The Kansas Supreme Court is legislating today

[Dugout DickStone]

If you hate checks and balances and you would rather a single group of individuals just do whatever they feel like, just come out and say it.

I like the system of checks and balances we had. The KS Supreme Court decided to tip the scales and usurp legislative authority, but I don't really expect you to understand or agree with that.

I've always though judicial review is vastly overrated.  I'm with you, toss it and lets let some hicks elected by the sod farmers in Jetmore decide what the constitution says.

[CNS]

If you hate checks and balances and you would rather a single group of individuals just do whatever they feel like, just come out and say it.

I like the system of checks and balances we had. The KS Supreme Court decided to tip the scales and usurp legislative authority, but I don't really expect you to understand or agree with that.

I've always though judicial review is vastly overrated.  I'm with you, toss it and lets let some hicks elected by the sod farmers in Jetmore decide what the constitution says.

You obviously don't get it.  There are non-republicans who actually have the gall to serve on the bench.  Can you rough ridin' believe that?!?!?!?!  The problem is that if you don't use your judicial review to decide that the amount of money is adequate, based on the judicial review that says that education is taking up enough of the state's budget, well then who the eff are you to decide money matters as a judge?

[Dugout DickStone]

If you hate checks and balances and you would rather a single group of individuals just do whatever they feel like, just come out and say it.

I like the system of checks and balances we had. The KS Supreme Court decided to tip the scales and usurp legislative authority, but I don't really expect you to understand or agree with that.

I've always though judicial review is vastly overrated.  I'm with you, toss it and lets let some hicks elected by the sod farmers in Jetmore decide what the constitution says.

You obviously don't get it.  There are non-republicans who actually have the gall to serve on the bench.  Can you rough ridin' believe that?!?!?!?!  The problem is that if you don't use your judicial review to decide that the amount of money is adequate, based on the judicial review that says that education is taking up enough of the state's budget, well then who the eff are you to decide money matters as a judge?

I don't think that makes sense.

[CNS]

If you hate checks and balances and you would rather a single group of individuals just do whatever they feel like, just come out and say it.

I like the system of checks and balances we had. The KS Supreme Court decided to tip the scales and usurp legislative authority, but I don't really expect you to understand or agree with that.

I've always though judicial review is vastly overrated.  I'm with you, toss it and lets let some hicks elected by the sod farmers in Jetmore decide what the constitution says.

You obviously don't get it.  There are non-republicans who actually have the gall to serve on the bench.  Can you rough ridin' believe that?!?!?!?!  The problem is that if you don't use your judicial review to decide that the amount of money is adequate, based on the judicial review that says that education is taking up enough of the state's budget, well then who the eff are you to decide money matters as a judge?

I don't think that makes sense.

Good.

[Mr Bread]

If you hate checks and balances and you would rather a single group of individuals just do whatever they feel like, just come out and say it.

I like the system of checks and balances we had. The KS Supreme Court decided to tip the scales and usurp legislative authority, but I don't really expect you to understand or agree with that.

I've always though judicial review is vastly overrated.  I'm with you, toss it and lets let some hicks elected by the sod farmers in Jetmore decide what the constitution says.

You obviously don't get it.  There are non-republicans who actually have the gall to serve on the bench.  Can you rough ridin' believe that?!?!?!?!  The problem is that if you don't use your judicial review to decide that the amount of money is adequate, based on the judicial review that says that education is taking up enough of the state's budget, well then who the eff are you to decide money matters as a judge?

I don't think that makes sense.

Good.

K-S-U-Wildcats? is an excellent barrister. 

[Rage Against the McKee]

What a stupid talking point. We're already spending 2/3rds of the state budget on education, and you really think the "school system will fail" if they don't get more? There is questionable if any correlation between pumping more money into public schools and improved education. And when the money is spent, it often goes to beefing up administration and bureaucracy as opposed to adding actual teachers.

