MICHAEL A. SMITH
Underpaid for years, Kansas legislators finally received a substantial pay increase this year. Instead of a paltry per diem (per day) allowance, they now receive $43,000 per year and remain eligible for KPERS benefits.
Normally, I would argue in favor of this. It takes courage for legislators to raise their own pay and then sit for re-election before collecting it. As per the state constitution, there is no other way to do this—not even to keep up with inflation—and constituents hate it, often believing their representatives (or more accurately, the representatives from other districts) to be undeserving. Yet political science research has shown for decades that professional legislatures produce better legislation, less likely to cause problems or be overturned in court. During session, legislators work far in excess of 40 hours per week, and it takes years to learn the ins and outs of complicated policies such as the state budget.
That said, with the hefty pay increase, one might think that the legislators would also lengthen the session. The Late KU Professor Burdett Loomis documented the cost of the Kansas Legislature’s short, rushed sessions all the way back in 1994. Loomis wrote at length about the frantic, sleep-deprived, late-night sessions in which the Legislature would cobble together budgets at the last minute. Each succeeding year, they would vow to pass a budget earlier—and then do the same thing again. In 2012, Representative Bob Bethell fell asleep driving home after the end of the session, crashed his car, and died.
Now the legislators finally make decent pay. So, why the super-short session this year? They rushed the budget through so quickly that they did not even allow time for the next round of budget estimates, which may make their numbers particularly inaccurate and require fixing later. The legislators were in such a rush, they held bulk line-item veto overrides, not taking the time to review Governor Kelly’s proposed spending cuts one at a time.
Unfortunately, the only plausible reason for this crazy hurry is the leadership’s desire to ram through policies without allowing time for discussion, deliberation, or debate. As shown during recent town hall meetings for Senator Roger Marshall and other members of Congress, public feedback can get raucous, particularly when programs, policies, or benefits that make a real difference in people’s lives are threatened. Constituents deserve to have a voice, and if what they say is hard to hear, well, that’s why we pay you the big bucks.
Granted--and in stark contrast with the current circus in Washington, DC--the Kansas budget this year was largely an incrementalist one, making only small, mostly upward changes to state appropriations. But some major “hot button” legislation passed, including a ban on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, a ban on gender-affirming medical care for Transgender youth, and some additional tax cuts on top of the huge one passed last year. This threatens to put the state into a $461 million shortfall by 2028. Constituents may want to talk about this, but whoops, the session’s already over! It should also be noted that the legislators shortened their session primarily by cutting the so-called “breaks.” These are—or were—the days
they would go home and listen to constituents, before heading back to Topeka to finish their work.
As a political scientist, I strongly support building up the institutional capacity of state legislatures, including pay. But is it too much to ask for better service in exchange for the higher pay? With their frantic session this year, the Kansas Legislature failed to hold up their end of the deal.
Michael A. Smith is a Professor of Political Science at Emporia State University.