Kansas House Bill HB2065

Kansas 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/22/25
• Refer: 1/23/25
• Report Pass: 2/11/25
• Engrossed: 1/22/26
• Refer: 1/23/26

Caption

Providing for the appointment of delegates to a convention under article V of the constitution of the United States and prescribing the duties and responsibilities of such delegates.

Summary

HB 2065 establishes a Kansas framework for selecting, instructing, and supervising delegates if an Article V convention of the U.S. Constitution is ever called. The bill defines key terms such as “delegate,” “alternate delegate,” “article V application,” and “unauthorized amendment,” and it sets out how Kansas’s delegation would be appointed from legislative leadership and party caucuses. It also requires delegates and alternates to be current members of the Kansas Legislature at the time of appointment. The bill gives the legislature continuing control over the delegation. Delegates must reaffirm their oaths, follow legislative instructions, and operate under a structure in which only the chairperson or vice chairperson may cast the delegation’s vote, subject to majority approval of the delegation. The bill also authorizes legislative staff and the revisor of statutes to attend the convention, communicate with legislative leaders, and provide legal and reporting support. It further provides for reimbursement of expenses and mileage under existing state law.

Impact

HB 2065 would add a new statutory scheme governing Kansas participation in any future Article V convention, including appointment procedures, recall authority, reporting requirements, and criminal penalties. It would affect the powers and duties of legislative officers, the secretary of state, the legislative coordinating council, and convention delegates, while creating a new severity level 6 nonperson felony for a delegate who votes for an unauthorized amendment. The bill also ties delegate compensation to existing expense statutes and would likely be codified as a new chapter of rules for convention participation rather than changing substantive policy outside that context.

Sentiment

The available voting history suggests the bill had majority support in the House, passing 79-43 on final action. That margin indicates a clear but not overwhelming level of support. No committee transcript is available, so there is no recorded discussion to show detailed arguments for or against the measure, but the vote pattern suggests the bill was generally favored by supporters of tighter legislative control over any future convention process and opposed by members concerned about the scope or necessity of the framework.

Contention

The main point of contention is likely the bill’s strict control over delegates and its criminal penalty for voting outside the authorized scope. Supporters appear to favor strong legislative oversight, recall authority, and a mechanism to prevent delegates from exceeding their mandate, while opponents may view the felony penalty and voiding of unauthorized votes as overly punitive or as an attempt to constrain the convention process. Another likely area of disagreement is the broader question of whether Kansas should establish detailed procedures at all for a hypothetical Article V convention, given differing views on the risks and constitutionality of such conventions.