KS lawmakers weigh taking away Kelly’s power to fill vacancies in some statewide offices

Kansas lawmakers are considering bills to limit Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly’s power to fill vacancies in statewide offices, a step that would allow Republicans to replace some elected officials if they leave office before the end of their terms.

One bill would limit the governor’s authority to appoint a state treasurer and insurance commissioner if the positions become vacant. Another would require U.S. Senate vacancies to be filled by someone who belongs to the same political party as the departing senator.

Under current law, Kelly has the authority to appoint a U.S. senator in the event of a vacancy to serve until the next election cycle. She also has the power to appoint a treasurer and insurance commissioner when there is a vacancy.

The bills would still allow the governor to fill the vacancy of the Kansas secretary of state and the state attorney general. To remove the governor’s appointment authority for those positions, a state constitutional amendment would be required.

Sen. Caryn Tyson, a Parker Republican who introduced the legislation, said they were intended to give more power to voters and increase transparency in the appointment process.

“It’s a process that’s needed to change for some time,” she said. “We have the ability to allow ‘we the people’ to be heard in this process, which is the goal of the legislation. It’s about transparency in the election process.”

While Republicans and Democrats are both regularly elected governor, Democrats typically have less success winning other statewide offices. Vacancies in recent years have sometimes been the only way Democrats have taken control of some statewide offices.

For example, in 2020 Kelly picked her lieutenant governor at the time, Lynn Rogers, to be state treasurer after Republican Jake LaTurner won election to Congress. Rogers ran for a full term but lost in 2022.

Rogers said positions such as state treasurer should be appointed based on competency instead of political party and called the proposed process to fill vacancies “totally inappropriate.”

“If you’re a Republican or Democratic governor, you’d be held responsible if their appointees didn’t do a good job,” he said. “If unelected political parties make that decision, it’ll be years before a bad decision can be removed.”

Four states – North Dakota, Oregon, Wisconsin and Rhode Island – require U.S. Senate vacancies to be filled only by special election, and 10 additional states require gubernatorial appointments to be a member of the same political party as the prior incumbent.

Sen. Cindy Holscher, an Overland Park Democrat, said the bills were another attempt to consolidate and concentrate power within the Republican party, especially since key counties could threaten the Republican supermajority in the upcoming election.

“If you look at the whole structure of how things are in the legislature, there’s a lot of power consolidated in certain positions,” she said. “So it does feel like a continuation of the trend we’ve seen over the past few years where maybe certain individuals weren’t happy with the results in the past couple of elections so there’s that consolidation of power.”

The Senate Federal and State Affairs Committee will hold a hearing Thursday on the bills, which were introduced last year. Sen. Mike Thompson, a Shawnee Republican who chairs the committee, said it was important for the bills to receive hearings this year during an election cycle.

Thompson said the legislation only intends to reflect the will of voters, ensuring appointments are done “correctly.”

“A vast majority of the state is red, and both of our U.S. senators are Republicans,” he said. “If the governor appointed one, it may not fit what the rest of the state voted for. So this really gives a voice to the people through their legislators.”

Sen. Oletha Faust-Goudeau, a Wichita Democrat and the ranking minority member of the Federal and State Affairs Committee, said she has not made a decision on whether the legislation aligns with her goals of protecting fair democratic processes.

“There’s this gray, circumstantial area where in the event of an emergency, we may not have the luxury of going through such a long process,” she said. “I’m not sure what the major problem is or why it is so high on our priority list yet, but I want to hear more before I decide anything.”