WASHINGTON (AP) —Former President Donald Trump and some other Republicans are twisting minor voting problems in <a href="https://apnews.com/hub/2022-midterm-elections?utm_source=apnewsnav&amp;utm_medium=featured">U.S. midterm elections</a>
 into conspiracy theories and false claims to sow doubt about Democratic
 victories, continuing efforts since 2020 to undermine Americans’ 
confidence in voting.

Election Day unfolded without major or 
widespread voting snags, yet some GOP candidates sought to distort the 
severity of the few hitches that occurred, such as voting <a href="https://apnews.com/article/2022-midterm-elections-donald-trump-arizona-4e15278b82452878d6f6aa45b2984579">machines temporarily malfunctioning in Arizona’s largest county</a> and some Detroit voters wrongly being told they had already cast ballots.

“The
 most concerning thing is the way those isolated incidents are being 
used to spread mis- and disinformation and lies around the election in 
an attempt to undermine people’s confidence and faith in the election,” 
said Sylvia Albert, director of voting and elections for the nonpartisan
 group Common Cause.

In 2020, conspiracies about a rigged election
 were fueled by bogus reports of suitcases stuffed with fraudulent 
ballots at a Georgia vote-counting operation and ‘’ballot mules’’ 
loading up drop boxes with fraudulent ballots.

The GOP has kept up the rhetoric since then and laid the groundwork for contesting this year's midterm elections. <a href="https://apnews.com/article/2022-midterm-elections-lawsuits-donald-trump-race-and-ethnicity-b5bbd44a2fe3ade45a1f6cf2a59c0639">More than 100 lawsuits were filed</a>
 across the country before Election Day, targeting mail-in voting rules,
 voting machine security and access for partisan poll watchers.

After
 Trump lost Arizona to President Joe Biden by just over 10,000 votes, he
 and his supporters peddled a string of allegations about election 
wrongdoing that crumbled under scrutiny.

Two years later, the state remains pivotal. <a href="https://apnews.com/article/arizona-governor-race-2022-midterm-elections-274fa547d321f88762954f8f8806c88d">Democrats held narrow leads early Wednesday</a> in too-close-to-call races for governor and U.S. Senate.

Trump
 and some of his supporters sought to amplify problems with 
vote-tabulation equipment in roughly 25% of polling places in Maricopa 
County, home to Phoenix and the majority of the state’s population.

Codes
 on ballots that were printed too lightly to be be read by tabulating 
scanners caused the confusion. Impacted voters were given a choice: 
Leave their ballots in a locked box at their polling place to be counted
 at a central office on Wednesday, or take them to another voting center
 on Tuesday.

Trump seized on the problem in a message on his 
social network. He said the problem, which appeared similar to a voting 
issue in New Jersey’s Mercer County, was an effort by Democrats to 
“steal the election.”

“Every national election you have problems 
like these somewhere,” said Lawrence Norden, senior director of the 
Elections and Government Program at the Brennan Center for Justice. “The
 fact that we’re talking about them the next day speaks to the fact that
 there was an organized effort to weaponize these types of things.”

The
 Republican official overseeing the election in Maricopa County 
apologized for the inconvenience and pledged that every legal vote would
 be counted no matter which method voters chose.

But Kari Lake, 
the Republican candidate for governor, told her supporters that they 
should leave the ballot to be counted later only if they couldn’t wait —
 and that they should not take it to another polling place.

In a late-night speech to supporters, Lake focused entirely on election issues.

“The
 system we have right now does not work,” she said. “We the people 
deserve to know on election night the winner and the loser and we will 
bring that kind of election back to Arizona. I assure you of that.”

Election
 critics also focused on a glitch in Detroit. Some electronic poll books
 used for signing in voters displayed an error message stating that 
numbers on ballots already had been assigned to an absentee ballot. Poll
 workers were able to use paper backup poll books when the electronic 
ones had problems.

Detroit is a Democratic stronghold in a swing state, so turnout there can be key in election outcomes. On Tuesday, <a href="https://apnews.com/article/michigan-governor-race-2022-midterm-elections-a91578081bc2141151efdf74bb4b3ccb">Democrat Gretchen Whitmer was re-elected</a> as governor. Democrats also won races for attorney general and secretary of state, defeating <a href="https://apnews.com/article/2022-midterm-elections-voting-donald-trump-0ee9afeb304662dcec28e8af0f18bc1d">Republicans who questioned the 2020 election results</a>.

“It
 was identified and resolved quite quickly” and voters who were wrongly 
flagged were given ballots, said Jake Rollow, a spokesman for the 
Michigan Secretary of State office.

But that didn’t keep Trump from urging his supporters to protest in Detroit — actions that did not materialize on Tuesday.

“We
 have seen misinformation spread about nuances and complexity of 
elections for more than two years,” Rollow said. “It continues to be a 
threat to our democracy, a threat to voters’ faith in our elections and 
really just an unfortunate part of the current political era.”

