Debate on late-term abortion will probably dominate the next legislative session

Next year is a full-blown election year for the Kansas Legislature where members of the House and Senate go before the voters.

Given that and the ongoing hoohaw over Dr. George Tiller and late-term abortions, both AP and the Kansas City Star are arguing that the next session will be dominated by debate over abortion. An interim legislative committee is soon expected to be appointed to study the issue this summer and even some Democrats say they're ready to discuss changes in the law.

My take is that the conventional wisdom of the mainstream media is right on this one.

Doctor denies financial ties to George Tiller

The Lawrence Journal-World reports that an attorney for former Lawrence physician Dr. Ann Kristin Neuhaus denies that she had a financial connection to Wichita's Dr. George Tiller.

The alleged ties are the basis for 19 misdemeanor charges filed against Tiller yesterday.

Morrison says Kline is either grossly incompetent or manufacturing evidence

And that's just the start of the back and forth between Kansas Attorney General Paul Morrison and his predecessor as AG, Johnson County District Attorney Phill Kline. All of this, of course, surrounds the charging of Dr. George Tiller, a Wichita abortion provider.

The incompetent-or-unethical quote is from today's Topeka Capital-Journal, which also reports on the tight security that greeted reporters when they went to Morrison's news conference yesterday. The security was in response to all the emails Morrison's office received. Judging from some of the emails I've received from anti-abortion folks, I think Morrison has every right to be concerned.

Meanwhile, Kline is trying to claim that Morrison's charges are a victory for him. While it's true that Morrison did use the records Kline obtained, it's also true that Morrison threw out all 30 of the charges Kline was trying to file against Tiller. If you believe Morrison, then all 30 of those charges was botched. That's hardly a victory for Kline.

Morrison says Kline was so driven by his political agenda that he did sloppy work. Whether or not Kline botched the cases, it does make sense that he was driven to press the charges he did. At least half of those charges had to do with how to define a medical rationale for a late-term abortion. If Kline had succeeded, that might well have had the effect of choking off just about any late-term abortions.

Morrison's point is that Kline was trying to make a political point and not trying to enforce the law. If so, then Kline was way out of line.

The Kansas Constitution kindly created an institution to allow citizens to change the law. It's called the Legislature. Kline's job as AG was to enforce the law. That's what his job is now in Johnson County. His record on the Tiller case is just one reason why Johnson County residents are a tad nervous about their new DA.

Tiller is expected to make his first court appearance Aug. 7.

The Lawrence Journal-World has a good story about the 19 charges Morrison filed against Tiller. It includes detail on each count.

Here's the Wichita Eagle's story. The Eagle's best contribution to the story are a timeline of events surrounding Tiller and a brief biography of Tiller.

Kansas Public Radio has an audio report with lots of quotes from Morrison's news conference. I can't seem to link directly to the Morrison story, so you will have to scroll down until you find it on a page of other news reports.

The Kansas City Star reports on the record of the physician who signed off on the abortions performed by Tiller. The doctor, who once practiced in Lawrence, was disciplined by a state board.

BREAKING: Kansas Attorney General rejects all of Kline's charges against Tiller, but files new counts

[updated 1:13 p.m.]

Kansas Attorney General Paul Morrison has filed 19 misdemeanor counts against Wichita abortion doctor George Tiller.

The charges stem from a state law requiring that a doctor who provides an abortion and a referring doctor not have any financial or legal ties. Morrison is alleging that Tiller had those kinds of ties in 19 cases.

Here's the Kansas City Star report.

The Star adds this interesting paragraph.

Morrison’s decision to charge Tiller is likely to come as a shock to anti-abortion groups who expected Tiller to be cleared. They predicted that Morrison would decline to charge Tiller, saying the attorney general would shield the abortion provider. A political action committee controlled by Tiller spent hundreds of thousands of dollars in the recent election attacking Kline.

One problem with instant analysis of the news is that you don't have time to dig up facts or get perspective, but having said that I'm going to leap in here for a quick opinion: At first blush, it appears that Morrison and his staff took their job seriously to investigate Tiller. (Hence the "shock" expected from anti-abortion groups.)

If that is true, isn't it much better that the new AG took his time and did a careful job, rather than doing what the previous AG, Phill Kline, may well have done? Botching an indictment doesn't help get a conviction.

