Republican leadership in the Kansas Senate this year created a committee on government efficiency, or coach to mimic the work that Elon Musk is doing at the federal level with the quasi agency known as Doge. Senate President Ty Masterson said he wanted to explore ways to make government more efficient, and the committee came with an online portal where the people of Kansas were invited to submit their ideas. Those suggestions which leadership hid for weeks showed that the committee's work was out of step with what Kansans actually want. Welcome to the Kansas reflector Podcast. I'm editor Sherman Smith here to talk about this coach business. Is one of the two Democrats who served on the committee, Senator Cindy Holscher of Overland Park.
Welcome to the podcast. Thank you. Sherman, glad to be here. So
the purpose of coach, this state level committee, according to the senate president, was to explore ways to restructure and reform state governments, to reduce spending and increase government efficiency. Is that what you saw is that how you would describe the committee's work. Well,
you're right. The Trump administration set up the doge Committee, which he and Elon Musk indicated, were designed to root out fraud and inefficiencies, and then on the Senate level, we were told that we need to do the same type of thing. I will say from the beginning, I was a little bit suspicious and wanted to be on that committee just to kind of be able to witness and push back as needed, and sadly, instead of actually looking for waste, the focus on both levels really has been to reduce or eliminate programs that help people and then eliminating critical jobs.
It does strike me as peculiar that somebody would look at what's happening with with Doge and the federal level and the outrage there and say, This is what Kansas needs. Let's have some of that here. Yeah.
Now, granted at the time when it was decided to start this committee, you know, we hadn't seen some of these drastic cuts and eliminations of jobs, but, but I would say similarly, the focus has been quite a bit the same. What
are examples of some of the things the committee actually produced this year? You
know, there were several bills brought forward by the organization called opportunity solutions project, and they are known as a quote Think Tank. They're out of Florida, though they're not really connected to Kansas, lobbying
arm of the government accountability, something or other brought us the Brownback tax experiment, right?
So they are policies. They are extremely right leaning. Interestingly, with a lot of the bills they brought forward, sometimes they were the only proponent, and then we would have several actual Kansans or actual experts who would be opposing a bill. However, what opportunity solutions project does? I mean? Their work very much lines up with the extremists that are in the legislature. So even though in many instances we had experts from Kansas who were local Kansans pushing back against bills the agenda of OSP pretty much lines up with the extreme agenda of the legislature and and the leadership.
Yeah, that this is a recurring theme in both the House and Senate this year, across a lot of committees where you have one or two sources from outside of Kansas saying we should do this. Sometimes more than 100 people show up from Kansas who say this is a bad idea, but there's really little debates or discussion among the committee, and it's just like everything was predetermined going in. Oh
yeah, certainly. And by the same token, lots of times during the hearings, you would have, again, maybe very, very few proponents of a bill given really a decent amount of time to present their case, and then sometimes you would have several opponents, and maybe they would be given, in certain circumstances, the same amount of time as one or two proponents. And that was likely by design in many cases, but very hard for opponents to clearly spill out their reasons why they did not favor certain bills, but that, that is how it was set up this session.
And I think the legislation that the committee produced was largely just targeting public assistance programs and some public employees.
Yeah, over and over, the bills pretty much dealt with public assistance programs looking for, quote, potential fraud there or inefficiencies. And what we found out, though, through several of the bills, was that, you know, it added layers to some of our processes, making it less efficient, pretty more red tape in place, which is something that obviously, voters tell us they they don't want. And ultimately, too, some of these bills were designed to give the legislature just even more power, consolidation of power with the legislature.
