 Originally published on Kansas Policy Institute.
Governor Laura Kelly’s Healthcare Access for Working Kansans (HAWK) Act was sold as a “middle-of-the-road” plan to expand Medicaid to 150,000 more Kansans when it was introduced during the 2025 legislative session. But there’s nothing moderate about growing a failing federal program that already leaves millions of patients nationwide waiting in line for care. Expanding bureaucracy isn’t compassion — it’s doubling down on what’s broken. As I explained recently in my column at the American Institute for Economic Research’s The Daily Economy, America’s healthcare crisis isn’t a market failure — it’s a government failure. The U.S. now spends nearly $5 trillion a year on healthcare, almost one-fifth of the entire economy. But half of that spending never reaches a doctor or a patient. It disappears into what Dr. Deane Waldman and I call BURRDEN: Bureaucratic, Unaccountable, Rigid, Regulated, Distorted, Expensive, and Needless costs. Our research finds that as much as $2.5 trillion in annual waste is spent on paperwork, compliance, and red tape — not on care. Those dollars don’t heal anyone; they feed bureaucracies. Expanding Medicaid in Kansas would only make this worse by adding more layers of administration without improving access to doctors. The Myth of “Coverage” Governor Kelly argues that expansion will “protect rural hospitals” and “ensure affordable care” by bringing billions of federal dollars to Kansas. But coverage does not equal access. Nationwide, more than 80 million Americans are enrolled in Medicaid, yet many can’t find a doctor who will take them. Reimbursement rates are so low that fewer physicians accept new Medicaid patients — especially in rural areas. Those who do are overwhelmed, leading to long waits. This is what we call death by queue: a Medicaid card promises care, but patients wait months for appointments while their conditions worsen, or even result in death. Adding 150,000 Kansans to this system won’t shorten the lines; it will lengthen them. Kelly also claims expansion will “create 23,000 new jobs.” But history shows most of those jobs will be bureaucratic — not medical. The Bureau of Labor Statistics projects that medical administrators will grow 23 percent over the next decade, compared to just 3 percent for physicians. America is producing more paper-pushers than healers. That’s not a sign of success — it’s the symptom of a broken system. Medicaid Expansion Crowds Out Care Kansas already spends more than 20 percent of its state budget on Medicaid, diverting resources from priorities like education, infrastructure, and tax relief. The HAWK Act would deepen that dependency, tying Kansas more tightly to Washington’s mandates and debt. Supporters claim the program will be “free” to Kansans because of federal matching funds. But those funds come with strings attached — and they won’t last. When the federal share drops, Kansas taxpayers will be left footing the bill for a larger, slower, and less effective bureaucracy. Worse, expanding Medicaid doesn’t just harm state finances. It harms innovation. By imposing government-controlled prices and rules, Washington discourages investment in new treatments and technologies. A study from the National Bureau of Economic Research shows that price caps can slash early-stage drug R&D by up to 60 percent — meaning fewer cures and longer waits for patients. A Better Path: Empower Patients There’s a better way forward — one that restores access, affordability, and accountability without expanding bureaucracy. The Empower Patients Initiative, which I co-authored with Dr. Waldman, lays out reforms that could transform Kansas’s healthcare system by freeing it from federal micromanagement:
If we cut BURRDEN in half, $1.2 trillion could be redirected nationally from bureaucracy to patients and providers. That would reduce family costs, raise take-home pay, and expand access to care — all without growing government or debt. The Moral Case for Kansas This debate isn’t abstract. It’s about Kansans forced to choose between prescriptions and groceries, about rural families losing access to care, and about doctors burning out while administrators multiply. The moral case is simple: stop rationing by bureaucracy and give patients the dignity of choice. Healthcare should not be a government favor distributed by politicians. It should be a service exchanged freely between people: doctors and patients. Expanding Medicaid won’t fix Kansas’s healthcare system — it will expand its problems. If lawmakers truly want to expand care, they should empower patients, not bureaucrats.
