Kansas
Kansas bills would end grace period for mail ballots and ban ranked-choice voting
Fact-checking Trump’s claims about windmills and the Panama Canal
President Trump made some questionable claims about birthright citizenship, renewable energy costs and voter turnout in the 2024 election.
Kansas’s two election committees are fast at work in the Kansas Statehouse this year and have already had hearings on some of the more controversial election bills being considered.
Kansas has taken on a flurry of election security bills since 2020, when President Donald Trump baselessly blamed widespread voter fraud for his defeat. Some of the laws that passed in the Statehouse fell flat in the courts, namely the prohibition of “impersonating an election employee.”
Democrats have signalled that they’re not willing to work on many of the bills being considered.
“Anything that makes voting more difficult for Kansans is going to be a nonstarter with us,” said Senate Minority Leader Dinah Sykes, D-Lenexa.
Kansas bill considers ending the ballot grace period
In 2017, the Kansas Legislature approved a three-day grace period for ballots that were sent before Election Day, but received by a county election office up to three days after the election. A bill that would make a hard deadline of 7 p.m. on Election Day for ballots was recommended to be passed by the Senate Committee on Federal and State Affairs despite substantial pushback from opponents.
Identical bills have passed the Senate and House over the past few years, but they’ve failed to overcome Gov. Laura Kelly’s veto.
Election Day is the mail-ballot deadline for most states, with 32 states requiring the return of mail-in ballots as the polls close. The other 18, plus Puerto Rico, Washington, D.C., and the Virgin Islands allows ballots after Election Day if it is postmarked with the date it was sent.
Written testimony for the bill largely skewed oppositional, with more than 50 organizations and private citizens asking the committee to reject the bill compared to 10 proponents.
Proponents argued that the U.S. Postal Service postmarks are unreliable, would speed up tabulation and would make elections more secure.
“Nothing in this bill does anything to change voters access. Kansas makes it very easy to vote. This law would also make it harder to cheat,” said Jason Sneed, executive director of Honest Elections Action Project, a Washington, D.C.-based organization that advocates for tougher election security laws.
Sneed previously managed the Heritage Foundation’s election fraud database, which found 16 cases of voter fraud in Kansas since 2005.
Opponents included several civil rights groups and civic organizations like the American Civil Liberties Union, the League of Women Voters and the Disability Rights Center. Opponents argued that the bill was uncontroversial when it passed in 2017, and responded to delayed USPS service that has only gotten worse since. Some also said this would throw out ballots and cause confusion among voters.
“Could you tell me your mail delivery time? How long it’s going to take for any letters? You don’t know,” said Davis Hammet, president of the youth voter access and engagement advocate Loud Light. “Weather events can happen that create mail delays that are outside of anyone’s control. So this is just a common sense simple thing. It’s about protecting people from some of the failures of the federal government.”
Ann Mah, former Democratic representative from Topeka and former Kansas State Board of Education member, called the bill “pure voter suppression” of Democrats, who are more likely to vote by mail than Republicans.
The bill was also opposed by the Kansas County Clerks and Election Officials Association, which represents the county clerks and election officials in the state.
“Most properly mailed advance ballots are returned the day after the election but diminishing quantities continue to be received after Election Day,” said Rick Piepho, the elections committee chair of the KCCEOA.
An identical bill, House Bill 2017, is submitted to the House, but so far the House Elections Committee hasn’t scheduled a hearing on it.
Bill would ban ranked-choice voting in Kansas
Sen. Mike Thompson, R-Shawnee, introduced a bill that would ban ranked-choice voting in Kansas, which hasn’t been adopted by any city thus far. Current state law doesn’t have a method for ranked-choice voting outlined in statute, meaning cities couldn’t do it unless lawmakers passed a law allowing it according to the Kansas Revisor of Statutes.
Madeline Malisa, a visiting fellow at Opportunity Solutions Project, argued that ranked-choice voting has been a “nightmare” in Maine, where she lives. She said the tabulation process throws out ballots, is too complicated and increases the chance of less-popular candidates to gain office.
Maine adopted ranked-choice voting in 2018, but several Republican-led states have soured on the idea after Alaska elected its first Democrat in decades in its first ranked-choice election.
Ranked-choice voting advocates argued that the practice could improve the voting process and that several of the proponents’ ideas aren’t backed up by evidence. About 75% of Utah voters who participated in a ranked-choice voting pilot found it easy, though neither ranked-choice or single-vote plurality voting reached majority support.
