From the Alvin and Rosalie Sara Check studio PBS Kansas Presents Kansas Week.

A last minute court decision could change the clock for Kansans voting by mail this fall, and it could have an impact on how some ballots are counted.

Plus, thousands of Kansans are dealing with medical bills.

But for many families, a big chunk of that financial burden is about to disappear.

But first, the U.S.

Senate race in Kansas is neck and neck.

Roger Marshall, facing attacks from his Democratic opponent over everything from campaign ads to where he actually lives.

Less than a month till election day.

That's what we're talking about right now on Kansas Week.

Hello and welcome to Kansas Week.

I'm Jared Sara.

The Kansas U.S.

Senate race is officially a nail biter.

And incumbent Republican Roger Marshall is apparently feeling the heat.

Recent polls show the race tied, placing Marshall under intense scrutiny.

As the election nears, critics are pointing to a series of missteps, including a commercial that used unauthorized photos of children at a Kansas summer camp.

Leaders at Tall Oaks Camp demanded a retraction.

They stated they never approved use of the images.

Meanwhile, Democratic challenger Adam Hamilton alleges that Marshall actually lives in Florida when he's not in Washington and barely spends any time in Kansas at all.

Marshall strongly dismisses those claims as lies.

He insists that he does spend hundreds of days each year traveling statewide across Kansas.

At the same time, Hamilton's campaign continues to highlight reports that Marshall sued hundreds of low income patients over minor medical bills.

At least one ended up in jail for missing a court date.

Marshall's team firmly defends his record.

They maintain that his focus remains on secure borders, lower taxes and delivering results for Kansas.

Here to discuss this, along with some of the week's other state and local news, is Harvey County now managing editor Adam Strunk, local journalist Craig Andrus, Wichita school board member Brock Booker and Sedgwick County Republican chair John Witmer.

Thank you all for joining us.

Chair.

Chairman Witmer, I'll start with you.

First, do you know, Marshall, if Marshall seems to be in trouble here, it's, you know, it's been 96 years.

I think we looked this up something.

Six years since a Democrat has held this seat.

Is it going to happen this time, or what do you think?

No, I think, I think it'll be fine.

It'll be closer than probably people expect, or certainly closer than we want.

But, you know, Adam Hamilton is, is too weak and too woke for for this state.

I know you laugh, but it's the.

That's the fact.

The guy is just not.

He doesn't match Kansas.

He's certainly doesn't match the majority.

900,000 residents of the state of Kansas are registered Republicans.

They're not going to elect Adam Hamilton.

Now, have there been some probably mistakes that the campaign, the Marshall campaign has made?

Probably.

But they're not going to elect, liberal pastor out of Johnson County.

I just don't see that happening now.

All right, Adam Strunk, let me go to you.

Do you think, Hamilton is going to win?

Do you think Marshall's in trouble or not?

To predict the outcomes for a long time now?

Because I'm usually wrong.

So take that with a grain of salt.

I will say that I haven't ever seen our county quite as energized in a federal race as I have with this, especially the Democratic Party side.

I also it's the I did chuckle at the wake and woke just because from the Democratic side, I hear from the people on the left that they don't want to have to vote for a pastor, but they're going to hold their nose and vote it because they hate Marshall that much.

So, like, I don't know if there's a whole lot of people who view Hamilton as super woke, but I think it is a I think it's definitely interesting and I have seen more energy around this.

He is trying to play the middle of the road card though.

Is he going to be middle of the road?

And I mean he'll vote for Chuck Schumer and women and girls or men and girls sports and all that stuff.

He'll be as left wing is is everybody else on that side of the aisle.

But I think that's very indicative of the one thing you just said.

And I think that's what it's ultimately going to come down to, is the people on the left, they want to vote, not for Adam Hamilton because he's got a great agenda or he's driving for some wonderful initiative.

They want to vote because they hate.

That's not a very good message.

You know, Marshall's running on a message of no tax on tips, no tax on Social Security and, on lowering riders on the border.

I haven't I've heard him say that too, whereas they're running on him on a platform of hate.

That's not a very good winning strategy.

If you are going to be enough people in the middle or left of the middle that are going to say, hey, well, we've had it with Roger Marshall, are there going to be enough to get somebody else?

And by somebody else, I mean, again, when was the last time we had a Democrat goes to the United States Senate?

Was it the Great Depression?

Yeah.

So it has been some time since we've seen that.

Are there enough voters that who are Republican in the state who are going to say, I'm voting the other way?

Oh, don't go out to vote at all, because I saw is this a race of attrition at this point?

That's a good question.

Let me go over to Barack here.

