ELECTION PROFILE: United States Senate - (R) Pat Roberts v. (L) Randall Batson v. (I) Greg Orman

Making for one more interesting and intensely watched race in Kansas, is the race for the United States Senate.  We have an incumbent that's been in Washington for 47 years and couldn't win the majority vote in his primary; an out of nowhere Independent who actually has the funds to compete in a high profile race; a viable Democrat who dropped out of the race and a completely ignored Libertarian who has ran for office two times before.  This race encompasses it all.

THE CANDIDATES

(R) Pat Roberts (incumbent) - The Senator has run what can only be described as the most inept campaign in recent memory.  It's been so bad you would think The Campaign was a prophecy of his re-election bid.  Roberts was born in Topeka, KS and raised in Holton, KS, graduating from Holton High School in 1954.  Immediately after high school Senator Roberts enrolled in Kansas State University (Manhattan, KS) where he graduated with a Bachelor of Arts in Journalism in 1958. 

Right after college, the Senator went into the Marine Corps, serving from 1958 to 1962.  After ending his service in the Marine Corps, Roberts became a journalist and editor for multiple newspapers in Arizona from 1962 until 1967.  In 1967, the Roberts left Arizona and joined former Senator Frank Carlson's and then joined (1st District) Congressman Keith Sebelius's staff in 1969.  Roberts served as the administrative assistant until Congressman Sebelius retired in 1981, when Roberts won his boss's seat.  In 1997, after living in Washington, D.C. for 28 years (16 as a Congressman), Roberts was sworn into the United States Senate after his successful campaign.  During that campaign, Roberts made the statement, "I don't plan on serving more than two terms in the Senate."  After almost 18 years, the Senator is seeking his fourth term.

(Interestingly, when Pat Roberts ran for Congress in the First District he listed then, just as he does now, that his residency was in Dodge City, but when did he ever have time to live there?  He lived in Topeka, Holton, and Manhattan until he was 22.  He then went away to the Marine Corps until he was 26, lived in Arizona to the age of 31, then went to work in Washington, D.C. and has worked there ever sense.  Not only is it odd that he listed Dodge City as his residence, but its odd that he had never lived in Kansas's U.S. Congressional District 1.  Manhattan was in District 2 at that time.  His 2014 Republican Primary Tea Party challenger was the first to point this out.)

Ironically, this is the first time in Roberts's 34 year career as a politician that he has faced a competitive race.  In the primary he clearly underestimated his opposition in Dr. Milton Wolf, the Kansas City area "conservative" and Kansas grassroots/Tea Party favorite.  Roberts started things off kind of rough when he stated that although he doesn't have a home in Kansas he does have full access to a recliner in Dodge City.  This fed right into Milton Wolf's disdain for Roberts and his perceived discontent with career politicians.  All of a sudden, the 33 year Congressional incumbent that hadn't really lived in Kansas (according to Milton Wolf's camp and how loosely you define "lived" as in "residency")  since he was 22 was facing heat for there being a 19 year gap between the last time he really lived in Kansas and when he was first elected to represent a district in Kansas he never really lived in.

Still though, it's questionable at what point Senator Roberts began to take Milton Wolf seriously as a legitimate challenger.  We're not sure if it was incompetence, hubris, or a Freudian-slip, but while on a radio show he made the statement, "every time I get an opponent...I'm home."  Catching himself right after he realized his slip and just before "I'm home", he interjected, "I mean every time I get a chance."  This gave Wolf even more ammunition against the Senator.  At the same time, the Senator had a few tricks up his sleeves as well.

Even though Pat Roberts had moved far to the right before the rise of the Tea Party, national and local Tea Party groups remembered Roberts's decades long record as a moderate Republican, allowing Wolf to pick up the Tea Party Express endorsement.  This caused the man who had spent the last 56 years of his life living away from Kansas to accuse Milton Wolf supporters of being outsiders and that Kansans shouldn't trust them.  Still though, the "right wing" radio show pundits began to rush behind Wolf's candidacy.  It seemed like it was every day that Mark Levin was calling for the Republicans of Kansas to throw Pat Roberts out and go with Wolf.

With Roberts feeling the pressure and fearing for his political life, he decided to make the race go personal and attacked Wolf for posting X-Rays on his Facebook page, pouring all of his money into the T.V. ads.  The ads effectively painted Wolf as an irrational, out of control radical reactionary.  This strategy was necessary, because he had essentially lost both bases of the Kansas GOP and needed to rally support around his candidacy. 

In moving to the right to avoid any potential primary challenge, Roberts even went so far as to call for the resignation of Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius.  The attack on Sebelius (also, the former Governor of Kansas) appalled many moderate Republicans throughout the state.  Had it not been for the Sebelius family, many of the moderates believed Roberts would not be anywhere close to as successful as he is now.  After all, it was Congressman Sebelius's staff that Roberts served on for 12 years.  It was Congressman Sebelius who handpicked Roberts to succeed Sebelius after he retired.  It was Sebelius's seat, in a district Roberts never really lived in that Roberts began his now almost 34 year career.  His attack on Congressman Sebelius's daughter-in-law was the final betrayal to the moderate base.