It will be interesting to hear the reaction of Kline and his camp to today's events.

One important fact to note is that both Kline's and Morrison's charges are misdemeanors.

The bottom line is that we will only know over time whether Kline or Morrison or neither of them have been right about Tiller.

------------------

[1:12 p.m. update]

Here's AP's take on the story. They quote Morrison as saying the 19 counts are "technical" violations of the law.

More from AP. This story names the doctor with alleged ties to Tiller. See the bottom of the story, which also provides more detail.

-------------------

[1:02 p.m. update]

A more national perspective is available at In This Moment.

-------------------
[earlier post]

First reports from Topeka say that Attorney General Paul Morrison has rejected all 30 counts Phill Kline filed against Wichita abortion provider George Tiller in December. However, Morrison has filed 19 new counts against Tiller.

Details are coming.

Morrison's office had already announced that it was not filing 15 of the original 30 charges originally pressed by Kline. Calling Kline's work sloppy and unethical, Morrison's spokesperson yesterday told the AP that the charges the previous AG had filed were unfounded.

Here's background on the entire Tiller saga.
----------
PHOTO: Paul Morrison

Morrison to announce whether he will charge Tiller at noon

The KC Star reports that Kansas Attorney General Paul Morrison has just notified the media of a noon news conference. The results of his investigation into George Tiller -- and whether or not Tiller will be charged -- will be announced then.

BREAKING: Paul Morrison's office says Kline botched George Tiller case

AP is reporting an exclusive interview with Ashley Anstaett, spokeswoman for Attorney General Paul Morrison. She alleges that former AG Phill Kline engaged in "unethical behavior" and left a mess for Morrison.

In a nutshell, Anstaett says Morrison's predecessor Kline, botched at least half of the charges he filed against Wichita abortion provider, Dr. George Tiller. Among the charges Anstaett makes, according to AP, are:

• 15 of the 30 misdemeanor counts Kline filled in December were flawed.
• In 11 of those 15 counts, Kline failed to include information that was favorable to Tiller -- a major ethical lapse by an attorney. (Kline's recently departed Johnson County Domestic Violence Division Chief Sue Carpenter was once censured for doing this.)
• In 4 of the counts, Kline cited the wrong patient records to back up his charges.
• “The case was not organized, summarized and ready to go, as Kline claims. This couldn’t be further from the truth.”

Anstaett’s comments covered only 15 charges. Morrison is set to announce by Friday whether or not he will file any charges against Tiller.

Kline denies everything. See AP for the details of his comments.

If what Anstaett says is true, then it's no surprise that Morrison has taken six months to finish his investigation of Tiller. If Tiller really is breaking the law, then the absolute worst thing Morrison could do is to bring a botched case before a judge. It amazes me that the anti-abortion folks can't seem to understand that. They seem more interested in screaming and making political points, than in actually getting a successful prosecution of Tiller.

My guess -- and I have no information on this -- is that Anstaett's interview is part of a PR campaign by Morrison to counter the Operation Rescue message that has been filling the Kansas media for the last few weeks.

I'm also guessing, that Morrison may well file charges against Tiller. Anstaett only discussed 15 of the counts. I suspect that she would have discussed more, if Morrison intended to clear Tiller completely.

Again, I have no information. Only guesses.

Morrison clears Planned Parenthood in Overland Park, but Kline still has records

Attorney General Paul Morrison has cleared Planned Parenthood -- one of two clinics at the center of former AG Phill Kline's mining expedition for medical records.

The attorney for the Overland Park clinic released a letter from Morrison tonight.

Here is a link to Morrison's letter. Note that the letter says that Kline -- now Johnson County District Attorney -- still has copies of the records. As the local DA, Kline could still file charges against Planned Parenthood.

No word yet on what Morrison intends to do about the 2nd and most controversial clinic -- that of Dr. George Tiller in Wichita.

I hear a lot of folks -- particularly anti-abortion groups -- screaming about how long it has taken Morrison to complete his investigation of the clinics. Given the controversy and all the publicity, I much prefer to see Morrison take his time and do a thorough job rather than jumping in to either follow in Kline's hasty footsteps or to jump away from them.

Republican vows to stop Lawrence's new domestic partner registry

To no one's surprise, Rep. Lance Kinzer said today he will once again try to ban domestic partner registries statewide.

