Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
What I believe is common sense, I'm learning is not that common. The public has been left out of so many conversations on community issues, and as a publicly elected official, I want to change this. I want to invite my community in a new space, where you can listen in behind the scenes to the discussions that lead to the decisions that are impacting our lives. In a podcast I named Common Sense, I'm inviting the whole world to see these conversations happening in real time! Subscribe to listen in on these conversations!
What I believe is common sense. I'm learning it's not that common.
Katy Tyndale is an accomplished woman. A law degree, a community
advocate, and one of the founding members of a local grassroots organization
called Leading Kansas. You'll often see members of Leading
Kansas at public events. See them at political rallies and at
marches like the recent no Kings protest, where they contend
that citizens need to rise up and defend constitutional
freedoms. I love grassroots movements, as you can
imagine. I have a lot of questions, and I'm genuinely curious
about what motivates this group into action. So I invited
Katy to discuss these things and a lot more. I hope you
enjoy my conversation with Leading Kansas co-founder Katy
Tyndell. Katy Tyndell, thank you for coming in today.
We have worked together in a couple capacities, but I want to tell a story
real quick as to why I'm really excited that you're here. Okay.
We had a town hall, a joint town hall with Mayor Lily Wu,
USD 259 Board President Diane Albert, and myself. We had a town hall in June,
and it was hosted at Wichita City hall at the council chambers.
And I come walking in this room, and there's 100 or so people in there,
and I promise you, 50 or so people are sitting there and they all have
on the same T-shirt. And I look, I'm like, what is going on here?
And this T-shirt said Leading Kansas. And I thought I'd heard
some rumblings about this organization, but there
was like 50 people in this room, all had the same T-shirts on. All
were engaged in the conversation. I was like, what? What is this
organization? What do they do and what are they about? And that led me to
you. So I'm delighted you're here today. I want to have a really
good faith conversation and learn more. I really seek to
understand, you know, who's doing what in the community, what are the
organizations that are involved. And I love grassroots movements. So,
Katy, thanks for being here today. I really appreciate it. Absolutely. Thank you
for having me. And I think that's one thing that we have in common, seeking
to understand and listening. So I'm excited to. To be here today
to hear what you have to say, too. But I do remember after that town
hall, I offered to get you a T-shirt, and you still haven't taken me
up on that offer, so. Well, we'll see. We'll see how this
conversation goes. We'll see. Yes, we'll see. Okay. Yeah. I'm kidding. I appreciate
all grassroots movements, really, but I really do want to understand Some things. But before
we get to that, what I'm really curious about is you're
a very accomplished lawyer. If I remember our conversation correctly,
you did your bachelor's at Stanford and then you did a law degree at
Maryland. You're a Turpin Cardinal, but. Yes. Is that what it
is? No, I'm talking about Stanford. I still. You identify
with Stanford and
you're practicing law today. You're involved in your kids' schools, and yet here
you are, one of the co-founders of this movement, in this grassroots movement.
What has drawn you to this movement? Why are you involved the way you are?
That's a lot of questions, I think. So first
of all, I know you
mentioned I'm an accomplished lawyer. I actually do not practice. I keep my
licenses current in case I need to go back to law. And I have done
that since I graduated from law School in 2009. But
some of what has allowed me to get involved with Leading Kansas is the flexibility
of my job because I am in the family business and
help to manage a few affiliated companies on the.
On the personal side. But with Leading Kansas, I think
I didn't. To me, it wasn't really a question. There is
an urgency, I think, in our country,
sort of a need right now for something different.
And so I got involved in Leading Kansas. I mean, I'm still trying to
figure out where the last seven months of my life have gone, but
Leading Kansas sort of hit the ground running and I found
myself a part of it. And I don't regret any of that.
But, you know, I'm curious to know specifically. I mean, do you want me to
tell you a little bit about how. We got started or how did this thing
start? What is it you do? I've gone to your website multiple times. We've
talked multiple times. And I've talked to other people that are involved in the organization.
So I think I understand the core tenants, but. But why did
it start? How many people are involved? You know, these are kind of the questions,
I think, to formulate, you know, what is Leading Kansas. And it's really pretty
fluid. I mean, we have. So right now, just in terms
of. Of responding to your question about how many people are involved. I think right
now our email list is up to about
1700 folks. I think our Facebook group is
upwards of 2000 and it's growing every day. But really we have a
core group of, I'd say probably 100 to 150 volunteers
that show up, that do the work, that make it a
success. And so to back up to March, because like I said, that's when
we got our start. There were a lot of people in the
community that were upset about what was
unfolding at the national level. And I think there were three things in
particular that people had concerns and questions about. One was the
dismantling of USAID and what that meant for Kansas
farmers. And the. And the dismantling of the Food for Peace program,
too, was the Department of Government Efficiency. And we had sort of
this extra. Yeah, right. This extra
governmental. It wasn't an agency, extra governmental
organization. I don't know what you want to call it. Entity. Right. That
was taking a chainsaw to our federal
government. Right. And then I think right around the time that
Leading Kansas formed, we had just seen sort
of the devolution of relations between
Volodymyr Zelensky and President Trump in the Oval Office. And so, you
know, we were kind of at this moment where it was like, is the United
States going to stand by our allies on the global scale in this new
administration? And so there were folks in Wichita that were
concerned about those things. And a lot of us, myself
included, had been meeting with our
federal representative's office, you know, Senator
Moran's office, Senator Marshall's office, Representative Estes' office,
meeting with their staffers, trying to get answers. And
at that point in time, again, there was this constituency of
people that couldn't get answers, that felt like nobody was there to
answer their calls. And so some of us met back on
March 5th. I did not call that meeting. I got invited to that
meeting. One of my co-founders, Jess Freese, organized that
meeting and we all met at Groover Labs. And we were like, what are we
going to do? Right. Our representatives are stonewalling us.