0 Comments
 Originally published on Kansas Policy Institute.
Jackson County residents voted overwhelmingly to recall County Executive Frank White Jr. in a historic election—the first successful recall in county history. The message was loud and clear: voters are tired of politicians wasting their money. For months, Kansas City leaders have fought over who should pay for new stadiums for the Kansas City Royals and Kansas City Chiefs. Taxpayers were supposed to pick up the tab through higher taxes or state-backed financing schemes. That’s what triggered the backlash—and it’s exactly what’s wrong with economic development in both Kansas and Missouri. Frank White also had to deal with the years-long fallout of property tax spikes. The government shouldn’t be in the stadium business. Jackson County voters rejected a new sales-tax increase in the Spring of 2024 to fund the stadium projects. That vote should have ended the conversation, but politicians on both sides of the state line keep trying to bring the issue back. State of Missouri officials threw their proposal into the ring, hoping it would prompt Kansas City, MO, or Jackson County officials to do likewise. While Kansas lawmakers are eyeing STAR bonds to lure the Chiefs or Royals westward, they extended the deadline earlier this summer. That idea has been tried before—and it fails almost every time. Kansas has already poured more than a billion dollars into STAR bond projects, yet the state’s own audits show that most have failed to meet revenue or job expectations. STAR bonds aren’t “self-financing.” They simply divert future tax revenue that would’ve gone to schools, roads, and public safety. It’s debt dressed up as development. When the government picks winners and losers, taxpayers always lose. If lawmakers want proof that there’s a better way, they only need to look west—to Denver. The Denver Broncos recently announced plans for a privately funded retractable-roof stadium and mixed-use district at the historic Burnham Yard, just south of downtown. The Walton-Penner ownership group—one of the wealthiest in professional sports—is financing the project with private investment, not taxpayer money. The new facility will include retail, entertainment, and community spaces designed to expand Denver’s economy through entrepreneurship and voluntary exchange, not government subsidies. This isn’t theory. It’s happening. And it completely undercuts the argument that public financing is “necessary” to keep or upgrade sports teams. The Broncos ownership group has shown that private capital can fund world-class facilities, create jobs, and drive growth without forcing residents to pay higher taxes or sacrifice public services. The Kansas City region could have followed the same path—but politicians, from both parties and both states, couldn’t resist meddling. Instead of trusting markets to work, they tried to use other people’s money to buy economic development. The results are familiar: angry voters, wasted resources, and little to show for it. Proponents of stadium subsidies like to claim that these projects create jobs and boost tourism, but decades of research from the Brookings Institution, Cato Institute, and George Mason University’s Mercatus Center show the opposite. Stadiums don’t increase regional income or employment; they just shift spending from one area to another. A family that spends $200 at the ballpark isn’t spending that $200 at a local restaurant, theater, or store. The pie doesn’t get bigger—just rearranged. If a stadium project truly makes financial sense, private investors will line up to fund it. If it doesn’t, politicians shouldn’t gamble taxpayer money trying to make it work. The best way to grow Kansas’s economy is to reduce spending, cut taxes, and remove regulations so entrepreneurs—not politicians—drive development. Every dollar that stays in private hands does more for growth than a government-backed bond ever will. Frank White’s recall wasn’t just a local political shake-up. It’s a warning to every policymaker in Topeka and Jefferson City…and Overland Park and Kansas City: voters are done paying for stadiums that don’t pay off. Instead of fighting over who can offer the biggest subsidy, Kansas and Missouri should focus on what really works—responsible budgeting, lower taxes, and a stable business climate that rewards innovation and hard work. Denver shows that when private enterprise takes the field, everyone wins. Kansas City shows what happens when the government calls the plays. The lesson is clear: it’s time to get the government out of the stadium business.  Originally published at Kansas Policy Institute.