WASHINGTON (AP) —Former President Donald Trump and some other Republicans are twisting minor voting problems in <a href="https://apnews.com/hub/2022-midterm-elections?utm_source=apnewsnav&amp;utm_medium=featured">U.S. midterm elections</a>
 into conspiracy theories and false claims to sow doubt about Democratic
 victories, continuing efforts since 2020 to undermine Americans’ 
confidence in voting.Election Day unfolded without major or 
widespread voting snags, yet some GOP candidates sought to distort the 
severity of the few hitches that occurred, such as voting <a href="https://apnews.com/article/2022-midterm-elections-donald-trump-arizona-4e15278b82452878d6f6aa45b2984579">machines temporarily malfunctioning in Arizona’s largest county</a> and some Detroit voters wrongly being told they had already cast ballots.“The
 most concerning thing is the way those isolated incidents are being 
used to spread mis- and disinformation and lies around the election in 
an attempt to undermine people’s confidence and faith in the election,” 
said Sylvia Albert, director of voting and elections for the nonpartisan
 group Common Cause.In 2020, conspiracies about a rigged election
 were fueled by bogus reports of suitcases stuffed with fraudulent 
ballots at a Georgia vote-counting operation and ‘’ballot mules’’ 
loading up drop boxes with fraudulent ballots.The GOP has kept up the rhetoric since then and laid the groundwork for contesting this year's midterm elections. <a href="https://apnews.com/article/2022-midterm-elections-lawsuits-donald-trump-race-and-ethnicity-b5bbd44a2fe3ade45a1f6cf2a59c0639">More than 100 lawsuits were filed</a>
 across the country before Election Day, targeting mail-in voting rules,
 voting machine security and access for partisan poll watchers.After
 Trump lost Arizona to President Joe Biden by just over 10,000 votes, he
 and his supporters peddled a string of allegations about election 
wrongdoing that crumbled under scrutiny.Two years later, the state remains pivotal. <a href="https://apnews.com/article/arizona-governor-race-2022-midterm-elections-274fa547d321f88762954f8f8806c88d">Democrats held narrow leads early Wednesday</a> in too-close-to-call races for governor and U.S. Senate.Trump
 and some of his supporters sought to amplify problems with 
vote-tabulation equipment in roughly 25% of polling places in Maricopa 
County, home to Phoenix and the majority of the state’s population.Codes
 on ballots that were printed too lightly to be be read by tabulating 
scanners caused the confusion. Impacted voters were given a choice: 
Leave their ballots in a locked box at their polling place to be counted
 at a central office on Wednesday, or take them to another voting center
 on Tuesday.Trump seized on the problem in a message on his 
social network. He said the problem, which appeared similar to a voting 
issue in New Jersey’s Mercer County, was an effort by Democrats to 
“steal the election.”“Every national election you have problems 
like these somewhere,” said Lawrence Norden, senior director of the 
Elections and Government Program at the Brennan Center for Justice. “The
 fact that we’re talking about them the next day speaks to the fact that
 there was an organized effort to weaponize these types of things.”The
 Republican official overseeing the election in Maricopa County 
apologized for the inconvenience and pledged that every legal vote would
 be counted no matter which method voters chose.But Kari Lake, 
the Republican candidate for governor, told her supporters that they 
should leave the ballot to be counted later only if they couldn’t wait —
 and that they should not take it to another polling place.In a late-night speech to supporters, Lake focused entirely on election issues.“The
 system we have right now does not work,” she said. “We the people 
deserve to know on election night the winner and the loser and we will 
bring that kind of election back to Arizona. I assure you of that.”Election
 critics also focused on a glitch in Detroit. Some electronic poll books
 used for signing in voters displayed an error message stating that 
numbers on ballots already had been assigned to an absentee ballot. Poll
 workers were able to use paper backup poll books when the electronic 
ones had problems.Detroit is a Democratic stronghold in a swing state, so turnout there can be key in election outcomes. On Tuesday, <a href="https://apnews.com/article/michigan-governor-race-2022-midterm-elections-a91578081bc2141151efdf74bb4b3ccb">Democrat Gretchen Whitmer was re-elected</a> as governor. Democrats also won races for attorney general and secretary of state, defeating <a href="https://apnews.com/article/2022-midterm-elections-voting-donald-trump-0ee9afeb304662dcec28e8af0f18bc1d">Republicans who questioned the 2020 election results</a>.“It
 was identified and resolved quite quickly” and voters who were wrongly 
flagged were given ballots, said Jake Rollow, a spokesman for the 
Michigan Secretary of State office.But that didn’t keep Trump from urging his supporters to protest in Detroit — actions that did not materialize on Tuesday.“We
 have seen misinformation spread about nuances and complexity of 
elections for more than two years,” Rollow said. “It continues to be a 
threat to our democracy, a threat to voters’ faith in our elections and 
really just an unfortunate part of the current political era.”

Minor poll problems twisted into false US election claims

On this episode of Forward Ever: Leading in Challenging Times host Gary Shorman speaks with Kansas Secretary of State Scott Schwab about the upcoming November 2022 election.

On this episode of Forward Ever: Leading in Challenging Times host Gary Shorman speaks with Kansas Secretary of State Scott Schwab about the upcoming November 2022 election.<div><iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/4CT12zEhq6M" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe></div>

🎤 Forward Ever: Kansas Secretary of State Scott Schwab

On this episode of the Post Podcast, Ellis County Sheriff Scott Braun and Graham County Sheriff Cole Presley, discuss the proposed amendment to the Kansas Consitution on the ballot in November that would enshrine the office of the Sheriff within the constitution.

<a href="https://hayspost.com/posts/e72721bf-17fe-43d1-a428-8eb7c32185ff">For more about the Post Podcast, including a full list of episodes and episode transcripts click here.</a>

On this episode of the Post Podcast, Ellis County Sheriff Scott Braun and Graham County Sheriff Cole Presley, discuss the proposed amendment to the Kansas Consitution on the ballot in November that would enshrine the office of the Sheriff within the constitution.<div><iframe title="Area Sheriff’s discuss proposed Kansas constitutional amendment" allowtransparency="true" height="300" width="100%" style="border: none; min-width: min(100%, 430px);" scrolling="no" data-name="pb-iframe-player" src="https://www.podbean.com/player-v2/?i=jdp7h-12f2b8a-pb&from=pb6admin&square=1&share=1&download=1&rtl=0&fonts=Arial&skin=3267a3&font-color=auto&logo_link=podcast_page&btn-skin=3267a3&size=300" allowfullscreen=""></iframe></div><a href="https://hayspost.com/posts/e72721bf-17fe-43d1-a428-8eb7c32185ff">For more about the Post Podcast, including a full list of episodes and episode transcripts click here.</a>

🎙 Post Podcast: Area Sheriff's discuss proposed Kansas constitutional amendment

Thomas Jefferson once wrote critically of those who “look at constitutions with sanctimonious reverence, and deem them like the arc of the covenant, too sacred to be touched.” While he firmly opposed “frequent and untried changes in laws,” he argued that, in the end “laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind.” In other words, as people learn and grow and change, their constitutions necessarily should too.

These words are on my mind today, with one failed constitutional amendment in our recent past and another constitutional amendment facing Kansas voters this coming November.

There have always been Americans who believe that society needs clear and unchanging constitutional rules, reflecting clear and unchanging values, or else it will fall apart. It’s undeniable that there is much&nbsp;truth in that belief.

But some of these people seem to express far more confidence as to the content of those values, and the operation of those rules, than is justified. Which means that when the democratically expressed interests of the people — their “mind” in Jefferson’s terms — come to challenge what those individuals assume to be necessarily unchanging rules and values, they sometimes see it as a political development that they need to save the “true” or “authentic” constitution from.

When the Kansas Supreme Court determined that the guarantee of “equal and inalienable natural rights” in the Kansas Constitution included at least a limited protection of “bodily integrity” and therefore the right of Kansas women to choose abortion, anti-abortion voters, and those who represent them, were furious, which was to be expected. But their response was to propose amending the Kansas Constitution itself, so as to make it impossible for people to legally or politically interpret the document in that way. That proposal was firmly rejected on August 2.

Come November 8, there will be another amendment on the ballot, this one designed to increase the power of the legislature in Topeka, enabling it to exercise exclusive veto power over how the governor chooses to implement the laws which the legislature itself had written and passed. This proposal, like the last one, is driven by political fury, this time to the way Governor Kelly, at the beginning of the pandemic, used the power granted her under existing laws to order school closures and take other extensive public health measures, actions that were highly unpopular with certain voters and their representatives. A legislative veto is their proposed response.