Resolution would say noncitizens can’t vote in Kansas
A House resolution proposed slightly altering the Kansas Constitution to more explicitly state that noncitizens aren’t allowed to vote, though Kansas’s laws have interpreted the current language as doing just that for over 100 years.
Some municipalities across the country have allowed noncitizens to vote in local elections, though they’re barred from participating in federal elections. No city in Kansas has followed suit.
The bill was supported by two out-of-state advocacy organizations, Americans for Citizen Voting and Opportunity Solutions Project. The ACLU, Loud Light and League of Women Voters opposed it.
Currently, Kansas enfranchises “every citizen of the United States who has attained the age of 18 years and who resides in the voting area in which he or she seeks to vote.” Proponents of the bill argue that it still leaves some wiggle room for municipalities to allow noncitizen voting.
“It does not prohibit a municipality from allowing a non-citizen to vote legally. It is granting the right to vote to citizens of the United States but not reserving the right to vote to only citizens of the United States,” Becky Arps, director of research for Americans for Citizen Voting, wrote to the House Elections Committee.
About 15 states have language explicitly barring noncitizens from voting. Arps said some states with similar language to Kansas’s statutes have cities that allow noncitizen voting. But Arps couldn’t point to any currently existing city in Kansas that allows noncitizen voting.
“I am unaware of any situations where noncitizens are voting,” Arps said. “You are at risk for a municipality that maybe even considers themselves a sanctuary city, I don’t know if you have any of those or that consider themselves that, they would be a municipality that might decide to allow noncitizens to vote.”
The committee hearing turned contentious when Hammet, president of Loud Light, could give people the impression that illegal immigrants are voting in elections and increase incendiary rhetoric surrounding immigration. He referred to the Garden City bombing plot in 2016 as an example of violence targeted at immigrants.
“In their legal defense, they tried to say that they thought it was OK because of the political rhetoric about immigrants. And I know that’s no one’s intention here, to be clear, but I just want you to think about this. Legally and practically, it won’t do anything, but it could create fuel on the fire for some radical groups,” Hammet said.
Lawmakers grilled Hammet, who is frequently an oppositional voice in committee hearings, for invoking political violence and his use of the term xenophobic.
“It’s a little distasteful that we got into this,” said Rep. Ricky James, R-La Cygne.
If it passes, the resolution would require approval by voters in a statewide election.
Bill would require comparison of voter rolls to temporary drivers’ licenses
House Bill 2020 was the least controversial of the election bills that got a committee hearing this week, with even opponent testimony saying it agreed with the concept of the bill but had concerns about how it would work in practice. The bill would require the Division of Motor Vehicles to provide a list of all temporary drivers’ licenses issued to noncitizens to the secretary of state, who would compare the list with voter registration rolls and delete any noncitizens on the rolls.
General counsel for the Kansas Secretary of State’s Office said the process is similar to what the office has been doing on its own.
“Essentially what this bill does is it makes a statutory requirement of something that’s been going on for about 15 years, and we recently worked with Gov. Kelly on this where the Department of Motor Vehicles would give us a list of people that have a temporary driver’s license, and we would compare it to the voter rolls, trying to identify anyone that might be a noncitizen,” Clay Barker said.
Loud Light and the ACLU submitted testimony in opposition to the bill, but Hammet said the system should required investigation and due diligence before removing people from voter rolls.
“The most dangerous thing you could do is assume that you can take two lists and perfectly compare them,” Hammet said.
Kansas
This Chiefs-Bears trade would land Kansas City it’s long-term Travis Kelce replacement
Bullet point summary by AI
- The Chiefs are exploring long-term solutions at tight end beyond Travis Kelce’s expected 2026 retirement.
- One potential move involves targeting a veteran player from a team transitioning to a new starter at the position.
- The deal’s structure hinges on future playoff performance, creating a high-stakes incentive for both franchises.
While the 2026 draft is just in the books, it’s never too early to start thinking about the 2027 season — and if there’s one team that’s already looking that far ahead, it’s the Kansas City Chiefs.
Star tight end Travis Kelce is almost certainly retiring after the 2026 campaign despite an inflated new deal, and looking at the Chiefs’ depth chart, backup Noah Gray is not starting-caliber material. You could argue the team can scout for star talent in next year’s draft, but that would come with significant risk and opportunity cost if a prospect isn’t immediately NFL-ready.