The federal government shutdown on October 1 because Congress couldn’t agree on how much more of our money to spend. It’s become routine in Washington: wait until the last minute, pass a short-term fix, and promise to deal with the problem later. That’s how we ended up with a national debt of more than $37.4 trillion. For many Kansans, that number feels far away, but the lesson isn’t. The same bad habits that broke Washington—spending too much, saving too little, and putting off tough decisions—are starting to show up here. Kansas lawmakers have passed one bloated budget after another. They celebrate when the budget gets done on time, but that’s not success if it just means spending more money we don’t have. Passing a budget without discipline is like paying off one credit card with another—it delays the pain but makes things worse later. According to KPI’s Responsible Kansas Budget 2026, total state spending has climbed almost 40 percent over the past five years. If state government had limited its growth to the rate of population growth plus inflation, as families do when making their own budgets, Kansas could have billions more today for permanent tax relief. Instead, the state keeps adding new programs while keeping old ones, even when they’re no longer needed. That’s how Washington operates—funding the same projects year after year with no accountability. Kansas can’t afford to make the same mistake. When the government grows faster than the average taxpayer can afford it, the burden lands squarely on Kansans. Every Kansan knows what it means to tighten their belt when times get tough. State government should do the same. A responsible budget means setting clear priorities, eliminating waste, and keeping spending growth below what taxpayers can support. The rule is simple: if spending goes up faster than population and inflation, it’s too much. Kansas also needs to stop treating every surplus as free money to spend. That’s similar to how Washington got into this mess. When revenues are strong, lawmakers should focus on cutting taxes so families can keep more of what they earn. Real tax relief—like broad, permanent income tax cuts—creates jobs and strengthens communities. It puts the economy in the hands of Kansans instead of politicians. Finally, the state needs fewer regulations that get in the way of small businesses, farmers, and local job creators. Reducing red tape helps the economy grow without new spending. When government steps back, people step up. None of this is complicated. It’s the same common sense Kansans use every day: live within your means, plan ahead, and don’t spend money you don’t have. Unfortunately, Washington has abandoned those values, and the federal shutdown is the result. But Kansas still has a choice. Instead of copying D.C.’s dysfunction, Kansas can lead by example. Lawmakers can pass a truly responsible budget, return money to taxpayers, and make it easier to start a business or hire a worker. Fiscal discipline isn’t about cutting for the sake of cutting—it’s about giving families the freedom to prosper. If Kansas acts now, it can show the rest of the country that good government doesn’t require chaos, shutdowns, or debt ceilings. It just requires the courage to say no to overspending and yes to freedom. The shutdown in Washington should be a warning, not a model. Let’s make Kansas the example of how to do it right: spend less, tax less, regulate less, and let people prosper.  Originally published on South Carolina Policy Council.
For years, critics have pointed to Kansas as a failed tax experiment—“cut taxes and calamity follows.” That’s a myth. The real problem wasn’t the tax cuts; it was the refusal to restrain spending. Kansas lowered income-tax rates in 2012 but let government outlays surge. By 2017, deficits ballooned, and lawmakers passed the largest tax hike in state history. The lesson is simple: tax reform succeeds only when paired with strict spending discipline. You cannot reduce revenue growth while spending more. Look at North Carolina, which cut taxes, created a flat tax, and capped spending growth. It is now on track to eliminate its corporate income tax entirely. Arkansas, Mississippi, and Oklahoma are also phasing out income taxes—precisely because they combined tax relief with fiscal restraint. South Carolina has started down this path. The 2022 reform lowered rates, with the top individual rate to 6.0%. That’s progress—but without durable spending rules, the state could repeat Kansas’ mistakes. Here’s how South Carolina can be “Kansas-proof”:
Colorado’s TABOR is the most well-known, and North Carolina has paired its cap with real tax relief. Yet few states have taken the bold step of tying a strict population-plus-inflation cap directly to surplus-driven income tax elimination. If South Carolina does this, it would set the standard for fiscal discipline nationwide. This is not austerity; it’s alignment. A population-plus-inflation cap ensures the government grows only as fast as taxpayers can sustain. Surplus buydowns provide a responsible path to a flat tax and ultimately no income tax. Kansas shows what happens when politicians cut taxes without controlling spending. North Carolina and others show what happens when states do it right. South Carolina should follow the proven path: spending restraint plus surplus-driven tax elimination. That’s a formula to let people prosper.  Originally published at the Kansas Policy Institute.
