Postcard — March 7, 2014, 5:59 pm

A Just Decision in Kansas

The state Supreme Court tells Kansas legislators to restore funding for education. Will they comply?

Kansas can be a bit of a blowhard. The state’s most infamous characters have long spoken with a didactic assuredness that defies the trope of Midwestern humility, and to that spirit is owed her original, enduring gift to the union — declaration as a free state at a pivotal juncture before the Civil War — as well as her most dangerous errors in the name of morality. In recent weeks, the Kansas legislature has offered plenty of the latter, introducing headline-grabbing bills to eliminate “no fault” as grounds for divorce, to ban surrogate pregnancies, to allow parents and teachers to bruise children with their open hands, and to let businesses deny service to homosexuals. Last month, Governor Sam Brownback headlined a rally for a political operative whose website declares, “This is a Christian nation, and the Lord wants His Bride to rise up.” But today, through its quietest branch of government, Kansas took a well-reasoned stance that will echo across the country: This is a democratic state, and its constitution wants the legislature to fund education.

This morning the state Supreme Court ruled, in Gannon v. Kansas, that lawmakers have failed in their constitutional obligation to fund schools, thereby upholding a district-court opinion that budget cuts in recent years have created unreasonable, wealth-based disparities and inequitable educational opportunities among schools. The ruling sets a July 1 deadline for the restoration of $129 million in funding to poorer school districts. With respect to the broader state education budget, the court was less prescriptive, returning the matter to the district courts without a deadline for action, though encouraging them to step lively. The lower court could call for more than $440 million in funding increases.

Whether the legislature will obey either edict is another matter. Compliance could require Kansas to repeal bone-deep cuts in income-tax revenue — $2.5 billion through 2018 — that were passed two sessions ago, or to take less sane measures like moving existing funds from other budget areas, or noodling with the formulas that decide appropriations per school. Last session, members of the Senate proposed an amendment to the state constitution that would nullify judicial authority in school-finance matters, and another that would allow the governor to name Supreme Court justices without input from an elected commission. Brownback has also urged Congress to alter the constitutional clause requiring the “suitable financing” of education, which keeps getting the state in trouble.

If the legislature continues to refuse this constitutional mandate, it will do so in the face of two court decisions based on a cumulative 28,327 pages of exhibits, 5,072 pages of trial transcripts, the testimony of sixty-three witnesses, and nearly fifteen years of litigation. More poignantly, it will do so on the sixtieth anniversary of another gift to public education from Kansas (among others): Brown v. Board of Education. In its focus on hard cash, Gannon adds a statement about socioeconomic class to Brown’s on race, challenging a state legislature and board of education that have been backed by proponents of siphoning public funds toward private-school voucher programs.

Jeff Gannon, the eponymous plaintiff and a Methodist pastor in Wichita, told me over the phone that the people running Kansas don’t hold equitable education as a value. The state constitution, however, does. “Until that clash is resolved or compromise is somehow achieved, we will never be able to get past this,” he said. “This is their opportunity to show that, in spite of the people who put them in office, [they] serve the whole of Kansas. Not just the persons who support them financially.”

Gannon and his wife are both products of public education, and they enroll their two children in Wichita’s diverse public district rather than in private schools. “That’s why we offered our children’s names. They were involved in that decision and totally concur with the idea that this is about the common good, and for them to be good citizens they have to have that vision,” he said. His desire to counter stereotypes about the state’s faith-based communities also drove his involvement. “The religious community are allowing a particular ideology to speak for the whole,” he said. “How dare you say that people of faith believe a particular way about this? I want to be a person of faith, I want to be a religious leader, who says that we have a moral obligation to serve every child in Kansas.”

Today’s court ruling is a theoretical victory for those children, but it’s on Kansas lawmakers to follow through with what Brownback has called “the messy business of appropriations.” The governor’s immediate response to the ruling promised cooperation among the branches and included the statement, “We will fix this.” Recent history suggests otherwise, but who knows? “God, by the Spirit, isn’t predictable,” the religious scholar Matt Sigler has said. “But as we come with child-like faith, the Triune God always meets us in our mess.”

Sarah Smarsh has reported on Kansas’s culture, politics, and environment for more than a decade. She is the creator of Free State Media, a public audio-storytelling platform that will focus on Kansas education in Autumn 2014. Read her post on the build-up to the Gannon decision, “Cutting School in Kansas.”

Single Page

More from Sarah Smarsh:

Postcard February 13, 2014, 10:42 am

Cutting School in Kansas

The state Supreme Court prepares to decide the fate of Kansas public-school funding

Get access to 169 years of
Harper’s for only $23.99

United States Canada



October 2019


Constitution in Crisis·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

America’s Constitution was once celebrated as a radical and successful blueprint for democratic governance, a model for fledgling republics across the world. But decades of political gridlock, electoral corruption, and dysfunction in our system of government have forced scholars, activists, and citizens to question the document’s ability to address the thorniest issues of modern ­political life.