The attack ads proved useful enough to hold off Wolf in the primaries, but even in victory Roberts still looked weak as he was unable to win the majority, only receiving 48%.  Wolf finished with 41% and two unknowns split the remaining 11%.  It was clear that he received the moderate base's support by framing Wolf as a radical incompetent, but he did so at the expense of alienating a significant portion of the grass roots, Tea Party, and "conservative" base.  This is most evident on social media, and that Milton Wolf still refuses to endorse Roberts.  The 11% portion going to unknowns in a hotly contested and covered primary looks like a moderate protest.  It is also unlikely that all of the primary support Roberts received is a lock as a good portion were alienated moderates who he made fear Wolf. 

(L)  Randall Batson - Batson is the Libertarian candidate in the race for the United States Senate race in Kansas.  Looking at his website you will find that he is from Wichita, served in the military, is blue collar, and had a political awakening.  We also know that he ran for State Representative twice and his candidacy is pretty simple: Justice, Liberty, & Peace.

(I) Greg Orman - All we knew was that right after the primaries Pat Roberts only had a 4 point lead over Democrat Chad Taylor.  Then a couple weeks later, after an Independent candidate actually had enough money to run an advertisement on television, polls started to show this.  A week later, Taylor's support tanked to 15% and he decided to pull out of the race altogether.  As soon as it was announced that Taylor was dropping out of the race every poll started to show Orman leading Roberts in a race even with Taylor's name left on the ballot.  This created all kinds of chaos both in Democrat and Republican ranks.  Clearly Orman's rise was spurred by moderate Republicans looking for a viable moderate candidate, Independents tired of the partisan gridlock, and moderate Democrats who wanted nothing more than to see Roberts gone.

But the question remained:  Who is Greg Orman? Why is he Independent? It became abundantly clear, Greg Orman is what the plurality of us are.  Someone who tried being a Republican, but after eight years of the Bush administration decided he would give "Change" a chance.  After four years of gridlock and no change, he voted for Romney, grew tired of the game and two years later decided he was none of the above.  A successful Venture Capitalist by profession, pragmatist by nature, and ideologically non-affiliated political Independent, Greg Orman has made what was already going to be an interesting election year in Kansas even more so.

ISSUES

1:  Partisan Gridlock?  Checking out the issues page of each candidate (Pat Roberts; Randall Batson; and Greg Orman) it's obvious that only one candidate actually acknowledges this issue and that it is a legitimate problem.  With Roberts being an ever-partisan-loyalist (regardless of where the party moves) and Batson seemingly a strict ideologue, there doesn't appear to be much room for agreement.  Orman on the other hand, is neither of these and as a result has much more room to make governance work.

Who Wins the Issue?
Greg Orman

2:  Jobs and Economy?  Roberts gives us generalized nonsense on his warrior experience in fighting regulation and an industry (although important) only employs 22,000 Kansans (we also doubt that Obama could pick Roberts out in a line up).  Batson actually proposes an interesting idea of eliminating income tax on overtime wages.  However, Orman grants us a more in depth look at how we can improve the economy and promote job creation. 

It makes sense that he would have a better understanding of the issue (not to knock Batson's experience), as he is an entrepreneur by trade and has created jobs where as Roberts only spent five years in the private sector (50 years ago as a newspaper writer) and at this point is just a Republican rubber stamp.  Orman points out that K-12 education must change, innovation must occur, healthcare inefficiencies and affordability issues must be fixed, and that governmental gridlock creates an environment of uncertainty for investors and would be small business starters. 

Who Wins the Issue?
Greg Orman.

3:  Immigration?  Roberts wants us to enforce our current laws.  Furthermore, he actually doesn't even take the time to even offer a general paragraph of words that don't say anything about the problem on his issues page (see).  Batson states on his issues page that if immigrants come here legally and have proven themselves with integrity, they should be allowed to become citizens.

Again, Orman really steals the points on the issue.  Pat Roberts claims Orman supports amnesty.  Pat Roberts is a liar when he says that.  Read Orman's immigration stance.  It's an accurate analysis of how Washington is handling the issue now, and it's a practical approach for the United States and for Kansas that addresses the problem and doesn't harm our economy.

Who Wins the Issue?
Greg Orman

4:  Education?  Roberts apparently was too busy to address education, because there is nothing on his issues page about it.  Batson is for eliminating the Department of Education because he sees that it has diminished our quality of education by taking the state's duty of administration of education away from them.  He also supports funding private schools.  Orman acknowledges the importance of education, claims that is primarily a function of states to administer, but believes the federal government has the role of encouraging innovation.  He is also for making higher education more affordable and reforming the student loan system and making universities accountable.  That makes a lot of sense since we do have over $1 Trillion in student loan debt as a nation.

Who Wins the Issue?
Greg Orman (Student loan debt is a HUGE ISSUE and it CANNOT be ignored.  Actually, it may be the most important issue to address in the next five years.)

5:  Taxes?  Roberts gives another paragraph of general nonsense, he claims he supports a Fair Tax, but doesn't explain what that is.  Batson supports the Fair Tax as well, but he refers to it as a consumption tax and would like to repeal the 16th amendment (he better watch out the Republicans might accuse him of being against the Constitution).  The Independent for U.S. Senate, though, recognizes that the most desirable trait in a tax system is it's equitability.  He's for simplification of the tax code, the closing of loopholes for major corporations and for moving to a territorial tax system that would punish businesses for moving out of the country and reward those that stay in the country and reinvest into their workforce.

