Laura Kelly risks her inheritance hoping the Republican Party will meet her amid tax cuts

It’s make-or-break time for Laura Kelly.

Kansas Governor Vetoed Again Last Week another tax cut plan from the GOP-controlled Legislature and announced it would call a special session so lawmakers could make another — smaller — attempt at cutting taxes before the November election.

“If we all work together,” Kelly said in a statement, “an affordable bipartisan tax plan can be passed in less than a day.”

Maybe. It’s worth noting, however, that lawmakers just finished a 90-day session without producing a tax plan that meets the governor’s demands. Traveling the last mile could take a little longer – if indeed a compromise can be found.

So yes, “less than a day” seems extremely optimistic.

But it’s not just tax cuts that are at stake in the upcoming special session. This is Kelly’s legacy as governor.

Currently, this legacy is largely defined by two factors. The first is his leadership in helping lead Kansas out of the fiscal disaster left behind by former Gov. Sam Brownback’s famously misguided tax experiment a decade ago. The second is the “meet in the middle” persona she used to win gubernatorial elections twice as a Democrat in a staunchly Republican state.

The special session contrasts these two elements.

For what? Because Kelly is clearly considering the tax cut options proposed so far this year — a Republican-sponsored flat tax plan passed and vetoed in the first few days of the session, then a pair of two-tiered tax bills passed on a bipartisan basis – as threatening. the “fiscal responsibility” part of his inheritance.

She wants to limit tax cuts to $425 million per year. The Legislature’s most recent bill is expected to cost between $462 million and $472 million annually over the first five years.

Too much, Kelly said in his veto statement. Cuts of this magnitude “put at risk all the progress we have made in restoring services to Kansans, funding our public schools, and investing in our infrastructure.”

In other words, no return to the bad days of the Brownbackian. So she puts her foot down. And maybe that’s necessary.

But it’s a hard thing to do during Also meeting in the middle.

Democrats worry about low-income Kansans

It’s also difficult for Kelly to continue to claim common ground when so many of her Democratic colleagues in the Kansas House have joined Republicans in passing the tax bill she just vetoed. Some of those Democrats are now openly concerned that she missed the best chance to provide tax relief to the state’s lowest income earners.

It is to be expected that Kelly will not be on the same wavelength as the Republicans. But if she’s also not on the same page as a critical mass of Democrats, what’s left?

And or East in the middle, exactly, in this scenario?

“I’ve been through different governors, different chambers and different speakers,” Democratic Rep. Barbara Ballard, a 30-year veteran of the Legislature, told the Star last month. “But I’ve never seen frustration this high.”

This all represents a high-stakes gamble for Kelly. Even with a special session in place, there is a risk that no deal will be reached in a year when almost everyone expected tax cuts and additional money in their wallets in November. That would probably make voters grumpy. This may be a small risk, given everyone’s desire to complete the job. But it’s still a risk.

It’s more likely, however, that Kelly will get the deal she’s aiming for: Republicans aren’t going to back out of tax cuts just to make her look bad, are they? – but this comes at the cost of a heavy price to her image as a moderate ready to make compromises.

Kelly is not running for office this fall and she cannot run for re-election in two years. Maybe she doesn’t need this intermediate reputation. Or maybe – just maybe – she feels it’s worth risking a key part of her political persona to preserve her fiscal legacy.

Joel Mathis is a regular correspondent for the Kansas City Star and Wichita Eagle Opinion. He lives in Laurent. A former Kansas newspaper writer and editor, he worked for nine years as a syndicated columnist.