We can't get answers. We felt like a lot of what was going on was
executive overreach at best. And so
we had a conversation about how we were going to hold our
elected officials accountable to their constituents. And
really, at that first meeting, there were so many voices in the room. And one
of them was my colleague, Noah Taylor. And
he is a veteran. Yes. And he's in marketing now,
very strategy oriented individual. And
I picked up on a couple of his remarks from that conversation. And
as we left the room, there were a group of people that were going to
pick the name of this organization. What were we going to be called?
There was another group of people that was going to design the logo. So this
really was, I mean, grassroots from the start. Right. And after we left
that room, Noah and I had a conversation about
Whether or not this organization was going to be nonpartisan,
and there were some people in the room that felt very strongly that it should
not be nonpartisan. So we all left that first meeting and
went our separate ways. Well, in the interim, I talked to the
folks that had called that original meeting, as well as Noah, and we sort of
developed a proposal to pitch to the group at the next meeting.
Mind you, we have met every week in person
since that March meeting. So when I say this took on a life of its
own, I mean, it really took on a life of its own. But I think
that that's one thing that sets us apart too, is that in person,
community building those relationships. So the
next week we came together again, and this time we had probably
doubled in size. I bet there were 75 to 80 people in that room. And
Noah and I pitched our proposal to the group, and that
proposal stuck. They all went for it. At that point. We had,
I think the naming committee picked the name Leading Kansas within like hours
of that first meeting. And I'll be honest, at first I didn't like it.
I wasn't so sure. Leading Kansas, what is this? And of course, it was a
playoff of Bleeding Kansas. Right. Another inflection point in our history.
And so. But now it makes perfect sense because I think what they were
thinking is if our leaders aren't going to lead, we are
going to fill that void. Right? The people are going to lead Kansas in the
right direction. And so that second meeting, again, we
pitched this idea. The mission statement was very basic, and that was
holding our leaders accountable to the people and not their party or special interest.
And we organized under four overarching tenants
that we felt a lot of people could get behind, but
they're not issue specific. Right. So there are these broader
tenets that we should all stand up for if we believe in democracy.
And those were. And those are defending
freedoms, protecting our institutions, securing Kansas. So we had that
Kansas specific focus and then championing the truth. And
so, you know, from there we were registering with the state,
we were filing our application. This is all within seven months?
Oh, this was all within the first few weeks. I mean,
we had our paperwork filed with the state and the feds within those first
few weeks. And thankfully, we have since received our
tax exempt status from the Feds. We're a
501c4 civic engagement organization. And that's what we're all
about is getting folks involved. Well, that's a lot. It's just a lot in
a short time. And what's interesting about this, and I
want to talk about some of those issues in particular. And I love to you
and I have already had conversations over coffee and talking through issues and worldviews
and perspectives, and I appreciate and advocate civil discourse
because I really do want to learn and understand. Help me understand this.
Yes. Is Leading Kansas really a nonpartisan group?
Is it really? I understand the tenants, and I agree with your tenants of these
things are things that the general populace could get around. Yes, but is
it really? Do you have any Republicans in the group? Is this something that you
really believe is a nonpartisan? And I know absolutely, because I'm
nonpartisan at this point. I. I mean, I think you've told me that before. Yeah,
I believe that I. And. And we can talk about go down that road, too.
But I think right now, I think in our country,
both parties, and this is no offense to you or any, you
know, because I think there are a lot of good civil servants on both sides
of the aisle standing up and trying to do what's right. But I think we
are in a moment where both parties have become so toxic
and the tribalism is so great that when you walk
into a room, if you do not check your party at the door,
there are immediately all sorts of
prejudgments made about where you stand on issues, who you are, what
you believe in, whether or not you're gonna be on my side of things.
And so when we were conceiving of leading Kansas in the way
that it unfolded, we wanted to stop all that. And I
think that's one wonderful thing about our organization is
people check their party at the door. So to answer your question, are we really
nonpartisan? I
honestly do not ask my members what side of the aisle
they're on. Now, I have had people offer it up, sure, that
I am a Republican and I cannot stand what's going on right now,
or I'm a Democrat and I want to advocate for xyz. And sometimes
it's to the point where we have to check people and say, whoa, we're not
an issue specific organization. We're here to advocate these
overarching tenants and to provide Kansans a platform
to have conversations about all these issues,
but we are not prepared to take a stance on those issues. And I think,
you know, my. This is funny because my aunt, who I love very
dearly, she's my neighbor, she lives three doors down and. And she keeps me grounded.
