell it on site or take it to other locations, such as a wine festival, and offer people sampling wines to buy bottles on site.

Brunk, who carried the bill, said that the bills are aimed at providing more consistent laws that reflect consumers’ behavior.

The decision, which sends the bill to the governor’s desk, came after a lengthy and at times emotional debate.

The final vote was a lopsided 33-4, but had been closer on early procedural votes to try to send the bill back to committee.

Opponents of the bill, including two Senators who signed the committee report to bring it to the Senate floor, argued that it is intolerant and unnecessary.

Sen. Tim Owens, R-Overland Park and chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, opened the debate by apologizing for putting the Senate in position of having to vote on the bill.

“This is one where I made some mistakes; the first one was signing the conference report,” he said. “I believe this bill is unconstitutional (and) intolerant.”

Emphasizing that he is himself a Christian, Owens said “I think this bill will set Kansas out as a place not to go if you believe any other way than particularly a very small religious-right perspective … This country is based on freedom. And it isn’t ‘You can only be free if you think like me.’”

Proponents fired back that the bill protects the constitutions of Kansas and the United States and would prevent the use of foreign law to take away fundamental rights that are enjoyed in American courts.

“I look back at those remarks (by opponents) and I almost think they’re outrageous,” said Sen. Ty Masterson, R-Andover. “Not only have we had a stretch of the truth, we’ve had a stretch of the rules. We don’t have any intolerance in this bill. Nobody’s stripped of their freedom of religion. This is talking about the law, American law, American courts.”

Sen. Susan Wagle, R-Wichita, argued that Sharia law itself is what’s intolerant.

“I find Sharia law to take away all the rights of women,” Wagle said. “They stone women to death in countries that have Sharia law, they (women) have no rights in court, female children are treated brutally … In this great country of ours and in the state of Kansas, women have equal rights.”

The proponents of the bill noted several times that Sharia was not specifically named in the bill and that it’s applicable to all foreign laws and legal systems.

But in an impassioned speech, Sen. Chris Steineger, R-Kansas City, said the bill was obviously directed at Muslims.

He said he was originally approached about the bill in January. The original pitch wasn’t about protecting the Constitution, but that Muslims were trying to use Sharia law to take over the United States and had to be stopped.

“I thought that was quite ludicrous at the time and I still do,” he said. “This (bill) doesn’t say Sharia law, but that’s how it was marketed back in January and all session long, and I have all the e-mails to prove it.”

That state contract was rejected last week by the Kansas Coalition Against Sexual & Domestic Violence, which subcontracts with 29 agencies across the state that help about 450 battered women, men and children being helped with transitions from abusive relationships to new beginnings.

The coalition believes new SRS contract requirements create barriers to serving survivors by requiring psychological evaluations required under the new contract could be used against mothers in child custody cases. SRS disputes their interpretation.

SRS officials say the coalition overreacted and that they just want more accountability to ensure the state complies with requirements tied to a federal grant that pays for survivor services.

But Sens. Laura Kelly, D-Topeka, Carolyn McGinn, R-Sedgwick, and John Vratil, R-Leawood believe shuffling funds between several budget allocations could allow the coalition to contract with the state without adhering to the new requirements initiated last fall.

Their proposal in a budget conference committee this morning would cut $1 million from alcohol and drug abuse service grants, replace that with problem gambling and addiction funds and add $1 million in state general funds handled by Gov. Sam Brownback’s office.

The House’s budget negotiators haven’t signed off on the idea yet. And there’s no guarantee the Governor’s office would forego the new requirements sought by SRS. Kelly said it would be a “good faith effort.”

To learn more about the dispute between the coalition and SRS, see The Eagle’s prior reporting here: http://www.kansas.com/2012/05/04/2323386/flap-over-state-contract-for-sexual.html#storylink=misearch

Kobach said in late April that he would have to bump the filing deadline from June 1 to June 11 if maps hadn’t been approved by today.

With the annual session scheduled to end Friday, hope is fading that the House and Senate will reach accord on redistricting. If they can’t, the districts will end up being drawn in court.