Messaging and messaging seems to be, lost in this in this race.

We we don't seem to be hearing about the truthful issues that really are affecting Kansas.

We're hearing about allegations on one side or the other.

And and I think the message, the message is about people hurting in our communities is lost in all of this.

Agree, disagree.

Yes.

And mostly, and thank you, Jared.

It's great to be here with everyone.

You know, there is a lot of mudslinging, as you said, going back and forth.

And people want to know what affects the kitchen table issues.

You know, people are concerned.

I think about what their senator, are they going to be for fair wages?

Are they going to be for things that really hit home in economic sense first and foremost?

You know, it certainly is.

This is one of the messiest campaigns that I've seen in quite a long time.

Let's talk a little bit about the governor's race here quick before we move on as well.

That may be closer, as well.

Do you think Cindy Holzer might, I don't know, give try Masterson a run for his money.

I mean, again, don't trust polls, but the polling hasn't been hasn't been great.

There's also really not been the support from Governor Kelly.

I mean, there was that really public spat when she was trying to keep her from running for office.

And it's kind of been take my ball, go home.

Yeah, I mean, that's what I'm saying, like, because it's not like there's a full throated she's out there campaigning for her.

Like there was just kind of an anemic like, yeah, we support her and maybe I'm wrong.

Maybe I've missed the press releases and all of the appearances Kelly's making, because I saw her do a whole thing about Iowa and making some joke about the Iowa governor.

I just hadn't seen her making a lot of statements about the Kansas race.

Governor Kelly did endorses and of course, in in the primary she did.

And it now seems that, you know, of course, it didn't win.

And it does seem like she's disappeared.

Well, you know, I think Laura Kelly was right when Laura Kelly said that Cindy Holes sure is too extreme for Kansas.

And I think that will play out that way.

Any quick words on the governor's race?

You know, I think it's going to be very, very close.

I you know, I think about the last couple governors races and they weren't by large margins wins with even with Governor Kelly, to be quite frank.

So it's going to be interesting to see how many people show up and, and I'll be tuning in just like you all on election night.

And Craig Quigley, your a long time journalist.

We've seen typically the governor's race in Kansas, the governor's seat will go to a Democrat for eight years and then a Republican for eight years.

And that often flips.

There is a reason why Laura Kelly got elected.

That's because she could work with Republicans.

Republicans understood her.

That is not the case in this race.

And like I will respectfully agree to disagree with you.

I don't think it's going to be close at all.

I think time is going to win this by a landslide, although I will say it's going to be a lot closer than people would have said even three months ago.

And Kelly also got to campaign on Brownback's mess.

That was an easy campaign because Sam Brownback, toward the end, there was not perhaps like round number two.

There was a third party candidate that they blame or some people blame for the vote.

Sure.

Our next story.

Thousands of other Kansans are getting help with medical bills now.

Two national nonprofits are teaming up to wipe out nearly $34 million in medical debt for more than 21,000 across the state.

Eligible families should receive forgiveness letters this month, but medical debt is just one piece of a wider health care crunch.

Third District Democratic U.S.

Representative Sharice Davids, who is running for reelection, is pushing a new legislative package that would lower costs and protect rural health care.

Davids says her plan restores expired ACA tax credits and saves families an average of $700 a year.

The Kansas Hospital Association is backing her push to raise Medicare caps, saying it helps rural facilities keep surgical centers open.

Her bill also shields rural labor and delivery units and allows early onset Alzheimer's patients to buy into Medicare.

Davis is blaming recent federal cuts for rising health care costs.

Adam Strunk, tell us your thoughts on this one.

This is an interesting deal for giving Medicare or for giving medical debt.

Is tough to do.

How are we going to do this without the taxpayers paying for it?

Yeah.

I mean, I think that rural hospitals are going to take any, any kind of money they can get coming to them right now.

I know that there is some, some scraping going on, from some of the federal budget cuts and I know that our local hospital got a grant out of the $50 billion that was set aside to try to make up for some of the big cuts.

They were very happy for it.

But what I'm hearing on the ground is it still doesn't make up for what the what they're missing out on some of the folks I talked to.

But I think people take any money any way they can get them.

Yeah.

Interesting.

John Whitmer well, you know, I tried to do a little bit of research to find out exactly.

There's really no fiscal note on David's bill, which is common.

I think that's the biggest issue.

It's great what she's proposing, but anyone who served with me in the legislature will tell you I was famous for asking one question in committee constantly, and that is, how are you going to pay for it?

And that would be what I would ask, Congressman Dave, is this how you pay for it?

And that's why it's not going to be you go it's not exactly it's going to die.

Show me the money.

Where does it come from?