But she even says that are, you know, are we. You know,
how can. In this moment, how can an
organization stay nonpartisan? And I said to her, and I'll say
it to you, it's not that what we're
advocating for is partisan. It's that in our current environment,
I think there only is one national party that
is maybe protecting some of the things that we're talking about
or standing up for some of the things. So what we're advocating looks partisan
because you have that divide at the national level. But
I don't think these are fundamentally partisan things. I mean, I really don't.
Well, let's talk through some of those founding tenants. And I appreciate your perspective and
appreciate your opinions. Defending
freedom. Yes. So obviously many of this in these
positions and these tenants are in response to what we're seeing primarily at the federal
level right now, defending freedom. Extrapolate that for me. Help me understand
how freedom, it needs to be defended in this point in time. So
I think really what we're talking about is individual rights right now. So
you see a crackdown
on things like freedom of expression, freedom of speech.
I mean, we. That's a big one right now. Right. Due process.
So when we talk defending freedoms, we're talking about those
freedoms as declared by our
Constitution. Right. And I don't think that there's. I mean, I
don't think there's much more to it. Like I said, we're not advocating
for specific policies on those fronts. It's really just, let's
uphold the Constitution. I want to. Let me fight devil's advocate for a bit and
give a perspective on the right. Yes. And you're trained in these things, so
this should be fun for me. I want to give you a perspective on
the right. Yes, yes. Freedom needs to be defended.
My pushback would be that there's a one, only one party that's
standing for freedoms. I'll remind people that
tyranny has existed and it does exist,
and that I lived through tyranny too, through the previous administration.
You remember, it was the previous administration that shut down schools, shut down
my church, shut down my business that told many friends of mine that if
they didn't get a shot, they could lose their job and defended employers for
terminating people for doing so. That to me felt
tyrannical. That felt like government overreach. When
I was told that I can't open my church. I was pastoring at that point
in time, that my small business with my 85
employees that we weren't allowed to open, that felt
tyrannical. So give me the comp today
of how tyranny is, is existing
today and the freedoms are under attack that need to be defended. This
is me playing devil's advocate, trying to extrapolate these things like what
freedoms are under attack, that we have to be protected. It was also,
you remember, as we learned past, and I'm not. This isn't just to throw
shade on the Biden administration, but there was a political administration,
a presidential administration that was pressuring Facebook and social media to
limit conservative voices and to censor conservative voices.
So I think many people on the right, when we hear
we need to defend freedom, the questions then come to, well, what freedoms are under
attack that need to be defended? And leading Kansas or
Katy would say these freedoms are what?
I think that's a good question. I think that's a fair question. I think,
as I see it right now, we are on a
very slippery slope. And I will give you an example.
So President Trump just issued an executive
order on antifa. Right. And he has
claimed that. I mean, and I'll be honest with you,
whether or not leading Kansas falls into an antifa group, I have no
idea. Right. But it is broad enough to
encompass anybody that challenges
elements of a capitalist society right? Now, that's scary.
That's not freedom of speech. Right. So I think freedom of speech is
first and foremost in this conversation when you talk about
what freedoms need to be defended. Right.
I also think that we
are in a situation now where we have the National Guard in
several cities across the country. And what bothers me about this
is it is so openly partisan. Right. He,
he is continuing to
divide us. Right. And, and, and openly go after, quote, unquote,
Democratic cities. Right. That would be a problem if he
was doing it to Republican cities. Right. This isn't, this is, in
America, we're all Americans first. And again, that's why I think I would pull
back on that. You know, the attempt to
push. The partisan
piece of it. I just, I don't know if that answers your question. It does.
And let me tell you, and I think any honest conservative that lives within the
first principles of conservatism needs to make sure that they are holding
all administrations accountable. And people know
kind of where my head's at on many of these issues. And I do have
one of the first principles of conservatism. I'm a movement conservative.
I'm an old school conservative. And we believe very
strongly in states' rights. Very strongly in states' rights.
I, I can say on two sides of the same coin, on one
side of the coin, what is happening in some areas across the
country and the violence is scary for citizens,
and it is a problem. On the other side of the coin is
if we allow the federal government to come
into individual cities at will,
in some regards, uninvited, in some regards, that. That's a precedent. That is a
scary precedent. And I'm saying that as a conservative. Sure. And that. And I'm trying
to have a good faith discussion as to. Okay. I want to make sure that
these. That these principles are guarded and safeguarded.
So I understand. But what I would like to say
is, and what I. My position has always been is I don't care who's
in the White House. I don't care. I have a disdain for the federal government,
and you and I have talked about this. I have a disdain for the federal
government on all levels, whether it's Trump or Biden or Obama or
Teddy Roosevelt or Abe Lincoln. I'm
a movement conservative that has a disdain for the federal government. And I believe that
we have been on a downward trajectory in the federal government since the New Deal,
and they've grown out of their bandwidth and steered from its core
principles so drastically since the
New Deal. So. But that is a worldview that I live and operate under.
So I. Yes to defending freedom, but I would just say that I don't
think it's one party that's defending freedom more than the other. I think there's a
lot to blame across the aisle for the last 60
years. So your thoughts?
