It’s election season, Shawnee Mission, and there are several Kansas House of Representative candidates vying for seats in area districts.
Last month, we asked Post readers what they wanted to hear candidates discuss before marking their ballots. With that input, we developed a five-item questionnaire for candidates running for seats in the Kansas House of Representatives.
We’ll be publishing candidate responses to one question each day this week. See the candidates’ responses to questions about election integrity and inflation.
Today, we’re publishing candidates’ responses to item #3:
In August, Kansas voters rejected the “Value Them Both” amendment that would have eliminated the right to an abortion from the state constitution. Are you comfortable with the current state of abortion access in Kansas? Would you like to see more restrictions on abortion in the state? Would you like to see access to abortion expanded? Please explain your position on abortion.
District 19
Stephanie Clayton (incumbent Democrat)
I support current Kansas law, as did 76% of the people I am honored to represent. I will vote to continue to protect our access to this medical care. As a legislator, I voted against the August constitutional amendment, and I also voted against it in the voting booth in August as a private citizen, like so many of you.
I have strong concerns that there will be attempts to change our method of Judicial Selection from our current system of Merit selection to a much more politicized Federal model (one need only look at our US Supreme Court to realize that we don’t want that here in Kansas). I oppose this back-door attempt to strip us of our abortion rights, and will work with members of both parties to continue to keep our current method of judicial selection.
I have major concerns with legislators and candidates who support abortion only in instances of rape, incest, and life of the mother. I do not think that Kansas women and girls should have to prove to the government that they were the victim of a crime, or to prove that they are dying in order to get health care. I do not think that our medical professionals should face jail time for taking care of their patients. If a candidate says that they support it only in these cases, ask yourself why that candidate thinks that you have to ask his permission, and then vote accordingly.
I respect you and your right to privacy, and I will continue to vote to protect your rights.
Nick Reddell (Republican)
Did not respond.
District 22
Linsday Vaughn (incumbent)
The overwhelming rejection of the constitutional amendment on abortion clearly demonstrates that Kansans do not want politicians interfering with their private healthcare decisions. While canvassing for the Vote No campaign, I learned first-hand that many Kansans believe our current regulations on abortion are sufficient. I am firmly against the legislature passing any further regulations.
If anything, I believe we should review and reverse some of the Targeted Regulation of Abortion Provider (TRAP) laws in place. These laws are not medically necessary but are instead designed to make it harder for providers of comprehensive reproductive health care to stay open. One egregious example of this is the infamous “font bill,” SB 83, passed in 2017. This bill requires providers to give patients seeking an abortion information about the physician performing the procedure that “must be provided on white paper, in a printed format, in black ink, and in 12-point Times New Roman font.” If the information is provided to the patient on any other type of paper or using a different font type, size, or color, the provider is out of compliance with state law. This level of governmental overreach is dumbfounding.
Ultimately, if we want to decrease the number of abortions in Kansas we should instead be focused on creating standards for comprehensive sex education and increasing access to free and affordable contraceptives. This is why I sponsored a bill last session, HB 2342, to allow pharmacists to temporarily prescribe and fill prescriptions for self-administered contraceptives. I believe it is this type of innovative legislation that we need to protect women and their privacy.
Robert Colburn (Republican)
Did not respond.
District 30
Courtney Eiterich (Democrat)
Kansans have spoken and voted to keep the state legislature from restricting access to abortion. I am the candidate in this race that voted No along with 65% of August 2nd voters in District 30 to the Constitutional Amendment.
Our voices were heard in record numbers but the reality is that this issue will keep coming back again and again until there is balance of power in the statehouse.
I have been advocating for healthcare access for at least a decade. I will always vote to protect bodily autonomy and access to safe, legal abortions. These are personal decisions between you and your healthcare provider.
