By MARTIN HAWVER
The decade-old scrap between the Kansas Legislature and the Judiciary, played out in the hallways and committees and budget bill votes, is now moving to…the Judiciary.
We keep hearing about that “three-legged stool” of tax apportionment. We need enough income, property and sales taxes to support the services that we want from our state government.
Well, there’s another stool out there, a bigger one that doesn’t deal just with taxes but with state government itself.
Here’s the fight. The Legislature’s leg of this stool keeps getting taller and some believe it’s to the point where the stool is so unlevel that you—or all us Kansans—can’t sit on it anymore. Oh, the other two legs? Judicial and Executive (governor).
Several judges and court employees have sued the Legislature for more money to operate the courts. Those Judiciary employees are seeking a budget with enough money to adequately, or at least comparatively with other states, pay its more than 260 judges and 1,600 non-judge employees higher salaries. About 90 percent of the court’s budget which is appropriated by the Legislature is for salaries. Now, the Judiciary budget isn’t all just legislative appropriations, there are some fees and such, but practically, do you want the courts to work on commission? Didn’t think so.
And, who makes that decision on an adequate budget for the Judiciary so that it can carry out its duties? Initially, it’s the Judiciary which figures out a budget and hands it to the governor, who generally—former Gov. Sam Brownback didn’t, Gov. Laura Kelly did—hand it off to the Legislature to pay. Simple. Get the budget, finance it, and lawmakers can turn their attention to fence law, gun bills, or maybe some other issue that they believe will get them re-elected.
But the Legislature the past few years has generally believed that the Judiciary hasn’t been good to the Legislature. Abortion rights, financing of public schools are the keys there, when the conservative-managed Legislature has felt at least ignored, if not actually whipped by the court over abortion rights and financing of public schools.
So…The plaintiffs in the lawsuit have sued an entire branch of government—the Legislature—for not adequately financing the Judiciary that hasn’t done what the Legislature wants.
But…there’s a possible trade here. If the Legislature—well, at least the Senate—got to approve or reject nominees to the Kansas Supreme Court, this fight might end. It’s practically that simple. Let the Republican-dominated Senate confirm or reject justices appointed by the Democrat governor, and chances are good the Judicial budget scrap will go away.
And a lawsuit that offers the Judiciary the right as a co-equal branch of state government to set its own budget and force the Legislature to appropriate the money to pay for it? Works out well for Judicial employees, no reason the Executive Branch should care much, and the Legislature loses its most powerful right…to decide where and how state tax money is spent.
Now, it looks a little, well, uncomfortable that the Judiciary if it decided that the handful of plaintiff employees who have sued the Legislature is right will set its own budget and set its own salaries while the Legislature looks on from the cheap seats (and yes, legislators in Kansas are paid less than in almost every other state within driving distance).
But we’re waiting for this one. Say the Supreme Court rules that its plaintiffs are right, and the Legislature loses. Those courthouse employees won’t have to get a second or third job.
Then does the Senate win? And a constitutional amendment to allow it to confirm justices passes in the building and on next fall’s ballot?
Still sorting out who wins this one…
Syndicated by Hawver News Company LLC of Topeka; Martin Hawver is publisher of Hawver's Capitol Report—to learn more about this nonpartisan statewide political news service, visit the website at www.hawvernews.com