Legislative vetoes aren’t a new idea; there are plenty of good legal and theoretical arguments both for and against them. What’s notable here is not the arguments being made, but the political reality inspiring them. In both cases, we have a specific action or decision which created a conviction that something shouldn’t be politically possible—that abortion can’t possibly be interpreted as a right, or that a governor’s emergency powers can’t possibly be used in ways which a legislative majority dislikes—in turn causing people who claim to value stability looking to change the constitutional basis of those powers and interpretations themselves.

I’m with Jefferson; I don’t think constitutions are sacred, and changing them doesn’t strike me as at all illegitimate. But when the impetus behind a proposed amendment isn’t an engagement with legal or theoretical arguments, but rather a politically-driven conviction, maybe voters should think twice. They did three weeks ago; whether they will again in November remains to be seen.

Dr. Russell Arben Fox teaches politics in Wichita.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2020/3/1583339056495.jpeg" alt="Dr. Russell Arben Fox teaches politics in Wichita." />
 <figcaption>Dr. Russell Arben Fox teaches politics in Wichita.</figcaption>
 </figure>Thomas Jefferson once wrote critically of those who “look at constitutions with sanctimonious reverence, and deem them like the arc of the covenant, too sacred to be touched.” While he firmly opposed “frequent and untried changes in laws,” he argued that, in the end “laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind.” In other words, as people learn and grow and change, their constitutions necessarily should too.These words are on my mind today, with one failed constitutional amendment in our recent past and another constitutional amendment facing Kansas voters this coming November.There have always been Americans who believe that society needs clear and unchanging constitutional rules, reflecting clear and unchanging values, or else it will fall apart. It’s undeniable that there is much&nbsp;truth in that belief.<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2019/12/1575913663048.png" alt="" />
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure>But some of these people seem to express far more confidence as to the content of those values, and the operation of those rules, than is justified. Which means that when the democratically expressed interests of the people — their “mind” in Jefferson’s terms — come to challenge what those individuals assume to be necessarily unchanging rules and values, they sometimes see it as a political development that they need to save the “true” or “authentic” constitution from.When the Kansas Supreme Court determined that the guarantee of “equal and inalienable natural rights” in the Kansas Constitution included at least a limited protection of “bodily integrity” and therefore the right of Kansas women to choose abortion, anti-abortion voters, and those who represent them, were furious, which was to be expected. But their response was to propose amending the Kansas Constitution itself, so as to make it impossible for people to legally or politically interpret the document in that way. That proposal was firmly rejected on August 2.Come November 8, there will be another amendment on the ballot, this one designed to increase the power of the legislature in Topeka, enabling it to exercise exclusive veto power over how the governor chooses to implement the laws which the legislature itself had written and passed. This proposal, like the last one, is driven by political fury, this time to the way Governor Kelly, at the beginning of the pandemic, used the power granted her under existing laws to order school closures and take other extensive public health measures, actions that were highly unpopular with certain voters and their representatives. A legislative veto is their proposed response.Legislative vetoes aren’t a new idea; there are plenty of good legal and theoretical arguments both for and against them. What’s notable here is not the arguments being made, but the political reality inspiring them. In both cases, we have a specific action or decision which created a conviction that something shouldn’t be politically possible—that abortion can’t possibly be interpreted as a right, or that a governor’s emergency powers can’t possibly be used in ways which a legislative majority dislikes—in turn causing people who claim to value stability looking to change the constitutional basis of those powers and interpretations themselves.I’m with Jefferson; I don’t think constitutions are sacred, and changing them doesn’t strike me as at all illegitimate. But when the impetus behind a proposed amendment isn’t an engagement with legal or theoretical arguments, but rather a politically-driven conviction, maybe voters should think twice. They did three weeks ago; whether they will again in November remains to be seen.Dr. Russell Arben Fox teaches politics in Wichita.

INSIGHT KANSAS: When politics and constitutions collide

By TIM CARPENTER and SHERMAN SMITH <a href="https://kansasreflector.com/2022/08/23/governors-race-schmidt-denounces-kellys-approach-to-flaws-in-kansas-foster-care-system/">Kansas Reflector</a>

TOPEKA — Republican governor 
candidate Derek Schmidt shared frustration Tuesday with pace of progress
 on longstanding challenges of caring for children brought into Kansas’ 
privatized foster care system due to abuse or neglect.

Schmidt, who serves as the state’s attorney general, said Democratic 
Gov. Laura Kelly hadn’t kept pledges made during her 2018 campaign to 
resolve the state’s foster care crisis. Schmidt noted Kelly declared it 
her “moral obligation” to resolve shortcomings. Schmidt’s objections 
have roots in service gaps that vexed the Kansas Legislature as well as 
GOP Govs. Sam Brownback and Jeff Colyer, who preceded Kelly as governor.

In a campaign statement, Schmidt and several of his GOP allies 
denounced Kelly because hard-to-place children were still sleeping in 
offices of organizations hired by the state to deliver foster care 
services. Housing was a point of emphasis for a task force as far back 
as 2017 that considered ailments of the foster system in Kansas. More 
recently, the Kansas Department for Children and Families, or DCF, 
reported 79 children spent nights in foster care contractors’ offices in
 the months from January 2021 to May 2022.

Schmidt said Kelly had yet to stop children in foster care from 
running away from residential placements. Three years ago, the state’s 
daily average of missing foster kids was 90. Colyer created a special 
response team to track runaways, while Kelly expanded that group to 12 
members. DCF says 60 to 75 foster children were missing on a typical day
 in Kansas. On Monday, DCF’s daily online report on runaways showed 66 
of approximately 6,200 foster care children were unaccounted for.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ inspector general 
also reported 7% of Kansas’ foster care children were absent without 
leave from July 1, 2018, to Dec. 31, 2020. Colyer was serving as 
governor for a portion of the 30-month inspection window, but the bulk 
of the period examined by HHS was on Kelly’s watch.

“It doesn’t have to be this way,” Schmidt said. “She hasn’t fixed the
 problems she promised to solve. Kansas children deserve better and with
 the right leadership we can and will do better.”

Schmidt also questioned Kelly’s use of an executive order in 2021 to 
launch the Division of Child Advocate to investigate the well-being of 
youth in foster care by compiling complaints, reviewing practices of 
child welfare agents, and educating parents and children of their 
rights.

Kelly relied on her authority as governor because the House and 
Senate was unwilling to compromise on an oversight bill. The Senate 
passed legislation in 2021 that would have assigned foster care 
supervision to Schmidt at the same time he prepared for a partisan 
showdown with Kelly. The House preferred a bipartisan approach that 
would have placed the Legislature at the helm.

“Establishment of a child advocate is a commonsense win for Kansas 
kids and families,” Kelly said. “For years, our state’s essential family
 services were neglected and underfunded, leaving our kids and families 
more vulnerable than ever before. Fixing those systematic problems has 
been a top priority of my administration, and the Division of Child 
Advocate is a significant step forward to ensure every Kansas child is 
protected from harm.”