Who Wins the Issue?
Greg Orman

6:  Environment & Energy?  Pat Roberts uses a GOP talking points bulletin for his views on the issue.  He completely ignores that coal is harmful to the environment and he erroneously states that the Keystone Pipeline will reduce prices for gas.  (The Keystone Pipeline will not reduce prices because the oil companies are in collusion and engage in market manipulation, it is however safer than the current means of oil transport, but he doesn't make that argument so we can't reward him for being for it's construction, we can only ding him for lying.)

Batson doesn't provide any information on his issues page.  Orman does though.  In fact, Orman tells us that having to choose between protecting the environment and protecting industry is an erroneous presentation of the choices.  He actually points out that his first company 'Environmental Lighting Concepts' was a lighting efficiency company that created jobs and helped the environment.

Who Wins The Issue?
Greg Orman

7:  Healthcare? Roberts insanely champions that he helped shut down the government and cost the American tax payers 12.5 MILLION DOLLARS AN HOUR FOR 17 DAYS in order to protest the Affordable Care Act.  He also promotes that he demanded Secretary Sebelius resign or post which is a reason moderate Republicans have decided to abandon him.  He also claims that he voted to replace the Affordable Care Act, but he doesn't say with what.  Further, Roberts's generalized GOP talking points memo claims that he believes healthcare is better between a doctor and the patient and not the government, but fails how to state where the government has asserted itself in the doctor-patient relationship and also ignores that insurance companies have always presented barriers to that relationship.

Batson doesn't provide any opinion on the matter, but we assume that he is not for the Affordable Care Act.  Yet, we still don't know.  It's only speculation.

Orman condemns the political games being played over the issue.  He accurately points out that the ACA expanded an already broken health care system and didn't solve the crisis that existed before.  Instead of playing more political games like Roberts (which cost the country billions of dollars) Orman believes we should work to truly resolve the problems with the healthcare law.

Who Wins the Issue?
Greg Orman

8.  National Debt?  Pat Roberts puts out another generalized GOP talking points memo paragraph that continues to say nothing specific.  We also find it interesting that when Pat Roberts was elected to Congress the United States national debt was $907 Billion, since Pat Roberts been in office the national debt has raised by $16,959,000,000,000.00.  That's SIXTEEN TRILLION, NINE HUNDRED AND FIFTYNINE BILLION DOLLARS!  So clearly he has been as effective as his claim that he has long championed a balanced budget.

Batson doesn't state a policy opinion here.

Greg Orman says that hard decisions will have to be made and that running up high debts only to pass on to future generations is immoral and that the partisan gridlock won't allow for any of those hard choices to be made (he's right).  He is also in support of requiring the government to report as detailed information about it's spending as it requires tax payers.

Who Wins the Issue?
Greg Orman (Roberts does not have a credible leg to stand on)

9.  Military & Veterans?  Roberts, Batson, and Orman all take honorable stances on veterans issues.  Roberts record on governmental accountability regarding military issues is pretty horrendous (often referred to as Cover-Up Chairman). Also, retired United States Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson has some choice words for Senator Pat Roberts and his involvement in the government's retaliatory leak of the identity of a C.I.A. agent. 

Batson is for respecting the sovereignty of other nations and explains how that is not an isolationist approach. 

Orman on other military issues, specifically with current international threats like ISIL, takes an approach we think most Americans agree with.  If the Iraqi people are going to have a stable and free society, it is ultimately they that need to accomplish it.  He believes we should continue to provide them with logistical, training, and armed air support, but boots on the ground is not a must.

Who Wins the Issue?
Greg Orman

10.  2nd Amendment?  None of the candidates are against the 2nd Amendment, as Pat Roberts's political propaganda would have you believe.  Background checks and firearm regulations are not against the 2nd Amendment "not even to the most "conservative" Constitutional-originalist judge in history" and Pat Roberts used to support them, but he has changed his mind because he has no backbone.  The constitution uses the term "arms" not "guns" nor "rifles" or "muskets".  If you believe that means any arms, such as military grade weaponry, you are completely irrational.  You have a fundamental right of self defense, but decades have long passed since the military's arms weaponry became so advanced that a civilian population could possibly defeat the military.  To advocate for access to such weapons would be entirely unreasonable, irrational, and irresponsible. 

Who Wins the Issue?
Tie - Randall Batson and Greg Orman

11.  Abortion?  Pat Roberts has received a 100% National Right to Life Rating (that means he's anti-abortion, which the person writing this profile likes, but it doesn't actually make him Pro-Life, which we find hypocritical; we also don't like partisan groups like National Right to Life that are really just extensions of political parties, not advocate groups).  However, his social policies have actually shown to increase the rates of abortion when his party has control, so that's a bit counterproductive to being anti-abortion if you can't ever win the majority necessary to amend the Constitution.  Being pro-life actually begins before conception and doesn't end at birth. 

Batson takes a much more pragmatic approach, seemingly very much in line with the understanding we laid out in criticizing Roberts for being nothing more than a partisan-point collector.  Orman is pro-choice.

Who Wins the Issue?
We're not sure.  Pat Roberts comes right out and says he's against abortion (good).  Batson doesn't say if he is against abortion or for women's choice, but from how we can read his tone we're going to guess he's Pro-Life, but in a much more practical manner than Roberts.  So we'll say:

Batson, but we'd like more clarity.

12.  Agriculutre?  Well, even though Roberts likes to tout his Agricultural Credentials this report just came out showing that he has missed almost 2/3 of all agriculture committee meetings he was supposed to attend over the last 15 years. 

