The Kansas legislative session begins January 13, with a slate of newly elected officials. After the 2022 election, Republicans narrowly held a two thirds super majority in both the House and the Senate, but have now expanded their super majority despite a $2 million political action committee led by Democratic governor Laura Kelly that hope to overturn it. The super majority gives Republicans the power to easily overturn the democratic governor's vetoes. Kelly's political action committee closely followed nine House races and six Senate races. Republicans won eight of the nine House races and five of the six Senate races. I'm here with two of those Republicans who won Senate seats. Brad Starnes is the first Republican senator to win the 22nd District seat in Riley County since 2008 and won his election against the Democratic incumbent by 437 votes. Jeff climp will represent the fifth district of Wyandotte and Leavenworth counties and beat the Democratic incumbent by 31 votes, the smallest margin this election season. Brad and Jeff, thank you for joining me. Thank you. Thank you. So you're both new to the state house. What are your backgrounds and why did you decide to run for office? Yeah, I
first of all thank you for the opportunity and the situation for me, 43 plus years, private, parochial, public schools, teacher, coach, Administrator, K 12 through college, university level, I continue with my work as far as education, regarding the building up of career and technical education, vocational programming, skilled labor in schools, and a program called build up Kansas. It's a state workforce development initiative that's having great results, and so why ran just the importance of feeling led to help others. Been doing that and in a server head leadership position in schools, and want to continue with that, to do everything we can to ensure that we're taking care of our people.
I'm Jeff clump, representing District five. And, you know, I jumped into this. I felt there was continued to be, on major legislative issues, a vote that votes from the incumbent that were not in line with, with with our voters. So I decided, when I look at my background, I'm a fifth generation Kansan, kind of, we're here as a family before state was a state. So we've been immersed in love with our state for a long time, since the mid 1800s and as I look at my background, I own a few businesses, and one of those is we're one of the largest movers in the Midwest, of our military families globally. And I also own an engineering firm, and that engineering firm builds out self, interactive, robotic solutions for retail. And I cut my teeth historically in large and small retail, providing, you know, services to consumers, and I've managed divisions that have been upwards of of 30 and 40,000 all the way down to startups where, when you can't make payroll, you have to make tough decisions. So I think for me, my business background and living in our community, for really nearly all my life has has built an appreciation for the state, for our community, have a good understanding of of how we can move our state, especially district five, forward, and I think that my background lends itself to being able to help a a great legislature that's been put in place for us to move forward with. So I'm excited about the opportunity.
Okay, thank you. So here is a really big question to get us started. Why do you believe that candidate to not only uphold the Republican super majority but to expand it by a couple seats? Yeah,
I'll jump on that one first. And you know, I think when we learned we did all of this polling early on, we we and then it was validated at the doors. And I think we'd had a wonderful group of candidates that on from a Republican perspective, that we're able to touch the the the the folks in the areas that we represent, Senator Lex Starnes and in his area, and myself in district five, and I think we had the a great team as well, in addition to that, helping us manage the narrative and really understanding what was a meaningful narrative and and then at the end of the day, pockets of voters, their pockets are stretched very thin, especially with inflation and where we sat during The election cycle. And I think we stuck to kitchen table issues, and those allowed us to to kind of grow the super majority. And I think it in last session, we did have a super majority in spirit, but not in in reality, on all major legislative issues, there was a hand. Where I call it the minority kind of and in addition to the governor and her vetoes, I think there was more minority that held that Kansas Kansans hostage. And so I think the folks really were, were anxious for a
Yeah, and I would echo what Jeff said, particularly the the idea of change, I think that people are hurting. It's evident when you talk to people on doorsteps and and when we got out and face to face with people that the number one concern is the amount of taxation, as far as what's happening with them, and increases in those sayings to the point that they were obviously from a national perspective as well, that we need change. We need to see things happen and for the good of the people, in that type of a sense. And I think that, as Jeff echoed that it was evident in in the vote,