Schmidt criticized Kelly for settling a class-action lawsuit, 
including a payment of $2.3 million for plaintiffs’ legal fees, that had
 been filed by Kansas Appleseed, which succeeded in demonstrating the 
state inadequately cared for foster children. The suit was launched 
before Kelly took office in 2019, but resolved in 2021.

He further objected to the Kelly administration’s failure to complete
 annual reports on child sexual abuse reported by abortion clinics. DCF 
pulled together the 2022 version of the report and worked backward to 
complete the other annual reports on child sexual abuse that weren’t 
timely filed by Kelly, Colyer and Brownback administrations in the 
previous six years.

DCF spokesman Mike Deines said the Brownback administration 
inexplicably ceased publishing that information in 2016 and no one at 
DCF resumed that work until questioned earlier this year.

“We have a governor right now that has badly overpromised and 
underdelivered when it comes to fixing our foster care system,” said 
Senate President Ty Masterson, an Andover Republican supporting 
Schmidt’s campaign.

Rep. Patrick Penn, a Wichita Republican also backing the GOP nominee,
 said he was once in the foster care system and Kelly’s rhetoric didn’t 
register with wards of the state.

“I know these kids need a governor more focused on setting them up 
for success, not sweeping her own failures under the rug,” Penn said.

The number of Kansas children in foster care has diminished every 
year of Kelly’s administration, falling from 7,558 in 2019 to 6,985 in 
2020, to 6,737 in 2021 and 6,261 in 2022.

The number mushroomed from 5,200 in 2011 when Brownback took office 
to more than 7,100 before he resigned in 2018. The figure climbed as 
Brownback worked with the GOP-led Legislature in 2015 and 2016 to shrink
 federal food and cash assistance to low-income families. Tens of 
millions of dollars in aid to Kansas families was blocked under 
Brownback’s leadership. In the lone year of Colyer’s tenure as governor,
 the foster care system bulged to nearly 7,700.

In 2022, researchers at the University of Kansas linked a 5% increase
 in enrollment in federal nutrition assistance programs to a 7.6% to 
14.3% reduction in the number of children a state placed in foster care 
or protective services. The 50-state study of food stamps, or the 
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, showed states with more 
generous SNAP policies had fewer children in state care.

“Having access to the social safety net has an effect on child 
abuse,” KU economics professor Donna Ginther said. “With so many 
children in low-income households, poverty is what typically gets people
 more engaged with child protective services.”

Rep. Jarrod Ousley, a Merriam Democrat, said Republicans were 
“absolutely desperate” to criticize Kelly’s handling of foster care.

“This administration has made leaps and bounds in improving our child welfare system,” Ousley said. “Are we perfect? No.”

Ousley, the ranking Democrat on the House Children and Seniors 
Committee, said Kelly had maneuvered the system so fewer children were 
entering foster care, fewer were sleeping in offices and fewer were 
missing. She also requested the Legislature make investments in 
preventative programs and roll back state restrictions on access to 
important safety net programs.

The governor’s decision to independently create an office of the 
child advocate appears to be working, Ousley said, because he gets fewer
 phone calls about problems within the foster care system, and he now 
has a place to direct people who have concerns.

“Governor Kelly took the football away from the Legislature when they
 were fighting over where to put the office of the child advocate, and 
when and what responsibilities,” Ousley said. “Derek Schmidt was a 
proponent of a terrible idea in the Senate, and even in his testimony he
 said, ‘If you’re going to do this, you ought to change this, you ought 
to change that.’ "

