This is why the Kansas Legislature hasn’t made sexual harassment training mandatory

Kansas is among roughly one-third of all state legislatures that do not require lawmakers to receive training about what constitutes sexual harassment, data compiled by The Associated Press show.

This week, legislators from both the Republican and Democratic parties will be able to attend sexual harassment training conducted by the YWCA of Topeka.

But despite recent recommendations by the Kansas City-based Women’s Foundation for mandatory training, legislative leaders say they can’t require training without passing a law since legislators are not employees.

“We have been working with our attorneys and we can require it for staff and personnel, but when it comes to elected officials, they are very independent, so we will highly encourage they attend the classes,” said Senate President Susan Wagle, a Wichita Republican.

“I can’t imagine anyone not going to training.”

Amid the recent wave of sexual harassment claims in entertainment, media and politics, 30 state legislatures — including Kansas — are reviewing their own policies for training and reporting misconduct.

In Missouri, a 2015 scandal involving the speaker of the House and a 19-year-old intern led to his resignation. Now, Missouri House members are required through policy to have training annually and senators are required to have it once upon taking office.

In October, The Star wrote several stories about sexual harassment in the Kansas statehouse of interns and staff by both political parties — a statehouse with a pervasive “good ol’ boy” environment, said one former intern.

Last month, the Women’s Foundation drew up a list of its recommendations for the Kansas Legislature, including the mandatory training sessions, anonymous reporting and external investigations.

Wagle said they would consider making the training available to legislators each year and she believes the training this week is the first time it’s ever been offered to legislators.

“We want to make sure we have a harassment policy but don’t stifle taking an intern across the street for pizza to talk about legislation. There is innocent communication that is healthy and the interns find that very informative,” Wagle said.

“It’s a long-term process that includes awareness, education, constant updates of policy and we’ve started down that road and I think we’ve made a lot of progress this year.”

According to the new analysis by the Associated Press, state legislatures vary tremendously in what kinds of policies and procedures they have in place to deal with sexual harassment and misconduct claims.

The AP review found that about three-fourths of the states have at least one legislative chamber that has updated its sexual harassment policy during the past three months, has developed specific proposals to do so or has undertaken a review of whether changes are needed.

Ron Ryckman, speaker of the Kansas House, said the legislative leadership council plans in the next month to review the current sexual harassment policy, which was last updated in the early ’90s, and to look at best practices in other states.

“Instead of waiting to finish the new policy, we wanted to start training,” said Ryckman, an Olathe Republican. “The policy that we have now has been in effect for a long time.”

House Minority Leader Jim Ward, a Wichita Democrat, said he believes that legislative leaders can essentially require the training even without passing a law.

While legislative leaders can’t fire anyone who doesn’t attend training, Ward said leaders can make it “mandatory” through other tools, like taking away committee assignments, leadership positions or perks like attending national conferences. So far, Ward said about 60 percent of his caucus has already completed sexual harassment training separate from the training offered this week.

“I believe it’s important and has to be done by everybody,” Ward said. “We haven’t had any pushback.”

Senate Minority Leader Anthony Hensley said he will also require Senate Democrats to participate in the training.

Ward announced he was requiring sexual harassment training for House Democrats after Abbie Hodgson, a former Democratic legislative staffer, alleged that in 2015 she was propositioned by a lawmaker and that lawmakers were relying on female interns as designated drivers after lobbyist-hosted cocktail hours. There is no current policy banning legislators from fraternizing with interns.

Since then, more women stepped forward with allegations of sexual misconduct, including the daughter of a former Kansas lawmaker. Kelly Schodorf, a lawyer in Wichita and the daughter of former state Sen. Jean Schodorf, said she was sexually assaulted while working on a congressional campaign in 2010.

In Missouri, the House is considering minor tweaks to its policy, but did not provide details, according to Missouri House Speaker Todd Richardson, a Poplar Bluff Republican.

“To the extent we need to update and improve our policy, we’ll certainly do so,” Richardson said in a recent news conference. “But I will say this: I’m happy with the way the policy is working and happy that, with all of those things in the news, Missouri actually was a leader in this space and provides good guidance for other states looking to implement similar policies.”

The reason Missouri is a leader in sexual harassment policies? A 2015 story by The Star revealed that the House speaker at the time, John Diehl, had a sexually charged relationship with a 19-year-old statehouse intern. A day after the story, Diehl resigned.

“Necessity drives policy,” said Colleen Coble, CEO at Missouri Coalition Against Domestic and Sexual Violence, who helped Missouri lawmakers develop their sexual harassment policies after the 2015 scandal.

While Coble acknowledges that Missouri has progressed, “We’re not there yet,” she said.

“It’s important to have good clear written policies and procedures. But I think it’s the daily experience, implementation, the culture and atmosphere of every workplace that makes a difference. The policies are the framework. More importantly, it’s how is it put into practice on any given Thursday. Do people feel supported by supervisors? Well informed? Are there clear and immediate consequences?”

In 2017, the Missouri House had four sexual harassment complaints. The speaker’s office would not release information about the outcomes and whether the complaints led to any suspensions or firings.

Rep. Lauren Arthur, a Kansas City Democrat, said that while Missouri has a formal reporting process and a House speaker who takes the issue seriously, the current system depends too heavily on leadership and the burden is on the victim to report.

“It is ultimately a leader’s discretion to either address allegations or ignore,” Arthur said.

Arthur would like to see a clearer outline of consequences for specific scenarios and some sort of statehouse code of conduct for members to sign, as well as a greater emphasis on ethics for all legislators.

“The statehouse is unique in that behavior is difficult to police there,” Arthur said. “In corporations, the business has an interest to remove the perpetrator. But in government, that can be perceived as undermining the democratic will of the public.”

It’s all part of a bigger ethics reform that the legislature needs to address, Arthur said, including unlimited gifts from lobbyists that “inflate lawmakers’ egos even more and they feel entitled to all sorts of things, including how they treat the people around him.”

“The money, the power, the ego all really informs the conversation as much as men behaving badly. Real change is going to happen when there’s more proportional representation of women in leadership positions.”

This story was originally published January 16, 2018 at 7:00 AM with the headline "This is why the Kansas Legislature hasn’t made sexual harassment training mandatory."