Can you phase in a constitutional requirement?

It would certainly be better for the state budget and taxpayers if the Legislature phases in a funding increase for K-12 education. A House proposal released Thursday would spread $500 million in new school spending over the next three years. But would the Kansas Supreme Court really go for phasing in a constitutional requirement? After all, the reason for the delay is primarily political: Lawmakers and Gov. Kathleen Sebelius don’t want to raise taxes during an election year.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee

8 Comments

  1. J
    Posted February 24, 2006 at 1:33 pm | Permalink

    You can’t phase in a Constitutional requirement. By definition things would remain unconstitutional during the phase in period.

    It’s time for the religious right to get off their high horse. If they won’t raise taxes (nobody wants to see their taxes go up but there may be no other option) they could give serious consideration to cost reduction measures such as consolidation and expanded gambling. But we know they won’t ever allow those.

  2. Nathan
    Posted February 24, 2006 at 1:43 pm | Permalink

    Who is the “religious right?”

    Does anyone know? I see alot of people reference them, but who are they really?

  3. Jed
    Posted February 24, 2006 at 2:29 pm | Permalink

    Oxy Morons!

  4. Brian
    Posted February 24, 2006 at 3:19 pm | Permalink

    Nathan,

    Are you kidding?? If it prays like Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell, and condemns like Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell, and sticks its religious head into politics like Pat Robertson or Jerry Fallwell, then you have yourself a GEN-U-INE person on the religious right

  5. CrusaderX
    Posted February 24, 2006 at 4:40 pm | Permalink

    Nathan

    ref:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_right

  6. J M Walker
    Posted February 24, 2006 at 10:35 pm | Permalink

    Nathan,youse bin edjuwkated.

  7. JWink
    Posted February 26, 2006 at 2:48 pm | Permalink

    Phasing in three increasing amounts over three budget years is only smoke and mirrors in my opinion. Only the first year amount would be legally budgeted and binding. The second and third year amounts would be wishful thinking and would require legislation those years. So, legislators — bite the bullet now and budget the correct amount for the first year and get it over with.

  8. Jed
    Posted February 28, 2006 at 6:16 pm | Permalink

    And how many years has the legislature been fighting increased school funding? They’re just trying to put it off longer! It’s past time to pay the piper.