There's a lot. So. So I want to back up a little bit because I
don't think I addressed your point about sort of the tyranny of the Biden
administration or as you called it during COVID And I do want to
talk about that for a. I think it's important to recognize that
we do live in a society. Right? And there are certain
societal goals that trump individual goals
or individual rights at some points in time. And that's undeniable.
Right. So I think in that situation, public health
called for some of those measures. And I'm not gonna say it wasn't overboard. It
wasn't overreach. Right. But I think people, the experts did what
they did at that point in time, and our elected officials. Right.
On every level of government. So. And I will say to be fair, and that's
representation. That's representative. To be fair is, I think, now playing
armchair quarterback. And looking back, we have a different perspective. But the compass that
holds all things accountable is the Constitution, primarily the First Amendment.
Freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of assembly, freedom of Expression. And
those things were absolutely limited.
National crisis or not. They were absolutely limited. Because the same
parallel, it's a dangerous parallel for people on the left that would say
that. Well, to extrapolate that to what's happening today. Because
what's happening today is we could make a case that illegal immigration
has led to a national crisis. So both sides of the aisle can make
those cases in an effort to peel back First Amendment rights.
But I would argue it is very dangerous. And I would argue that if there
is an immigration problem, I wouldn't go so far to say illegal immigration. Cause I
don't think any individual human is illegal. But
if there's a problem with immigration, you know who should fix it?
I'll give you one guess. The legislature. Right. That's representative
government. It's not the president. And I think that
is fundamentally what bothers me the most in the
landscape right now is that our elected representatives
on the national level and the federal level have completely capitulated their
power to the executive. And going back to the Constitution,
there's a reason why the executive, why the legislative branch is in Article
one and not Article two. Right. That was the primary
source of our law. I will agree with you. I don't think this is a
Trump phenomenon. I would tell you that the
neutering of the legislative branch and the overreach of
executive authorities and proclamations and declarations and all
these executive orders is indirect file. I would agree with you
wholeheartedly that this is not the system that the, certainly that the
founders originated, but it's certainly not the system that is best for America. I
would certainly agree with that. But. But I would just contend. And here I
am defending Donald Trump in this regard. I
would. That this isn't just a Trump phenomenon. That this is. This is something
that's been a trajectory in recent modern history for our lives.
In particular, I think the rise of the executive order has. I mean, that's
definitely something we've seen over the last two decades. And again, I think it's. It's
a product of the fact that our representatives are not governing.
Right. They are passing the buck in so many ways. I'll give you an example.
So I was doing some research on this continuing resolution that they're trying. Yeah.
The clean cr. It has been almost 30
years since the legislature since Congress
has passed all 12 appropriations bills by the October
1st deadline in the manner that it was envisioned. Right.
1997, they passed omnibus bills, those
ginormous bills. Right. Or minibus. I don't even know If
I'm saying that right, minibus bills or continuing resolutions.
But when it comes to the hard work of going through the
budgets of each of those 12 appropriations bills and
or agencies and really parsing out what needs to stay,
what needs to go, that's governing. Right. And it's their job.
So why are they running if they're not going to do their job? You and
I have a lot of agreement in that regard. Regard. And here we are with
a $38 trillion debt. I think we've reached an
inflection point that I don't know is recoverable. Frankly, I really don't know.
Let's talk about the we have people on the left
and people on the right that have grown so frustrated with
the system, with the governing system in the state of
affairs in America today that it has led to
disruption and led to the way they vote, the way they act and their activism.
I think leading Kansas is an example of that. And I'm not going
to say just on the left, but I think there's a lot of left leaning
anti-Trump people that have moved into that grassroots organization and
they're frustrated. I would back us up. Are you saying have moved into
grassroots organization in general or in general? And I would say even Leading
Kansas, they're frustrated with what's happening. And I think most people get to have grassroots
activism because they're frustrated. I would walk
us backwards a few years as to why people that were not
conservatives, they're not pro-life, they're not traditionalists,
also supported Donald Trump. And it's something I talk about frequently, the
rise of the MAGA movement. Who I would say is certainly a
right leaning movement, but I don't think it's
based purely in conservative principles. And many conservatives like
myself have always had a little bit of tension with some of these things.
So I have my ideas. Give me your
perspective as to what motivates the MAGA movement. This is
not a. We have not talked about these things you and I before, but
I But what I want to draw the comparison to is that there's a lot
of people in this country that are frustrated, particularly young people,
people that are even younger than us and that are very frustrated. It's so hard
to get into a home nowadays. Rents and affordable housing are through
the roof. Everything seems to be broken for them. And
inflation and what it's done to the family unit and the household expenses, everything
is just hard. They're on the backside of COVID and what took place with COVID
in regards to the shutdown of their schools and their fellowships and their
relationships. And it's just so hard for so many people. So many people
are frustrated, and I contend, right or wrong,
they wanted someone to bust the system and take it to the studs.
Is that what many people on the MAGA right see Donald Trump doing,
they wanted that. They wanted him to destroy and break a
system that wasn't working for America and working for them today.
I'm not saying right or wrong. I'm just saying I talk to these people
and their frustration has bubbled to the extent that they looked
and said, this is the one guy who really doesn't give a damn, and he'll
do it. He'll take the man on, he'll take the system on. But it both
comes from both sides of a lot of frustration. Do you agree? Disagree.