Lawrence's new registry goes into effect Aug. 1 for both same-sex and heterosexual couples. Even if he succeeds, Kinzer couldn't get the Legislature to pass a ban until the session starts in January. If that happens, a victory by Kinzer would demolish a registry that would already have been functioning for months. A victory by Kinzer would declare null and void the registrations of many couples.

The bill by the Olathe Republican was approved last session by a committee in the House. However, it never made it to a vote of the full House. The ban would have to be passed by the House and then get through a Senate committee and the full Senate before going to Gov. Kathleen Sebelius for her signature. Sebelius has not said whether or not she would sign such a bill.

A domestic partner registry does nothing more than allow couples to access benefits their employers already offer to them. It is nothing more revolutionary than a list of names. Kansas Attorney General Paul Morrison has already said that Lawrence's registry is constitutional, even with the state ban on same-sex marriage.

If you want to be part of stopping Kinzer's attempt to keep Lawrence couples from getting insurance and other benefits, join the Kansas Equality Coalition and become a part of the fight for fairness.

Replacement for attorney fired by Phill Kline walks after only two months

After only two months (two months?!) on the job, Sue Carpenter has resigned as head of Phill Kline's domestic violence section in Johnson County. Carpenter took over after Kline fired the 15-year veteran who headed the unit.

The Kansas City Star reports that Carpenter's last day was Friday.

Carpenter had some problems before she got to Kline's office. Her resume, as announced by his office, was also a tad inflated.

Once again, why do we care about Kline?

First, his office oversees law enforcement for one of the state's biggest counties. How he performs his job has an impact on the lives of people who live in the suburban Kansas City county. Since Kline got his DA job under less-than-normal circumstances, the question in the minds of many in the county has been whether or not Kline is competent, or as The Pitch said this week, a dimwit.

By the way, I've never thought Kline was dim, dull or in any way stupid, but he constantly shows signs of ignoring the nuts and bolts of his job in favor of his own political, far right agenda.

As important for the rest of the state and nation, Kline has wider political ambitions. He is a darling of the Christian Right.

Kansas Supreme Court upholds Lawrence smoking ban

Wahoo! We'll still be able to breathe freely in Lawrence. I am such a happy camper.

The decision just came out.

Gitmo in Kansas? Ah, maybe not.

Reports that the Bush Administration might close the detention center at Guantanamo Bay appear to have been a bit premature.

Even if Gitmo is closed, it looks like Fort Leavenworth may not be the destination for remaining Gitmo prisoners after all. The Washington Post reports today, at the very bottom of a fascinating story on the politics of all of this:

The Pentagon did a contingency study on housing the detainees at military facilities in the United States last year and determined that the only detention center that could realistically house more than 200 detainees from Guantanamo in maximum security cells would be the Navy brig in Charleston, S.C., but that the brig and the surrounding base would need significant security enhancements.

An earlier AP story contained complaints from Rep. Nancy Boyda, who sounded none-to-pleased that Gitmo detainees might end up in Kansas.

A Step-by-Step Guide to figuring out if the religious right is turning toothless

I posted a detailed rundown of what's happening and what to watch on my national blog, In This Moment. I stuck the post over there because I do believe what happens here has national significance.

The Pitch takes on Phill Kline

Interesting story in The Pitch with some old -- and some new -- detail about the state of Phill Kline's tenure as district attorney of Johnson County.

Gitmo in Kansas?

I don't know how I missed this before, but the Lawrence Journal-World has reported that if the prison at Guantanamo Bay ever closed, the inmates might end up at Fort Leavenworth.

Their destination would be the U.S. Disciplinary Barracks in northeast Kansas, about 35 miles from Lawrence. The USDB, as it is known locally, is the only maximum security prison in the United States.

I toured the USDB in the late 1980s when I was still a reporter for The Wichita Eagle. At that time, it was a grim place with a "special processing unit," i.e. death chamber, and an 1,000-inmate maximum security "barracks" that was a dead ringer for Alcatraz as imagined in the old Burt Lancaster movie, "Birdman of Alcatraz."

By the time I took the tour of the USDB, I had already done stories in several prisons in both Kansas and Michigan. At that time, the USDB was by far the creepiest of them all.

However, those old maximum security barracks were torn down in 2002, and today the prison only has a capacity of 500. It has a daily inmate count of 450.

