So What About These 20 KS Judges Up for Re-Election? Yea or Nay?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Rose Gerringer on October 24, 2012 at 3:38pm

My sources say vote no on all judges EXCEPT Leben, Bruns, and Vano. Good to see 3 of them are worth retaining.

As for the boat thing...even the boat dealer I asked didn't know about it. If passed, would allow the state to treat watercraft differently than other personal property (cars?). Probably trying to 'stick it to' those with enough free time to get out on the water. I'm voting NO on this constitutional amendment question.

Permalink Reply by Sally on October 24, 2012 at 4:02pm

What I was told is that MO taxes on watercraft are lower than KS, so people have been going to MO to license their boats. KS is losing out on that money - money they really need and should be collecting, from their citizens who use KS services! So they decided it would be best to lower the taxes in KS so that KS would receive the money from Kansans. Others have told me they don't like it because it isn't good to mess with the constitution - unintended consequences often follow. Personally, unless someone knows something that I don't know, I think I will vote YES - I want the money to go to the state in which the boat owners live!

On the judges, I appreciate knowing there are a few good judges, although I'm still tempted to vote no on all. Not sure about that, though - would appreciate others' opinions as well. I do think we need to change the way our judges are selected in the beginning.

Permalink Reply by Yvonne Starks on October 24, 2012 at 6:44pm

This has been one of the discussions on our V&V Group networking.....and a definite concern of mine as well. I have been voting NO on all of them for years because finding out anything about them is overwhelming, if at all possible....and do not like the way Kansas initially gets them into office just for starters.

IF we are fortunate enough to get the conservative Kansas Republican House AND Senate this election, think we have a good chance to get the Kansas law for judicial choices changed.  Representatives Kinzer and Rubin are two (Kinzer a lawyer; Rubin former judge) who are interested in working something through the system to make it better.  As it is now, in simple essence, is that the appointment choices are narrowed by a group of attorneys with three names given to the Governor for his appointment, which he must choose from only those three.

Then, after they're in, they seem to be in "for life".....the public "votes" (loosely used here) to only RETAIN.  Most people are going to say, "oh, okay....sure..."

I don't know about Steve Leben....he WAS appointed by Sebelius, which makes me a little nervous about WHO he is and what his voting decisions would be.....as consider her a way-out liberal.  I don't think I'd include him in my "yes" list....unless someone here can tell me otherwise and why.....

DAVID BRUNS....appointed by Bill Graves 1999 AND by Sam Brownback in 2011. I will vote YES on him, but would still like to know more if anyone knows....

Here's names of judges up in case anyone ambitious enough to look them up.....sometimes you can get a snippet of info that may help you decide...or....my suggestion would be, if not, just vote NO.  The odds are it won't make any difference in volume, but if enough of us do get smart.....you never know.....

 

        KANSAS COURT OF APPEALS: Steve Leben, G.Joseph Pierron, David Bruns, G. Gordon Atcheson, Karen Arnold Burger, Richard Greene

 

10th JUDICIAL: James Vano, Thos Sutherland, Gerald Elliott, Stephen Tatum, James Franklin Davis, James Charles Draege, Thos E. Foster, Brenda Cameron, John Bennett, Sara Welch

DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, 10th JUDICIAL: Michael Farley, Linda Trigg, James Phelan

 

 

Only Supreme Court Justice up this election is Nancy Moritz....a SIX YEAR TERM.....Looked her up on Google and here's an EXCERPT:

*********************************

.......After law school, Justice Moritz began her legal career with the Kansas Supreme Court, where she served as a Research Attorney from 1985 to 1987. She then served as a law clerk to the United States District Court in Wichita, Kansas from 1987 to 1989. From 1989 to 1995, Justice Moritz was an associate with Spencer Fane Britt and Browne, in Overland Park, Kansas, and Kansas City, Missouri, where she handled defensive matters and specialized in employment litigation.

She returned to public service in 1995 when she became an Assistant United States Attorney in Kansas City, Kansas.

She worked in the Civil Division of that office in Kansas City and later in Topeka until 1999, when she became the Appellate Coordinator for the United States Attorney's office, a position she held until she was appointed by Governor Kathleen Sebelius to the Kansas Court of Appeals in October 2004. Governor Mark Parkinson appointed her to the Supreme Court on November 1, 2010................."

                                           ******************************************************

Our Kansas Supreme Court is way too liberal for me and I'm sure Nancy Moritz is one of them who has proven herself to be one of 'em, based on Sebelius and Parkinson.  Definitely voting NO....

Alex Poulter has said he is going to try to get more info for all of us on the judges before November 6th so you may want to hang on for voting, just in case.  :)

Permalink Reply by Sally on October 24, 2012 at 7:24pm

What about the Constitutional Amendment, Yvonne? I told you what I'd heard but would like more opinions. So far, Rose and I have different viewpoints from info we've gathered, and I'd like to know more before voting...

Permalink Reply by Yvonne Starks on October 24, 2012 at 10:03pm

Sally....help me remember what you're talking about re the Constitutional Amendment....

Permalink Reply by Sally on October 24, 2012 at 10:35pm

Above in the text, Brian asks, "...what about this watercraft tax constitution thing?" There's a Constitutional Amendment question at the end of the ballot. Go to the JoCo Election website, go to the Voter Lookup & Sample Ballot, and find the ballot for your area. It will show you exactly what is on your ballot. The question is quite long - too long to copy here, but you can easily find it. I'll bet those who aren't aware that it is there will have no idea how to vote on this! I was glad to see that Mary Pilcher Cook put out an e-mail statement today explaining this. She did add that it does not mean that the law will change if this passes - it just means it could in the future if KS house and senate so choose.

Permalink Reply by Yvonne Starks on October 24, 2012 at 10:47pm

I thought you were talking about the judges because we'd had some discussion on that within V&V.....

What a Chipper friend told me, who'd already voted, was that voting against this question meant that one would keep the status quo...which would likely mean that more will still go into other states to purchase to save money (I related it to Democrat John Kerry and his yacht maintenance and boarding....would not do it in his own state of Massachusetts because it cost more than his neighboring state).

Voting YES on this question would mean we want Kansas to lower the taxes to keep the money in our state.

Now....I have done no research on this at all on my own...this is what I was told by a third party.

Anyone?

Permalink Reply by Sally on October 25, 2012 at 8:27am

That's kind of what I also said earlier here, Yvonne, in my first post on this, following Rose's. Just wanted to know if there was info I didn't know that could be added to help us know how to vote.