Opinion
Lawrence Journal-World l LJWorld.com l Wednesday, February 17, 2016
EDITORIALS
School denial Kansas legislators seem to be taking a head-in-the-sand approach to addressing a court order on funding K-12 public schools.
K
ansas legislative leaders appear to be in denial on the issue of public school finance. The Kansas Supreme Court has ordered the Legislature to provide a new, more equitable way to fund the state’s K-12 public schools by June 30. If legislators fail to meet that deadline, the ruling says, the state will not have a valid funding mechanism for those schools. Without state funds, the schools cannot operate. That seems like an important matter, but members of the Kansas House and Senate are blithely going about the business of passing a budget for the next fiscal year without even discussing how the state will meet its court-ordered obligation to fund schools. Last week, both the House and Senate passed revised budgets for fiscal year 2017, which starts on July 1, without even discussing the school finance issue. On Monday, a conference committee representing both houses reconciled the two proposals and passed a compromise budget, again without any school discussion. That proposal may be considered by the full House and Senate later this week. Senate budget committee chairman Ty Masterson, R-Andover, said the court opinion was irrelevant to the budget debate and called Democratic efforts to raise the issue “nothing more than an opportunity to politically grandstand on a hot topic.” House budget chairman Ron Ryckman Jr., R-Olathe, said that lawmakers could talk about schools later. “There’s no reason to hold the rest of the state budget hostage on one issue.” Here’s one reason: The original House and Senate budgets committed all but about $6 million of the state’s expected general fund revenue, but state education officials estimate it would cost about $70 million this year and $39 million next year to comply with the court’s ruling. Where will that money come from? Last year, legislators instituted a block-grant system that essentially keeps school funding flat for two years. During that time, they said they planned to write a new school finance formula. That was almost a year ago, but there appears to have been little progress on that task. Faced with the June 30 deadline, legislators are taking a head-in-thesand approach to the problem. Rather than reinstating the previous school finance formula or stepping up efforts to write a new plan, they are refusing, at least for now, to acknowledge the unpleasant reality they face. Legislators seem to be hoping this problem will go away, but it won’t. They may think the Supreme Court would never close Kansas schools and they’re going to call the court’s bluff — or if, by some chance, schools close, Kansans will blame the court, not the Legislature. If that’s what they’re thinking, they could be seriously misreading the Kansas public. Meeting the state’s obligation to fund public schools is a real responsibility that requires some real leadership that seems to be sorely lacking in the Legislature right now. LAWRENCE
Journal-World
®
Established 1891
What the Lawrence Journal-World stands for Accurate and fair news reporting. No mixing of editorial opinion with reporting of the news. l Safeguarding the rights of all citizens regardless of race, creed or economic stature. l Sympathy and understanding for all who are disadvantaged or oppressed. l Exposure of any dishonesty in public affairs. l Support of projects that make our community a better place to live. l l
W.C. Simons (1871-1952); Publisher, 1891-1944 Dolph Simons Sr. (1904-1989) Publisher, 1944-1962; Editor, 1950-1979
Dolph C. Simons Jr., Editor Chad Lawhorn, Managing Editor Kathleen Johnson, Advertising
Ann Gardner, Editorial Page Editor Ed Ciambrone, Production and
Manager
Distribution Director
THE WORLD COMPANY
Dolph C. Simons Jr., Chairman Dolph C. Simons III, Dan C. Simons, President, Newspapers Division
President, Digital Division
Scott Stanford, General Manager
9A
Future of weaponry is unsettling Munich — The Munich Security Conference is an annual catalog of horrors. But the most ominous discussion last weekend wasn’t about Islamic State terrorism but a new generation of weapons — such as killer robots and malignly programmed “smart” appliances that could be deployed in a future conflict. Behind the main events at the annual discussion of foreign and defense policy here was a topic described in one late-night session as “The Future of Warfare: Race with the Machines.” The premise was that we are at the dawn of a new era of conflict in which all wars will be, to some extent, cyber wars, and new weapons will combine radical advances in hardware, software and even biology. Espen Barth Eide, the former foreign minister of Norway, imagined a future weapon that fuses GPS guidance, facialrecognition technology and artificial intelligence and can be programmed like an electronic hit man. Kenneth Roth, the head of Human Rights Watch, noted the advantages of such “killer robots” for military planners: They don’t get tired, they wouldn’t get scared, and they would exercise consistent, if merciless, judgment. “The genie will come out of the bottle,” predicted retired Adm. James Stavridis, a former NATO commander who now runs the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts. He noted that “warfare
David Ignatius
davidignatius@washpost.com
“
American, Russian and Chinese ability to use these New Age weapons is indeed worrisome. But more frightening is the ability of terrorist groups, whose signature may not always be discernible, to use cyber and other high-tech skills.” has always been a process of invention and adjustment.” A century ago, many people thought submarines were terrifying and unethical. Compared with, say, land mines or nuclear bombs, the effects of the new high-tech weapons may be less toxic and more precise. Guests at a “Cyber Dinner” hosted here by the Atlantic Council considered the dawning world of killer appliances. In the coming “Internet of Things,” speakers noted, there will soon be more than 30 billion smart chips embedded in cars, elevators, refrigerators, thermostats and medical
devices. These pervasive, connected systems may well have poor security and be easily hackable. The big worry in the future, argued several tech experts at the dinner, may not be data privacy — forget about that — but data security. “You can know my blood type, but don’t change it,” one speaker explained. Hackers may be able to alter data in financial markets, hospitals and electronic grids — paralyzing normal economic and social activity. The rapidly evolving interface of technology and security was one theme of an unusual panel discussion here that brought together intelligence chiefs from the U.S., Britain, the Netherlands and the European Union. Spy chiefs don’t usually attend such foreign policy gatherings, least of all in Germany, a country with a deep mistrust of intelligence agencies. But led by James Clapper, the U.S. director of national intelligence, this group made a collective pitch for greater transparency on intelligence issues as technology empowers individuals and adversaries. Clapper opened the door on the brave new world of weaponry with his annual threat-assessment testimony last week before Congress. He made headlines with comments about the explosive growth of the Islamic State and Russia’s onslaught against Syrian rebels. But the most surpris-
ing part of Clapper’s testimony involved technology — especially the mischievous uses of the “Internet of Things” (or IoT), smart devices embedded in vehicles, appliances and other computer products. “In the future, intelligence services might use the IoT for identification, surveillance, monitoring, location tracking and targeting for recruitment, or to gain access to networks or user credentials,” Clapper told Congress. And he warned in his testimony that as artificial intelligence is built into weapons, they will be “susceptible to a range of disruptive and deceptive tactics that might be difficult to anticipate or quickly understand.” American, Russian and Chinese ability to use these New Age weapons is indeed worrisome. But more frightening is the ability of terrorist groups, whose signature may not always be discernible, to use cyber and other high-tech skills. The Islamic State has already used chemical weapons in battle, according to Clapper, and the group is known to be working with drones. The next step, experts here said, may be bioweapons. “We may look back on the good old days when all we had to worry about was nuclear weapons,” said Eide. That sounds like a joke, until you think about what’s ahead. — David Ignatius is a columnist for Washington Post Writers Group.