Does the path out of our current era of stalemate, minority rule, and executive abuse require amending the Constitution? Do we need a new constitutional convention to rewrite the document and update it for the twenty-­first century? Should we abolish it entirely?

This spring, Harper’s Magazine invited five lawmakers and scholars to New York University’s law school to consider the constitutional crisis of the twenty-­first century. The event was moderated by Rosa Brooks, a law professor at Georgetown and the author of How Everything Became War and the Military Became Everything: Tales from the Pentagon.

Good Bad Bad Good·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

About fifteen years ago, my roommate and I developed a classification system for TV and movies. Each title was slotted into one of four categories: Good-Good; Bad-Good; Good-Bad; Bad-Bad. The first qualifier was qualitative, while the second represented a high-low binary, the title’s aspiration toward capital-A Art or lack thereof.

Some taxonomies were inarguable. The O.C., a Fox series about California rich kids and their beautiful swimming pools, was delightfully Good-Bad. Paul Haggis’s heavy-handed morality play, Crash, which won the Oscar for Best Picture, was gallingly Bad-Good. The films of Francois Truffaut, Good-Good; the CBS sitcom Two and a Half Men, Bad-Bad.

Power of Attorney·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

In a Walmart parking lot in Portsmouth, Virginia, in 2015, a white police officer named Stephen Rankin shot and killed an unarmed, eighteen-­year-­old black man named William Chapman. “This is my second one,” he told a bystander seconds after firing the fatal shots, seemingly in reference to an incident four years earlier, when he had shot and killed another unarmed man, an immigrant from Kazakhstan. Rankin, a Navy veteran, had been arresting Chapman for shoplifting when, he claimed, Chapman charged him in a manner so threatening that he feared for his life, leaving him no option but to shoot to kill—­the standard and almost invariably successful defense for officers when called to account for shooting civilians. Rankin had faced no charges for his earlier killing, but this time, something unexpected happened: Rankin was indicted on a charge of first-­degree murder by Portsmouth’s newly elected chief prosecutor, thirty-­one-year-­old Stephanie Morales. Furthermore, she announced that she would try the case herself, the first time she had ever prosecuted a homicide. “No one could remember us having an actual prosecution for the killing of an unarmed person by the police,” Morales told me. “I got a lot of feedback, a lot of people saying, ‘You shouldn’t try this case. If you don’t win, it may affect your reelection. Let someone else do it.’ ”

Carlitos in Charge·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

I was in Midtown, sitting by a dry fountain, making a list of all the men I’d slept with since my last checkup—doctor’s orders. Afterward, I would head downtown and wait for Quimby at the bar, where there were only alcoholics and the graveyard shift this early. I’d just left the United Nations after a Friday morning session—likely my last. The agenda had included resolutions about a worldwide ban on plastic bags, condemnation of a Slobodan Miloševic statue, sanctions on Israel, and a truth and reconciliation commission in El Salvador. Except for the proclamation opposing the war criminal’s marble replica, everything was thwarted by the United States and a small contingent of its allies. None of this should have surprised me. Some version of these outcomes had been repeating weekly since World War II.

Life after Life·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

For time ylost, this know ye,
By no way may recovered be.

I spent thirty-eight years in prison and have been a free man for just under two. After killing a man named Thomas Allen Fellowes in a drunken, drugged-up fistfight in 1980, when I was nineteen years old, I was sentenced to life without the possibility of parole. Former California governor Jerry Brown commuted my sentence and I was released in 2017, five days before Christmas. The law in California, like in most states, grants the governor the right to alter sentences. After many years of advocating for the reformation of the prison system into one that encourages rehabilitation, I had my life restored to me.

Cost of renting a giant panda from the Chinese government, per day:


A recent earthquake in Chile was found to have shifted the city of Concepción ten feet to the west, shortened Earth’s days by 1.26 microseconds, and shifted the planet’s axis by nearly three inches.

A group of researchers studying the Loch Ness Monster did not rule out the possibility of its existence, but speculated that it is possibly a giant eel.

Subscribe to the Weekly Review newsletter. Don’t worry, we won’t sell your email address!


Happiness Is a Worn Gun


“Nowadays, most states let just about anybody who wants a concealed-handgun permit have one; in seventeen states, you don’t even have to be a resident. Nobody knows exactly how many Americans carry guns, because not all states release their numbers, and even if they did, not all permit holders carry all the time. But it’s safe to assume that as many as 6 million Americans are walking around with firearms under their clothes.”

Subscribe Today