Who Wins the Issue?
Anyone who can show up for a meeting half the time.

CONCLUSION

Greg Orman was taking a lot of knocks for not having enough information regarding his policies, but after analyzing all the candidates, Orman is far above the most comprehensive in his policy agenda.  We pick Greg Orman (Randall Batson is a strong 2nd, while Roberts is a long distant 3rd).  It's not really that difficult.  Kansas has an opportunity to spur national change, true to its Jayhawker spirit.  If Kansas and South Dakota can send Independents to the Senate in Washington this election, how many more will rise around the country in the next election?  In America, we almost never limit ourselves to either or choices, why have we let political parties tell us we have to when it comes to politics?  We even lost almost all respect for the Tea Party caving in on their principles for the sake of the Republican Party.

ELECTION PROFILE: Kansas Secretary of State - (R) Kris Kobach v. (D) Jean Schodorf

The last of our state wide elections of offices that are NOT SUPPOSED TO succumb to partisan politics, but instead the duties of their office, is the Secretary of State.  For the last time we'll show the government organizational chart (we won't for governor, because if you don't know what the governor's role in government is, you shouldn't vote).



For state wide offices that are not intended to be politically partisan activists in their objectives, the Attorney General is generally the more interesting and almost always gets the most publicity.  It makes sense, the Attorney General plays an integral role in the justice system.  When high profile crimes occur, the Attorney General's office almost always gets involved, either by direct prosecution or with assistance and the providing of resources to the county attorneys.  When the Federal Government enacts a law like the Affordable Care Act and the majority of citizens in Kansas believe it's unconstitutional, the Attorney General files suit on the state's behalf. 

The Secretary of State, however, almost never receives publicity.  Usually, if an office holder whose office doesn't receive publicity is showing up in the news everyday, it's not a good thing.  If half a state knows the name of their Secretary of State, generally speaking, it is not a good thing.  Why then, is the Secretary of State election in Kansas so heated?  Why are their national media agencies paying attention to the 34th (out of 50) most populated state's Secretary of State race?  When "Googling" the Kansas Secretary of State by his name "Kris Kobach", why is the top related search "Kris Kobach racist"? (Seriously, Google "Kris Kobach" then scroll down to the bottom.) What does the Secretary of State do to garner all of that attention?  Well, that's why we're here, to answer those questions.

KANSAS SECRETARY OF STATE

AUTHORITY:

Like the Kansas Attorney General, the Kansas Secretary of State's office derives it authority from Article 1, Section 1 of the Kansas State Constitution.

DUTIES:

The Kansas Secretary of State office serves three basic purposes, (1) electoral, (2) economic, and (3) administrative.  We'll break each of them down for you.

• Electoral:  As the chief elections officer of the state, he or she provides this service in an administrative role.  In this role, the Secretary of State oversees elections and voter registrations.  In addition, the Secretary of State is required to file campaign finance reports of all the campaigns in the state, as well as register lobbyists.  However, when the matter turns to regulating lobbying and campaign finance, he or she shares that duty with the Kansas Governmental Ethics Commission.
• Economic:  The Secretary of State operates the Business Filing Center.  The Business Filing Center registers business entities, trademarks, trade-names, and liens pursuant to the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC).  In addition, the Secretary of State has regulation duties for a wide range of businesses such as: trade unions, funeral homes, and cemeteries.
• Administrative:  The Secretary of State's other administrative duty is Publication.  That duty includes publishing legal or informational state documents, i.e., statutory and administrative law publications, session laws, regulations, the "Kansas Registers" (the state's gazette). The Secretary of State also operates "Safe at Home". 

The Secretary of State has an enormously important responsibility of administering our most basic right in a democratic-republic (voting) and safeguarding it against any electoral violations (both statutory and inherent) that may infringe on that most basic right, as well as serving in an extremely detailed oriented capacity registering businesses and administering the publication of all state business.  Due to those responsibilities, the Kansas Secretary of State must continuously strive to be as impartial as possible regarding political-partisan influence.  Furthermore, the office, by it's very nature, requires a holder that must be held to a significantly higher standard of ethical behavior.  If our most fundamental and basic right as Americans and Kansans is compromised for the political advantage for (and undue influence of) parties, political actions committees, Super-PAC's, 501(c)(4)'s and/or any other politically interested entity, our freedom will be fundamentally stripped away.

THE CANDIDATES

(R) Kris Kobach (Incumbent) - When it comes to educational prestige, Kris Kobach is rarely matched.  After graduating at the top his class with a Bachelor's degree in Government from Harvard University (only regarded as the #1 undergraduate university in the world), Kobach earned his Master of Arts and Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D. in the U.S.) from Oxford University (United Kingdom; and only regarded as the #1 political theory graduate university in the world).  Upon returning to the United States, the Kansas Secretary of State attended Yale Law School (only the #1 law school in the U.S.) where he was an editor of the Yale Law Journal (that's a really big deal to law students) and earned his Juris Doctor (law degree).  Basically, Kobach's educational pedigree could only be summarized as a scholastic triple crown (in the studies of law and politics). 