as I'd like to add a little color, I think also, there's a need in our in the legislature, just in government in general, for balance. And we talk about a super majority and how that may throw things out of balance. I think that's not a the way I would look at it. And I would tend to take this perspective of, you know, there's this super majority does allow us to whether it's the right term is keep a governor in check or to make sound decisions on behalf of Kansans, and I think that we're teed up nicely for for a very balanced approach. And I'm sure we'll get into some additional questions on how we think that's an that's probably the direction that we're willing to go in the legislature. Yeah,
I'd love to talk more about that. When you say balanced approach, how do you think that that will be approached this next session? In the session? Yeah,
teed it up nicely for the next segue. So, yeah, you know, I look at the so from, from how I view this, we have a much stronger super majority, and I think that puts more pressure on whether it's Senator elect starrence or myself and our entire talented legislature, just in general, and especially the Republican caucus. I look at that, I say, well, there's probably more energy that needs to be on the decisions that we make. So we don't get into this. We have all this stuff we want to do, but at the day, we still have to pay for it, and the paying for it, you can't put that as a secondary part of, hey, let's just get all of these, these initiatives over the goal line. So when I look at that, I think there's even more pressure on the caucus and the legislature to make impactful decisions that are fiscally responsible in the same breath. And you have to have it in the same breath or, or we'll create some challenges with, how do we do we have enough money to pay for the the things that we want to do, and we've had that historically, where we've been challenged there. And I think we don't want to to have that be the outcome it needs to be. We have a wonderful new committee that's going to be, I, let's see, I think it's, it's being headed up by Renee Erickson, and I think that that committee is coached similar to do she we can, you know, think about the impact of of that committee, which is, what are some potential areas of opportunity that we have some savings? Because I do think when you're at the doors, the pain at the doors is a few different things, and we can get into those in future questions. But I do think the the the reason that we were so successful is we listened, and I think we have to now enact what we heard, and that is, your spending might be a little bit out of control. Let's go ahead and get that into check, and let's come up with some things that alleviate the pain at the doors, which the number one thing was property tax and and I'm sure we can probably have a whole segment on on how we can affect that. So that would be my, my take.
Yeah, very much. So and the opportunity, I think the I'm a believer in results, and we want to see results for your money, and that it's an investment in our futures. And what we're going to do to ensure that the Kansans future are bright, take care of those that need help and take care of those that are hurting, which are a lot of people. And we do it, as Jeff pointed out, in a fiscally sound way, that we ensure that we're doing what we need to do to help people. But I think the importance, too, of incentivization of programs. And so you, I think, on a doorstep, and we, I think, can agree that you just can't fix something by throwing more money at it. It's never worked. It never has. And so there's gotta be an opportunity to help those willing to help themselves and provide them those opportunities and incentivize that. So if you you know the whole parable about teaching man to fish, etc, etc, the same kind of concept with that that the fact. Fact that we're there to help those help themselves in this process and provide the support that's needed as a state, and it may take some finances to get that done. But again, much to Jeff's point. Number one thing on property taxes across the board, on almost 99% of every door. The first thing, and particularly in Manhattan area, with their situation, with their percentage of sales tax already at 10% and some things that people literally were saying, I'm being taxed out of town. So that's something we really have to address. Both
of you won by narrow margins this election. What do you think set you apart from your opponent?
I think the votes on major legislative issues didn't reflect the district and and and I think that puts pressure on myself and and Senator elect to to not be here hypocrites not and to to enact issues in that are responsible in a responsible way that allow us to let our constituents know that their voices were heard. And I think that sometimes is missing, especially in our world of politics and politicians. And I think you get a different I think Brad and I bring a different perspective, and and arts experiences are very different in general, and I think it really allows for a broad, unique mix in the legislature, and especially in the Republican caucus, to to to help move real impactful legislation forward.