OLD HOME TOWN
100
Independent judiciary serves all By Lumen Mulligan
To some of us, whether we are in government or as citizens, the Kansas Supreme Court’s recent actions striking down the 2015 school-finance scheme could be seen as a wrongful power grab. Nothing could be further from the truth. The independence of the judiciary is not maintained for the benefit of the judges. It is for us — free citizens of a democratic republic governed under rule of law — for whom the courts stand open as fair and i m p a r t i a l Mulligan tribunals. Of all the evils listed in the Declaration of Independence, none was worse than the colonial judges’ complete dependence upon the king. As Thomas Jefferson penned, “(King George III) has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.” Having experienced life under a system where judges bowed to political pressure, instead of standing up for the rights of the people under law, the
YOUR TURN founders were determined not to repeat that mistake. Our founders were right on this score. Consider two recent examples where we, the people, needed an independent judiciary to strike down legislative acts to protect our rights: l When the D.C. legislature banned all handguns, an overwhelmingly popular law, the independent courts were there to exercise their duty to strike this law as a violation of the people’s right to bear arms. l When Gov. Kathleen Sebelius’ administration attempted to condemn property without first ensuring that all the creditors were paid, our independent Kansas judiciary was there to find the this conduct unconstitutional. As these cases, and many more that I could list for you, demonstrate, we need an independent judiciary in our state now as much as we ever have. Even if some believe the independence of the courts are a barrier to the enactment of wise laws at this current moment, can these same people be sure that the next state or federal administration will not act beyond the bounds of the Constitution? None of us
knows who the next governor or president will be. Prime Minister Winston Churchill famously quipped, “It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.” What he meant was, democracy is a human endeavor. It is, therefore, not perfect, but it is better than any of the alternatives. Much the same can be said of independent courts with the power to strike statutes as unconstitutional. I make no claim that the Kansas or federal courts have never erred, at least from my perspective, in applying constitutional law. I know full well that all Kansans have passionate views on school funding and many other issues. But perfection cannot be the right measure for any human institution — including our independent Kansas courts. The question must be, over the course of our history and looking toward an uncertain future: Are our liberties better protected with an independent judiciary? The answer to this question can only be “yes.” — Lumen Mulligan is the Earl B. Shurtz Research Professor of Law and director of the Shook Hardy & Bacon Center for Excellence in Advocacy at the Kansas University School of Law.
From the Lawrence Daily Journal-World for Feb. 17, 1916: years “To decide the ago sentiment of the IN 1916 students of the University of Kansas in regard to the present military questions before the public, the International Polity club on the hill is conducting a straw vote which will be concluded Tuesday. The students are asked to answer whether they favor compulsory military training in American schools, courses of instruction in military science, compulsory training in schools below the University, a substantial increase in armament for the United States, the administration’s program for increasing the army and navy.” “In following out a policy of enforcing ‘to the letter’ the new regulations concerning University of Kansas student social activities, Mrs. Eustace Brown, adviser of women, has indicated that hereafter there may be stricter ‘regulation’ of the manner in which the students dance. A section of the new social rules approved by the joint committee on students interests of the University provides that, ‘To relieve the chaperone of the disagreeable character of certain responsibilities which may fall to her in case of any discourteous or questionable conduct on the part of those present, a floor committee should always be appointed to cooperate with the chaperone.’... While she does not condemn the conduct of K. U. students attending dances this year, Mrs. Brown feels that dances which are not tolerated by the Kansas City welfare officers, should also be on the taboo list here.” — Compiled by Sarah St. John
Read more Old Home Town at LJWorld.com/news/lawrence/ history/old_home_town.
Letters Policy
The Journal-World welcomes letters to the Public Forum. Letters should be 250 words or less, be of public interest and avoid namecalling and libelous language. The JournalWorld reserves the right to edit letters, as long as viewpoints are not altered. By submitting letters, you grant the Journal-World a nonexclusive license to publish, copy and distribute your work, while acknowledging that you are the author of the work. Letters must bear the name, address and telephone number of the writer. Letters may be submitted by mail to Box 888, Lawrence, KS, 66044 or by email to: letters@ljworld.com.