You know, the they put in this public portal, which I think is fascinating, because it's a rare opportunity to kind of hear in real time what, what your constituents in mass. Saying they want you to do and particularly for this committee, the purpose of the portal was to receive ideas from the public about ideas to make Kansas government more efficient and effective. One of our columnists pointed out they could start by not saying ideas over and over again in these sentences. What did you learn from the submissions, the emails and the people who filled out this online form. Yeah,
very much. It was evident that the suggestions that were submitted via the portal is very evident that the legislature is out of step with the will of the people. I mean, the suggestions that came in were things like expand Medicaid, which over 70% of the population supports. There were lots of messages too in regard to stop trying to ban abortion care, reproductive health care, suggestions in terms of quit harassing the LGBTQA population. I mean, so you know, it was evident that a lot of these were people who have been paying attention to what's been going on the legislature and what the agenda has been, you know. And incidentally, too, there would be some people who were familiar with some of the bills that have been brought forward, and as a result, they were saying, Stop this nonsense. There's no reason to have a committee like this, because so many of them did target public assistance and just elimination of critical jobs. Yeah, there
was a bill. I think the first thing the legislature did this year is pass a bill targeting the transgender community again, and there was just a flood of people in real time saying, this is a bad idea. This does not help Kansans. We don't want you to do this. Why is leadership not listening to them?
You know, they have their agenda. There are certain things that and certain topics and issues that stir up their base, so they know what those topics are. So, you know, while that base is not the majority of the population, they pretty consistently vote. So I would say that agenda is tailored very much to the base of people that vote for these extreme candidates.
We touched on some of the issues that people brought up. I think there are more than 60 emails or something like that that's called for legalizing medical marijuana, some other issues as well. Again, over and over again, we see what what people say they want is at odds with what their elected officials are
doing. Yeah, and interestingly, too, there were a lot of messages saying, Please streamline the whole testimony process, the whole committee process. And I would say that in general, a lot of people are frustrated with being able to participate in state government, because each committee has their own set of rules, often in terms of when you can submit testimony, how you can submit it, if you have to have paper copies or not. So depending upon which committee you're submitting testimony to, you've got a different set of rules. Often,
I thought this was really interesting. How many people wrote about the legislative process and something we notice when we're covering it all the time. I think those of you in the legislature see this, but you know, we never know like it, does the public care about process, right? And we see people saying we need more time to prepare our testimony. Let us, you know, give us three days, or whatever it is. And of course, what we see play out increasingly, I think, in recent years, are these committees where it's very clear one side showed up knowing for a week or more in advance that this was going to happen, and they all had their testimony ready, and the other side got as little notice as possible. There's a Senate hearing, I think, early in the session where a nun stood up to testify on something in the cynic the committee's chairman, Senator Mike Thompson, said, Oh yeah, you didn't get your testimony in time. It has to be 24 hours. She said, you put this on the calendar last night, like, What are you talking about? And wouldn't let her talk. So were you surprised to see that the public is really clued into this sort of broken system.
I will tell you it was a relief to some extent, because, you know, you kind of wonder if people are paying attention. But certainly this, this session. I mean, there were 1500 entries to the portal, I believe maybe more than Yeah. I think 1600 or so, yeah? And, I mean, that's a decent amount so. And again, these were people who, yeah, have been watching the process and wanted to be easier to participate, yeah, you know. And one person, I believe, said something like, Why isn't there just one button on the website that says, I want to submit testimony, and I click on that, yeah, and then, you know, then it's made easy. But it is. It is a disservice to the voters and to Kansans that it is so difficult and that really that there's feel like so many hurdles, because there are, in terms of, again, what time you have to get it in, if you have to have paper copies. And you're right. Right? There have been so many instances where it was very clear that one side had advanced notice, yeah.
And, you know, late additions to the calendar that, right? You know, catch us by surprise. Sometimes, just trying to keep everything, just to try to cover everything,
yeah. And, you know, my question is, they, you know, Republicans have a super majority. They can do whatever they want, absolutely. If what they are bringing forward are such great ideas, you shouldn't have to be less than transparent.
Did you have any personal favorites of the emails that came in? Well,
it's a family podcast. I don't know if I can share some of those, but some of these are people. I will say there were some that were very pointed in terms of their feelings about this legislature and the direction that this committee was going, as well as just the legislature in general. But yeah, some pretty passionate people out there.