Anyway, this is a policy debate that should probably be left to the legislature and people who directly elect them, dontcha think? No, I guess you don't. We got some libs on the court you see, and they're providing an important "check" by doing a little legislating themselves!

The school system will fail to meet its obligations as mandated by the state, yes. You realize that the state revenues fell by about 20% this year due to the new tax plan, right? Well, the cost of teachers, technology, and supplies did not, so education funding is going to have to take a much greater percentage of the state budget than it has in the past in order to maintain current levels of quality.

[Panjandrum]

What a stupid talking point. We're already spending 2/3rds of the state budget on education, and you really think the "school system will fail" if they don't get more? There is questionable if any correlation between pumping more money into public schools and improved education. And when the money is spent, it often goes to beefing up administration and bureaucracy as opposed to adding actual teachers.

Anyway, this is a policy debate that should probably be left to the legislature and people who directly elect them, dontcha think? No, I guess you don't. We got some libs on the court you see, and they're providing an important "check" by doing a little legislating themselves!

The school system will fail to meet its obligations as mandated by the state, yes. You realize that the state revenues fell by about 20% this year due to the new tax plan, right? Well, the cost of teachers, technology, and supplies did not, so education funding is going to have to take a much greater percentage of the state budget than it has in the past in order to maintain current levels of quality.

Why should we care about quality education in the state of Kansas?  What do they need to know that the Bible can't teach them?

[Rage Against the McKee]

What a stupid talking point. We're already spending 2/3rds of the state budget on education, and you really think the "school system will fail" if they don't get more? There is questionable if any correlation between pumping more money into public schools and improved education. And when the money is spent, it often goes to beefing up administration and bureaucracy as opposed to adding actual teachers.

Anyway, this is a policy debate that should probably be left to the legislature and people who directly elect them, dontcha think? No, I guess you don't. We got some libs on the court you see, and they're providing an important "check" by doing a little legislating themselves!

The school system will fail to meet its obligations as mandated by the state, yes. You realize that the state revenues fell by about 20% this year due to the new tax plan, right? Well, the cost of teachers, technology, and supplies did not, so education funding is going to have to take a much greater percentage of the state budget than it has in the past in order to maintain current levels of quality.

Why should we care about quality education in the state of Kansas?  What do they need to know that the Bible can't teach them?

The evils of socialism?

[star seed 7]

the bible is quite socialist 

[Rage Against the McKee]

the bible is quite socialist 

Well, yeah. If it wasn't, we wouldn't need school at all.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

Its Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) that there's a constitutional provision so desperately vague that it requires repeated litigation to interpret.  But enough people thought it was a good enough idea to make it part of the constitution so clearly education is important in Kansas.

What's unfortunate is that none of this has anything with paying for education of children, but rather some the bloated bureaucracy that is the educational "system".

[raquetcat]

This article gives a nice brief overview of the history of this issue

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/09/us/kansas-legislature-threatens-showdown-with-court-over-school-financing.html?_r=0

[ednksu]

This article gives a nice brief overview of the history of this issue

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/09/us/kansas-legislature-threatens-showdown-with-court-over-school-financing.html?_r=0

Great piece.  Really shows just how totally out of touch radical Republicans are from reality.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

Ruling tomorrow morning. Given current composition of court, I expect a ruling something along the lines of "you need to spend $500 million more on schools, we don't care how you do it - budgeting's your job, legislature!"

[steve dave]

LIBERAL KANSAS JUDGES!

[Dugout DickStone]

Ruling tomorrow morning. Given current composition of court, I expect a ruling something along the lines of "you need to spend $500 million more on schools, we don't care how you do it - budgeting's your job, legislature!"

That's a lot of bibles

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

LIBERAL KANSAS JUDGES!

I know, right? It's just so quintessentially liberal: demand that we spend a crap ton more money but leave it to someone else to figure out how to pay for it.

[GCJayhawker]

LIBERAL KANSAS JUDGES!

I know, right? It's just so quintessentially liberal: demand that we spend a crap ton more money but leave it to someone else to figure out how to pay for it.