Okay, when you say that the incumbent voting out of line with what Kansans want, what are some specific instances? I know there's,
you know, I'll lead with the main issue at the door was 99% was on property tax and and there were significant pieces of legislation numerous times. I would say there's probably over six times that I can think of where there was legislation on the table that were vetoed by the governor and on ones that were on pieces of legislation, 39 or 3229 I'm butchering the number. But on property tax or tax relief in general, it was nearly unanimous, I think may have come down or it was unanimous in the house. It was nearly unanimous in the Senate. And we move that forward to a governor, we get a veto, and then when we go to the override, we have the incumbent, in my case, decided he was going to support the governor in in that decision to to hold firm on the on the veto. And I think when you have truly bipartisan legislation that we know is good for Kansans, and we choose to the term I used on the on the stump, and it's probably a little harsh, is to be up to play politics at the expense of Kansans. I think we start making bad decisions that we look back on and say, Man, I wish I would have done that differently. And I think Kansans were they should expect more out of us, and these are sometimes tough decisions, and it might put us at a difference with the caucus, or might put us a difference with with folks in Topeka, but at the end of the day, we answer to one party, and that is Kansans in district five, and that is again, and I would as I think through that we have 36% Republican, 31% independent, and 28% Democrat. That's a pretty that's a pretty good pie, right there pieces of the pie that are very in the middle, and that sometimes puts us at at odds. But I think that for when we're making decisions for our constituents, and the answer is clear, and it's very bipartisan. We have to respect that and move forward legislation that that allows us to have represent our district. So
okay, Brad, what do you think set you apart? Well, I
think again to the point that I'd made with the previous interview with the reflector. You know, 60 80% of us can agree on things that are all important to everyone and get those moved forward. I think is important to be able to do that. My district, obviously, with education, is a huge factor, ag related and as well, with Kansas State being the oldest land grant university in the country and having that influence, as well as rural with education and etc, and Veterans Military that are on Fort Riley, that's out of my district, but at same time, affected within my district. So it's a unique blend of population. But I think the only thing that I would say to that would be just voting record, that there are situations that the votes were things that then maybe didn't reflect what the specific questions. Because I as a follow up, I know you asked Jeff specifically what that would be, and my. Owner had voted no against the selling of foreign ground, or, excuse me, selling of ground around a military base or installation to any foreign adversary. Voted no on that. And so from that perspective, especially with Fort Riley and the importance and we've got in bath in our backyard in Manhattan, those kind of issues are very paramount to the protection of our people, and I also understand too, on the other flip side, we've gotta have a balance of, I'm a big believer in individual rights, and we've gotta protect those rights, and individual landowners and etc, have those rights to be guarded and safeguarded and taken care of, but also the where is the balance with the protection of our country? So those are some issues that I think were just the difference too.
Republican leaders have said their main goal for this term is tax cuts, and Kelly has said she wants to take a cautious approach. What would you all like to see happen with tax cuts, not only on property, but on other types of taxes and the budget as
a whole. Yeah. So what's interesting is Brad and I are both on the tax committee, so we are able to be a part of one of the major issues at the doors, and so we're anxious to to to be a part of that committee, and are excited, it's probably better than anxious. So it's when I look at policy. I do agree with that the caucus is going to aggressively push for some type of of tax relief, and it will be centered around property tax. And I do understand the governor has an appetite to move slowly or cautiously, and I think that that's that's a fair approach, I think for us in our if we put on the fiscal conservative hat as well, how do you tie in a what you're hearing at the doors, which is significant pain in property tax, with how does that affect our overall budget, and with The other committees that are in play, I think there it's not just a single committee. There's a lot of movement that occur, because you have to take a look at the overall budget, and do you get ahead of yourself? Or when do you get where expenses have and what you're paying out is is more than revenue, and I think you start to to get up close to that line here pretty quick, without having or taking a look at areas of opportunity or how. And then, in addition to that, how do you drive? Then I said on commerce as well, how do you drive in additional businesses into our community that can, that can help bring revenue into our state. And I think that there's this connected that ties into education, commerce, transportation, infrastructure, just in general, all of those play a role together and and for me, I think there's going to have to be some movement in all of those different buckets for us to craft a environment, and that environment needs to be one that has a competitive tax base and to Senator elect Starnes. Point whether it's 11 or 14 on the the highest taxing percent wise. And whenever you're in that, that top echelon of the highest taxing state, you have to look at, how do we create a competitive environment to where businesses do want to come into this state? And today, it's a little bit challenging, although we do have some opportunities, and we've been successful in bringing groups in, but the entire state has to be looked at as a whole, and how do we bring in groups that can can help our communities grow? And I sit in a very strong military area that that doesn't participate as much as we would like in in the world of property taxes. And what we see is, when we're so close to the border that we'll have a lot of our constituent or military personnel will travel over into Missouri to live and because it is a more competitive tax environment, so we have to be competitive to craft that or create that culture that allows businesses to want to move in here. So long story to get back to the point I think crafting legislation around property tax is going to happen quickly. Don't want to get ahead of the Tax Committee, because they're working on some very wonderful things, and I think that that is going to allow us to let the folks know that their voices were being heard doing that in a responsible way to make sure it is fiscally responsible. There'll be plenty of arguments around that and but my commitment to my constituents, we have to be able to fund it so we don't get ourselves in trouble. And they absolutely need some relief, because the pain, especially around seniors, is so significant, they aren't opting to move out of our state because the pain is too is so severe. Gotcha,