What do you think? I agree it's frustration. I think
it's. Yes, frustration, people being
angry. I personally think that social media has
tons to do with it. Our country is so divided right
now because it's so easy to get online and
launch divisive rhetoric, insults at people that
you and I would never say to each other's faces right? And so that's one
thing that leading Kansas really does help to build is those
human connections that I think people are so hungry for in this moment.
And we can talk more about that later. But so I think that that
division online is a big part of it. And then I think
people, you mentioned that they
wanted somebody to come in and break it. And I've heard my friends say that,
too. Right. Well, you know, at least he's going to shake it up in there.
Right? So we kind of saw that movie and how it panned out the
first time around. But, you know, setting that aside, I
think it's seemed good. It seems good until
it affects you. And I'll give you an example. One of
my best friends, huge Trump supporter. I grew up with her.
She also has worked for the U.S. Forest Service for 20
years. So she voted for him once. She voted for
him twice this time around. By about February,
she was like, what the hell did I just sign on to? Right?
Because she had gotten the emails from Doge. It was like, who is
Elon Musk to tell me how to do my job? I'm losing all sorts of
good people that I worked with that can't stick it out. I don't know what
I'm gonna do. All of a sudden I'm having to scrape through contracts
for DEI language rather than do my job. I mean, just
crazy stuff, right? And then it was like a switch went off, and she was
like, well, maybe I thought that wrecking ball was good until
it meant that I could no longer work from home and have the flexibility
that I had to take care of my family. Now I have to go back
into an office. Oh, wait a minute. The Forest Service doesn't even have an office
here because I'm in rural Oregon, and now I have to figure out where I'm
going to go back into the office and commute to every day. So, like, so
I say that as an example, to say, I think that a lot of people
bought what he sold, that he was going to break it, that he was going
to drain the swamp. But I think what is scary to me in this moment,
whether you're a Trump supporter or not, is the fact that
now government really is broken. Right? So, like, all these things that he maybe
talked about but weren't really true, like, yes, we can improve efficiencies.
Yes, some of, some of our agencies have gotten bloated. There's room for
improvement. Let's take a scalpel instead of a chainsaw.
But now they really aren't going to function how they're supposed to.
And I mean, I mean, it's anybody's guess. I hope that they still do. But,
you know, there could be cracks in the system that are going to
further hurt these people, and then I think we'll really find out whether or
not they were okay with burning it all down. Right. I do
think, though, that this provides a wonderful opportunity to build something better. I will
say that because I do think that the bureaucracy was huge. It had gotten
too big. But again, my main problem from
a constitutional standpoint is it wasn't his job to fix it.
It's our legislator's job to fix it and do your damn job. I
admire the purists of the branches of government,
the approach that you take. And you and I remember the first time you and
I had coffee and had this discussion, and I think we were talking about education.
And I told you and you pushed back at me. Yes. And still will.
Yes. And it was a lively discussion in good faith,
because my approach is I don't want the federal
government telling us what to do in Kansas. Education,
health. I don't want them involved because the way we lead our lives here in
Kansas is different than what they may be doing in Oregon or Tennessee
or New York or Florida. Florida. And I'm a true believer in
states rights. In this laboratory of experiment that we have here
to do the things that we do. I don't want the federal government telling us
to do these things. Here's my contention, though, with my own
argument, is if the federal government. We're paying, you know,
effective tax rates of 36% of our income tax to go to the federal government
to do all these things that I don't think they should be doing. But unwinding
these things at this point is so difficult if they're not going to do it
and push it back to the states. And what I would expect is my 36%
income tax rate to do this and my state income tax rate
to do this. And I would rather be paying 36% to my state
government than 36% to my federal government. What happens is they're saying, we'll break it
and send it back to the states, but they're not changing now. The states are
saying, well, we've got to take control of these things. We got to fund it,
but how do we. Taxation without representation,
maybe. And which is to
my frustration with the federal government model as it exists today.
And what I contend is it has nothing to do with who's sitting in the
White House. And as much as the system itself is so broken
that we can't even get ourselves back to what the
original intent or design was supposed to be.
Certainly in 250 years, things have to pivot and change, but
the state's role in our lives and government being. That's why I'm a localist. I
cared so deeply about government on the local level. I just think the federal government
is at a level that it was never intended to be. And I think we
see diminishing returns and growing frustration that leads to
populist movements that upset a lot of people. Yeah,
absolutely. I think it's. I mean, you said a lot there.
But I think one thing that I want to pick up on is this idea
of states' rights and the federal government's role in everything. You
know, I think it's easy to say 250. We've obviously changed in the last
250 years, but we need to sort of get back to what it was meant
to be. But you can't do that with some of these
federal agencies that were created in the last 100 years to
address more recent problems. Take the Department of Education, for
example. And I think this is what we talked about before when we met for
coffee, is, in my understanding is one of the primary reasons that the Department of
Education was built was to enforce civil rights. Right.
And that whole states' rights thing on the question of
civil rights hasn't really worked out so well in the past. And I think one
of the scariest things right now with everything
involved in this rollback of DEI
is that underneath the umbrella term
dei, what has happened effectively in some of these
agencies is they've rolled back the civil rights departments
that are in federal agencies. And not only that, it is sort of like undoing
all the civil rights. Not all, but some of the civil rights progress that we
have made in the last six years. And that's. That's a scary thing. Right.