After racking up the most impressive educational resume' one in law could every hope to achieve, Kris Kobach clerked for the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals and became a law professor at the University of Missouri in Kansas City - School of Law.  After a few years he was offered a fellowship under United States Attorney General John Ashcroft, eventually serving as Counsel for the Attorney General.  He was charged with the task of leading a team of attorneys and researches who created the National Security Entry-Exit Registration System.  (If that sounds familiar it may be that you watched "Aliens Among Us".) 

After his tenure with United States Attorney General's office, Kobach returned to UMKC and resumed his role as a law professor and also found himself in various immigration lawsuits.  He sued the states of Kansas (2004; case was dismissed), California (2005; he lost), and Nebraska (2010; case is still pending) over the states allowing illegal aliens (there's a difference between state residency and U.S. citizenship) to only have to pay in-state tuition for higher education (they still have to meet the same state residency requirements as anyone else does).  In 2009, Kobach finally won a final appeal on an immigration lawsuit in Missouri, but then lost on a similar case in Pennsylvania in 2013.  He's currently involved in another similar lawsuit in Texas.

On the immigration front, Kobach is most known for playing a significant role in the drafting of Arizona SB 170, the highly publicized and controversial Arizona state illegal-immigration law.  In Arizona v. United States, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down 3 of the 4 challenged provisions as being unconstitutional.  Most notably of the provisions struck down was Section 6, which gave Arizona law enforcement officers the power to make warrantless arrests of immigrants suspected of being removable. In another highly controversial state immigration law, Kobach is given primary credit for authoring Alabama H.B. 56.  Described as a tougher version of Arizona SB 170, it has essentially been completed dismantled for being unconstitutional as a result of Alabama v. United States. This has resulted in the state of Alabama agreeing to settle out of court in two other cases, HICA v. Bentley and Central Alabama Fair Housing Center v. Magee.  In the settlements, the state of Alabama has agreed to pay the opposing parties' attorneys' fees, totaling up to $580,000.00.

In the middle of his immigration law career, Kris Kobach became the Chairman of the Republican Party, starting in 2007.  His time as the Chairman included establishing a "direct-role policy" for the Republican Party in targeted races (a requirement of all Republicans to support the Republican party in that specific race, or else...).  He initiated the creation of a "loyalty committee" which sanctioned (within the party) Republicans who supported (enacting their constitutionally guaranteed right - "Freedom of Association") Democrats in any contested races.  As a result, many party officers were stripped of their party voting rights as punishment.  Kobach also sent out an email to state Republicans stating,  "To date, the Kansas GOP has identified and caged more voters in the last 11 months than the previous two years." (For those of you who don't know what "voter-caging" is.)

In an audit, the Federal Elections Commission found that the Kansas Republican Party, while under the direction of Kris Kobach from 2007 - 2009, accepted illegal campaign contributions and failed to pay Federal and State taxes.  In addition, his 2010 Secretary of State campaign underreported campaign contributions and expenditures by $75,000 and as a result was fined $5,000 by the Kansas Governmental Ethics Commission (he claimed that it was a 'liberal' attack, but neglected to note that the majority of those on the commission were Republicans).

(D) Jean Schodorf  - Kobach's challenger is an interesting character in her own right.  Jean Schodorf is the sister of world renowned journalist and film personality Bill Kurtis (A&E; voice overs in the Anchorman; owns a good portion of Montgomery and Chataqua counties) and the mother of Emmy winning television producer and director Brian Schodorf.  Jean received her Bachelor's and Master's degrees from New Mexico University and her Ph.D. in Communicative-Disorders (as well post doctoral in education administration).  She is a Speech Pathologist in Wichita, KS by trade.

Schodorf's political career is nothing to wince at either.  She served on the USD 259 (Wichita) school board from 1989 - 2000, even serving as the school board President in '93, '97, and '99.  In 2001, Jean Schodorf was elected to the Kansas State Senate as Republican, representing the 25th Senatorial District.  In 2010, Schodorf ran for the Republican nomination for U.S. Congress in Kansas's 4th district.  Although she lost the primary, she managed to pick up an endorsement from U.S. Senator Nancy Kassenbaum.  In the Kansas State Senate, Jean rose to the rank of Majority Whip.  However, she fell victim in the 2012 primaries, in what has come to be known as The Great Kansas Republican Purge of 2012.  After the 'Moderate' Republicans were forced out of the party, Schodorf switches party affiliation in January, 2013.

THE ISSUES

1.  ELECTORAL:  Kris Kobach, while serving as Kansas Secretary of State, is mostly known for his drafting and advocating of Kansas's (and other states') stricter voting laws.  Not only are there Voter ID laws, but one must also prove their citizenship when registering to vote, by providing a birth-certificate.  In 2012 alone, it was estimated that 18,000 voters' voting rights were blocked as a result.  In 2014 alone, it is estimated by the Secretary of State's office that number is over 22,000.  It is harder to vote in Kansas than it is to buy a gun.  That's quite a bit troubling.  Especially when you add his uber-partisanship past (most evident of the circus he created regarding the Chad Taylor incident.  Any law school student at Washburn, KU, or even UMKC could have told you how that was going to play out.  The definition of "shall" is pretty well established in Kansas law), campaign ethics violations, and proud proclamation of voter-caging. If they take away the people's right to vote, how hard do you think it will be to take away your guns?

Jean Schodorf wants to restore the voting process back to an easier and simpler process.  It's not as if there aren't already a poll watchers that circle the process like vultures waiting to spring on anyone that acts remotely suspicious. 