I'm not borrowing a phrase from you, but no.

Where does the money come from?

Look, rural hospitals have been struggling for a long time trying to make ends meet, trying to figure out.

So I think the bigger piece of this picture here is perhaps a little bit of forgiveness.

And in addition to that, backing off of some liability here for rural hospitals when it comes to med mount, because that's the big issue.

I don't think the funding is going to be there for that.

So the question remains, how are hospitals going to see more money because they are going to take every dime that's not nailed down right now.

And rural hospitals have been struggling for a long time.

You know, it's kind of a I hate to use the word phrase 6 or 7, but I think, you know, it's whether you support forgiving medical debt or support for giving this debt for hospitals.

It's a tough question.

Well, debt relief helps one time, you know, but restoring the ACA tax credits and keeping rural labor and delivery units open would help every single year.

So, you know, I work, for the past five years in health care as, I'm a med tech, and, you know, I can see the difference in when people have decided for some reason not to take their medication or the it shows up in their health report.

Yeah.

And so as a med tech, let me ask you a quick question then.

Are more rural hospitals and providers fearful of offering services?

I, I don't know if I would say that per se.

You know, there are professionals that get paid a little more, to go out into the rural areas many times, not every case.

So it just depends if there was more money in the system, who knows?

And that would require tax credits.

I don't know if we'll see that.

Time will tell.

Right.

Meanwhile, Kansas voters relying on mail in ballots just got a legal win.

The Kansas Court of Appeals has ruled that ballots arriving up to three days after the November election will still count.

The ruling upholds an injunction against a 2025 state law that eliminated the three day grace period.

Secretary of State Scott Schwab had asked the court to suspend the injunction, but the appellate panel stated that courts must avoid rulings that could cause votes to be lost right before an election.

While the court agreed to fast track Schwab's appeal, the three day grace period remains in place, at least for the 2026 general election.

Greg, it seems like this is you know, this is a never ending battle as well, is it?

Tell me your thoughts.

First off, what have we seen?

That much mail fraud to the point that we can't have a three day wait?

That's my own question.

Anybody answers.

Is mail fraud that rampant that we can't count on it?

I would think the argument would say no, I perhaps yes, I would agree.

Well, I'm going to jump in here too.

I mean, I don't see a problem with this, but the amount of votes that are coming in two days past the postmark is like when we have a close election.

They're like, well, those results are unofficial.

So I go down to the courthouse every day.

How many votes came in the mail?

We got two, we got three.

Like, it's not like it's a huge, huge, huge number.

I don't think this is going to shift in maybe one race every like 2 or 3 years.

I still think I mean it matters.

But again, we're also relying on the Postal Service.

Like we've got a lot of rural areas, we've got a lot of older people who have trouble getting there.

We've got the Postal Service that was getting rid of postmark dates from when they got them, like there's all this stuff going on where it's less and less reliable.

And the post office, I mean, if I was giving people recommendations, I'd say do what you can to vote.

If you're doing Mail-In voting, vote like a week, two weeks, three weeks early because, like, you know, like how many times have you not gotten a letter from the Postal Service when you're waiting?

So why would you count your vote on that?

I'm not saying don't.

I'm just saying if you're gonna vote by mail, vote early.

Yeah, it is another argument for you against mail in voting, I suppose.

Why should we even be using the mail?

No to vote.

Florida can do an election and get it all done in one day.

There's no reason why we can't.

I'm sorry.

Election day should be election day.

Like you have to pay your mortgage early in-person voting.

You don't have to look, you have to pay your mortgage on time.

You have to pay your bills on time.

You should vote on time.

And if you can't get your vote done in time, it doesn't count.

That's the way I think it should be done.

If we make it a federal holiday, if we, my take on it is election should be done on election day.

Period.

Unless you're military or something or traveling, you make it.

If they want a federal holiday, they're all down for that.

Everybody go.

That's the way I do it.

Oh, and by the way, I would also agree I would also do away with the electronic machines if I had my druthers.

But let's just go back to paper ballots.

I do away with the machines.

I don't have a problem with them, but I think there are a lot of people that don't trust them.

I don't mind them, but there's nothing else.

I would say make it a federal holiday and then everybody goes and votes and it counts on one day.

And if it doesn't come in on Election Day, it doesn't count.

What about early in-person voting is kind of nice.

You know, you don't just go on Election Day in person.

Have, you know, right.

Not in-person voting in person, really.

You know, in early, early.

You know, I vote on election.

Brock, let me move over to you.

The goal is to get as many people to vote as possible, obviously.

But how far should we take that?

Well, I think it just sits at the door of voter confidence and people feeling that they have got equal access to the ballot box.