Gallup recently found that just 54% of Americans now view capitalism positively, the lowest share since they began asking the question in 2010. That’s down from 60% in 2021, which is about where it has been since at least 2010. Meanwhile, 39% still view socialism positively, a number that hasn’t changed much overall but masks troubling increases among Democrats, where two-thirds now rate socialism favorably. This decline in confidence in capitalism should concern every Kansan. Not because capitalism is failing — but because it’s being misunderstood, deliberately misrepresented, and too often replaced with crony corporatism and creeping socialism. What Capitalism Really Means At its core, capitalism is just another word for free enterprise. Gallup shows that 81% of Americans view free enterprise positively, and 95% view small business favorably. That’s capitalism in action. It’s families starting businesses, farmers innovating to feed more people, and entrepreneurs creating value through voluntary exchange. It’s not government subsidies, bailouts, or backroom deals. Capitalism is simply the freedom for people to make choices, take risks, and keep the rewards (or losses) that follow. And it has done more to lift people out of poverty than any system in human history. Globally, the spread of free markets has brought billions out of extreme poverty since the 1980s. That’s not a coincidence — it’s the power of voluntary exchange and open competition. Kansas Isn’t Practicing Real Capitalism The problem isn’t capitalism. The problem is that in Kansas, let alone Washington, DC, too often what we see is crony corporatism dressed up as capitalism. Take the Panasonic battery plant deal in De Soto. The state promised $829 million in taxpayer incentives to lure a company that would deliver thousands of jobs. But EV demand has slipped, production is delayed, and Kansans are left holding the bag. That’s not free enterprise. That’s the government trying to pick winners and leaving taxpayers with the risks. Meanwhile, ordinary Kansans face rising state and local taxes per person of $6,326, among the highest in the region. Property taxes have more than doubled in the last 25 years, even as many rural counties are losing population. That’s not capitalism either. That’s the government expanding its footprint while families and businesses get squeezed. Cronyism vs. Socialism vs. Capitalism Cronyism is when government and big business collude — handing out subsidies, tax breaks, or regulatory favors to the well-connected. Socialism is when the government itself takes over the commanding heights of the economy, directing resources by political decree. Both undermine freedom and prosperity. Capitalism, by contrast, relies on profits and losses to guide progress. If a business succeeds in serving customers, it earns profits that allow it to grow, employ more people, pay higher wages, etc.. If it fails, it loses resources, freeing them up for better uses. When government steps in with subsidies or bailouts, it breaks that feedback loop, rewarding inefficiency and punishing the people who play by the rules. That’s why Americans instinctively love small businesses but distrust “big business.” Gallup found that only 37% now view big business positively, down from 58% a decade ago. People don’t dislike the idea of markets; they dislike systems rigged against them. Kansas’s Choice Kansas is at a crossroads. It can double down on the tired game of corporate welfare, expanding government programs and hoping central planners in Topeka can steer the economy. That path leads to more deficits, higher taxes, and continued outmigration of nearly 100,000 residents in the last decade. Or it can embrace real capitalism — the kind that trusts families, workers, and entrepreneurs to drive growth. That means creating a level playing field, cutting red tape, and letting voluntary exchange work its magic. The Gallup poll is a warning sign: Americans’ faith in capitalism is slipping because too often they see cronyism or government expansion masquerading as free enterprise. Kansas has a chance to remind people what capitalism really is and why it works. Because at the end of the day, capitalism is just another way of saying freedom — the freedom to create, to trade, to prosper, and yes, to fail. It’s the system that built America, lifted billions, and can still ensure Kansas remains a place where people choose to live, work, and thrive. |
Vance Ginn, Ph.D.
|
RSS Feed
Proudly powered by Weebly