The deadlock has already forced a change in the deadline to file for candidacy in the upcoming August primary election. The Secretary of State’s office announced the deadline to file for House, Senate and Board of Education seats is being pushed back from June 1 to June 11.

The Senate Reapportionment Committee, having had its original Senate map rebuffed in the more conservative House, passed three new district maps for consideration by the full Senate. All three maps draw conservative challengers out of the districts of moderate incumbents they want to challenge.

Later, the House sent the Senate a variant on a district map the Senate has rejected twice. That map, which originated with Sen. Steve Abrams, R-Arkansas City, is far friendlier to the conservative challengers.

Rep. Clay Aurand, R-Belleville and vice chairman of the House Redistricting Committee, blamed the delay on the conservative-moderate division in the Senate.

“I’m hopeful that the fear of the unknown will motivate some senators to finally find a way to talk to each other,” Aurand said. “I hope this (the House passing a Senate map) helps, but I’m not overly optimistic.”

Senate redistricting Chairman Tim Owens, R-Overland Park, has already said that he thinks the courts would draw a fairer map than anything that could pass the staunchly conservative House.

Conservatives have targeted at least eight Senate Republican incumbents for primary challenges in an effort to take control from more moderate elements of their party.

All involved believe that the way the district lines are drawn can heavily influence whether conservatives or moderates prevail, which has delayed the once-every-10-year task of realigning House, Senate and congressional districts to account for population shifts in the 2010 Census.

House Speaker Mike O’Neal, R-Hutchinson, said the maps the Senate will consider are all unacceptable because they draw out the challengers, and he urged the House to go forward with the Abrams map.

“I would respectfully suggest that we not wait for the Senate to pass us yet another fatally, incredibly flawed map that perpetuates this arrogance of entitlement to districts at the expense of anybody who would dare to challenge them,” O’Neal said.

At O’Neal’s request, the Senate had amended its original district map to put two challengers – both sitting members of the House — in the districts where they want to challenge sitting senators.

“We gave them a map that put them (the challengers) in and none of them voted for it,” Owens said.

Senate leaders have said they thought they had an agreement with O’Neal to approve their maps if they did that.

Instead, O’Neal denied such an agreement existed and he escalated the battle with disparaging comments about the Senate and by getting the House to step in and put through its own Senate map.

The Senate’s three new maps, called “Buffalo 20,” “Buffalo 30” and “Buffalo 40,” all would create a new Senate seat in Johnson County, which has grown by in the last 10 years more than 90,000 voters – about 20,000 more than the average population of a Senate district.

Each of the three maps also creates a district where incumbent senators would have to run against each other:

The Buffalo 20 map would set a head-to-head match for the 40th District between Sen. Ralph Ostmeyer, R-Grinnell, and Sen. Allen Schmidt, D-Hays.

Buffalo 30 would match Abrams against Sen. Ty Masterson, R-Andover.

Buffalo 40 would match Schmidt against Senate Majority Leader Jay Emler, R-Emporia.

In Sedgwick County, any of the three maps would draw Rep. Brenda Landwehr, R-Wichita, out of the 25th District where Landwehr wants to challenge incumbent Sen. Jean Schodorf. Landwehr would be in the 29th District, a largely minority and Democratic district now represented by Sen. Oletha Faust-Goudeau.

They also separate incumbent Sen. Carolyn McGinn from her prospective opponent, Wichita businessman Gary Mason.

As part of the failed negotiation with O’Neal, the original Senate-passed map, called “Ad Astra Revised” was amended on the Senate floor to put Landwehr in Schodorf’s district and Rep. Greg Smith, R-Overland Park, in the district where he wants to challenge Sen. Tim Owens, R-Overland Park.

The new maps also draw Smith out of Owens’ district.

Landwehr said the new maps are “unrealistic” and split communities of interest.

“They’re ignoring the rules that were set out by the committee and ignoring federal law,” Landwehr said.

Schodorf said she’s tired of the “continuing saga of the maps.”

She said redistricting generated the same kind of “animosity and tension” 10 years ago but the factions eventually were able to settle it.

“I believe we will vote on another map, which one I don’t know,” she said. “I still hope the House will accept our map.”

As for putting Landwehr in her district, Schodorf said “I tried,” and on the new maps, “I would probably do it again.”