I'll read one of my favorites from the emails that came in, because it just addresses directly the existence of the committee and what's going on here? They said, What are you doing? Have you not, as an elected representative, practiced efficiency, and all the bills you have introduced and votes you have taken, give me a break, coach is not necessary. Bureaucracy and it you know, there's a point to be made here, that Republicans have been in charge for 30 years. Government isn't efficient, whose fault is that?
Absolutely? Yeah, perfect point. I mean, leading up to this session, yet, we had the 2024 elections. I guarantee you, most Republican candidates out there had on their campaign materials, property tax relief, right? Yeah, we didn't see that happen. Or at least, I think a one built was very minute. It was
supposed to be a day one priority, yeah, at the end, it was getting rid of one and a half mills. That's fun, building maintenance,
I think, yeah. I mean, that's not going to do much of anything for the general population. And yes, the point being, they have a supermajority. They can pass whatever they want. If they really wanted to get property tax relief, they could have what
do you think they didn't?
You know, again, there were other priorities that took precedence, and then maybe some infighting within the different factions, but of the Republican Party, but honestly, it just didn't feel like it was that much of a priority. There were other issues, you know, yes, certainly. And you know, some of these other issues, again, that kind of stir the base of their voters. That's what took precedence. So social issues, other things that were done early in session.
One of the things I want to talk about here is the the open records request that we made to get these, these public suggestions. We filed our first request my colleague, Anna Kaminsky did in early February, got kicked around from one person to the next which isn't supposed to happen before it actually landed in the inbox of the the committee chairwoman Renee Erickson, Republican from Wichita, in late February, initially, she told us it would take two months before she could possibly get these to us. Then it's became one month. But at the same time you know one of your colleagues, Senator Patrick Schmidt from Topeka, Democrat from Topeka, He submitted his own records request, and she responded by saying, here's how you can get access. Well, meanwhile, telling us it's going to be weeks and weeks before I could possibly give them to you know, open records law says you have to provide the records as soon as possible. And that didn't happen. Do is, is there any doubt in your mind whether she violated open records law? Oh,
there's no doubt. Um, you know, the information was there, you know, I guess the question is, you know, why were they holding on to it and they didn't want want the information out there. But you know, the fact of the matter is that Porter was, I believe it was launched at the end of January. Is that right? I'm the ranking Democrat on the committee. I mean, the portal was launched without any input from Democrats. I don't know if there were other people on the committee that had input, or if it just strictly came from leadership. So the portal gets launched. A number of us are asking when we get to have access into February rolls around, still no access. I believe it was towards the end of March when I finally got access. And to your point, yes, Senator Schmidt also filed an open records request. He initially was told that he could have access through the Senate Minority leader's laptop. Now that's not really access, I mean, so we still, a number of us were waiting to get access. We had been told there were a volume of submissions and that we. Would need to continue our work through the interim, because there's so much work to do. Yeah, we weren't given any of the information. So like I said, finally, I believe it was the end of March. I finally did have access, granted.
Why do you think they delayed you guys in the public us getting access to these why would they not want us to see them while they were still doing their work.
Yeah, I think they were just trying to run out the clock of session honestly. And really, I think it's because the suggestions that were received showed that this legislature is very much out of step with the will of the people. It
would be really embarrassing to have people testifying in the middle of a coach hearing that said, you know, we've seen these submissions, we know this is not what the people Exactly, yeah,
so they didn't want the public to know. Or there's
an attorney Max couch, a one, a attorney that we work with sometimes, he wrote a column for us, he said, and I'm quoting here, the real reason for her delay became clear. The Portal was a repository for criticism of the super majority's legislative agenda, and it was in the Super majority's interest to keep that fact from the public for as long as possible. Yeah, certainly, officially, the explanation was they needed time to review and redact any personal information. When we got the official response, there were some redactions, but they were inconsistent. Or, you know, out of 1600 emails, or maybe 50 or so that had been redacted with some people's phone numbers, other people's phone numbers, they didn't mind giving to us, some people they wanted to protect. They also blacked out the name of Senate President Ty Masterson in some of these emails. Didn't want us to know, apparently, as if we couldn't figure it out that he has a like, $150,000 gig, right? That's funded by coke at Wichita State University. Is there any explanation you would have for these reductions, why they did some and not others?