So I think I would push back the, you know, at all that
the federal government doesn't have a role to play. Can it be improved upon?
Certainly. Had it gotten too big? Absolutely. But again, I go back to. We should
have taken a scalpel to it and not a chainsaw.
But I will agree with you that especially in this
moment, local government's gonna be critical. And, you
know, Leading Kansas has talked a lot about, you know,
building. I mentioned before, it's really about building community at this point and civic
engagement and how much more necessary that's going to become
as some of the federal resources aren't there. See it on the local level
lot. And we chat about that because I think it's important. And I appreciate that
Leading Kansas is involved at the local level. You're coming to meetings, you guys are
advocating and. And we're talking on a lot of levels, coming to town halls and
such. I do want to ask this question, though, in regards to
if the only reason we have a federal bureaucracy is
civil rights, which would be enough to hold a federal
bureaucracy to maintain civil rights. There's no other
way to make sure that civil rights laws are being
honored and practiced at all levels of society outside of
a bloated bureaucracy that's managed at the federal level. Certainly there's
other causes of having a federal bureaucracy other than
making sure that civil rights. Civil rights, whether we have the Department of Education or
not, there's federal law talking about the
administration of civil rights and the assurance of civil rights. Well, it's being gutted. The
Voting Rights act right now is being gutted. So some of those. Those
landmark civil rights laws are no longer.
They no longer have the effect that they used to. But I don't
think. I mean, the federal government has so many. So many more
roles than just enforcement of civil rights. And I think that's really.
But I think that's an example of one reason why the federal government
needs to be there it's on these bigger picture
issues that cannot be effectively handled by the
states. The environment's another one. There's a reason why
I personally believe the EPA has a role to play in keeping
all states honest and making sure we have clean air and clean water. Right. Those
federal. Exactly. Those pieces of federal legislation
are integral to everything. Now, I'm not one to implode the federal
government or public health is another one. Nih. There is certainly a role
to play on the federal level in regards to things like
defense, things of. And I do think that there are, there are
federal things that they have a role. Immigration is one of these things. Federal government,
certainly in the border and border protection and border security. Absolutely. I, I
would just contend that I would rather trust the lawmaker that I can go and
see at the grocery store than the, the individual setting in the White House
where knowingly what's led to all this frustration is every four
to eight years you're going to get a pendulum swing this way and a pendulum
swing this way and the pendulum. And it's like, I just don't think that's healthy
for this republic. You just hit on something, though. You're going to have
that pendulum swing. If our institutions hold, if we have free and fair
elections right now, we've got, there's, there's a big question mark about that.
Let's, let's dive into that. So where's the threat to elections? What are you seeing?
And. Well, is that part of the protecting
institutions piece? Absolutely. I mean, I think it's our foundations.
Right. Well, one of the biggest pieces, I think I would be a lot more
apt to agree with you on, let's turn it all over to the states if
the states weren't gerrymandered into oblivion. Right. If you have both sides
do this. Both sides do it, but that doesn't make it right. Right. So
I personally would be in favor of
independent redistricting commissions, independent maps, fair maps.
Right. Let's get back to actually giving people
the power, power at all with their vote instead of having
the outcome be rigged. Right. Because in our scheme right now,
it is rigged in a lot of ways, both at the state and the federal
level. So that's one. But. So the gerrymandering piece is huge right
now. And so will the elections. Yeah. Will the
elections even matter next year? But I think
more so than that, will they be free and fair? I don't know. I mean,
I really don't know. We've got right now
an executive branch that has placed Military
troops in the streets of Democratic Cities. Right. We're nine
months in 10 months into this administration. So
in three years, what does that look like in Democratic cities? Are people
too scared to come out and vote? Are you thinking. I want
to track. Oh, and, and, and with
the lack of civil servants or sort of the
drain, federal drain, if you will, from the
drain of. What am I trying to say? Workers out of the federal government. The
downsizing of the federal government. Will things like the
usps, the mail service, still function properly? Right.
We'll begin with, but. Yes. Right. But we have a lot of these laws on
the books now. I think Kansas is one of them. Right. They just said, no,
it's no longer just postmarked by election day. We need that ballot back
by 7 pm on election day. Who gets to determine. Yeah. The
mail? Right. Like, you see what I'm saying? Right. There
are problems here. I do. Potential problems here.
Potential problems. I think saying that there's. We are
questioning free and fair elections. I think the statement in and of
itself would lead someone to believe is, okay, like, we are not having
elections. We are doing things. I think what you're getting at and alluding to
is that there are things, you're seeing things that could be
building up to restriction of voter access and all of these things. And I would
just simply say that these things are leveled at the state and the local level.
Sedgwick County, we run the elections department here in the county. It is a
phenomenal operation. We've expanded multiple polling sites to
give more access to people. Maybe it's just me
being an optimist. Maybe it's me that I'm not as fearful of what's happening on
the federal level. Some would say it's because maybe it just doesn't impact me and
my family as much as. Yeah. And I will tell you that in the previous
administration, I was more fearful because things were impacting me and my family. Maybe I
would have. I want to be play devil's advocate. Maybe I would have a difference
of opinion. I would just say that this entire system
is busted and it's not working for people, especially
people of a younger generation. And they are frustrated. When they are frustrated, they look
to leaders that will say, I'll fix it, I'll break it, and I'll build it
back up. And many people look to Donald Trump and they said, that's the guy
that can do it. He has the courage to do it. And I think that's
what we've seen, especially young, young men, particularly. They were so
frustrated with these things. And they said, he's the one that doesn't care.