Wren is seeking the 83rd District seat that will be open due to the retirement of longtime Rep. Jo Ann Pottorff, R-Wichita.

On Wednesday, Wren won a challenge over whether he lives in the district where he is running. A panel made up of Secretary of State Kris Kobach, Lt. Gov. Jeff Colyer and Attorney General Derek Schmidt ruled that Wren has legally established residency in the district.

Wren works as a teacher and debate coach at Wichita Collegiate high school.

The rally will be from 1 to 3 p.m. Saturday at the Beech Lake picnic ground at 1120 N. Webb Road, Gate W11.

The bill House members approved in a 65-58 vote projects a $2 billion state deficit in 2018. Democrats are furious about the vote, saying House Speaker Mike O’Neal cut off debate. Rep. Jim Ward, D-Wichita, said the bill devastates public education, public safety and will let more people die while awaiting state services for people with physical and developmental disabilities. Rep. Richard Carlson, R-St. Marys, said he hopes that the Senate will move to approve their plan to give lawmakers another chance to negotiate a tax plan.

–

TOPEKA — The House this afternoon has abruptly taken up a massive tax-cutting bill that has been lying dormant for weeks as House and Senate negotiators tried to create a politically-viable and less expensive tax reduction bill.

The move would send a heavily-altered version of Gov. Sam Brownback’s plan to the Governor’s desk. Brownback has indicated he would sign the bill, but he has said he prefers a bill negotiated by the House and Senate that leaves a positive ending balance.

The House’s move is viewed by some as an attempt to pressure the Senate to approve the negotiated tax bill this afternoon. If the House approves their plan, it would kill the negotiated deal. But if the Senate votes first and passes its plan, it would kill the House’s version and advance the bill to the House where its passage is all but assured.

The House awaits a vote on a big tax cut plan. (This photo merges several photos to provide a wider perspective of House floor.)

That plan the House is considering this afternoon would cost an estimated $3.7 billion over five years. It is a heavily altered version of the governor’s original tax-reduction proposal. Senators removed from Brownback’s original pitch a 2 percent cap on the growth of government spending, and they reinstated a wide variety of tax credits and deductions that Brownback wanted to eliminate to simplify the tax code and reduce the impact of the tax cuts on state revenue.

Projections created by legislative researchers earlier this month show that the more expensive plan would leave the state with a $270 million deficit in the 2014 fiscal year, the first full year of the tax cuts. That deficit would grow to $2 billion by 2017, according to the projections.

Several House members have spoken against the bill. Meanwhile, others are trying to put an end to the debate and force a quick vote to preempt the Senate’s planned debate this afternoon, which was slated to start at 2 p.m.

If the House votes first and sends the bill to the Governor’s desk, it would kill the bill the Senate had planned to vote on today.

Projections on the plan the Senate is slated to vote on this afternoon show the plan would leave a $165 million budget surplus in 2018.

The proposal collapses the state’s three income tax brackets, which are now set at 3.5 percent, 6.25 percent and 6.45 percent. It would lock the lower bracket for the first $30,000 of income for married couples or $15,000 for individuals would be dropped to 3 percent. The bracket for income above that would be set at 5.5 percent in 2013-2014 and drop to 5.3 percent in 2015 before hitting 5.1 percent in 2016.

It phases out nonwage income taxes for 191,000 limited liability companies, subchapter S corporations and sole proprietorships. The first $100,000 of nonwage income would be exempt in 2013-2014. That would shift to the first $250,000 in 2015-2016 and eliminate the tax entirely starting in 2017.

It forces low-income families to choose between claiming the earned income tax credit or a food sales tax rebate.

The plan eliminates 17 tax credits. And renters would no longer be able to claim the homestead property tax refund. The money saved from that would go back into the program for homeowners, allowing them a maximum $800 refund.

Currently oil and gas companies get a two year exemption from severance taxes on new wells. Under the new plan, any producer drawing more than 100 barrels a day would have to pay the tax.

The plan provides $45 million a year to local governments for property tax relief.

Read more about the bills here: http://www.kansas.com/2012/05/09/2327940/brownback-plan-to-lower-income.html