Kansas Senate Bill SB5

Kansas 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/14/25
• Refer: 1/15/25
• Report Pass: 1/29/25
• Engrossed: 2/13/25
• Refer: 2/13/25
• Report Pass: 3/7/25
• Enrolled: 3/21/25
• Vetoed: 4/10/25
• Override: 4/10/25

Caption

Prohibiting the use of funds provided by the United States government for the conduct of elections and election-related activities unless approved by the legislature.

Summary

SB 5 creates and amends Kansas law governing how election officials and other governmental agencies may finance election administration and election-related activities. The bill is titled the “transparency in revenues underwriting elections act” and generally prohibits election officials from knowingly accepting or spending money from private persons, and prohibits governmental agencies from knowingly accepting or spending federal government funds for election administration or related activities unless the spending is authorized by an appropriation act or otherwise allowed by state law. The bill specifically includes voter registration and voter assistance within the covered election-related activities, but excludes election security funding from the federal-funds restriction. The measure also preserves two narrow exceptions: money collected from fees or assessed costs required by law, and campaign contributions received for a candidate for county clerk. A violation is classified as a severity level 9, nonperson felony. The bill amends K.S.A. 25-2436, repeals the existing version of that statute, and takes effect upon publication in the Kansas Register.

Impact

SB 5 would significantly tighten state control over election funding by limiting the use of outside money in election administration, especially federal grants or assistance, unless the legislature has specifically approved the expenditure or state law otherwise permits it. It would affect county election officers, the chief state election official, and other governmental agencies involved in elections, while leaving election security funding outside the new restriction. The bill also creates a criminal penalty for violations, increasing the legal consequences for election officials and agencies that accept or spend prohibited funds.

Sentiment

The voting history suggests the bill had substantial support but also meaningful opposition. It passed the Senate and House on emergency final action with clear majorities, then later passed both chambers again on veto override votes, indicating that supporters were strong enough to sustain the measure despite executive opposition. The repeated successful votes suggest the bill was viewed favorably by a majority of legislators, even though a sizable minority consistently opposed it.

Contention

The main point of contention appears to be whether Kansas should restrict the use of federal money in election administration and related activities. Supporters likely viewed the bill as promoting state legislative oversight and transparency in election funding, while opponents likely objected to limiting access to federal resources that support voter registration, voter assistance, and election operations. The felony penalty and the breadth of the prohibition on “direct or indirect” acceptance or expenditure of funds likely also raised concern among critics, especially because the bill reaches not only election officials but broader governmental agencies.