You know, it's interesting bringing up that point because you're absolutely right. I mean, I saw those too, and of course, didn't take much to figure out who they were talking about in terms of particular legislators. I also think what's interesting too is we have asked several times if there were emails that were deleted, because there kind of was the appearance that some have been moved. We've never gotten an answer on that. And I guess ultimately, you know, there's no penalty necessarily, in terms of the legislature and leadership complying with the open records request.
Well, we could file a complaint with the Attorney General's Office, which would require them to at least investigate right? You know, Rene Erickson would have to cough up an explanation that right satisfies the law. I suppose it is an issue with open records law in Kansas that the agency that is responsible for defending government is also responsible for determining whether they violated the law. And I think until that changes, they don't have a lot of hope for getting, you know, much satisfaction out of complaints with the Attorney
General. Well, no, absolutely. And yeah, you know, I think it's pretty evident that the AG, office is pretty heavily aligned with the agenda of legislative leadership, the, you know, arts dramas that are in power, you know, and interestingly, all throughout the session, and actually early on, it became pretty evident that there was a building up of the Ag office, or intended, intended build up of the Ag office. So it felt like the foundation was being laid, even from the beginning, to attack public services and agencies that are a benefit to people, while at the same time working to beef up the Ag office. And I think in total, I saw that between bills that, you know, not not just through this committee, but bills that were introduced along with budget provisos, I think there was the request for close to 30 additional full time positions for the Ag office, which obviously is not a move in the direction of being efficient,
and it is also, again, directly at odds with what people said in their emails to the committee right portal, you know, rein in what the Attorney General was doing. Yeah. Do you expect these suggestions from the public to be taken seriously during the interim. When the committee meets, well,
I guess we'll see. I think we're meeting next week. We have been told this work is very important, that we will need to continue through the interim so we will see. You know, so far, it's been a lot of the same in terms of aiming towards public assistance programs. So we'll see what direction happens this summer, and also see you know what, what is done with all of these entries in terms of discussion or plans made? Well, let's
wave our magic one for a second and put you in charge. What would you do to. Make government more efficient. Well,
I mean, I would take the I would take the suggestions of the people. I mean, yes, this process needs to be streamlined for people to actively participate, and I don't think it would be very hard to do we just have to have the political will to do it. But, you know, there are other things to point it out. I mean, my gosh, if we had expanded Medicaid, the money that that would save, and incidentally, I brought an amendment on the Senate floor to the budget to expand Medicaid, because the savings from that would have went ahead and funded special education. Yeah, that's right. So I mean, there are some very practical things we can do in terms of following the will of the people that are good for the state. And you know, you mentioned too medicinal cannabis was mentioned again. Another thing, another issue that a supporter by the bulk of Kansans that could bring revenue to us, which now we are losing to all the states surrounding us.
That's right, we're going to be on an island here before too long, maybe the last state. How does, how does this fit into the broader political moment? What we're seeing locally with this coach committee, this efforts, and what the people are saying,
Yeah, ultimately, the coach committee, as well as Doge on the federal level, I mean, it's hurting our people, the actions that are being taken, you know, one of these bills, where may think one of these bills, I think it was SB 161 again, puts another layer in the process of getting certain programs funded that can cause delays and cause, you know, delays In care to people. So ultimately, a lot of the things that are going through this committee, as well as the doge committee, hurt our people, and that's the biggest concern overall, that the impact it is having. And then in some cases, too, we're talking about potential loss of critical jobs and certain departments that just slows things down and makes it even more difficult for people to receive the services they need. We're
recording this on May 1. A little while ago, you spoke to a large crowd that was gathered at the State House, people holding signs and chanting, clearly frustrated with what's happening politically, I think, both at the local and federal level,
yeah. And I would say, you know, they are feeling it already from the federal level. I don't know that they're feeling these things from the state level yet, because, you know, session just ended recently, you know, some of these aren't implemented for a little while, so
the budget creators in like, two years. So, you know, we don't know what the impact is going to be? Quite, yeah,
absolutely. So, like I said, you know, that's the thing. I don't know that people are feeling it necessarily from what's happened on the state level. Now, I will say, with the cuts that were made to education this year, with special ed as well as general ed, being under funded, that means that, you know, local school boards are gonna have to make some tough decisions that might be what what is seen earlier?