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/8/1661349644152.png" alt="Attorney General Derek Schmidt, the Republican nominee for governor, said Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly had fallen short in reforming the state’s fostere care system. (Photos by Sherman Smith and Thad Allton/Kansas Reflector)" />
 <figcaption>Attorney General Derek Schmidt, the Republican nominee for governor, said Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly had fallen short in reforming the state’s fostere care system. (Photos by Sherman Smith and Thad Allton/Kansas Reflector)</figcaption>
 </figure>By TIM CARPENTER and SHERMAN SMITH <a href="https://kansasreflector.com/2022/08/23/governors-race-schmidt-denounces-kellys-approach-to-flaws-in-kansas-foster-care-system/">Kansas Reflector</a>TOPEKA — Republican governor 
candidate Derek Schmidt shared frustration Tuesday with pace of progress
 on longstanding challenges of caring for children brought into Kansas’ 
privatized foster care system due to abuse or neglect.Schmidt, who serves as the state’s attorney general, said Democratic 
Gov. Laura Kelly hadn’t kept pledges made during her 2018 campaign to 
resolve the state’s foster care crisis. Schmidt noted Kelly declared it 
her “moral obligation” to resolve shortcomings. Schmidt’s objections 
have roots in service gaps that vexed the Kansas Legislature as well as 
GOP Govs. Sam Brownback and Jeff Colyer, who preceded Kelly as governor.In a campaign statement, Schmidt and several of his GOP allies 
denounced Kelly because hard-to-place children were still sleeping in 
offices of organizations hired by the state to deliver foster care 
services. Housing was a point of emphasis for a task force as far back 
as 2017 that considered ailments of the foster system in Kansas. More 
recently, the Kansas Department for Children and Families, or DCF, 
reported 79 children spent nights in foster care contractors’ offices in
 the months from January 2021 to May 2022.Schmidt said Kelly had yet to stop children in foster care from 
running away from residential placements. Three years ago, the state’s 
daily average of missing foster kids was 90. Colyer created a special 
response team to track runaways, while Kelly expanded that group to 12 
members. DCF says 60 to 75 foster children were missing on a typical day
 in Kansas. On Monday, DCF’s daily online report on runaways showed 66 
of approximately 6,200 foster care children were unaccounted for.The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ inspector general 
also reported 7% of Kansas’ foster care children were absent without 
leave from July 1, 2018, to Dec. 31, 2020. Colyer was serving as 
governor for a portion of the 30-month inspection window, but the bulk 
of the period examined by HHS was on Kelly’s watch.“It doesn’t have to be this way,” Schmidt said. “She hasn’t fixed the
 problems she promised to solve. Kansas children deserve better and with
 the right leadership we can and will do better.”<h2>‘Commonsense win’</h2>Schmidt also questioned Kelly’s use of an executive order in 2021 to 
launch the Division of Child Advocate to investigate the well-being of 
youth in foster care by compiling complaints, reviewing practices of 
child welfare agents, and educating parents and children of their 
rights.Kelly relied on her authority as governor because the House and 
Senate was unwilling to compromise on an oversight bill. The Senate 
passed legislation in 2021 that would have assigned foster care 
supervision to Schmidt at the same time he prepared for a partisan 
showdown with Kelly. The House preferred a bipartisan approach that 
would have placed the Legislature at the helm.“Establishment of a child advocate is a commonsense win for Kansas 
kids and families,” Kelly said. “For years, our state’s essential family
 services were neglected and underfunded, leaving our kids and families 
more vulnerable than ever before. Fixing those systematic problems has 
been a top priority of my administration, and the Division of Child 
Advocate is a significant step forward to ensure every Kansas child is 
protected from harm.”Schmidt criticized Kelly for settling a class-action lawsuit, 
including a payment of $2.3 million for plaintiffs’ legal fees, that had
 been filed by Kansas Appleseed, which succeeded in demonstrating the 
state inadequately cared for foster children. The suit was launched 
before Kelly took office in 2019, but resolved in 2021.He further objected to the Kelly administration’s failure to complete
 annual reports on child sexual abuse reported by abortion clinics. DCF 
pulled together the 2022 version of the report and worked backward to 
complete the other annual reports on child sexual abuse that weren’t 
timely filed by Kelly, Colyer and Brownback administrations in the 
previous six years.DCF spokesman Mike Deines said the Brownback administration 
inexplicably ceased publishing that information in 2016 and no one at 
DCF resumed that work until questioned earlier this year.“We have a governor right now that has badly overpromised and 
underdelivered when it comes to fixing our foster care system,” said 
Senate President Ty Masterson, an Andover Republican supporting 
Schmidt’s campaign.<h2>Sweeping under rug</h2>Rep. Patrick Penn, a Wichita Republican also backing the GOP nominee,
 said he was once in the foster care system and Kelly’s rhetoric didn’t 
register with wards of the state.“I know these kids need a governor more focused on setting them up 
for success, not sweeping her own failures under the rug,” Penn said.The number of Kansas children in foster care has diminished every 
year of Kelly’s administration, falling from 7,558 in 2019 to 6,985 in 
2020, to 6,737 in 2021 and 6,261 in 2022.The number mushroomed from 5,200 in 2011 when Brownback took office 
to more than 7,100 before he resigned in 2018. The figure climbed as 
Brownback worked with the GOP-led Legislature in 2015 and 2016 to shrink
 federal food and cash assistance to low-income families. Tens of 
millions of dollars in aid to Kansas families was blocked under 
Brownback’s leadership. In the lone year of Colyer’s tenure as governor,
 the foster care system bulged to nearly 7,700.In 2022, researchers at the University of Kansas linked a 5% increase
 in enrollment in federal nutrition assistance programs to a 7.6% to 
14.3% reduction in the number of children a state placed in foster care 
or protective services. The 50-state study of food stamps, or the 
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, showed states with more 
generous SNAP policies had fewer children in state care.“Having access to the social safety net has an effect on child 
abuse,” KU economics professor Donna Ginther said. “With so many 
children in low-income households, poverty is what typically gets people
 more engaged with child protective services.”Rep. Jarrod Ousley, a Merriam Democrat, said Republicans were 
“absolutely desperate” to criticize Kelly’s handling of foster care.“This administration has made leaps and bounds in improving our child welfare system,” Ousley said. “Are we perfect? No.”Ousley, the ranking Democrat on the House Children and Seniors 
Committee, said Kelly had maneuvered the system so fewer children were 
entering foster care, fewer were sleeping in offices and fewer were 
missing. She also requested the Legislature make investments in 
preventative programs and roll back state restrictions on access to 
important safety net programs.The governor’s decision to independently create an office of the 
child advocate appears to be working, Ousley said, because he gets fewer
 phone calls about problems within the foster care system, and he now 
has a place to direct people who have concerns.“Governor Kelly took the football away from the Legislature when they
 were fighting over where to put the office of the child advocate, and 
when and what responsibilities,” Ousley said. “Derek Schmidt was a 
proponent of a terrible idea in the Senate, and even in his testimony he
 said, ‘If you’re going to do this, you ought to change this, you ought 
to change that.’ "

Schmidt denounces Kelly’s approach to Kansas’ foster care system

By DYLAN LYSEN <a href="https://www.kcur.org/news/2022-08-24/most-kansas-voters-want-abortion-access-but-their-legislators-may-further-restrict-it-anyway">Kansas News Service</a>

LAWRENCE — Voters made beyond clear that they didn’t want to give the Kansas Legislature more power to restrict abortion.

But
 the state’s lawmakers spent the last generation enacting ever-tighter 
restrictions. And their ranks are loaded with people who want to go even
 further.

Now, despite voters declaring <a href="https://www.kcur.org/news/2022-08-02/kansas-voters-rejected-an-amendment-that-would-have-stripped-away-abortion-rights" target="_blank">by a nearly 60-40 margin</a>
 that they didn’t want to change the Kansas Constitution in a way that 
would have opened the door to an outright ban, legislators could still 
test just how far they can restrict abortion.

“There is a right to
 abortion in Kansas, for now, (but) the anti-abortion movement is going 
to try to chip away at abortion rights as the anti-abortion movement has
 been doing for decades,” said Greer Donley, a Kansas native and 
abortion law expert at the University of Pittsburgh.

Certainly elections matter. But when voters choose who they want 
representing them in every Kansas House district in the state this fall,
 they’ll have relatively little choice.

Nearly half the people 
running for the House face no opponent. Some of those Republican seats 
even represent swing districts where Democrats have often won in the 
past. That will make it hard for any abortion rights wave to remake the 
Legislature.

So even districts that voted against a constitutional
 amendment to strip abortion rights from the Kansas Constitution will 
ultimately send conservatives to represent them in Topeka.

Nathaniel
 Birkhead, a political scientist at Kansas State University, said the 
Aug. 2 election shows a mismatch between Kansas voters and their 
representatives. While a majority of Kansans clearly support some level 
of abortion rights, they have elected lawmakers who don’t.

Gerrymandering that practically locks down a district for one party or the other, he said, could be a factor.

“As
 a consequence,” Birkhead said, “we will continue to see mismatches like
 these, where legislators are promoting ideas and issues that may not 
really align with … what the citizens want.”

Consider Crawford 
County, the home of Pittsburg State University in southeast Kansas. In 
recent years, the Democratic and Republican parties have traded off 
ownership of their seat in the Kansas House.

But this fall, 
Pittsburg’s Republican state Rep. Chuck Smith will cruise to reelection.
 Nobody ran against him. Smith’s county rejected the constitutional 
amendment by a 10% margin. But he wants tighter restrictions.

“No matter how I vote, I'm voting with (only) 50% of my constituents,” Smith said. “But you don't change your values.”

It
 also shows that a decisive election on one of the most contentious 
issues in the state over the last three decades is not going to bring 
the fight to an end. Kansans for Life, the largest anti-abortion group 
in the state, characterized the vote as only a temporary setback.

Kansas
 Republicans could pass more restrictive abortion laws, even if 
incumbent Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly, who supports abortion rights, 
wins reelection this fall over Republican challenger Derek Schmidt.

