Conference committee discusses inserting SB 258 into bill, restoring 2056 language to close ballot-loophole

A conference committee on elections discussed inserting Senate Bill 258 — a measure addressing impersonation of election officials — into the contents of item 02/1956 while also restoring 02/1956’s original language to close a separate ballot-access loophole.

Committee member 1 said, “I believe that y'all substituted in Senate Bill 2 58, which was about impersonating an election officer,” and described 02/1956 as “about fixing a loophole in the law” that allowed some candidates nominated by third parties to remain on the general-election ballot even after losing a major-party primary.

The nut of the committee’s discussion was twofold: (1) preserve the impersonation provisions of SB 258, which members said were tightened to require criminal intent, and (2) reinsert 02/1956’s original text to prevent a candidate from effectively getting “two bites at the apple” by running simultaneously as a third-party nominee and running in a major-party primary.

Committee member 2 described SB 258 as “the secretary, the state's bill regarding impersonation of an election official,” and said the substitute tightened prior language to require intent to impersonate. That tightening, members said, was intended to conform the statute to a state high-court decision in litigation involving the League of Women Voters. Committee member 2 summarized the statutory change as narrowing the offense to conduct “with the intent to cause the person to believe that they are somebody they're not.”

Several members raised concerns about vagueness and whether the revised language had been reviewed by the Kansas Supreme Court. One member said the language remained “extremely vague” and recommended removing SB 258 from the conference report and referring it back for further committee work. Another member argued keeping the language was important ahead of upcoming elections, and said fraud committed with intent is not protected speech.

No formal vote on the substitute language occurred in the transcript. Members discussed procedural next steps, including running an “agree to disagree” and signing the conference committee report before taking the matter to the floor. One member noted that signatures would be required before the report could be taken to the floor and that completing that could not be guaranteed the same day.

Ending with procedure, the committee chair concluded the conference meeting after members agreed on next steps for preparing the report and possible alternative conference reports if agreement on SB 258 could not be reached.