Laura Williams (Republican)
The people of Kansas spoke this summer and made clear their position. I am one of many Kansans who has never advocated for a complete ban on abortion and who strongly believes that we should work to advance policies which find broad consensus amongst Kansans. I will always support exceptions to accommodate heartbreaking and difficult situations such as rape, incest, and life of the mother. I am committed to ensuring women receive the emergency care they desperately need for ectopic pregnancies, miscarriages and other health complications. For me, being pro-life, signifies that I will continue to support and work to defend the commonsense restrictions currently in state law and are mainstream beliefs held by many Kansans on both sides of the aisle.
District 39
Vanessa Vaughn West (Democrat)
There are more than 20 laws that regulate abortions in Kansas. We don’t need more.
Despite investing millions, Kansans for Life and other extremist supporters of the Value Them Both Constitutional Amendment coalition could not overcome the overwhelming will of the people. All of us from every political party said ‘No’ to Amendment 2. In fact, nearly every precinct in District 39 voted ‘No’, and those votes should be respected.
Pregnancy is a health condition that should remain between a person and their doctor. A potential parent doesn’t need a legislator figuratively in the doctor’s office as they make very difficult life choices.
In contrast, my opponent feels very differently. Kansans for Life (KFL), a pro-life extremist PAC, lists him among its top supporters. Representative Donohoe has been endorsed by KFL repeatedly during his political career, including this election season. He’s still not listening to the 66 percent of you who, like me, voted ‘No’ on Amendment 2. If he is sent back to Topeka, Owen Donohoe will continue to vote with the KFL, banning abortions without exception. Owen Donohoe will further erode women’s rights.
The majority of Kansans know abortion bans hurt women, families, and entire communities. I will fight to protect the right to safe and legal abortions.
Owen Donohoe (incumbent Republican)
Did not respond.
District 117
Courtney Tripp (Democrat)
On August 2, Kansans made their voices heard resoundingly that they do not want an abortion ban in Kansas. They voted against this extremism and government overreach, and said that they want these decisions to remain between patients and their doctors. Legislators have no business intruding in the very difficult and complicated world of reproductive health care. Doctors should never have to call a lawyer before administering life-saving care like has happened in other states.
In our district, voters showed up in record numbers and nearly 64% voted no. It’s important that we respect and honor the voters’ voices, and as their representative, I would.
In Kansas, we have strong, responsible and comprehensive abortion regulations in place, and I am comfortable with those laws and regulations. It is also important to note that there was an amendment proposed that would have added an exception for the life of the mother to the August 2 amendment. Sadly, that proposal was voted down on party lines in the Legislature. As your representative, I would stand up for your reproductive healthcare rights, privacy and the lives of women. And importantly, the voices of voters in our district.
Adam Turk (Republican)
I am pro-life. That means a pursuit of policies that build upon a culture of life in Kansas and protect the most vulnerable in society. Going forward, I believe the current protections in place in Kansas – such as prohibitions on taxpayer funding of abortion, restrictions on late-term abortion, healthy and safety standards, parental notification requirements, and the like – must be preserved. Consistent with the vote on August 2nd, I believe the best course in the future is that any future action taken to protect life have wide support among Kansans and include exceptions for rape, incest, and life of the mother.
District 17
Michael Kerner (Libertarian)
I am unhappy that the amendment failed but it was not the best way to correct the problem. The problem was created by the Kansas Supreme Court hallucinating a right not specified in the constitution. This isn’t the first time the Court overstepped its bounds. In the past, they decided that an explicit right to keep and bear arms was not enforceable and that they knew, better than the elected representatives, how much money need be spent on public education. We need to review and limit the powers of the Court.
My position on abortion is that it is killing a human being. It should be permitted in limited circumstances, specifically when the life of the mother is at stake or in cases of rape, incest, or a medical condition of the fetus not compatible with life.
Emily Carpenter (Republican)
The issue of abortion has always been a topic of which there are many diverse points of view – while politics often unfortunately enters the discussion, it is an issue that should be viewed through a lens of compassion and care for all involved, including the unborn child and the mother carrying the baby. I believe we must meet these women/mothers with absolutely no judgment and with our complete love and support. As a pro-life woman and mother of four, I believe that a complete ban on abortion is not something Kansans support nor would I advocate for it as a member of the legislature.