He's the one that we can trust to do it. And again, this is more
of a populist movement than a conservative movement. Yeah. Oh, yeah. I could
have a list of things that I'm frustrated with in regards to
all the things that are happening in our country on the federal level. I will
never sugarcoat or just white box checklist anything for any president, and
I will not do that. But I do understand the frustration
that comes from both sides right now, and I do understand
that people are looking for change. They want change. This is
different. I would push back on that a little bit, though, because I do think
that this is different than just politics as usual,
if you will. I mean, that pendulum swing that you're talking about, it works
until it. Until things are completely broken and it can't work.
Right. And so that, to me, takes me back to what we
talked about in the beginning, the need for leading Kansas and sort of the urgency
of now to build a
grassroots movement of civically engaged people
that not only will have each other's
backs in the community right? But really know what's
going on and won't let our leaders continue to get away with
not. Because I'll tell you what, if. If what
you say is true and the whole point of President Trump was to break it,
who's gonna pick up the pieces? That's a question for you, I'm curious
to know. And that is the question. I think that's the question
at hand. And I actually come from an accord and an opinion that
I don't think many of these things at the federal level are really repairable
anytime soon. I really don't. I think that we met an inflection point
years ago. I think a $38 trillion debt, the things
that it takes to right size the country, I don't think are politically
popular. I don't think people have the political
courage to do the things that will be necessary. And structurally speaking,
we've built something that I don't think can be walked back. If you
talk about what are the main sources of a $38 trillion debt? Well,
certainly the defense budget and some of these things are driving that, and I have
my own opinions on those things and what's happening on a geopolitical, worldwide scale.
But you also think about the entitlements, Social Security,
Medicare and Medicaid. These are things that people have become very dependent on.
You can't just strip that away from people. Right. So how do we walk these
things to a level to where they're actually solvent for future
generations. I, I don't know if I know the answers. I don't know if anyone
knows the. I don't know if it's doable with the current system. And I think
that's the, that's the paradox that we're. Oh sure it is.
Well, I shouldn't say that now you're the optimist. Yeah. Oh absolutely. Well,
I shouldn't say with the current system because I do think
there are inherent problems which we've already talked about. I mean one is just the
two party system in general. Right. And the fact that there's so much money in
campaigns and everybody's running a permanent campaign instead
of actually doing the hard work of governing. But when I said that, my knee
jerk reaction to say oh sure it is, was that's the fun
stuff. Right. Like that. To me, people that get
into government and you're a perfect example just from the little I know about you,
should want to solve problems. Yes. Should want to be engaged
with their constituents, listening, right. Hearing different
viewpoints. And maybe, maybe that lawmaker, maybe that leader
doesn't have the capacity to come up with the policy solutions. But guess
what, they know the people that can put it pen to paper and find
those policy solutions. And that's what I hope we can build
with leading Kansas is again that accountability in government. Do your
job. So we are on the same page. I would just continue that. I think
that the model has to be done on the local level is that how do
we fix these things is we're so concerned about what's happening at the federal level
and there are broken systems there. We all know. I think
most people can say you're right, we've got to do something about protecting the border.
But our current immigration system is so broken and it's not working for anyone
that we've got to have in many. They could fix it in
some regards. I think you're right. I do. But what I would say is
we're so concerned about what's happening in there. Let's fix the local level. Let's create
models on the local level that people can glean from the local level turns into
the state level and we do things at the state level and we tell the
federal government we'll handle our own. Yeah, we'll handle our own. This is what we
do and we create models that attract people to the governing systems that are
happening at the local level. So I do agree and I'm really
proud of some of the work that we're doing at the local level, because I
think that we are engaging citizenry. We're listening to ideas, we're trying to
pivot, we're trying to reform. Because I think government is best at the
local. At the local level, the closest to us, so. Well, you guys,
I was gonna give you credit for holding the town hall. I couldn't attend the
one last week. But I'm glad you guys are talking to constituents because that,
that is huge in this moment. The only other thing I would say on this
local versus federal thing is I think that the federal government
is responsible for so many things that go unseen and unheard. Right. I
agree. So that's the scary part to me is like, okay, well, what
happens when all those food inspectors are fired or air traffic controllers. Air
traffic controllers, right. The things the, the scientists that are
curing cancer, you know, for those are the types of
things I think that concern me the most when you think about the federal government
just disappearing into oblivion. Yeah. So I don't think we should disappear into
oblivion. I do think many people supported what
was happening on the Doge level because they realized that we had grown
to such an extent that it really wasn't sustainable. And when you heard about
some of the. And obviously politics got in the way and we started hearing about
the flagrant situations like, oh my gosh, we're giving condoms
to Uganda, or, you know, whatever it was, and, and people were throwing
a fit while we have starving homeless people in our own cities. Right.
