Former Kansas GOP leaders: We can go back and change state politics for the better | Opinion

Imagine a Kansas where your vote isn’t a faint echo lost in partisan noise but a powerful force shaping the future. This is the promise of fusion voting, a system Kansas once embraced and can reclaim today.

As former Kansas Senate President, and former House Majority Leader, respectively, we’ve seen gridlock paralyze progress while everyday Kansans are sidelined by a system rigged for the powerful.

Fusion voting—where multiple parties can nominate the same candidate — offers a remedy. It would make minor parties constructive players in the political process, help bridge divides, and give voters more choice and more voice.

This isn’t just wishful thinking. It’s happened here before.

Kansas has a proud history with fusion voting. Until the early 1900s, it fueled competitive elections, giving voters more parties to choose from, which amplified their voices at the ballot box and in the Statehouse.

Then the major parties banned it — not for the public good, but to cement their dominance.

For over a century, that ban has dimmed our democracy, stifling innovation and entrenching polarization.

Restoring fusion voting would rekindle a legacy of elections driven by ideas, not just party loyalty, returning power to We the People, where it belongs.

Today, the new United Kansas Party, led by citizens from across the political spectrum, is leading the charge to revive this right, challenging the ban on fusion in state court.

Their argument is rooted in our state’s Constitution, which guarantees freedom of political association and expression, and the right of equal treatment under the law.

The ban violates these bedrock principles by restricting how parties, candidates and voters can associate, silencing coalitions that amplify voter priorities. It is an unconstitutional gag order on political expression, and the Kansas Supreme Court has a duty to strike it down.

The Kansas Constitution’s Bill of Rights doesn’t bend for political convenience — it demands freedom.

The benefits of fusion voting are clear and practical.

It empowers minor parties to influence elections and policy, forcing candidates to appeal beyond narrow party lines.

Voters can back specific issues — like rural development or education — without wasting their ballot on long-shot candidates.

Imagine a farmer supporting a candidate endorsed by both a major party and the United Kansas Party, boosting rural priorities with real clout. Historical data from Kansas’s fusion voting days backs this up: a greater say for citizens, higher turnout, sharper ideas.

Fusion voting also softens the edges of rank partisanship.

When parties can align on shared goals, candidates will build coalitions instead of burning bridges.

Kansas could lead the Midwest in this renewal of democracy, setting a standard for more freedom in — and less partisan control over — our politics.

This fight is personal — it’s about the Kansas we hand to our children.

We want a state where politicians answer to the people, not the other way around. We want a state where our elected officials work across party lines, together, to solve our problems, not just fight to one-up each other.

We’re hopeful that the Kansas Supreme Court will see the state’s fusion ban for what it is: a violation of our state constitutional rights.

But this isn’t just about a lawsuit; it’s part of a movement to reboot our stuck and degraded politics.

This story was originally published May 3, 2025 at 5:00 AM.