2. NOTHING ELSE MATTERS
What?  Nothing else matters?  No.  It's not supposed to be a controversial office.  If someone is running for the office charged with safeguarding the election process and all laws and procedures associated with it, habitually committed the very violations the office is supposed to protect against, it's a no brainer.

But if you want the other issues, look at their websites and do some Google searches.  Stay away from the crazy sites and keep a level head.  We have no idea, why Kris Kobach's issues page includes the 2nd Amendment under "Important Issues".  The Secretary of State is not a legislator nor is he the governor.  He has no authority in passing and executing laws and certainly no authority in administering laws outside of his scope.  Furthermore, it's quite concerning that he has a really bad history of not understanding what the Preemption Clause of the United States Constitution is (given his legal career track record). (Here's Schodorf's issues page.)

CONCLUSION

If you're an Independent, there isn't a worse candidate for any office in any state, at any level, that's more against your interest than Kris Kobach.  Being an informed Independent and voting for Kris Kobach, would be like the British Parliament installing Napoleon Bonaparte as Prime Minister.  It would be like the Missouri Republicans nominating Todd Akin for another shot at U.S. Senate.  It would be K-State hiring Ron Prince back after Bill Snyder retires again.  It would be like the Germans going for a Fourth Reich.  It would be like electing the Cookie Monster as the "Cookie Conservationist".  IT'S THE DUMBEST THING YOU CAN DO ON NOVEMBER 4TH!

ELECTION PROFILE: Kansas Insurance Commissioner - (R) Kevin Selzer v. (D) Dennis Anderson

Moving on to our next state wide elected office is the Kansas Insurance Commissioner's race.  Again, we'll provide a government organizational chart below so that you know where the office falls.

 

 

Like the Attorney General's office, the Kansas Insurance Commissioner is not a partisan influence office by design.  Yet again, that's very difficult to guard against.  I think the biggest question about this office in particular is, "what does an Insurance Commissioner do?"  That's a fair question for the average voter, considering it's not what you traditionally think of as an elected office. So we'll try to answer that for you.  (But you may want to start with checking out this website: http://www.ksinsurance.org/).

 

 

KANSAS INSURANCE COMMISSIONER

MISSION:

If you click here, you'll see the four goals of the office:

1. Regulate and review companies;
2. Educate consumers;
3. Assist consumers; and
4. License agents.

It seems to be pretty self explanatory.  The Kansas Insurance Department makes sure that insurance companies follow the law, they help consumers with insurance compliance and insurance disputes, and they regulate insurance agents and administer tests (similar to how the Kansas Bar Association regulates attorneys in the state).

So basically, what you're looking for in an Insurance Commissioner is someone who (1) understands the insurance industry, and (2) has effective management and administration skills.



THE CANDIDATES

(R) Kevin Selzer - Looking at Kevin Selzer's website, you're immediately impressed with his education (B.S.-Accounting from Kansas State University, and a M.B.A. from the University of Southern California), professional (Certified Public Accountant,  "Executive Managing Director for Aon Benfield and has extensive experience in the reinsurance and reinsurance brokerage industries"), and community organization experience.  Click here if you don't know what "reinsurance" is.

(D) Dennis Anderson - The Democrat nominee received an Agriculture Economics degree from Kansas State University and currently works for A.D. Banker, a company he founded, where he trains and provides continuing education for licensed insurance agents.  He has 30 years of experience in all lines of the insurance industry and even received the endorsement from the current Kansas Insurance Commissioner, (R) Sandy Praeger.  In addition Dennis Anderson also has an issues page, for your inquisitive pleasure.

CONCLUSION

Both are qualified for the position, but on paper Dennis Anderson seems to be the first choice candidate.  That's no slight at all to Kevin Selzer, we mean would Jeff Corwin be upset if you told him we'd prefer Steve Irwin (if he were still alive) to wrestle the alligator?  If Kevin Selzer doesn't win this election (which is probably unlikely), we'd certainly like to that fun KS imagery on a State Treasurer sign some day.

ELECTION PROFILE: Kansas Attorney General - (R) Derek Schmidt v. (D) A.J. Kotich

Finally, we move beyond U.S. House of Representative races and we get to focus on broader offices that entire state's electorate will decide.  Our first office in this list will be the Kansas Attorney General race.  Just so there's no confusion about the Kansas Attorney General's office, we're providing a Kansas state government organizational chart below.

Unlike policy offices, e.g. Representatives, Senators, Governors, etc., state offices such as Attorney General, Secretary of State, State Treasurer, and Kansas Commissioner of Insurance, are largely non-partisan positions.  There is, of course, no escaping that partisan politics can (and often do) affect how the office holders perform their tasks.  However, they are not inherently designed to be major policy influencing/shaping offices, so much as they are to be policy enforcing offices.  With that in mind, it is probably better to start off with outlining and explaining what the responsibilities are of the Kansas Attorney General, before examining the credentials and competency of those running for the office.

KANSAS ATTORNEY GENERAL

AUTHORITY:

The Kansas Attorney General derives it's authority from Article 1, Section 1 of the Kansas State Constitution.  It reads as the following:

 

"The constitutional officers of the executive department shall be the governor, lieutenant governor, secretary of state, and attorney general, who shall have such qualifications as are provided by law."