Brad, do you have anything to add on taxes and the budget? Yeah,
some things on the assessment, piece of that tax and assessment, and that's a big part of what we'll be discussing as well the whole appraisal process. Process and how that works, because you talk to people and and it's hard for them to understand, if somebody sells a house down the street from from this amount, that it's above the value, and then that affects them personally with their taxation and how that all works. So to Jeff's point, those are some things that need to be looked at and discussed and questions asked and determine what's best and fair to ensure again, we're to provide services everybody understands, and I think for the most part, that with taxes, the importance of protection, for infrastructure, for streets, for those kind of things, are people willing to pay for those kind of things, because they expect that and want that. So beyond that, there's a lot of wiggle room to talk about a lot of different things. But the other thing is, as far as the economy and things, when you look at Kansas and we have approaching 2 billion in a rainy day fund, which is great, we have approaching 4 billion in money, that is, quote, the federal COVID money, and those extra monies, and people are asking the question, you've got this money in the bank, and you can't afford to do these type of things. And so looking at projections out with tax cuts through 2028 we'd still be having a surplus. So that's important. And we, to Jeff's point, we want to be fiscally Santa responsible in those decisions, not to put a debt back on us, but at the same time, utilization of the money that's there to take care of our people now and with the economy, I think much to his point, people are excited. They've seen a change immediately. The day after the election, stock market through the roof. People are looking at things economically and and we need to do everything that we can to ensure again, to Jeff's point, we're keeping Kansans in Kansas and attracting people moving
on. Surveys have shown Canton support Medicaid expansion, with which Kelly has been very vocal about for this session, and legalized marijuana. Where do each of you stand on those issues? Well,
I'll go first Jeff on that one. And Medicaid expansion, we've continued to we as as a legislature, had continued to push the reimbursement rate. And the question that we all should ask is, when we have these, let any type of legislation, what's the purpose of it? And so with that, with Medicaid expansion, what is the purpose? Is it to, quote, save rural hospitals? And if that's the case, you talk to those involved in rural hospitals, and it won't, it won't do that. And so we need to have more providers. We need to be able to have and everybody should. We all agree should have affordable, accessible health care. That's very important. But the idea is, we don't want to expand a scenario that creates a situation, anytime you sign a contract with the federal government, when that money runs out, which it will then, who's going to be responsible to pay that bill? It'll be back on Kansans to pay that bill for that Medicaid expansion piece that summer advertising and would like to push forward, I think again, reimbursement rates are the way to go. We've been doing that, we continue to do that, and it's proven successful. And so those are the things. Again, back to the overall question, what are we doing to help our people and as a group? We've gotta continue to do that to help people, but as I said, looking those particular things. So that's on Medicaid expansion. And if Jeff wanted to lead forward with the rest of the question, that would be great, yes
on legalized marijuana,
yeah. So I'll touch on both of those topics, if that's okay. So just to layer on to what Senator Alex Starnes had mentioned in regards to Medicaid expansion, I do think that we're going to be immersed in additional data and information that will help us make a decision on whether that is Medicaid expansion or finding ways. And as I look at things today, where I sit it's I'm always open to I have a data science division, so understanding information and data that allow us to to learn and grow. But where I sit today is we have a system that that is probably not optimized, finding ways to optimize that the current system, and whether that is and to layer another 75,000 or whatever that number is, it's always probably a little more than what the expectations show of more people onto a system that is not optimized today may implode that system, and whether it's finding additional doctors or additional folks that that excuse me from a doctor perspective, or how does that affect our rural hospitals out west, or just rural hospitals in general? Role throughout the state. I think we need to really take the time understand the issues, be open to a conversation, whether that's with the groups that are in support of Medicaid expansion or those that are against it. I think there's going to be very talented people on both sides of that I tend to sit with. Let's fix what we have once it's up that's running as efficiently as it can be, and waits in line aren't 10 years to to have services for special needs. One example, I think that creates this opportunity to to really look at at the information and see how we move forward. So talked a little bit in a circle there, but I don't think we have all of the information to make a great decision at this point. And then, if I look at the medicinal on the marijuana conversation, and I feel I am, personally, I'm open to a conversation that is around medicinal marijuana. However, there and there's so much for us to learn from the surrounding states that have done it incorrectly, and states that have done it in ways that we can learn and grow from if we take a look at that, I tend to be a fan of pill form administrated by a pharmacist. I've had conversations with our Sheriff's Department around the state, understanding the challenges and the concerns that they have, and I feel like there is a openness to slowly exploring the medicinal conversation, if it's administered correctly, if it's just about, how do we get to smoking marijuana? I'm probably not open to that conversation, but it is about, I'm truly going to find ways to relieve pain by adding some percent of THC into a dosage that I can take orally, and it does help, whether it's PTSD from a veteran perspective or a military perspective, those are things we have to be open to because the pain, and I'm in a very high veteran area, and it is a conversation that at the doors I had when I was having conversations with veterans, and I had numerous conversations. It was something that was brought up, and it's important to them, so I think we have to do our due diligence and explore that. So I'm not a no on that topic. I'm a hey, let's learn as much as we can. And being a small business person and running businesses, when I say, Let's take time to explore it. We're we need to do that in a quick way so we can understand if it makes sense or not. So I'm not looking to kick the can. It's just we need to really understand that, and what's what legislation Can't we can move forward that both the House and the Senate can, can get behind another
hot button issue in Kansas is abortion rights, and how do you eat?