Republicans will likely keep their supermajority in the Kansas Legislature and the power override Kelly’s veto.

While every seat in the Kansas House was up for grabs, 55 of the 125 
seats only have a single candidate running. That vast majority of those 
candidates — 36 of them — are Republicans. That’s more than 40% of the 
seats the party would need to retain to keep its supermajority in the 
chamber.

Meanwhile, 22 of those unchallenged Republicans — more 
than half — are set to represent districts that include part of counties
 that rejected the amendment on abortion. Those seats alone make up the 
total difference between a simple majority and a supermajority in the 
Kansas House.

Birkhead said that leads to the mismatch, where 
lawmakers hold views that don’t align with most of their constituents. 
Without an opponent, those lawmakers won’t risk their seats by passing 
more abortion restrictions.

“If you fail to adhere to this sort of
 medium in your district,” he said, “there's no sanction because you're 
not going to lose your election.”

Smith is one of those lawmakers.
 Over the last 10 years, his district has routinely switched hands 
between Republicans and Democrats. But he faces no challenger from 
either party this year. That’s after he voted in 2021 to put the state 
constitutional amendment on the ballot that his constituency voted 
against.

Still, Smith said he still wants some more restrictions 
on abortions. But what restrictions lawmakers could pursue may need to 
be scaled back.

The
 election made one thing clear: abortion rights will continue in Kansas.
 What it doesn’t make clear is what exactly those rights are. Currently,
 state law bans abortion after 22 weeks.

Smith, for instance, said
 he “could live with” a 15-week ban. Some states, like Florida and 
Mississippi, have installed 15-week bans. The challenge to Mississippi’s
 ban was the catalyst for <a href="https://www.npr.org/2022/06/24/1102305878/supreme-court-abortion-roe-v-wade-decision-overturn" target="_blank">overturning Roe v. Wade</a>.

Donley
 said Republican lawmakers could use a 15-week ban to test the Kansas 
Supreme Court’s ruling by passing such a law and trying to defend it in 
court. But with the way <a href="https://www.kcur.org/2019-04-26/kansas-supreme-court-rules-state-constitution-protects-right-to-abortion" target="_blank">the state’s high court ruled in 2019</a>, Donley said it’s unlikely it would then allow a 15-week ban to go into effect.

Yet, the court could allow a softer, 20-week law to go into effect, she said.

“I could imagine a court being more likely to entertain that law than a 15-week law,” Donley said.

Conservatives
 and anti-abortion activists still have another option to try to remove 
the right to an abortion from the state. They could push voters to 
remove Kansas Supreme Court justices through retention elections, 
allowing for Republican leaders to reshape the court with their ideology
 on abortion.

That would be similar to what happened at the 
federal level when former President Donald Trump nominated three 
conservative justices to the U.S. Supreme Court. It led to the 
overturning of the decades-old precedent, Roe v. Wade, that provided 
abortion rights nationwide.

That’s a fear that has already been expressed by abortion rights activists.

Ashley
 All of Kansas for Constitutional Freedom, the campaign that worked to 
reject the constitutional amendment, said the day after the election 
that she expected conservatives to <a href="https://www.kcur.org/news/2022-08-03/abortion-rights-forces-won-a-huge-victory-in-kansas-but-the-fight-in-the-state-rages-on" target="_blank">shift their focus to the state supreme court</a>.

Six
 of the court’s seven justices will be up for retention in the November 
general election. If some of the justices are removed, and a Republican 
governor is able to put more conservatives in the court, the right to an
 abortion could be challenged again.

“Even though the entire state
 voted and essentially said no,” Donley said, “if the court changes its 
structure, they could overrule that previous holding and Kansas would 
lose the right to abortion.”

