Name bill sponsors in Topeka

Lawmakers should want to claim credit for bills they introduce. Yet Kansas stands out among states for increasingly keeping such sponsorship anonymous – a strategic secrecy that translates to a lack of accountability.

More than 90 percent of the nearly 750 bills filed during the 2015 session had no named sponsors, the Topeka Capital-Journal recently reported, up from 75 percent in 2005 and 60 percent in 1985. Instead, the bills were filed by legislative committees, even if they were initially sought by individual lawmakers, lobbyists, or public or private agencies.

The only official record of a bill’s origins might be in meeting minutes, which can be unavailable online for weeks. Trying to identify authorship before then can be difficult and even contentious. That was the case with one unsuccessful bill this year to keep school employees’ relatives off of school boards and another meant to forbid state university professors from using their official titles when writing newspaper columns. Each was introduced as a “committee bill” by one House member as a favor to another, with the sponsors later distancing themselves from the proposals.

The Capital-Journal’s extensive research of procedures in the other states “indicates Kansas is alone in conducting business this way.” Most states require that bill sponsors declare their identity, also using committee bills sparingly. The sponsors’ names can often be found with a few clicks on a legislature’s website.

Yet the practice of filing anonymous bills has many defenders at the Kansas Statehouse. Senate President Susan Wagle, R-Wichita, told the Capital-Journal that “it indicates broad consensus.” But it also can inaccurately imply a full committee’s bipartisan endorsement.

Other legislators, especially the badly outnumbered Democrats, like committee bills because they have a greater chance of passage than solo efforts. But so do bills whose proponents have done the work of lining up co-sponsors.

If a lawmaker doesn’t want his name attached to a bill, he should let somebody else file it. If no one else will, taxpayers will be spared the cost of drafting and printing a bill going nowhere.

The prevalence of anonymous bills is another case of putting what works for lawmakers ahead of what enables the public to watch, scrutinize and understand its government. The Capital-Journal’s series on government transparency also highlighted the opposition met by proposals to stop bundling as many as 10 unrelated bills into one must-pass measure and to start streaming audio or video of legislative committee meetings online. It’s absurd that the $300 million Capitol renovation upgraded technology for online audio and video streaming, yet House leadership has blocked Senate-passed bills for the past two years.

Legislative leaders need to curtail the out-of-control use of committee bills, and otherwise promote more transparency in state government.

For the editorial board, Rhonda Holman

This story was originally published November 4, 2015 at 6:07 PM with the headline "Name bill sponsors in Topeka."