DUTIES:

The Attorney General's office carries out its prescribed duties through the coordinated efforts of its constituent divisions. The office is responsible for (1) protecting consumers from fraud, (2) assisting the victims of crime, (3) defending the state in civil proceedings, (4) giving legal council to the state's various agencies and boards, and (5) ensuring the legal integrity of overall governmental operations as per Kansas' constitutional guidelines and state code. http://ballotpedia.org/Attorney_General_of_Kansas.

DIVISIONS:

1. Kansas Bureau of Investigation
2. Civil Litigation Division
3. Consumer Protection Division
4. Criminal Litigation Division
5. Legal Opinions and Government Counsel Division
6. Medicaid Fraud and Abuse Department
7. Victims' Services Division

LAYMAN'S TERMS: (Corresponding with the list above)

1. Investigates criminal activity at the request of local law enforcement.  Ex: Drug stings, organized crime, mass shootings, etc.
2. Acts as a defense law team when the state is sued.  Ex: State neglected to properly fix a dam which as a result broke and water flooded property and caused a lot of damage.
3. Investigates Scams.  Ex: Check fraud.
4. Assists by providing advice and resources to county attorneys offices in criminal cases. Ex: A huge child prostitution bust occurs in Kiowa County. They probably don't have all the resources necessary to deal with such a case, given how small it is.
5. Prepares legal opinions (can be binding) for public officials to avoid litigation by resolving legal disputes.  Also provides legal advice to other agencies to reduce litigation expense.  Ex: Legal interpretation on the definition of "shall" in the context of a specific statute.
6. Investigates and prosecutes health care provider fraud, handles complaints of patient abuse (financial and/or physical), and complaints of neglect by Medicaid providers.  Ex:  Doctor offices running up fraudulent bills and having Medicare cover the cost; nursing home residents who are scammed or abused by nursing home providers; and making sure Medicaid providers pay for what they're supposed to.
7. Educates victims and community members of victims' rights and coordinates statewide victim's services programs. Ex: Child abuse victims and counseling.

So basically, what we're looking for in an Attorney General, is someone who carries out and follows the law.  An attorney who upholds their oath to protect the Constitution of the United States and the Kansas State Constitution.  Also, we'd prefer the candidate to not easily succumb to political pressures or inappropriately use their office for political or personal reasons.

THE CANDIDATES 

(R) Derek Schmidt (Incumbent) - Personal campaign bio available here. Attorney General Schmidt served for 6 years as the majority leader of the Kansas State Senate before being elected to attorney general in 2010.   He served as an aid to 'moderates' Governor Bill Graves (R-Kansas, '95-'03), U.S. Senator Nancy Kassenbaum (R-Kansas, '78-'97) , and U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-Nebraska, '97-'09; currently serving as Secretary of Defense).  He received his B.A. in Journalism from KU, a Masters in International Politics from the University of Leicester (United Kingdom), and his Juris Doctor from Georgetown University Law Center. 

(D)  A.J. Kotich - The challenger in this race is no slouch either.  A.J. Kotich touts an equally impressive resume'.  He served in the United States Marine Corps, both as an enlisted soldier and as a Laywer Officer.  During his military career he was a USMC Judge Advocate and received the Navy Achievement Award.  He received his law degree from Washburn University and attended the prosecutor institute at Northwestern University School of Law. 

After his honorable service in the Marine Corps, "Kotich served as Chief Legal Counsel to three major state administrative agencies for thirteen agency heads under seven Kansas Governors of both major political parties. Additionally, Kotich served as Special Assistant Attorney General under each of the former Kansas Attorneys General beginning with Attorney General Bob Stephan....Beginning with the term of office of Kansas Governor Robert Bennett, Kotich first served as staff attorney and then as Chief Legal Counsel in the Kansas Department of Human Resources, now renamed the Kansas Department of Labor. Kotich served as Chief Counsel as well as other top executive positions at Human Resources/Labor from the late-1970’s until 2010 and became Chief Counsel for the Kansas Department of Administration shortly after Governor Sam Brownback took office in 2011. Kotich left that position in March of 2013."

CONCLUSION

It's clear that Derek Schmidt puts his office duties ahead of politics.  A.J. Kotich, although qualified, is not receiving any support from the Democrat machine.  His only real issue is that conceal carry permits are not being issued fast enough.  Ironically, this is what some on the 'right' were fervently criticizing Derek Schmidt for, even threatening to run a candidate to the 'right' of him.  You could vote for A.J. Kotich, but we think you should probably err on the side of the incumbent.  Why?  Kansas is in need of principled, state-first, party-second office holders.  Schmidt may not have any further political ambitions after his time as Attorney General is over, but we hope like Hell he does.  He's exactly what Independents look for.

ELECTION PROFILE: U.S. Congressional District 3 - (R) Kevin Yoder v. (D) Kelly Kultala

Primetime, Kansas City metro-area U.S. Congressional race of 2014:  Free State style!  Below is the map of 3rd U.S. Congressional District of Kansas.

 

 

It's always an interesting race when Kevin Yoder is on the ballot.  No, we won't make a cheap shot about skinny-dipping in the Holy Land.  We mean whoops!  We're very sorry.  But, seriously?

 

 

THE CANDIDATES

Our Kansas City race consists of incumbent (R) Kevin Yoder and his challenger (D) Kelly Kultala.