Dylan Lysen reports on politics 
for the Kansas News Service. You can follow him on Twitter @DylanLysen 
or email him at dlysen@kcur.org.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/8/1661349805178.png" alt="Despite Kansans overwhelmingly rejecting a state constitutional amendment to remove the right to an abortion, conservative lawmakers may continue to restrict abortion access in Kansas. KNS" />
 <figcaption>Despite Kansans overwhelmingly rejecting a state constitutional amendment to remove the right to an abortion, conservative lawmakers may continue to restrict abortion access in Kansas. KNS</figcaption>
 </figure>By DYLAN LYSEN <a href="https://www.kcur.org/news/2022-08-24/most-kansas-voters-want-abortion-access-but-their-legislators-may-further-restrict-it-anyway">Kansas News Service</a>LAWRENCE — Voters made beyond clear that they didn’t want to give the Kansas Legislature more power to restrict abortion.But
 the state’s lawmakers spent the last generation enacting ever-tighter 
restrictions. And their ranks are loaded with people who want to go even
 further.Now, despite voters declaring <a href="https://www.kcur.org/news/2022-08-02/kansas-voters-rejected-an-amendment-that-would-have-stripped-away-abortion-rights" target="_blank">by a nearly 60-40 margin</a>
 that they didn’t want to change the Kansas Constitution in a way that 
would have opened the door to an outright ban, legislators could still 
test just how far they can restrict abortion.“There is a right to
 abortion in Kansas, for now, (but) the anti-abortion movement is going 
to try to chip away at abortion rights as the anti-abortion movement has
 been doing for decades,” said Greer Donley, a Kansas native and 
abortion law expert at the University of Pittsburgh.<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/8/1661349897983.png" alt="" />
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure>Certainly elections matter. But when voters choose who they want 
representing them in every Kansas House district in the state this fall,
 they’ll have relatively little choice.Nearly half the people 
running for the House face no opponent. Some of those Republican seats 
even represent swing districts where Democrats have often won in the 
past. That will make it hard for any abortion rights wave to remake the 
Legislature.So even districts that voted against a constitutional
 amendment to strip abortion rights from the Kansas Constitution will 
ultimately send conservatives to represent them in Topeka.Nathaniel
 Birkhead, a political scientist at Kansas State University, said the 
Aug. 2 election shows a mismatch between Kansas voters and their 
representatives. While a majority of Kansans clearly support some level 
of abortion rights, they have elected lawmakers who don’t.Gerrymandering that practically locks down a district for one party or the other, he said, could be a factor.“As
 a consequence,” Birkhead said, “we will continue to see mismatches like
 these, where legislators are promoting ideas and issues that may not 
really align with … what the citizens want.”Consider Crawford 
County, the home of Pittsburg State University in southeast Kansas. In 
recent years, the Democratic and Republican parties have traded off 
ownership of their seat in the Kansas House.But this fall, 
Pittsburg’s Republican state Rep. Chuck Smith will cruise to reelection.
 Nobody ran against him. Smith’s county rejected the constitutional 
amendment by a 10% margin. But he wants tighter restrictions.“No matter how I vote, I'm voting with (only) 50% of my constituents,” Smith said. “But you don't change your values.”It
 also shows that a decisive election on one of the most contentious 
issues in the state over the last three decades is not going to bring 
the fight to an end. Kansans for Life, the largest anti-abortion group 
in the state, characterized the vote as only a temporary setback.<h2>Political mismatch</h2>Kansas
 Republicans could pass more restrictive abortion laws, even if 
incumbent Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly, who supports abortion rights, 
wins reelection this fall over Republican challenger Derek Schmidt.Republicans will likely keep their supermajority in the Kansas Legislature and the power override Kelly’s veto.<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/8/1661349956299.png" alt="While every seat in the Kansas House was up for grabs this fall, 55 of the 125 seats only have a single candidate running. That vast majority of those candidates — 36 of them — are Republicans. Additionally, 22 of those unchallenged Republicans are set to represent districts that include counties that rejected the amendment on abortion. Dylan Lysen / Kansas News Service" />
 <figcaption>While every seat in the Kansas House was up for grabs this fall, 55 of the 125 seats only have a single candidate running. That vast majority of those candidates — 36 of them — are Republicans. Additionally, 22 of those unchallenged Republicans are set to represent districts that include counties that rejected the amendment on abortion. Dylan Lysen / Kansas News Service</figcaption>
 </figure>While every seat in the Kansas House was up for grabs, 55 of the 125 
seats only have a single candidate running. That vast majority of those 
candidates — 36 of them — are Republicans. That’s more than 40% of the 
seats the party would need to retain to keep its supermajority in the 
chamber.Meanwhile, 22 of those unchallenged Republicans — more 
than half — are set to represent districts that include part of counties
 that rejected the amendment on abortion. Those seats alone make up the 
total difference between a simple majority and a supermajority in the 
Kansas House.Birkhead said that leads to the mismatch, where 
lawmakers hold views that don’t align with most of their constituents. 
Without an opponent, those lawmakers won’t risk their seats by passing 
more abortion restrictions.“If you fail to adhere to this sort of
 medium in your district,” he said, “there's no sanction because you're 
not going to lose your election.”Smith is one of those lawmakers.
 Over the last 10 years, his district has routinely switched hands 
between Republicans and Democrats. But he faces no challenger from 
either party this year. That’s after he voted in 2021 to put the state 
constitutional amendment on the ballot that his constituency voted 
against.Still, Smith said he still wants some more restrictions 
on abortions. But what restrictions lawmakers could pursue may need to 
be scaled back.<h2>New restrictions</h2>The
 election made one thing clear: abortion rights will continue in Kansas.
 What it doesn’t make clear is what exactly those rights are. Currently,
 state law bans abortion after 22 weeks.Smith, for instance, said
 he “could live with” a 15-week ban. Some states, like Florida and 
Mississippi, have installed 15-week bans. The challenge to Mississippi’s
 ban was the catalyst for <a href="https://www.npr.org/2022/06/24/1102305878/supreme-court-abortion-roe-v-wade-decision-overturn" target="_blank">overturning Roe v. Wade</a>.Donley
 said Republican lawmakers could use a 15-week ban to test the Kansas 
Supreme Court’s ruling by passing such a law and trying to defend it in 
court. But with the way <a href="https://www.kcur.org/2019-04-26/kansas-supreme-court-rules-state-constitution-protects-right-to-abortion" target="_blank">the state’s high court ruled in 2019</a>, Donley said it’s unlikely it would then allow a 15-week ban to go into effect.Yet, the court could allow a softer, 20-week law to go into effect, she said.“I could imagine a court being more likely to entertain that law than a 15-week law,” Donley said.<h2>Reshaping the court</h2>Conservatives
 and anti-abortion activists still have another option to try to remove 
the right to an abortion from the state. They could push voters to 
remove Kansas Supreme Court justices through retention elections, 
allowing for Republican leaders to reshape the court with their ideology
 on abortion.That would be similar to what happened at the 
federal level when former President Donald Trump nominated three 
conservative justices to the U.S. Supreme Court. It led to the 
overturning of the decades-old precedent, Roe v. Wade, that provided 
abortion rights nationwide.That’s a fear that has already been expressed by abortion rights activists.Ashley
 All of Kansas for Constitutional Freedom, the campaign that worked to 
reject the constitutional amendment, said the day after the election 
that she expected conservatives to <a href="https://www.kcur.org/news/2022-08-03/abortion-rights-forces-won-a-huge-victory-in-kansas-but-the-fight-in-the-state-rages-on" target="_blank">shift their focus to the state supreme court</a>.Six
 of the court’s seven justices will be up for retention in the November 
general election. If some of the justices are removed, and a Republican 
governor is able to put more conservatives in the court, the right to an
 abortion could be challenged again.“Even though the entire state
 voted and essentially said no,” Donley said, “if the court changes its 
structure, they could overrule that previous holding and Kansas would 
lose the right to abortion.”Dylan Lysen reports on politics 
for the Kansas News Service. You can follow him on Twitter @DylanLysen 
or email him at dlysen@kcur.org.

Despite abortion vote, Kan. legislators could further restrict it anyway

OLATHE, Kan. (AP) — A decisive&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/2022-primary-elections-kansas-abortion-b6d62a852c2ce4617f2c03589fbb523e">statewide vote</a>&nbsp;in favor of abortion rights in traditionally conservative Kansas was confirmed with a partial hand recount, with fewer than 100 votes changing after the last county reported results Sunday.

Nine of the state’s 105 counties recounted their votes at the request of Melissa Leavitt, who has pushed for tighter election laws. A longtime anti-abortion activist, Mark Gietzen, is covering most of the costs. Gietzen acknowledged in an interview that it was unlikely to change the outcome.

A no vote in the referendum signaled a desire to keep existing abortion protections and a yes vote was for allowing the Legislature to tighten restrictions or ban abortion. After the recounts, “no” votes lost 87 votes and “yes” gained 6 votes.

Eight of the counties&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/abortion-2022-midterm-elections-health-election-recounts-constitutions-f4062be36f3d72ca6e8aef5585324fdb">reported their results</a>&nbsp;by the state's Saturday deadline, but Sedgwick County delayed releasing its final count until Sunday because spokeswoman Nicole Gibbs said some of the ballots weren't separated into the correct precincts during the initial recount and had to be resorted Saturday. She said the number of votes cast overall didn't change.

A larger than expected turnout of voters on Aug. 2 rejected a ballot measure that would have removed protections for abortion rights from the Kansas Constitution and given to the Legislature the right to further restrict or ban abortion. It failed by 18 percentage points, or 165,000 votes statewide.

The vote drew broad attention because it was the first state referendum on abortion since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in June.

Gietzen, of Wichita, and Leavitt, of Colby, in far northwestern Kansas, have both suggested there might have been problems without pointing to many examples.

