Recent Kansas editorials

The Kansas City Star, Feb. 28

What the Kansas Catholic Conference might consider giving up for Lent is its official neutrality on a bill that would eliminate the statute of limitations for civil suits filed by victims of childhood sexual abuse.

To do otherwise would give the surely mistaken impression that the Catholic Church still doesn’t understand and/or care about the extent of the damage caused by its long history of covering up abuse perpetrated by priests.

If you understand abuse at all, you know that it takes even most adult victims many years to come forward. The average age of disclosure is 52.

So Kansas law, which gives childhood victims only three years after they turn 18 to file lawsuits, desperately needs the overhaul that it might finally get, though legislators have opposed such an update in the past and many are hesitant still.

Ten states have completely eliminated civil statutes of limitations for child sex abuse, and 14 other states have set the statute of limitations over the age of 50 for victims.

In Kansas, which has one of the shortest windows for lawsuits by victims of childhood abuse in the country, the effective limit of age 21 keeps most victims from ever being able to pursue civil action.

That limit was set in 1992, when so much less was understood, and the general public thought little about the issue at all.

State Rep. Cindy Holscher’s bill would do away with the time limit back to 1984. Victims also want a “look-back period” during which victims of abuse that occurred before that time could come forward.

For some reason, the Kansas Catholic Conference says it’s staying neutral on the bill, even though its director, Chuck Weber, repeatedly apologized to victims at a recent hearing on it, and said lawmakers should take a “survivor-centric approach.”

“At one time there was a reason for (a) statute of limitations,” Weber said. “There still is a reason for (a) statute of limitations. (Are) there reasons to eliminate them today? We ask the question. We’re not saying no. We’re asking the question: What are the ramifications of that?”

He surely knows the answer and the ramifications, especially since he also testified that, “We know that it sometimes takes decades for a survivor of childhood sexual abuse to come forward.”

It took Susan Leighnor 50 years. She testified that starting when she was 10 years old, she was raped by two different priests at Church of the Holy Cross in Hutchinson, Kansas, where she grew up. The first of the two told her she would go to hell if she ever told anyone, and she believed him. The other, William Wheeler, who died in 1994, was on last year’s list of priests against whom there have been substantiated reports of childhood sex abuse in the Diocese of Wichita.

Maybe you think the church’s position on the bill no longer matters, but it does. Holscher said what she’s heard from some of her colleagues is, “I don’t think the church would like that.”

At the hearing, Weber said, “Again, I want to say I’m sorry on behalf of the Catholic Church for anyone who has ever been abused. We are very, very sorry. And I know for many, that means nothing, and I understand that.”

If that’s the case, then he also must understand that these apologies would mean a lot more if the four bishops that the Kansas Catholic Conference represents came out in support of Holscher’s bill.

_____

The Topeka Capital-Journal, Feb. 29

To the 76 Catholic nuns who signed a letter urging the Kansas Legislature to pass Medicaid expansion, we say, thank you for your courage.

In the letter, the nuns say it is “deeply immoral” for anyone to go without medical care.

“We cannot allow anyone to suffer because of their inability to pay,” they wrote.

We agree.

The Network Lobby for Catholic Social Justice, a national advocacy group for Catholic sisters, organized the letter. It was signed by nuns from Atchison, Basehor, Concordia, Dodge City, Garden City, Great Bend, Kansas City, Kan., Larned, Leavenworth, Pawnee Rock, Roeland Park and Wichita.

Earlier this year, it appeared Kansas might finally expand Medicaid allowing an estimated 130,000 Kansas adults and their children to obtain access to care. However, when an amendment to the Kansas Constitution regarding abortion failed on the House floor, Senate President Susan Wagle stalled the progress on the proposed expansion.

Wagle used the failed amendment as political capital to stall the expansion claiming it would lead to state-funded abortions.

The nuns are asking that rather than using the threat of abortion to hold expansion hostage, we provide care to needy Kansans. How nuanced. How novel.

The situation clearly creates a moral dilemma for many in the anti-abortion movement, especially Catholics. Essentially two values regarding taking care of others are pitted head to head. It likely took some deep reflection on Catholic social teachings regarding the sanctity of life for these nuns to take a stand. Even more so to go against more powerful groups in Catholic circles.

The Capital-Journal’s Sherman Smith reported Kansas Catholic Conference, which supports Medicaid expansion but has lobbied against passage before the Legislature adopts and Kansas voters approve a constitutional amendment on abortion.

Archbishop Joseph Naumann, of the Archdiocese of Kansas City, also opposes expansion because of abortion.

“There was no official support for the program in the absence of guarantees against abortion funding,” Naumann said. “Regrettably, advocacy of certain groups led to years of legal and political battles over the issue of life. We must not repeat these mistakes in Kansas.”

For these nuns to pen their names to a letter that disagrees with the bishops and primary Catholic lobbying group took required spirit.

We hope the Legislature will demonstrate similar courage and spirit and find a way to bypass Wagle and other gatekeepers to get an expansion to Gov. Kelly’s desk.

______

The Wichita Eagle, Feb. 25

Wichita leaders recently decided to explore a citywide ban on plastic bags.

It didn’t take long for some state lawmakers to sharpen their dictatorial pencils and craft a proposal to ban the bans - a bill that would prohibit local governments from imposing any tax, fee or ban on single-use bags or plastic straws.

The proposal echoes laws already approved in Missouri and Oklahoma. But Kansas can and should do better.

Local jurisdictions should have a say in addressing single-use bags and other plastic products in their own communities.

In recent years, hundreds of communities around the country have moved to ban plastic bags. They have become the new tumbleweed, somersaulting across the landscape, hooking into tree branches, littering roadways and ending up in rivers and oceans, where they contaminate the water and harm fish and wildlife.

Wichita is one of a handful of Kansas communities, including Lawrence, Salina and Prairie Village, that has begun considering bans on plastic products. Both Walmart and Kroger, the parent company of Dillons grocery stores, have plans to phase out single-use bags in Kansas and elsewhere.

State lawmakers should encourage those efforts and look for other ways to protect the environment, not put up roadblocks that preempt cities from doing so.

Some retailers understandably are worried about irregular standards across the state. Wichita would be the first city in Kansas and one of the largest in the Midwest to ban or tax plastic bags.

But former Wichita City Council member Lavonta Williams, a proponent of banning plastic bags, rightly noted that such a move would be similar to a smoking ban the city approved in 2008.

That ordinance prohibited smoking in any business where people under 18 are allowed. And although controversial at the time - it passed by a vote of 4-3 - it was only two years before the state followed with an even harsher ban. Now it’s hard to remember a time when smoking was allowed in restaurants and bars.

Banning or taxing plastic bags would have some negative consequences. Shoppers would be forced to buy reusable bags, which range from $1 and up, or pay a surcharge for the single-use plastic ones - an additional cost that would hurt low-income residents the most.

But Wichita citizens - through our elected officials or a vote on the issue - should be able to exercise judgment and decide for ourselves.