# What's going on in the Kansas Senate election? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [September 11, 2014, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-going-on-in-the-kansas-senate-election/698237 "2014-09-11T21:10:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2014, 6:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-going-on-in-the-kansas-senate-election/698237/21 "2014-09-19T06:22:05Z")
My prediction – Kobach will find a shill, someone who claims to be a Democrat and will walk into Dem Party headquarters and volunteer to run and get on the ballot. Then the Dems won’t be able to claim they couldn’t find a Democrat who was willing to run. Or maybe the shill will entirely bypass the party – just show up to the Secretary’s office, claim to be a volunteer and sign some paper to get on the ballot. ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Feldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lord_feldon/32/341_2.png) [@Lord\_Feldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Feldon)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2014, 6:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-going-on-in-the-kansas-senate-election/698237/22 "2014-09-19T06:39:46Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > My prediction – Kobach will find a shill, someone who claims to be a Democrat and will walk into Dem Party headquarters and volunteer to run and get on the ballot. Then the Dems won’t be able to claim they couldn’t find a Democrat who was willing to run. If it comes to that, the Democrats should find someone named Pat Roberts. ---
**Author:** ![Shoeless](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shoeless/32/7099_2.png) [@Shoeless](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shoeless)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2014, 11:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-going-on-in-the-kansas-senate-election/698237/23 "2014-09-19T11:48:21Z")
It may be worth noting that Kobach is up for reelection this year too. I’m not sure how he’s polling at the moment, but between the voter ID laws he’s put into place and all the time he’s spent in other states helping them with their anti immigration legislation (which he claims he’s doing on his own time) I wouldn’t be sorry to see him go. ---
**Author:** ![Katriona](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/katriona/32/113_2.png) [@Katriona](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Katriona)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2014, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-going-on-in-the-kansas-senate-election/698237/24 "2014-09-19T18:32:23Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > My prediction – Kobach will find a shill, someone who claims to be a Democrat and will walk into Dem Party headquarters and volunteer to run and get on the ballot. Then the Dems won’t be able to claim they couldn’t find a Democrat who was willing to run. > > Or maybe the shill will entirely bypass the party – just show up to the Secretary’s office, claim to be a volunteer and sign some paper to get on the ballot. This guy? He claims to be a Democratic voter who says he’s being disenfranchised by not having a Democrat to vote for, but he has family ties to Brownback’s reelection campaign. [http://ksn.com/2014/09/18/democrat-petitions-to-be-added-to-kansas-senate-race-after-lawsuit/](http://ksn.com/2014/09/18/democrat-petitions-to-be-added-to-kansas-senate-race-after-lawsuit/) ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2014, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-going-on-in-the-kansas-senate-election/698237/25 "2014-09-19T18:47:03Z")
That guy is a shill who is (allegedly) trying to get someone _else_ on the ballot - that is, any Democrat. **Jim** is saying Kobach will find a patsy to _be_ on the ballot. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2014, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-going-on-in-the-kansas-senate-election/698237/26 "2014-09-19T20:24:18Z")
Couldn’t the Democrats just name Orman as their candidate? ---
**Author:** ![Inner\_Stickler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inner_stickler/32/318_2.png) [@Inner\_Stickler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inner_Stickler)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2014, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-going-on-in-the-kansas-senate-election/698237/27 "2014-09-19T20:26:40Z")
He wouldn’t accept and he can’t run as both the independent candidate and the democratic candidate. ---
**Author:** ![squeegee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/squeegee/32/14537_2.png) [@squeegee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/squeegee)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2014, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-going-on-in-the-kansas-senate-election/698237/28 "2014-09-19T20:29:31Z")
Blogs are saying that Kobach caved, will send out mail-in ballots with no Dem candidate on them. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2014, 11:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-going-on-in-the-kansas-senate-election/698237/29 "2014-09-19T23:37:24Z")
