President Bush objects to judges who legislate from the bench rather than follow the rule of law and the clear intentions of the legislative branch. But he is guilty of similar activism — big time.
Bush has issued more than 500 bill-signing statements — twice as many as President Clinton and former President Bush combined. Bush used these little-known statements to attach his own interpretation of legislation and signal whether he wants agencies to implement the new laws, including the recently passed ban on torture.
Lawmakers tried to rein in Bush’s activism in 2003 by passing a provision requiring the Justice Department to inform Congress whenever the administration ignored a law based on constitutional objections. But Bush used a bill-signing statement to assert his right to ignore that requirement.
Apparently, activism is in the eye of the beholder.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
The eagerly awaited legislative audit of school finance was released this morning. The news was good for schools, bad for lawmakers hoping the $290 million more they found for schools for fiscal 2006 would be good enough going forward. The audit concludes that $316 million more a year is needed to provide the “suitable” education mandated by the state constitution. And if the state wants to truly leave no child behind, as mandated by Congress, the Legislature would need to spend an additional $399 million a year. Lawmakers who’d earlier touted the validity of the audit, including some anti-tax conservatives, now must decide whether to live by it, and how — perhaps by forcing consolidation, expanding gambling or raising taxes. And what will the Kansas Supreme Court make of what lawmakers do, especially if it’s spread over multiple years or some act of judicial defiance? In any case, the audit will be hard for the Legislature to ignore.
Posted by Rhonda Holman
After the 2004 presidential election, some Democrats began looking for a way to better incorporate faith into the party’s platform. But this commentary in The Washington Post argues against Democrats linking public policy goals to the goals of religious progressives. Joseph Loconte writes:
“Christians are right to argue that the Bible is a priceless source of moral and spiritual insight. But they’re wrong to treat it as a substitute for a coherent political philosophy. . . .
“When people of faith join political debates, they must welcome those democratic virtues that promote the common good: prudence, reason, compromise — and a realization that politics can’t usher in the kingdom of heaven.”
Posted by Melissa Cooley
The recent dismissal of a federal lawsuit stemming from a Baxter Springs criminal defamation case presents another opportunity to state what should be the obvious: The Legislature needs to repeal this appalling law and let libel cases play out in civil court, where they belong in a civil society. It’s wrong for somebody to knowingly spread false information, of course. But the proper remedy is civil action that can lead to a monetary damages award. Kansas’ criminal libel law, which carries fines and up to a year in jail, is the stuff of despotic Third World countries.
Attorney General Phill Kline has said the law should go, as have legal scholars across the nation. How can legislators do nothing as a law that criminalizes free speech not only sits on the books but continues to be used by prosecutors?
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Despite the tremendous ridicule President Bush got for saying that then-FEMA Director Michael Brown was doing a “heck of a job” post-Katrina, Bush is still praising people that way. At a Thursday summit on international education, he termed Condoleezza Rice “a heck of a secretary of state” and Donald Rumsfeld “a heck of a secretary of the defense.” He also noted that “our ideology is a heck of a lot more hopeful” than terrorists’.
Posted by Rhonda Holman
The official start of the new legislative session today and Gov. Kathleen Sebelius’ State of the State address tonight will both be overshadowed by the biggest legislative news of the day: the release of a cost study on K-12 education by the Legislative Division of Post Audit. Will lawmakers accept the results or dismiss them, as they did with the last study? If the study says that education is underfunded, how much more money will be needed? Would that require increasing state revenues, either by raising taxes or expanding gambling? Should funding be based on “inputs,” such as course offerings, or student achievement “outputs”? Will the Kansas Supreme Court accept the study as legitimate? We’ll start to get some answers today.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