Personally, I think it may well be a good idea to stop using Gitmo as an excuse for inhumane treatment of inmates -- treatment that does nothing but ruin our reputation around the world. If the end of Gitmo means prisoners end up in Kansas, then that might well be a good thing. However, that idea won't work unless the military puts a lot more money into the USDB.
-------------

PHOTO: A 2002 photo of the detention camp of Gitmo.

What's next for Lawrence's domestic partner registry

Both the mundane and, let's say, the profane are expected in the next few months now that the Lawrence City Commission has passed a domestic partner registry.

First up will probably be the mundane. The registry is supposed to go into effect on Aug. 1. The city still needs to determine an exact fee and set up the web site that partners will use to register. As soon as I have details, I'll post them and a link to the registration site. You can read the ordinance here.

What may be profane -- or what dictionary.com calls "common or vulgar" -- is an expected attempt to stop the registry. The Lawrence/Douglas County Chapter of the Kansas Equality Coalition has been hearing for months that someone (don't know who) plans to file an injunction to block implementation of the registry.

This may well happen, but right now I'm personally a bit uncertain it will. Although the battle was long and hard and took a ton of work, the opposition proved itself to be fairly toothless by the time the whole thing was over. On the other hand, it never pays to underestimate the commitment of our opponents.

I'm more concerned, though, about a renewed attempt in the Kansas Legislature to pass a bill banning domestic partner registries throughout the state. Introduced by Olathe Republican Lance Kinzer, the bill was passed by an ultra-conservative House committee last session.

When the Legislature goes back into session in January, Kinzer's bill could go to a quick vote by the full House, which is largely conservative. The bill would still have to pass the more moderate Senate, but I would prefer that we never have to engage in that fight.

Kansas Equality Coalition Chair Thomas Witt reminds us that "the work is not done," and he's right.

I propose a short break for everyone to catch their breath, and then renewed commitment to the fight. One important way to get involved is to become a member of the Equality Coalition. It only costs $15.

Becoming a member not only provides financial support for the group, but it also proves to decision makers that everyday voters support our goals. The truth is that many do, but our opinions have often been drowned out by the screams of the religious right.

BREAKING NEWS: The 1st domestic partner registry in Kansas history is law

[updated 7:19 p.m.]

The Lawrence City Commission just took it's third and final vote on the registry. As before, the ordinance passed 4-1. This is historic.

There was no discussion. The whole thing was over with in less than 5 minutes.

For the first time in Kansas history, same-sex couples have a means of getting public acknowledgment of their relationships. This is not a symbolic gesture. This means that domestic partners will have access to health insurance and other benefits offered by their partners' employers.

The registry goes into effect Aug. 1. Details on the new registry can be found in the approved ordinance. The registry is open to both same-sex and heterosexual couples, but is only available to residents of Lawrence. Couples will register online and pay a fee, which has not yet been determined.
------------------
[update]

Even though tonight's vote was over in minutes, it took months of grassroots effort to win the registry. Kudos to Maggie Childs and the rest of the Lawrence Chapter of the Kansas Equality Coalition. You did very well indeed!

The final vote on the Lawrence domestic partner registry is tomorrow

This is it: Tuesday night the Lawrence City Commission is expected to take the final vote to create Kansas' first domestic partner registry.

The meeting starts at 6:35 p.m. at Lawrence City Hall, 6 East 6th St. One more time, we need to go to the meeting to support the proposal. The discussion and vote should be near the beginning of the meeting.

The Kansas Equality Coalition expects the proposal to be pulled off the consent agenda by Commissioner Mike Amyx. If he doesn't do that, he can't vote against it. With the proposal off the consent agenda, the Commission could, once again, hear comments on it. However, I doubt that Mayor Sue Hack will provide much if any time for testimony. Both sides have had ample time to speak and contact the commissioners.

We seem to be retaining our 4-1 margin on the Commission, which means the domestic partner registry should finally become official Tuesday night. If all goes as expected, this will be a huge victory for fair treatment under the law in Lawrence.

The city expects to start offering the registry online Aug. 1. A fee will be charged, but the amount of the fee has not been announced yet.

Here is the full text of the registry ordinance.

Lawrence domestic partner registry final ordinance

Here is the full, final version of the ordinance that the Lawrence City Commission will vote on Tuesday night. If approved, this becomes the law in Lawrence on Aug. 1, 2007.