I mean it is not like the KS constitution has a completely open for interpretation standard of the Legislature providing an adequate education.  It is also not like the Courts are set up to determine the constitutionality of legislation that the Legislature passes, including funding questions when they pertain directly to parts of the state constitution.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

LIBERAL KANSAS JUDGES!

I know, right? It's just so quintessentially liberal: demand that we spend a crap ton more money but leave it to someone else to figure out how to pay for it.

I mean it is not like the KS constitution has a completely open for interpretation standard of the Legislature providing an adequate education.  It is also not like the Courts are set up to determine the constitutionality of legislation that the Legislature passes, including funding questions when they pertain directly to parts of the state constitution.

No, our constitution has exactly the vague provision you're talking about. And if the legislature slashed the education budget, that might indeed be unreasonable enough that the court would be justified to step in. But when the legislature is already devoting half the budget to education, that might be a good time for the court to exercise a little deference, particularly when it's the legislature, not the court, that is left picking up the pieces of a busted budget. Again, however, liberals do not care about such trivialities. By gum, they're gonna tell the legislature to spend more money and let those jerks figure out how to pay for it! It's not the courts job to balance a budget - only to say that more money must be spent!

[star seed 7]

Hard to believe that liberals have such a stranglehold on the state

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

I keep hearing that brownback cut school funding, but I keep reading he wants to make kindergarten all day. Now the court is in charge of telling the legislature what to spend. What's going on 

[Rage Against the McKee]

LIBERAL KANSAS JUDGES!

I know, right? It's just so quintessentially liberal: demand that we spend a crap ton more money but leave it to someone else to figure out how to pay for it.

I mean it is not like the KS constitution has a completely open for interpretation standard of the Legislature providing an adequate education.  It is also not like the Courts are set up to determine the constitutionality of legislation that the Legislature passes, including funding questions when they pertain directly to parts of the state constitution.

No, our constitution has exactly the vague provision you're talking about. And if the legislature slashed the education budget, that might indeed be unreasonable enough that the court would be justified to step in. But when the legislature is already devoting half the budget to education, that might be a good time for the court to exercise a little deference, particularly when it's the legislature, not the court, that is left picking up the pieces of a busted budget. Again, however, liberals do not care about such trivialities. By gum, they're gonna tell the legislature to spend more money and let those jerks figure out how to pay for it! It's not the courts job to balance a budget - only to say that more money must be spent!

Yeah, it's sort of like slashing a school's budget and then telling them that they have to find a way to pay for all day Kindergarten. Only, the state legislature slashed their own budget willingly, so it's not really like that at all.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

And by "slashing" they mean spending more than the year before. 

[Rage Against the McKee]

http://cjonline.com/news/education/2013-09-12/study-kansas-cuts-k-12-education-funding-fourth-most-nation

 

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

http://cjonline.com/news/education/2013-09-12/study-kansas-cuts-k-12-education-funding-fourth-most-nation

 

Oh - a "study" from a liberal think tank (the article forgot to mention that, I guess) says it, so it must be true. Here is the actual spending in KS per pupil: http://www.kansasopengov.org/SchoolDistricts/SpendingPerPupil/tabid/1271/Default.aspx
2008 - $12,096
2009 - $12,631
2010 - $12,267
2011 - $12,226
2012 - $12,595
2013 - $12,776

Adjusting for inflation, that means that 2013 spending per pupil is approximately 6.8% lower than spending at its peak in fiscal year 2009 (when the economic collapse took its toll on state governments), and 2.4% lower than what we spent in 2008. And, of course, because these figures are per pupil and adjusted for inflation, we're actually spending a record amount in total dollars on education in 2013. But to libtards, this = THEY'RE SLASHING SPENDING!!!!! 

This kind of deranged thinking, by the way, is a perfect microcosm of why our federal debt is currently over $17 trillion and growing by leaps and bounds. Libtards are simply too stupid or dishonest to be trusted with the pocketbook.