Instead, there’s a potential solution general manager Brett Veach can utilize by acquiring an excess asset from another team.
This Chiefs-Bears trade solves Kansas City’s Travis Kelce problem
The Chicago Bears are clearly moving forward with 2025 first-round pick Colston Loveland as their TE1, in addition to taking blocking specialist Sam Roush out of Stanford in this year’s draft. All of which leaves backup — and previous starter — Cole Kmet on the outside looking in. The 27-year-old still has a lot of high-quality football left to play, and he’d certainly sign off on the opportunity to get starting snaps for a team with a championship window still wide open.
The problem is going to be convincing Chicago to pick up the phone in the first place. Kmet signed a restructured deal in April which disincentivizes the Bears from moving him until next year. A pre-June 1 deal would cost Chicago $4.1 million against the salary cap, while any swap after that date only saves the team $1.4 million.
So, with the present season not really an option, these two teams would need to be negotiating with next year in mind as Kmet is projected to cost the Bears $15.4 million against the cap in 2027. That’s the incentive Chicago needs to move him.
At the moment, Kmet is worth a conditional 2027 fifth-round pick — which may sound cheap, but the devil is in the details. Chicago will certainly dictate that an escalator be attached to the pick: For example, if Kansas City misses the playoffs in 2027, then it remains a fifth-rounder but may be deferred until 2028. If they qualify for the postseason then it could stay in 2027. A championship could push it up a round or two (though that would be a tough sell for the Chiefs).
Kmet has topped 500 receiving yards in three of his six seasons in Chicago, so there’s a good reason for Kansas City to inquire about his availability. The Bears, in turn, used a third-round pick to select Stanford’s Sam Roush – signaling they too are preparing for Kmet’s eventual departure.
Follow
Kansas
Kansas court sides with Stormont Vail in Medicaid payment dispute
Stormont Vail Healthcare is in a legal battle with the state government, alleging the Medicaid program was wrong to refuse payment for the hospitalization of a pregnant patient with complications.
At issue is a disagreement between the Topeka hospital and the Kansas Department of Health and Environment over whether inpatient health care services were medically necessary for the Medicaid patient’s last two weeks of pregnancy.
The Kansas Court of Appeals did not resolve that dispute, but it did side with Stormont Vail in a May 8 decision. The unanimous three-judge panel reversed a decision by Shawnee County District Court Judge Thomas Luedke and vacated an order from KDHE’s State Appeals Committee. The matter now goes back to the appeals committee for reconsideration.
The appellate panel was comprised of Judges Jacy Hurst, Thomas Malone and Stephen Hill, which heard oral arguments on Aug. 5. Hurst wrote the court’s opinion.
The lawsuit stems from a 2018 case of a pregnant patient, who is not named in appellate court documents. She was 28 years old at the time and had an intellectual disability among other complications, including rapid weight loss caused by hyperemesis gravidarum.
The woman was originally admitted at Newman Regional Health in Emporia before she was transferred to Stormont Vail. Part of the hospitalization during her third trimester was covered.
But the final two weeks were not because Sunflower Health Plan, one of the managed care organizations in the state’s privatized Medicaid program known as KanCare, refused to reimburse for the patient’s continued hospitalization through the day the child was born via cesarean section.
“We are here because the Kansas Medicaid program has wrongfully refused to pay for some of an inpatient hospitalization while a Medicaid beneficiary was at Stormont Vail,” said Amanda Wilwert, an attorney for the hospital, during oral arguments. “Stormont believes the inpatient care was medically necessary as defined by the Kansas Medicaid regulations.”
Court records and oral arguments show the state expected Stormont Vail to look into having a home health agency care for the patient in Emporia instead of continued hospitalization — even though home health generally does not take care of pregnant patients and her doctors believed the expectant mother was not stable enough to discharge.
“The way it’s supposed to work,” said Darren Sharp, an attorney representing KDHE, “is the managed care organization, in this case Sunflower Health, on behalf of KDHE reviews the medical records, asks about the appropriate level of care and whether there’s any other interventions that would be more cost effective or appropriate depending on the level of or depending on the patient’s records and the patient’s status.”
Sharp argued medical records showed the patients was getting better because of total parenteral nutrition, or TPN.
“This is when a tube, a PICC, is inserted and your minerals and your electrolytes and all of your nutrition is then intravenously provided,” Sharp said.