This is available on the city web site, but you have to download the entire meeting packet to get it.

-------------------------
ORDINANCE NO. 8120

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LAWRENCE, KANSAS ESTABLISHING A DOMESTIC PARTNERSHIP REGISTRY; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO DEVELOP PROCEDURES FOR THE REGISTRY


NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE CITY OF LAWRENCE, KANSAS:

Section 1. Chapter 10, Article 2, of the Code of the City of Lawrence, Kansas, 2006 Edition, and amendments thereto, is hereby enacted to read as follows:

10-201 DOMESTIC PARTNER DEFINED.

Whenever used in this Article, “domestic partner” shall be construed to mean two individuals who are residents of the City of Lawrence, as defined in Section 10-202, who have reached 18 years of age, who have the mental capacity to contract, and who live together in a relationship of indefinite duration, with a mutual commitment in which the partners share the necessities of life and are financially interdependent. Domestic partners are not married to another person, do not have another domestic partner and are not related by blood more closely than would bar their marriage in this state.

10-202 RESIDENT DEFINED.

For the purpose of registering a partnership with the City of Lawrence under this Article, a “resident” shall mean a person who has established at least 60 consecutive days prior to filing a Declaration of Domestic Partnership with the office of the City designated by the City Manager, a present and fixed residence within the city limits of Lawrence, Kansas where the person intends to remain for an indefinite period and to which the person intends to return following absence.

10-203 CRITERIA FOR ESTABLISHING A DOMESTIC PARTNERSHIP.

The following criteria must be met for two individuals to be considered domestic partners for the purposes of registering the partnership with the City of Lawrence:

(A) Both individuals are residents of the Lawrence, Kansas as defined in Section 10-202.

(B) Both individuals share a common permanent residence. It is not necessary that the legal right to possess the common residence be in both of the individual’s names;

(C) Both individuals agree to be in a relationship of mutual interdependence;

(D) Both individuals contribute to the maintenance and support of the household. The individuals are not required to contribute equally to the household.

(E) Neither individual is married to a third individual or a member of a domestic partnership with a third individual;

(F) Each individual is 18 years of age or older;

(G) Each individual has the mental capacity to contract;

(H) The two individuals are not related by blood in a way that would prevent them from being married to another in this State; and

(I) Both individuals agree to file a Declaration of Domestic Partnership with the City pursuant to this article.

10-204 REGISTRATION.

(A) Two persons seeking to register as domestic partners may complete and file a Declaration of Domestic Partnership with an office of the City designated by the City Manager.

(B) No individual who has previously filed a Declaration of Domestic Partnership in this City may file a new Declaration of Domestic Partnership until at least ninety (90) days after the date that a Request for Removal from the Domestic Partnership Registry was filed with the City under this article. This prohibition does not apply if the previous domestic partnership ended because one of the partners died.

10-205 REMOVAL FROM REGISTRY UPON DEATH OR VOLUNTARY DISSOLUTION OF PARTNERSHIP.

(A) A domestic partnership registered with the City shall be removed from the registry in accordance with this Section:

(1) Reasons for removal from registry:

(a) One of the partners dies and the City is notified thereof; or

(b) A Request for Removal from the Domestic Partner Registry has been filed by one or both of the individuals registered as domestic partners with the City or

(2) Procedure for removal from registry:

(a) Within ninety (90) days of the dissolution of the domestic partnership, at least one former partner shall file a Request for Removal from the Domestic Partner Registry with an office of the City designated by the City Manager pursuant to procedures adopted by the City Manager. Upon receipt, the City shall provide the domestic partner who filed the Request for Removal from the Domestic Partner Registry with two copies of the Request marked “filed.” Unless the partners jointly file the Request, the partner filing the Request, shall within five days send a copy of the filed Request to the other partner’s last known address. This notice requirement does not apply if the removal request is due to a death of one of the domestic partners.

(b) The request shall be effective upon filing the Request for Removal from the Domestic Partner Registry with the City by one or both partners or on the date of the death of one.

(c) A former domestic partner who has given a copy of the Declaration of Domestic Partnership to any third party to qualify for any benefit or right and whose receipt of that benefit or enjoyment of that right has not otherwise terminated, shall notify the third party in writing of the Request for Removal from the Domestic Partner Registry, at the last known address of the third party.

