The views and opinions expressed in this editorial article are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of Salina Post or Eagle Media. The editorial is intended to stimulate critical thinking and debate on issues of public interest and should be read with an open mind. Readers are encouraged to consider multiple sources of information and to form their own informed opinions.
By: BRIANNE HEIDBREDER
Insight Kansas
Governor Laura Kelly has received national media attention this summer for resigning from the National Governors Association and joining a lawsuit against the federal government over the release of appropriated funds. These actions reflect the current, charged political climate. But beneath the headlines is an issue that should be important to all Kansans, regardless of party identification. This issue is the balance of state and federal power.
Governor Kelly’s decision to join other states in suing the federal government was based on a delay in the release of already-approved federal dollars that are used to fund key programs in Kansas. The Kelly administration has said these delays are political. The delayed funds, which were included in legislation that was passed by Congress and signed into law, would be used by Kansas for items like broadband buildout, clean water, school improvement, and other important local development projects. Such delays have tangible consequences. Without appropriated funds, projects stall, jobs are delayed, and communities that have planned for these investments are left waiting.
Governor Kelly also announced she will pull back from the National Governors Association. She explained this decision by pointing to the rising partisanship in an institution that has been characterized with bipartisan cooperation in the past. This decision indicates the increasing difficulty of consistent effective communication between state officials and federal institutions in today's deeply polarized political environment. It also raises the question of where governors will now find common ground across party lines, and whether alternative forums for collaboration can fill the gap.
It is important to understand that this political moment is not just an argument about spending between a Democratic governor and Republican federal administration. It is, more broadly, an argument about the merit of federalism, which is our system of dividing powers between national and state governments. Federalism provides a framework where states can respond to local conditions, represent their constituents directly, and, when necessary, counter federal actions that don't best serve their communities. This balance is about making sure political decisions, even national ones, align with the unique needs of our state.
Conflict between states and the federal government are not new. In fact, they are as old as the nation itself. But instances like these remind us that there are benefits to be gained by making sure power remains diffused, accountable, and responsive. It makes certain that decisions involving Kansans are not merely decided in Washington, but also in Topeka, by representatives who work and reside among us.
Governor Kelly's actions, particularly lawsuits, will work their way through the courts for a while, and there will be disagreement about the case merits. But her actions pose a fundamental question: how does our state claim its space in a changing national landscape? The answer is to remain vigilant and ensure the values of balance and local control are not lost in our federal system.
Brianne Heidbreder, PhD is an Associate Professor of Political Science at Kansas State University.
You can send us your opinions/letters to the editor, along with your name, city and or county location to [email protected]