He said the treatment “was eliminating her vomiting, her diarrhea, she had no fever, her glucose levels were stabilized.”
In their ruling, the judges indicated the KDHE appeals committee primarily cared about the cost saving of using home health versus hospitalization while disregarding the treating physician for insufficient reasons and ignoring evidence on potential benefits or harms to the patient.
But the judges declined to resolve the dispute. Rather, unless the decision is appealed to the Kansas Supreme Court, the matter goes back to the KDHE administrative process.
There, the agency’s appeals committee must reconsider the case consistent with the Court of Appeal’s ruling. The published decision sets new precedent interpreting state laws and regulations on the Medicaid program.
“While this court provides no opinion on whether the disputed inpatient healthcare services met the definition of medical necessity,” Hurst wrote, “the record shows that some of the (appeals committee’s) factual findings were not supported by the record as a whole and that the (appeals committee) inaccurately applied the law when it failed to consider (the patient’s) individual characteristics and assess the harms and benefits of the healthcare intervention.
“In making a medical necessity determination, the reviewing agency must make an individualized determination based on the record as a whole.”
Jason Alatidd is a Statehouse reporter for The Topeka Capital-Journal. He can be reached by email at jalatidd@usatodayco.com. Follow him on X @Jason_Alatidd.
Kansas
Kansas Lottery Pick 3, 2 By 2 winning numbers for May 7, 2026
The Kansas Lottery offers several draw games for those aiming to win big.
Here’s a look at May 7, 2026, results for each game:
Winning Pick 3 numbers from May 7 drawing
Midday: 6-2-2
Evening: 0-5-9
Check Pick 3 payouts and previous drawings here.
Winning 2 By 2 numbers from May 7 drawing
Red Balls: 07-15, White Balls: 02-16
Check 2 By 2 payouts and previous drawings here.
Winning Millionaire for Life numbers from May 7 drawing
05-08-21-44-48, Bonus: 01
Check Millionaire for Life payouts and previous drawings here.
Feeling lucky? Explore the latest lottery news & results
Are you a winner? Here’s how to claim your lottery prize
All Kansas Lottery retailers will redeem prizes up to $599. For prizes over $599, winners can submit winning tickets through the mail or in person at select Kansas Lottery offices.
By mail, send a winner claim form and your signed lottery ticket to:
Kansas Lottery Headquarters
128 N Kansas Avenue
Topeka, KS 66603-3638
(785) 296-5700
To submit in person, sign the back of your ticket, fill out a claim form, and deliver the form along with your signed lottery ticket to Kansas Lottery headquarters. 128 N Kansas Avenue, Topeka, KS 66603-3638, (785) 296-5700. Hours: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday. This office can cash prizes of any amount.
Check previous winning numbers and payouts at Kansas Lottery.
When are the Kansas Lottery drawings held?
- Powerball: 9:59 p.m. CT Monday, Wednesday and Saturday.
- Mega Millions: 10 p.m. CT Tuesday and Friday.
- Pick 3 Midday/Evening: 1:10 p.m. and 9:10 p.m. CT daily.
- 2 By 2: 9:30 p.m. CT daily.
- Lucky for Life: 9:38 p.m. CT daily.
- Lotto America: 9:15 p.m. CT Monday, Wednesday and Saturday.
- Super Kansas Cash: 9:10 p.m. CT Monday, Wednesday and Saturday.
- Millionaire for Life: 10:15 p.m. CT daily.
This results page was generated automatically using information from TinBu and a template written and reviewed by a Kansas editor. You can send feedback using this form.
-
Science3 minutes agoPentagon Releases Files on U.F.O.s
-
Health9 minutes agoGuava for Weight Loss Is a Real Thing—Here’s the Juicy Truth
-
Culture21 minutes agoWhy Is Everyone Obsessed With Bogs?
-
Lifestyle27 minutes agoHow ‘Mile End Kicks’ Nailed the Indie Sleaze Look
-
Technology39 minutes agoThese great digital gifts will arrive just in time for Mother’s Day
-
World45 minutes agoNorth Korea updates constitution to require automatic nuclear strike if Kim Jong Un is assassinated: report
-
Politics51 minutes agoHarris accuses Trump allies of trying to ‘rig’ 2026 midterms after Virginia court tosses redistricting measure
-
Health57 minutes agoSingle workout cuts cravings, offering new hope for smokers trying to quit