(d) Failure to provide third-party notice required in Section 10-205(A)(2)(c) shall not delay or prevent the removal of the domestic partnership from the registry. The City shall have no duty to provide notice to third parties.

10-206 REMOVAL FROM REGISTRY FOR FAILURE TO MEET DEFINITION OF DOMESTIC PARTNER.

If it appears based upon a preponderance of the evidence that one or both of the partners in a registered domestic partnership no longer meets the definition of a domestic partner under this article, the City shall, after notice and an opportunity to be heard, remove the partnership from the Registry. The City Manager shall develop procedures for the implementation of this Section.

10-207 REGISTRATION.

(A) The City Manager shall develop procedures and standard forms for the “Registration of Domestic Partnership” and “Notice of Removal from the Domestic Partnership Registry.”

(B) The City Manager, or his or her designee, shall determine a reasonable fee based upon the cost of processing the forms and the City shall charge these fees to the persons filing a Declaration of Domestic Partnership. No fee shall be charged for filing a Request for Removal from the Domestic Partnership Registry.

(C) The City shall maintain the registry based upon the information provided by the individuals filing the Declaration of Domestic Partnership. The City shall have no duty to independently verify the information provided by the individuals filing the Declaration of Domestic Partnership.

10-208 LEGAL EFFECT.
Registration pursuant to this Article creates no legal rights, other than the right to have the registered domestic partnership included in the City’s Domestic Partner Registry pursuant to this Article. No parties are prohibited from extending rights or benefits to persons listed in the Domestic Partner Registry.

10-209 OTHER APPLICABLE LAWS.
This Article shall not be interpreted nor construed to permit the recognition of a relationship that is otherwise prohibited by State law.

10-210 REGISTERING A PARTNERSHIP WITHOUT THE INDIVIDUALS’ CONSENT.
No person shall register or attempt to register a domestic partnership pursuant to the Article without the consent of the persons to be registered. Any person who is convicted of a violation of this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and shall be punished by a fine of not less than $500 or a jail term of not less than 30 days, or both such fine and jail term.

10-211 SEVERABILITY.
If any provision, clause, sentence or paragraph of this Article or the application thereof to any person or circumstances shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions of this Article which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Article are declared to be severable.

Section 2. This ordinance shall be published as provided by law and shall be effective as of the 1st day of August, 2007.

Even in Kansas, Bush is unloved & kept safe in a bubble

Our not-so-beloved president was in Wichita today, and it looks like he was, once again kept far from the regular folks of even this very red, red town.

The Wichita Eagle reports about Bush's arrival at McConnell Air Force Base:

"Several hundred Air Force personnel and Boeing employees were gathered there to greet him."

That's it? Just military personnel who have to be nice to the president and Boeing employees who may have been as eager to see the plane they built -- Air Force One -- as the president?

Bush then went to what is by all accounts a terrific Boys and Girls Club complex in Wichita and then on to speak at a private fundraiser for Kansas Sen. Pat Roberts. The Republican senator is up for reelection next year.

I wonder if Bush's appearance will help Roberts or hurt him. Bush's very public support of Jim Ryun didn't seem to do much for the recently ousted GOP Congressman. Bush's low-key arrival leads credence to the idea that the prez isn't even welcome in the Heartland.

Recent polls support that.

In a poll taken from 6/8 to 6/10 by Survey USA, Bush got only a 38 percent approval rating in Kansas. His disapproval rating is a whopping 60 percent.

Meanwhile, Roberts own approval rating is 14 points higher than the president's in Kansas. Roberts approval number is 52 percent. The senator scores a 36 percent disapproval rating.

Johnson County district attorney race tests religious right

To no one's surprise, Phill Kline has already picked up two opponents in the race for Johnson County district attorney.

We've got one Republican --Steve Howe, one of seven assistant district attorneys fired in January by Kline -- and one Republican turned Democrat -- former assistant district attorney Rick Guinn.

This will be an interesting race to watch. It will not only determine the future of law enforcement in the county, but will be a good gauge of the strength of the religious right.

The far right forced Kline into office in a Republican precinct committee vote. If moderates can't boot him out in 2008, then I doubt if there is much hope that moderate Republicans and Democrats can retake their county anytime soon.

Stay tuned.