You know, for people with disabilities, seniors that might not that might struggle to get to that door on Election Day.

Exactly.

And since we're talking about it, let's just make sure we understand one other thing here.

It should be citizens only voting, period.

I think that's good.

Yeah.

But, you know, that's that's not the argument.

True.

That's still, you know, as far as delays mail in voting, sometimes we're talking about things getting lost in the mail.

Yeah.

You know, I haven't gone too far down that rabbit.

I would say one day give it a grace period, not three days, because that does open the door to somebody saying, oh, it's close race.

I'm going to vote and send it in maybe one day.

Yeah, yeah, but you can't vote after Election Day anyway.

It has to be postmarked before seven.

It's supposed to be, but now we're talking about, you know, Friday, Saturday, sometimes the you know, the mail service isn't even running on Saturdays.

I don't trust the postal contract to Amazon, you know?

Hey, we actually got some, you know, all this work really, really well.

Don't sell it if you don't.

Yeah.

Will outsource it.

Millions also in corporate tax breaks really paying off or are they really paying off for the city of Wichita.

The city council believe so.

It has just approved nearly $6 million in property tax exemptions for two local aviation companies.

Lee Aerospace and Diversified Services get the relief for expansion projects, but it comes at a price those tax breaks mean millions in lost revenue for the city, county and local school districts.

It now means that Wichita has given more than $200 million in corporate tax breaks since 2010.

Businesses are arguing that the incentives keep them competitive.

The taxpayers are left wondering if the trade off is worth it.

Brock I'll start with you and congratulations, by the way, on your recent appointment with the Wichita School Board.

I hope you do some good work there.

And this affects you as a school board member?

Drastically.

Because when the city of Wichita does these kind of deals, it actually takes money away from the school district.

And tell us, tell us how that works.

Well, it does every time there's a blank check written as you just described, it affects the county and the city itself.

So we need to look at and I know this gets becomes cliche, almost.

Clawbacks, we need to look at, you know, I think about equity in the system, you know, is everyone being treated fairly?

You know, this case, I'm sitting next to you, John.

I don't want to sound anti-business at all, and I understand that this is an aviation community.

I understand that many people are feeding their families in that industry.

But we have to have a system that, for me, and my identity, I would have to walk into a bank with a business plan and good credit and you name it.

I wouldn't be able to just because of my name and, or my business.

I'm saying both of these companies have a good credit.

I guess what I'm trying to say, how many these companies do.

But that's not always the case.

Getting to your point, though, are there clawbacks in this?

Because, man, how much money we can Boeing spirit, Boeing spirit, Boeing spirit, whatever we're calling about Boeing.

Right.

So what are the clawbacks.

Are we going to get our money's worth?

I think there could be some arguments as to question whether or not we are getting our money as taxpayers.

John, I ask you, I know you've been plugged into this thing for a long time.

What do you think?

Well, first off, I'm not a huge fan of incentives.

I don't like them because in general, it's picking winners and losers.

And I'm a big see, here's one we're going to agree on because I'm with him.

I like the idea of clawbacks.

If you promise to make jobs and you don't deliver them, we should get some money back.

Do they not do that here?

So I don't know why that's not enough.

Oh, because how do we do that now?

Here's some issues on the side.

Well, Boeing, let's take Boeing for example.

There are spirit.

It was at the time in 2021 there was an agreement or before 2021, I think because the pandemic hit.

And then there had been an agreement with Boeing.

Did we even get one third of the jobs that were promised?

Nothing.

They lower.

They lost.

They lost jobs because of the pandemic.

There was no clawback.

On the flip side, though, we do a lot of incentives.

Like, for example, there's a proposal for a football complex for the, Bernie Sanders football complex.

You know, exactly.

There's no jobs that are created with that.

And versus a public service like that maybe is.

But let's take a look at the airlines.

Things we aerospace is at least is manufacturing.

It's going to bring jobs.

It's going to bring property tax in ten years.

It's going to bring revenue.

The football complex isn't going to create jobs and tax revenue.

So yeah, but there's a reckoning for about quality of life issues.

If you would come in and spend money while they're there I mean these economic development but they're all maybes.

Right.

And I'll repeat this after they throw out.

So it might be my be here is jobs.

Maybe if we're going to do it, then either do it for everybody or do it for nobody.

Yeah.

And this is the issue that bothers me about all of these concepts is we're picking winners and losers.

Everybody does it.

And so the minute you're like, this is a bad idea, they're like, yeah, but if we don't do it then it's going to go here, Charlotte, North Carolina.

And that's what's hard about it.

And that's that's the issue.