I would pursue a course where we work together to ensure the commonsense protections for women and the unborn that are currently in law – and backed by a vast majority of Kansans – remain in place. In addition, I prefer that any additional policies have a broad consensus from the people of Kansas and further the culture of life. For instance, we must continue to limit late-term abortion, taxpayer funding of abortion, preserve parental consent, and the like.
I also strongly support including exceptions in the case of rape, incest, life of the mother, and fetal abnormalities which make life outside the womb impossible. As I have stated to Kansans who have inquired about my position, I will be a strong advocate for women, ensuring they receive the care they need for ectopic pregnancies, miscarriages, and other complications that endanger them. That is part of being pro-life.
As with any issue, I will always listen and respect the point of view of any Kansan on this topic. Our society often undervalues women and children. Women do not always receive the proper health care and respect while pregnant or after giving birth. Children are an afterthought and often dismissed – just look at our foster care system.
My goal is to create a support system where women and children are valued and given a voice. To that end, I believe we must be willing to engage in conversations – and that by listening and learning, we will find that most of us share enormous common ground on this issue of such importance to so many.
Jo Ella Hoye (incumbent Democrat)
Kansans united to save our right to bodily autonomy on August 2, but the U.S. Supreme Court decision to overturn Roe v. Wade means that our right to choose is on the ballot again. I am the only candidate in this race who will fight to protect the right to a safe, legal abortion. The legislature tried to abolish our constitutional freedom in order to impose crimes and penalties and medically unnecessary mandates on healthcare. We don’t want doctors wasting time determining whether the best method to save a life violates the law. The government shouldn’t interfere between physicians and their patients. Our role is to protect the safety of patients by ensuring that the practice of medicine is well regulated and improve access to prenatal and postpartum care. Why is this still so complicated? If the legislature gets any more extreme after this election, then we will be hearing about it again and again. Now is not the time to be complacent. We must come together again on November 8 to protect our reproductive rights.
District 18
Cathy Gordon (Republican)
Abortion services are very liberal in KS. For example, one can get an abortion without any concern for a women’s health or reason up to 20 weeks. Children can get an abortion without parental consent. Unfortunately, the regulations for abortion lack safety for women, we need a detailed review of the current regulations in terms of the safety of women. For example: currently in our state, we have safety regulations in place whereas a woman can give birth in an outpatient facility such as identifying risks factors such as bleeding disorders, hemorrhage risks, prior surgical incision of the uterus, hypertension, diabetes, miscarriage in the 1st or second trimester and much more. These risks factors are NOT in place for women who seek services in abortion facilities. IT is time we stand for women.
Cindy Neighbor (incumbent Democrat)
Yes, I am comfortable with the current policy on abortion. I believe access to abortion due to rape, incest, or life and health of the mother should stay in place. Legislators that brought this amendment to the floor claim they are for more privacy and smaller government. But, they demand more government when it comes to our bedrooms and our doctors’ office. I do not believe we need further restrictions on abortion as they currently stand.
As it is now, a fetus which appears normal, may only be aborted no later than 21 weeks (about 5 months) and 6 days unless complications exist which puts the mother’s or fetus’s life in danger. To have an abortion is a very difficult decision not taken lightly by women who choose it. According to the 2021 Kansas Department of Health and Environment, Abortions in Kansas report (page 4), no partial birth abortions have been reported in Kansas since 2019.
There are many false myths running around about increasing insurance rates, tax dollars paying for abortions, and abortions cause breast cancer which have been proven false. It is time we educate ourselves on the scare tactics that are used and allow these decisions to be made by the doctors and patients that are making this very tough decision.
Tomorrow, we’ll publish candidates’ responses to item #4:
This spring, Gov. Laura Kelly signed a bill that will allow students to attend any public school in the state provided it has space for them starting in June 2024. The “open enrollment” bill has attracted a lot of attention here in Johnson County. Are you comfortable with the open enrollment policy taking effect in 2024? Why or why not?