 

 

(R) Kevin Yoder (Incumbent) - The incumbent Congressman was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives during the "Tea Party Year" in 2011.  Prior to serving in Congress, Yoder was a State Representative in the Kansas Legislature for eight years, starting in 2003.  During his time in the Kansas Legislature, he "chaired the House Appropriations Committee where he led the effort to cut spending, balance the state budget and fight tax increases."  With that experience at the state level, the Congressman is now on the House Appropriations Committee in the United States Congress. 

 

Before his 12 years of political office holding, Yoder went to the University of Kansas, where received both his Bachelor's degree (with honors) and his law degree in 2002.  It is widely said in Lawrence that while the Congressman was at KU, he was the President of the College Democrats.  After receiving his J.D. Yoder practiced law in the KC area, while he was a State Representative before being elected to the United State Congress.  The Congressman supports many social causes (head start education and down syndrome) and has received many awards for his efforts.

 

(D) Kelly Kultala - The Democrat challenger, like her opponent, is fifth generation Kansan.  She has an impressive list of political experience and accomplishments as well.  She "served on the Piper School Board, as a commissioner on the Unified Government of Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas and as a State Senator for the 5^th District, which included western Wyandotte and Leavenworth Counties." 

 

Her bio further states that "she served on the Ways & Means Committee and was the Ranking Minority Member on the Transportation Committee and Utilities Committee.  She was part of the leadership team that crafted the T-Works Comprehensive Transportation Plan, creating 175,000 jobs throughout the state and she was instrumental in working with local and state officials to bring the Sporting KC Soccer Stadium and Cerner office complex to Wyandotte County, creating over 5,000 jobs."

 

 

Both candidates have impressive resumes and have shown instrumental leadership in accomplishing big and important tasks. 

 

THE ISSUES

 

1.  EDUCATION:  Kelly Kultala's website presents her deep commitment to assuring that Kansas schools are properly funded and that teachers have all the resources they need.  Kevin Yoder's website does not list issues.  We are aware that he has received the Kansas State Head Start Champion's Award in 2012 and that he is for cutting unfunded mandates like No Child Left Behind.  However, we don't really have much to provide here.

 

WHO WINS THE ISSUE:

There's simply not enough information.  While its true Republicans are for cutting funding to social programs, such as education, in order to cut spending, both candidates did benefit from public education and both claim it's something they want to enhance.  Surely there is wasteful spending on education, but improving education needs to be top priority for our leaders in Washington.  An educated workforce is essential to improving the economy and reducing spending on Welfare programs for the lower class. 

 

We lean towards Kultala, but we aren't going to pledge a full victory for her on the issue either.  She provides good rhetoric here, "We need to educate our kids for the jobs of the 21^st century in science, technology, engineering and math. And we need to make it easier, not harder, for middle class families to send their kids college", but good rhetoric isn't enough.

 

2.  MIDDLE CLASS:  Kelly Kultala refuses to balance the budget on the backs of the middle class.  She will not support cuts to Medicare or Social Security and she supports more efficient measures to take care of veterans.  She accuses Congress of trying to slash those programs as well as education, in order to maintain tax cuts for the wealthy.  She is opposed to shutting down the government, which she believes burdens small businesses and is for raising the minimum wage. 

 

In 2010, Yoder was on the record for opposing the privatization of Social Security and retirement accounts.  Nothing of his voting record suggests he has changed his position on the issue.  He's also not nearly the high profile U.S. Representative of Jenkins or Huelskamp which makes it more difficult to accurately access his voting record.

 

WHO WINS THE ISSUE:

Still not enough information.  Kultala probably has more in line with typical independent voters, but due to her lack of specificity on the issues and Yoder's lack of publicity of votes on them, its hard to determine who really represents Independents in the 3rd District the best.

 

3.  THOSE ARE THE ONLY ISSUES:  We're not joking.  Yoder doesn't have an issues page and Kultala only lists those two issues on hers.  Still though, there must be some way to measure them up.  That's why we have decided to consult with American Conservative Union, the right wing interest group that calculates every member of Congresses 'conservative' score.  We've decided to compare Yoder to his fellow Republicans (both in Kansas and high profile out-of-staters).

 

Yoder has a lifetime score of 88. 

 

Lynn Jenkins (KS - 2) has a lifetime score of 91.2.

 

Tim Huelskamp (KS - 1) has a lifetime score of 93.33.

 

Mike Pompeo (KS - 4) has a lifetime score of 96.

 

Eric Cantor has a lifetime score of 95.07.

 

John Boehner has a lifetime score of 86.99.

 

Pat Roberts (KS - Senator)  has a score of 86.4.

 

Jerry Moran (KS - Senator) has a score since of 89.51.

 

Paul Ryan (WI - 1) has a score since of 90.67.

 

Trey Gowdy (SC - 4) has a lifetime score of 98.67.

 

Michelle Bachman (MN - 6) has a score of 99.35.

 

Marco Rubio (FL - Senator) has a score of 98.67.

 

Mitch McConnell (KY - Senator) has a score of 90.16.

 

Rand Paul (KY - Senator) has a score of 98.67.

 

Ted Cruz (TX - Senator) has a score of 100.00.

 

CONCLUSION

We are under the impression that Yoder still holds on to some of his previous 'Democrat' beliefs and that he probably represents Independents about as well as any Republican in Congress.  Further, since he is in the Kansas City metro area, and as a result is required to break from political dogmatists more often because his constituents are more 'moderate' by their nature.  We're okay with that.......for now.