By ALEXANDRA MIDDLEWOOD
Insight Kansas
In the 2025 state legislative session, the legislature overrode 14 of Governor Kelly’s 18 vetoes, the most overrides during her time as governor. What should be a rare, constitutionally serious step has become routine — an unmistakable sign that one branch of Kansas’s government now wields outsized power.
With a legislative supermajority firmly in place, the system of checks and balances meant to protect Kansans from government overreach is in jeopardy.
Kansas’s Constitution, like the federal one, is built on the idea of separation of powers. The legislature writes laws, the governor can sign or veto them, and the courts interpret them. Each branch was designed to serve as a check on the others, ensuring no single part of government could dominate the rest.
But when one party secures a supermajority in the legislature — enough seats to override gubernatorial vetoes and unilaterally propose constitutional amendments — this balance is fundamentally disrupted.
A supermajority removes the need for negotiation and compromise.
With two-thirds control, lawmakers can push through legislation without concern for the executive branch or the political minority. In recent years, the Kansas legislature has used this power to bypass Governor Kelly on high-stakes issues ranging from education policy to reproductive healthcare.
Even when the governor exercised her constitutional role to veto, lawmakers reversed her decisions in rapid succession. Often doing so with limited debate and minimal public input.
This isn't just a clash of partisan agendas. It’s an erosion of checks and balances. Supermajorities often lead to extreme policy swings, discourage compromise, and undermine democratic responsiveness.
The normal push-and-pull that leads to moderate, widely supported policies has been replaced with a one-sided rush to enact partisan priorities. In other words, supermajorities further partisan polarization by removing the incentives to listen, negotiate, and build consensus across ideological lines.
Unchecked legislative power also puts judicial independence at risk. Lawmakers in Kansas have proposed changes to how judges are selected and sought to restrict the courts’ ability to block or review legislation. With a supermajority, those proposals don’t face the usual constitutional friction — they can move quickly, and potentially permanently, reshaping how justice is administered in the state.
Political science tells us this is not unique to Kansas. States with long-standing supermajorities — of either party — often see declining voter trust, increased polarization, and stagnant civic engagement. When people believe outcomes are predetermined by one party’s dominance, they disengage from the political system, which only deepens the imbalance.
Kansas voters should take this seriously. Checks and balances aren’t about left versus right — they’re about making sure no one has too much power for too long.
Checks and balances exist to protect everyone from government overreach regardless of party affiliation. That’s how we keep our government grounded, accountable, and focused on solving real problems, not scoring political points.
Defending that balance doesn’t require radical reform. It just means standing up for fair-minded policies — like fair redistricting — protecting judicial independence, supporting candidates who value consensus over confrontation, and showing up at the ballot box in every single election.
Most Kansans don’t want government by extremes. They want pragmatism. They want thoughtful debate. They want leaders who listen.
The Kansas Constitution wasn’t written to let any one party push through its full agenda unchecked. It was written with the understanding that no group, however popular, should govern without limits and to make sure every voice has a seat at the table.
Those are principles worth protecting.
Alexandra Middlewood, PhD is an associate professor and chair of the Political Science Department at Wichita State University.