top of page
HCR5014 Infographic (2).png

 The amendments on the ballot are complicated.
We hope this page helps you make sense of them.
The bottom line is - VOTE NO.

Power Grab #1: The No Checks No Balance Amendment 
HCR 5014; Legislative Oversight of Administrative Rules and Regulations 

"...would provide that, whenever the Legislature by law has authorized any officer or agency within the Executive Branch to adopt rules and regulations that have the force and effect of law, the Legislature may provide by law for revocation or suspension of any such rules and regulation, or any portion thereof, by a majority vote of the Legislature."

(Excerpt from official summary)

The Pro-Choice Vote

Voting NO is pro-choice. This amendment would expand the power of the legislature which is currently controlled by an anti-abortion Republican super-majority that tried to sneak the Value Them Both Amendment by Kansans by placing it on the August ballot and using misleading language and dishonest campaign tactics.

Their Claim

"The purpose of this amendment is to provide the legislature with oversight of state executive branch agencies and officials by providing the legislature authority to establish procedures to revoke or suspend rules and regulations."

(Excerpt from official summary)

The Truth

Voting NO keeps our three branches of government (executive, legislature, judicial) all operating separately, protects our current system of checks and balances, and keeps the constitution the same.


Voting YES would expand the power of the legislature and skew those checks and balances in their favor in a big way by making it possible for a simple majority of the legislature to overrule the Governor and other members of the executive branch.


The executive branch includes: Attorney General of Kansas, Chief of Staff to the Governor of Kansas, Governor of Kansas, Kansas Commissioner of Education, Kansas Commissioner of Insurance, Kansas Corporation Commission, Kansas Secretary of Agriculture, Kansas Secretary of Labor, Kansas Secretary of State, Kansas Secretary of Wildlife and Parks, Kansas State Board of Education, Kansas Treasurer, Lieutenant Governor of Kansas.

HCR 5014 InfoGraphic

Power Grab #2: The Attorney General Sheriff Swapper Amendment 
HCR 5022; Kansas County Sheriff Electionn and Recall Amendment 

"...would preserve the right of citizens of each county that elected a county sheriff as of January 11, 2022, to continue electing the county sheriff via popular vote. The amendment would also direct that a county sheriff only may be involuntarily removed from office pursuant to either a recall election or a writ of quo warranto initiated by the attorney general." (Excerpt from official summary)

“The office of sheriff has deep historical roots and the longstanding practice of election rather than appointment makes sheriffs uniquely accountable to the people,” - Derek Schmidt (R), Attorney General, Candidate for Governor

The Pro-Choice Vote

Their Claim

Voting NO is pro-choice. County Sheriffs play a role in keeping our communities secure but should leave election security to the County Elections Officer (usually the County Clerk) unless they are needed because a law has been violated or there is a safety issue requiring law enforcement intervention.


You may have heard stories of the Johnson County Sheriff who has made baseless claims of election fraud and even traveled to speak about election fraud to groups of voters. If this Sheriff were to interfere with the election, the District Attorney would  be able to remove him. This would not be the case if this amendment passes - then only the Attorney General would be able to remove him.


The Republican Candidate for AG is Kris Kobach, who is known for making baseless claims of voter fraud. The pointless, expensive recount of the August election made it clear that some actors in our state have an interest in overturning our elections.

The Truth

There is already a law on the books that establishes Sheriffs as elected officials and requires 4 year term limits.

19-801a. "Except in those counties operating under the provisions of any consolidated law enforcement act, beginning with the general election in 1976, a sheriff shall be elected in each county, for four (4) years..." 

There is already a law on the books that establishes that sheriff default or misconduct is dealt with by prosecutors.

19-817. "Any action for default or misconduct of any sheriff, his undersheriff, jailer, or any of his deputies, may be prosecuted against the executors or administrators of such sheriff."

We're getting flash backs to the Value Them Both Amendment here...if there are already laws on the books why amend the constitution? To us this looks like a power grab that would grant permanent power over your county's Sheriff to the Attorney General.

Voting NO would keep removal of a Sheriff in the hands of both your local District Attorney, a county office, and the Attorney General, a statewide office.

Voting YES would take this power from your local District Attorney, leaving the removal of Sheriffs up to the  to the Attorney General alone.

Hear about these amendments from a legal expert:

bottom of page