False framing of school dispute continues

Ignoring their constitutional duty to provide suitable funding to Kansas public schools, the state’s governor and legislative majority continue to portray their dilemma as a power dispute between them and the Kansas Supreme Court.

Their comments range from petulant: “Why do we even have a Legislature? Why don’t we let the courts run the whole thing?” – Sen. Ralph Ostmeyer, R-Grinnell

… To darkly threatening: “You know, there’s five justices up for retention this fall and there’s four in particular that have got a very good chance of not being retained.” – Rep. Gene Suellentrop, R-Wichita

… Through cynical piousness: The court “should not be playing politics with our children’s education.” – Gov. Sam Brownback

… To supremely inelegant: The court is “going to continue dropping little turds ... to do everything they can to discredit the Legislature.” – Sen. Jeff Melcher, R-Leawood

… And stunningly incoherent: Pass a law prohibiting the court from holding any Kansas officials in contempt. – Sen. Mitch Holmes, R-St. John.

All the fulminating is, however, both misguided and misleading because it’s based on false framing. The dispute over school funding is not between the Supreme Court and the people who rule state government; the dispute is between the Topeka political duopoly and the school boards and citizen plaintiffs in the endless Gannon v. Kansas case.

But framing the dispute accurately would require the governor and legislators to take on and vilify not spectral “unelected, activist judges” but instead elected members of their local school boards. Those dedicated folks, some representing more people than do many legislators, serve without even a per diem pittance for their year-round duties, much less accumulate a full-time, lifelong pension for part-time work, as do legislators.

In our delicately balanced tripartite governing system, courts exist only to settle disputes that are presented to them. They do not go in search of things to do or flaws to fix. Their authenticity flows from the constitution, not from election results. Their power is triggered only when two parties – whether people or governing agencies or businesses or police and accused criminals – cannot agree on some consequential matter.

That happens a lot. The Kansas Supreme Court receives nearly 900 petitions for review annually and deals with about 15 percent of them. When a dispute involves an original constitutional issue, as does Gannon, the court is required to decide it.

An independent court system is every citizen’s most precious possession. Absent the right to petition courts for relief from harm and for restoration of rights impaired by government action, individual liberty evaporates.

And when elected officials fail to understand or willfully refuse to acknowledge that reality or attempt to alter it with narrow-purpose legislation, they need to be reminded that the state constitution is the direct mandate of all the people and only the people can change it; laws are simply the expression of the often-transient will of the Legislature.

This story was originally published June 7, 2016 at 12:04 AM with the headline "False framing of school dispute continues."