> [@squeegee](#): > > Blogs are saying that Kobach caved, will send out mail-in ballots with no Dem candidate on them. A bylined news article from the [LA Times](http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/politicsnow/la-pn-kansas-ballots-senate-mailed-20140919-story.html): > [@](#): > > Secretary of State Kris Kobach has told county election officials to begin sending out ballots to voters overseas and in the military starting Saturday, instead of delaying the process by a week so that Democrats could appoint a nominee, a spokeswoman for his office confirmed. > > Along with the ballots, voters will receive a letter cautioning them that they could be receiving new, replacement ballots later on if Democrats decide to appoint a nominee. In-state voters will not receive ballots until after Oct. 15. OK, I guess, but is he trying to say that the current ballots won’t count if replacement ballots are sent out? After the deadline? But even better: > [@](#): > > Kobach had told reporters this week that state law allows him the right to appoint a replacement for the Democrat on the ballot, but did not elaborate on any plans to do so. I have no particular desire to inform Kansans on who they should vote for for Senate, but damn!, they need a new Secretary of State! ---
**Author:** ![Katriona](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/katriona/32/113_2.png) [@Katriona](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Katriona)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2014, 1:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-going-on-in-the-kansas-senate-election/698237/30 "2014-09-20T13:30:18Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > That guy is a shill who is (allegedly) trying to get someone _else_ on the ballot - that is, any Democrat. **Jim** is saying Kobach will find a patsy to _be_ on the ballot. I know–I was attempting to make a funny, and it clearly didn’t work as well as I’d hoped! ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2014, 1:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-going-on-in-the-kansas-senate-election/698237/31 "2014-09-24T13:03:42Z")
> [@Katriona](#): > > This guy? He claims to be a Democratic voter who says he’s being disenfranchised by not having a Democrat to vote for, but he has family ties to Brownback’s reelection campaign. > > [http://ksn.com/2014/09/18/democrat-petitions-to-be-added-to-kansas-senate-race-after-lawsuit/](http://ksn.com/2014/09/18/democrat-petitions-to-be-added-to-kansas-senate-race-after-lawsuit/) The Kansas Supreme Court has referred the case to a district court (from [here](http://www.kansascity.com/news/government-politics/article2217754.html)): > [@](#): > > On Tuesday the Kansas Supreme Court put off consideration of a lawsuit aimed at forcing Democrats to nominate a Senate candidate to replace Chad Taylor, who withdrew from the race Sept. 3. > > Instead, Chief Justice Lawton Nuss sent the lawsuit, filed by David Orel of Kansas City, Kan., to Shawnee County District Court for further consideration. > > … > > His decision is likely to delay any final ruling for weeks, making it impossible for Democrats to provide a nominee before November ballots are locked in place. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2014, 1:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-going-on-in-the-kansas-senate-election/698237/32 "2014-09-24T13:26:15Z")
> [@Frank](#): > > The Kansas Supreme Court has referred the case to a district court (from [here](http://www.kansascity.com/news/government-politics/article2217754.html)): That’s an interesting ruling. The justice who shipped it out said the KS Supreme Court “lacked evidence” to determine whether state law allowed the AG to force the Democrats to add another candidate. Evidence? There’s a claim about what the law means, there’s the text of the law, and the court is supposed to decide if the interpretation is correct or not. What other evidence do they need? Also, the article in in error in at least one point. The delayed lawsuit won’t make it impossible for the Democrats to put up a candidate. What it will do is make it impossible for the AG to _force_ the Democrats to put up a candidate. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2014, 1:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-going-on-in-the-kansas-senate-election/698237/33 "2014-09-24T13:28:27Z")
They need a record: witness testimony, documentary evidence, and so on. Appellate courts don’t hear testimony or make pretrial evidentiary rulings themselves, and generally aren’t well-equipped to do so. If the parties agreed, they could dispense with the requirement for a formal record and just answer the question of law. But if the parties don’t agree due process won’t allow that - and the KSDP isn’t going to agree because there’s nothing in it for them. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2014, 1:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-going-on-in-the-kansas-senate-election/698237/34 "2014-09-24T13:31:32Z")
Why didn’t they need all that for the first decision? ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2014, 1:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-going-on-in-the-kansas-senate-election/698237/35 "2014-09-24T13:38:45Z")