We're going to get drone fighters based out of Newton, by the way.

I mean I think this is where we county I think that there will be a facility.

I mean, I think that there will be work.

I don't know if it's going to be quite the number.

I saw the press release, 2000 jobs, but if you read the fine print, you got to read the fine print supported jobs, not jobs, supported jobs and a possible estimated 5 billion in regional activity.

But the estimate I mean, I can estimate that Harvey County now supports 900 jobs and we cause $3 million of regional activity.

Like, I don't know if that's true or not, but you know what I mean?

Like it's like and again, I'm not don't I don't want to get sued by these folks.

Like, I know that they hired someone to go and do a really good job on these numbers.

But again, it's like why we have reporters like, you got to read through the numbers sometimes be like, well, how does this how does this, you know, way out waiting for the Panasonic deal to pay off?

Oh, you mean has it paid off yet?

Hey, I wouldn't have voted for it.

Let's get back on topic here.

Let me go back to you as a school board member, though.

Have you planned on, and recently, have you planned on meeting with any city council members to talk about how this affects, you know, other jurisdictions and, you know, the cities?

The the school board's asking for a bond issue as well as much money loaded question.

Oh, but no, in all seriousness, yes.

And we do have they have had one this year, a tri governmental meeting, the county, the city and the school board.

Now, what come out has come out of that those meetings I'm not for sure exactly yet.

Nothing major yet.

I think we're to have two a year from what I'm hearing.

Your second part of your question, if you could.

Well, just have you have you planned on meeting with with, any council members and also the school bond issue, which I was just trying to tie in the school bond issue with, you know, the district needing money, all the time.

And with the city council making these incentive deals with developers, the school district misses out on tax money that should be there.

It seems like, you know, I'm sure we'll have a whole host of meetings.

I don't want to get ahead of the cart.

Come on.

That you.

But but no, the bond issue and and I guess, for the sake of a plug, it it it this is going to open up a way, for, to the bond is intended to alleviate the capital overlay fund, and that will essentially help all of the schools in the district.

If it is indeed a yes, yes, turnout to the vote.

I know there's a lot of talk and different opinions and views on that.

I understand that, but, I, I'm willing to go on the record and say, I'd rather, build schools than jails.

I'd rather, make the in key investments now, for our kids and for our, administrators, teachers.

Then wake up one day and we're in a worse situation than what we're in now.

So let's continue this bond issue discussion, and we're going to have a wider show next week talking more about the school bond issue that's going to be, on the ballot.

But John Whitmer, you know, it seems like the school district is doing this again.

And, last year, I believe they asked for $450 million, and now they're asking for $615 million.

And separating it into two questions.

It seems to be coming, or is it a more convoluted process this time?

And does it have any chance of passing?

Well, I can't speak to the latter part.

What I can tell you is nothing's changed.

They just are greedier.

Look, the district is down 4000 students.

They've closed, six schools.

What's changed?

The only thing that's changed is they want more money.

And ultimately, their student achievement numbers are down over the last ten years.

And ultimately, the only thing that's really changed is, oh, by the way, they've just raised our property taxes by $10 million.

They received this year alone.

They received $100 million in more money, increased funding from the state of Kansas.

So they got $110 million more in their 2027 budget.

And yet they still want another $650 million over the next 30 years.

Just keep one thing in mind.

They say it's revenue neutral.

In two years, your property taxes go down.

This is a property tax increase.

The average family at home.

The average home in in Wichita is worth $250,000.

It's a $200 a year tax increase for the average homeowner.

And folks are taxed enough already.

I hope this fails.

Vote no.

Adam Strunk, any comments on I know you're from Harvey County?

I mean, yeah, it's you can squeeze numbers until they scream.

I mean, there's a little bit of right and wrong and both like it's not a 200.

It's not a $200 tax increase.

It's a failure of a tax decrease in two years.

I think that's fair decrease.

We're in semantics.

But when you're throwing it out there with folks, when you're the one paying $200 on your MP about we, editorialized our community failed to bonds and they said, hey, we got to really pass this because if we don't like our roofs are going to fall in.

And it's getting really bad over here.

And so everyone sat down the school district, the community, we had a whole year and a half of planning and we said, okay, what do we think is going to pass?

What is the community want?

What doesn't the community want?

And then everyone got together and then we passed it like by 66, 67%.

And that's the one thing we quickly tend to do.

And I think it was good to get input from folks.

They did as best as you can.

I think you're right.

All right.

That's a wrap for this week.

Thank you so much to all of you for joining us.

And thanks also to cake for sharing their video with us.

I'm Jared Cirillo.

Have a great weekend.

And.