Each of the Kansas PACs shown above was ranked in the Top Ten PACs in Kansas for at least one of the election years, 2002, 2004, or 2006.

Questions:

1. ProKanDo was the #1 overall Kansas PAC over the 2002-2004 election years, but dropped off the political radar screen in 2006?  A future Meadowlark report will give details of the amazing $651,200 raised by ProKanDo in 2005-2006, not including an additional $163,260 in in-kind contributions! ProKanDo's 2006 total, including in-kind contributions, amounted to $814,460!! ProKanDo spent $651,104 in 2005-2006.  ProKanDo avoided being listed in the 2006 "Top 20" list of Kansas PACs because of how they cleverly hid their money through a "non-profit", and because the reports by the Kansas Governmental Ethics Commission are too narrow in their focus.  In 2005-2006 ProKanDo spent almost as much as the contributions by the top six 2006 Kansas PACs combined!  What tricks will ProKanDo use in 2008 to hide their political money?  
   

2. Will  KNEA continue spending more money during each election cycle?  KNEA's 2004 spending was 162% of their 2002 spending.  KNEA's 2006 spending was 197% of their 2004 spending.  These are HUGE increases by election cycle.  A future Meadowlark report will give additional details about the KNEA PAC's influence on Kansas politics, especially in 2006.  KNEA/NEA channeled $122,000 to the Kansas Alliance for Education PAC to "buy" certain Board of Education seats. KNEA channeled $25,000 to the Kansas Traditional Republican Majority (KTRM) group, and $15,000 to the "non profit" Progress Kansas to knock off certain Kansas State Representatives.  KNEA already has $125,637 in the bank for 2008.
   

3. Will the Greater Kansas City Chamber of Commerce continue their push for Missouri influence on Kansas politics through every increasing donations in 2008?  Why did the Greater Kansas City Chamber spend 271% more in 2006 than in 2004 on Kansas politics?  Based on political contributions, why does this Missouri Chamber of Commerce have more interest in Kansas politics than the Kansas Chamber of Commerce, the Overland Park Chamber of Commerce, the Wichita Chamber of Commerce, the Topeka Chamber of Commerce, or any of a number of Kansas Chambers of Commerce?  The Greater Kansas City Chamber's PAC sent $25,000 to the "non profit" Progress Kansas to knock off certain Kansas State Representatives.  The KNEA and the Greater Kansas City Chamber are two of the three known groups that sent money to the "Progress Kansas" non-profit. Why has the press mostly ignored the Progress Kansas non-profit?

Comments:

1. The Kansas Governmental Ethics Commission needs to reconsider the reports it creates of political money raised and spent by Kansas PACs.  Besides ProKanDo's $651K raised and spent in 2005-2006 and not appearing on any report of "Top 20" PACs, out-of-state PACs can hide their involvement in Kansas politics by filing "Verified Statements," which are not made public online like other Kansas PACs, and are not included in any analysis with Kansas PACs.  A March 21, 2007 Meadowlark report gave details of the Heavy Constructors of Kansas City, MO spending $198,300 on Kansas political contests, which would have made it the #2 Kansas PAC.  However, the Heavy Constructors weren't even considered for inclusion in the Top 20 list of PACs in 2006 since they were from Missouri.  Perhaps a report of "Money raised" or "Money spent" over a two-year election cycle would be more informative than simply a report about contributions by a PAC to candidates.  Too much money can be hidden by "non-profits" or out-of-state PACs via "verified statements."
   

2. While Kansas made great progress in early 2006 in publishing campaign information online (Sun Shines on Kansas Politics, Meadowlark, Dec 23, 2005), summary information by candidate, by party, or by PAC is nearly impossible to tabulate because the data can be read by a human, but cannot be easily analyzed using accounting/statistical software.  Kansas political money information needs to be available online in a machine-readable form, much like data the Federal Election Commission provides on  federal races and PACs.  Information can be retrieved via the online search engine, but it's quite difficult to manipulate directly. 

Update (Sept 2, 2007)
Carol Williams, Executive Director of the Kansas Governmental Ethics Commission, explained the rationale behind the current "Top 20" list of PACs.  Prior to 2004, PACs were not allowed to make money transfers to other PACs (but they could transfer funds to "party" committees).  Prior to 2004, the "Top 20" list more accurately reflected the strength of the various PACs in terms of dollars than in 2006.