That’s a little complicated, but the basic answer is that the petition was filed on an emergency basis and the defendant was a state agency, which is not entitled to due process (or at least to the same degree as a private litigant.) ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2014, 1:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-going-on-in-the-kansas-senate-election/698237/36 "2014-09-24T13:45:31Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > Why didn’t they need all that for the first decision? Just wanted to add a few followup thought to this. Their first decision was that the AG could not refuse to allow the Dem candidate from the ballot. This was unanimous, or maybe more accurately, by consensus. One would think there would be MORE evidence needed to decide that case – prior withdrawal letters submitted candidates, prior refusals to accept such a letter, prior case histories of any litigation of the issue, etc. It’s arguable that this second issue might need the same kind of research, but why accept and decide the first and refuse the second? And particularly when the court must have understood that the delay meant a defacto loss for the AG. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2014, 1:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-going-on-in-the-kansas-senate-election/698237/37 "2014-09-24T13:57:26Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > That’s a little complicated, but the basic answer is that the petition was filed on an emergency basis and the defendant was a state agency, which is not entitled to due process (or at least to the same degree as a private litigant.) It must have been the Candidate or the Democratic party who filed the first case, to force the AG to remove the name after he proclaimed that he wouldn’t. Do we know how this second case came about? As I understand it, after the first ruling the AG issued an order that the Party put up another name. So I would guess that the Democrats would also be the ones filing the second case. But it’s possible the Dems just made some public snorting sounds about not doing it, and the AG then filed papers asking the court to rule on his order as an aid to enforcing it. In the first case, I’m sure the Dems wouldn’t have filed it with a claim of “emergency” since they were in no hurry. Does the AG have the power to request some kind of “emergency” rapid ruling, no matter which side filed? ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2014, 1:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-going-on-in-the-kansas-senate-election/698237/38 "2014-09-24T13:59:51Z")
I don’t know what you mean by “prior case histories”, but case law isn’t considered evidence. It’s considered _argument_, and it’s always admissible without notice to the other party (just like, say, the text of a statute). Again, both parties in the new law suit are private litigants, which means they get to present evidence and the like no matter what. The only evidence the court considered in the first lawsuit were a few affidavits, Taylor’s letter and those of prior candidates. ETA: In the second case the plaintiff is a “registered Democrat” (the father of a Brownback campaign staffer) who wants to force the Dems to nominate someone. Kobach isn’t officially involved. Taylor did file the first lawsuit, and he was _certainly_ in a hurry; if it hadn’t been decided quickly, his name would have been on the ballot. Kobach is the Secretary of State, incidentally, not the Attorney General. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2014, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-going-on-in-the-kansas-senate-election/698237/39 "2014-09-24T14:08:29Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > I don’t know what you mean by “prior case histories”, but case law isn’t considered evidence. It’s considered _argument_, and it’s always admissible without notice to the other party (just like, say, the text of a statute). > > Again, both parties in the new law suit are private litigants, which means they get to present evidence and the like no matter what. The only evidence the court considered in the first lawsuit were a few affidavits, Taylor’s letter and those of prior candidates. > > ETA: In the second case the plaintiff is a “registered Democrat” (the father of a Brownback campaign staffer) who wants to force the Dems to nominate someone. Kobach isn’t officially involved. Taylor did file the first lawsuit, and he was _certainly_ in a hurry; if it hadn’t been decided quickly, his name would have been on the ballot. Kobach is the Secretary of State, incidentally, not the Attorney General. Ok, I thought the two parties were essentially the same in both cases, but I now see they aren’t. Thanks for the clarification. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2014, 2:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-going-on-in-the-kansas-senate-election/698237/40 "2014-09-24T14:37:22Z")
Fascinating. Yet again, I am baffled by the fact that in the US, the person in charge of the electoral process is a partisan politician, rather than a non-partisan, neutral official. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-going-on-in-the-kansas-senate-election/698237.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-going-on-in-the-kansas-senate-election/698237.md?page=3)