Recounts increasingly are tools to encourage supporters of a candidate or cause to believe an election was stolen rather than lost. A wave of candidates who have echoed former President Donald Trump’s lie that the 2020 election was rigged have called for recounts after losing their own Republican primaries.

Kansas law requires a recount if those who ask for it prove they can cover the counties’ costs. The counties pay only if the outcome changes.

Leavitt and Gietzen provided credit cards to pay for the nearly $120,000 cost, according to the secretary of state’s office. Leavitt has an online fundraising page. Gietzen also said he is getting donations from a network built over three decades in the anti-abortion movement.

Gietzen said Sunday he doesn’t accept the results of the Sedgwick County recount because of the discrepancy about the way the ballots were sorted and because some of the recount happened Saturday without outside observers present to watch.

“We still don't know what happened in Sedgwick County. I won't pay for Sedgwick County,” he said.

He said he’s also concerned about the results statewide because of a report out of Cherokee county in southeast Kansas about the results of one county election being transposed between two candidates when the results were transferred on a thumb drive from one voting machine to a tabulating machine.

Gietzen said he plans to file a lawsuit Monday seeking a full statewide recall.

Gietzen said he won’t publicly report the names of private donors helping him finance the recount, even though a state ethics official says it’s required. Gietzen, who leads a small GOP group, the Kansas Republican Assembly, argues that he’s not campaigning for the anti-abortion measure but is instead promoting election integrity.

Votes were recounted in Douglas County, home to the University of Kansas’ main campus; Johnson County, in suburban Kansas City; Sedgwick County, home to Wichita, Shawnee County, home to Topeka; and Crawford, Harvey, Jefferson, Lyon and Thomas counties. Abortion opponents lost all of those counties except Thomas.

In Jefferson County, the margin remained the same, with the pro- and anti-amendment totals declining by four votes each. Linda Buttron, the county clerk, blamed the change on things like ovals not being darkened and “the challenges of hand counting ballots.”

In Lyon County, the anti-amendment group lost a vote. County Clerk and Election Officer Tammy Vopat said she wasn’t sure the reason. But she noted: “You have to factor in human error.”

Johnson County, the most populous in Kansas, faced the biggest recounting challenge because it had the most ballots. It pulled in workers from different departments to help. The sorting process took so long that the actual counting didn’t begin until Thursday afternoon.

“This is almost like doing an Ironman triathlon and having to add on another marathon at the end,” said Fred Sherman, the county’s Election Commissioner. “So it is quite a gargantuan process.”

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/8/1661035438136.png" alt="Vote recount in Johnson County -photo courtesy KCTV" />
 <figcaption>Vote recount in Johnson County -photo courtesy KCTV</figcaption>
 </figure>OLATHE, Kan. (AP) — A decisive&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/2022-primary-elections-kansas-abortion-b6d62a852c2ce4617f2c03589fbb523e">statewide vote</a>&nbsp;in favor of abortion rights in traditionally conservative Kansas was confirmed with a partial hand recount, with fewer than 100 votes changing after the last county reported results Sunday.Nine of the state’s 105 counties recounted their votes at the request of Melissa Leavitt, who has pushed for tighter election laws. A longtime anti-abortion activist, Mark Gietzen, is covering most of the costs. Gietzen acknowledged in an interview that it was unlikely to change the outcome.A no vote in the referendum signaled a desire to keep existing abortion protections and a yes vote was for allowing the Legislature to tighten restrictions or ban abortion. After the recounts, “no” votes lost 87 votes and “yes” gained 6 votes.Eight of the counties&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/abortion-2022-midterm-elections-health-election-recounts-constitutions-f4062be36f3d72ca6e8aef5585324fdb">reported their results</a>&nbsp;by the state's Saturday deadline, but Sedgwick County delayed releasing its final count until Sunday because spokeswoman Nicole Gibbs said some of the ballots weren't separated into the correct precincts during the initial recount and had to be resorted Saturday. She said the number of votes cast overall didn't change.A larger than expected turnout of voters on Aug. 2 rejected a ballot measure that would have removed protections for abortion rights from the Kansas Constitution and given to the Legislature the right to further restrict or ban abortion. It failed by 18 percentage points, or 165,000 votes statewide.The vote drew broad attention because it was the first state referendum on abortion since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in June.Gietzen, of Wichita, and Leavitt, of Colby, in far northwestern Kansas, have both suggested there might have been problems without pointing to many examples.Recounts increasingly are tools to encourage supporters of a candidate or cause to believe an election was stolen rather than lost. A wave of candidates who have echoed former President Donald Trump’s lie that the 2020 election was rigged have called for recounts after losing their own Republican primaries.Kansas law requires a recount if those who ask for it prove they can cover the counties’ costs. The counties pay only if the outcome changes.Leavitt and Gietzen provided credit cards to pay for the nearly $120,000 cost, according to the secretary of state’s office. Leavitt has an online fundraising page. Gietzen also said he is getting donations from a network built over three decades in the anti-abortion movement.Gietzen said Sunday he doesn’t accept the results of the Sedgwick County recount because of the discrepancy about the way the ballots were sorted and because some of the recount happened Saturday without outside observers present to watch.“We still don't know what happened in Sedgwick County. I won't pay for Sedgwick County,” he said.He said he’s also concerned about the results statewide because of a report out of Cherokee county in southeast Kansas about the results of one county election being transposed between two candidates when the results were transferred on a thumb drive from one voting machine to a tabulating machine.Gietzen said he plans to file a lawsuit Monday seeking a full statewide recall.Gietzen said he won’t publicly report the names of private donors helping him finance the recount, even though a state ethics official says it’s required. Gietzen, who leads a small GOP group, the Kansas Republican Assembly, argues that he’s not campaigning for the anti-abortion measure but is instead promoting election integrity.Votes were recounted in Douglas County, home to the University of Kansas’ main campus; Johnson County, in suburban Kansas City; Sedgwick County, home to Wichita, Shawnee County, home to Topeka; and Crawford, Harvey, Jefferson, Lyon and Thomas counties. Abortion opponents lost all of those counties except Thomas.In Jefferson County, the margin remained the same, with the pro- and anti-amendment totals declining by four votes each. Linda Buttron, the county clerk, blamed the change on things like ovals not being darkened and “the challenges of hand counting ballots.”In Lyon County, the anti-amendment group lost a vote. County Clerk and Election Officer Tammy Vopat said she wasn’t sure the reason. But she noted: “You have to factor in human error.”Johnson County, the most populous in Kansas, faced the biggest recounting challenge because it had the most ballots. It pulled in workers from different departments to help. The sorting process took so long that the actual counting didn’t begin until Thursday afternoon.“This is almost like doing an Ironman triathlon and having to add on another marathon at the end,” said Fred Sherman, the county’s Election Commissioner. “So it is quite a gargantuan process.”

Election 2022