You know, I think that was one of the areas that was a hand that was overplayed during the election cycle. And what I mean by that is it's a decided issue. I'm a pro life candidate. I was endorsed by a pro life groups. And I realized quickly in the conversation, and even before that, that is a settled issue, from where we sit today, and it may have been in some some groups, a strong issue of concern. I do think it that it is a decided issue. So personally, pro life, I support giving women more options through things like pregnancy resource crisis centers, ensuring child support is paid prior to birth. I think that's going to be important in the conversation as we go forward, in providing more choices for women. And I think that is where many of us fall in and in the world that being a pro life person in general, I think there's things we can do to provide more choices and options prior to the birth of the child. So that's where I said, Yeah,
and I agree with what Jeff was saying, the opportunity. And again, back to initially, when the overall philosophy is incentivization opportunities, and so incentivize adoption opportunities for the scenarios with tax, some type of tax scenario or something, to incentivize that as another option. Because, as Jeff is exactly right, we want to ensure that women have the correct opportunities and to ensure that we follow the law. And so it is a quote done deal. And just from a perspective of being on doorsteps, we hit 9000 homes, and we had four people talk to us about abortion out of that 9000 and after talking to those four, two of them said they would vote for me. So I think that that just speaks to the question.
Okay, so back to that conversation of doorsteps and really getting out there and listening to your voters how this is our last question. How do you. Plan on retaining the trust of your voters throughout your term, especially those who switched over from the incumbent to you.
I'll tackle that first two. The scenario is following through what we said we're going to do. I think that that's the important and the value. And much to Jeff Senator klemps point earlier, when he said that we're listening and we hear what you say, and we're going to take action based upon those interests and what's in the best interest of all people, but at the same time, we understand what the issues are with you and what you want to see done, and how we can work together to ensure that everybody wins out of the scenarios. So I think that's the best way to do that again, in a sense of what votes have a backbone, understand and stand up for what's right, and those sayings, and I think some people like mentioned earlier, some may not like a specific issue or vote or whatever, but they know this is how their stance is going to be, and we're listening to our people as well. And so the trust is a huge issue. Being a former school administrator, a lot was with trust. We had situations with executive sessions and those kind of things that that people are you're hiding something, or you're doing this or that, but it comes down to basically the trust, trust us with the information that we have at the time to make the best decision for all people.
Okay, yeah, as I, as I look at the approach that we took as a as a campaign team, and when we decided to jump into this, we we did our our research, in polling, we felt we had the narratives that fell in line with kind of my core principles in general, and we also then had conversations with the President of the Senate and his team to make sure that we voiced the issues that we're seeing and that we were hearing about, To make sure that we could advance legislation that was meaningful to the folks. So when we're at the door, we're having a conversation, and we're hearing the pain that was coming from, from the folks on on significant issues. And like I said, Brad hit 9000 doors. We were fortunate, and we hit a lot more than that. And his point is, is on the money that the issues seem to fall in line. And for me, with the a third of each of the different groups, whether it's Democrat, Republican or independents, they all seem to have the same, same types of issues that were most important to them. And I think that those issues are the same ones that a that the Senate is going to be moving forward. And it seems to be similar ones to where the house is also in line with. So I think that the voice of the people, especially in district five and throughout the entire state, was very well heard. It falls in line with the the legislation that's going to move forward. And I think for us to make sure we're acting in a responsible way, it's making sure that we are being fiscally responsible during this entire process. I think those two things combined will ensure that our folks hear that, understand that their voice was being heard, and then also that we can pay for, pay for that voice. So that's, that's, I think, how we ensure that the folks are happy with our decisions at the end of this session,
okay, well, Brad and Jeff, thank you both for your time for the Candace reflector Podcast. I'm Grace hills. Thank you for listening.