Yeah, the blueprint for literacy was defunded as well. Yes, we
had been told that we needed to improve kids reading. So a plan was put together to improve reading scores, to improve literacy, and this year, the legislature did not fund it at all.
One year later, yeah, is there a way Democrats can seize the momentum from this kind of in the way, like, for instance, the Tea Party did a dozen years ago, whatever long ago, that was, Can Democrats seize this moment? I
hope so. I think what's really important is, you know, there was, for many years, there was that rule of, you know, never say your opponent's name. And you know, when you're talking about elections and such, I firmly believe we have to call it out. I mean these things that are happening, these are not Democrat initiatives in terms of cutting services, the flat tax that passed this year, which will disproportionately reward upper brackets and penalize low lower earners. I mean, that's a Republican agenda item. That's their initiative. And like I said, I think we as Democrats have to call out again the things that were addressed this session, the things that were pushed through, as well as the things that weren't addressed that the people want us to do. Do
you have any closing thoughts?
Oh, my closing thoughts for that. We just need people to stay engaged and watch what is going on. I do think there's been an awakening to some degree and respect that what's happened on the federal level is hitting people in the pocketbook, and so I think people are taking more notice. And, you know, the thing I think that is very important is that, you know, people need to connect the dots in terms of, then what's happening on the state level that's coming, that's going to affect them. You know, we see the push. Bucha on the federal level for a Brownback style tax plan. I mean, something like that happens along with what's happened on the state level, with what we've put in that's going to make for a concerning situation, but ultimately, too I mean, we have elections coming up next year, and there's been a group of us that gets smaller every year that's been fighting for our public schools, we got to make the right choices next year in 2026 or the house is being pushed off the cliff when I'm talking about our schools. Because again, it's been a very small group of us fighting to push back voucher plans that destroy public education. It's a small group of us fighting to get funding. We're outnumbered right now, and so we didn't get as much funding as we would have wanted. But again, those selections made next year are going to make a big impact.
You know, it feels sometimes like watching a train wreck in slow motion, because we've seen this over and over again where, you know, changes happening to revenue in the budget now that are going to be unsustainable. One of the only big things that you can go after to balance the budget is going to be pulling funding away from public schools. That leads you back into the court system, and you fight this long, drawn out battle before the courts say, No, you really do have to fully fund public education, as the Constitution says. And then they say, Okay, well, at least we got out of, you know, funding for the past, however, many years, right? So, I mean, it just feels like that is almost inevitable here.
Yeah, no, and that's what I'm saying. We have to get our choices right in the next election, in terms of Governor, in terms of the legislature, every house seat will be on the ballot. We are at such a critical juncture that, like I said, we have to get this right next year. I
mean, the other big election next year, which also ties into the school funding, is whether Supreme Court justices should be an elected position. Right? That's a constitutional amendment on the ballot in August. You know, that's something that would dramatically reshape Kansas politics. Yeah,
and I don't know that people necessarily understand it. I mean, the fact of the matter is, we had a system of elections in the past that was very corrupt. So from that, the merit system was established that we have now. It has worked well. But of course, what has happened here again? This is part of the agenda of, you know, the Maga movement, the extremists that are in the legislature, they haven't been able to defund our schools as of this point. They haven't been able to outlaw reproductive health care. So this is that Next Avenue, that other path to take.
I think we have to leave it there. Thank you for joining us, Senators. Senator Cindy Holscher from Overland Park, thank you.