So I do think the effort of saying we're going to look at
any waste, any fraud, any of these things is, is a, is a
worthwhile effort. But like anything that
happens on the federal level, it gets politicized. We can't have an
honest discussion about we have a $38 trillion
debt, we can't even balance a budget.
The government has shut down. Now today, I think we're almost 30 days in and
we're recording this at the end of October. It's like, this isn't working.
These things aren't working. I think one thing that's so sad to touch
on, the federal government shutdown right now.
You see so much of the bomb throwing and the,
oh, the Republicans will just say, oh, it's all the Democrats and fault. They won't
sign onto this clean cr. The Democrats will say, it's the Republicans. They want to
take away the ACA subsidies. Right. But to me,
the piece of this that the public needs to know and be aware of is
that there is no trust. Right. And one of the reasons why there is no
trust is because back in March, Congress passed a
continuing resolution. Right. What happened a few
weeks later? Donald Trump did not release the funding for
certain things. He rescinded funding. So then he went back to
Congress and said, hey, guess what? I just took away the funding. I didn't enact
your law that you passed. Right. That cr. I'm not following it. Could you just
go ahead and pass this Rescissions Act? So then the Republicans in
Congress, without the Democrats, passed that Rescissions Act. Right. The Rescissions act
of 2025, to claw back some of that funding. So that
happened in March and June, I think.
Why on earth would anybody come to the negotiating table
when they know that the potential is there to do that again? Right. You'd be
foolish if somebody. If somebody didn't hold up their end of the bargain
before, and now they're telling you to walk into this the same
thing again. I mean, to me, there is no trust at that point. And
shame on our lawmakers for thinking we're not smart enough to understand that. Right.
That's one of the. I think that's one of the key reasons why they can't
reach an agreement right now is because nobody knows if they're gonna
really enforce, I mean, hold the administration's feet to the fire
to release the funds that they do agree to. Interesting. Yeah, I appreciate that
perspective. I do. Now, you have been very critical of some of our federal delegation.
What is your biggest critique? So we're talking about Senator Moran, Senator
Marshall, Congressman Estes here in the 4th district. These are individuals that I
know, individuals, particularly in Congressman Estes and Senator Moran, that I do
a lot of work with. And they've been very good to me, and
they've communicated very clearly with me that you haven't had the same experience. No,
I have not. Talk to me. What is your biggest critique? And I. And I'm
leading you into this conversation saying that my relationship with them has been very
beneficial, and I have seen a lot of work that they've done on the local
level here. But you. You're frustrated that you don't have
the access to the town halls and such. Is. Am I reading the room right?
Yeah. I think for me, it's less about
access and more about accountability. And what I mean by that
is there is such a litany, a laundry list of questions
that constituents have asked and haven't gotten answers to at this
point that it's hard to keep up. I know for
me, the focus is really on these bigger picture checks and balances
questions. For example,
when USAID got dismantled and the Food for Peace program
went out the window, I heard from Senator Moran’s staffer at the
time. Well, you know, he tried to. He's trying to pass a bill with Tracy
Mann to get that moved into USDA. Well, that's great.
But my question was, what happens if that bill
passes and the executive branch doesn't follow the law? Because guess what?
USAID was already spelled
out in law as an independent agency that was already authorized by Congress and
you guys just allowed the executive branch to dismantle it completely.
And I haven't gotten an answer on that. So if you can give me an
answer on that, please do. But I think, again, I think that's my
frustration is the big question, you know, why are you capitulating your power?
Why are you putting yourself out of a job if you don't legislate, right? If
you don't pass these, do the nitty gritty work of
governing and just hand that off to the executive branch.
We don't have. This has been really helpful for me
to understand, really kind of the genesis of maybe not just
Leading Kansas, but Katy Tyndell’s ideology in
regarding your worldview is that you believe,
purely believe, that we have a benign legislature that is not doing their
constitutional duty and the checks and balances are not operating.
No. Well, and I go one step further. I
think it's increasingly hard for the judicial branch to keep up
its obligation of checks and balances,
because even if it issues decisions, it's the executive
branch that has to enforce those decisions. And so we, unless Congress
comes in and does what, you know, stands up for
the rule of law, and we have yet to see that. So that, that's, I
think, the crux of why I think we're in such a different political
landscape now. And it's not just politics as usual. Right? There are some
really broken, there are some really
frightening, I would say frightening things happening right now when it comes to rule
of law. I mean, my dad used to always say, if you don't have the
rule of law, you don't have anything. And right now, again, I would go
back to this USAID or Doge, pick a number of the actions that they
took, right, to dismantle the federal government. Those were
authorized by Congress, but yet Congress just let the
executive branch unilaterally dismantle them. I understand the
genesis of your argument. I appreciate the genesis of your argument. If we have
no Interestingly enough, and I'll tell you, I'm going to
give you a little backstory to some of these things.
My father in law is a cattle rancher. He's one of the more successful cattle
ranchers here in the state of Kansas. Cattle ranchers by and large
are typically more conservative individuals. My father in law
is a very avid Trump supporter. Here in the
last week, and again we're recording this at the end of October, the last week,
Argentina Beef. Bring it on. The President
made some comments that have really offended
some ranchers here in Kansas in particular. Me knowing a
little bit about the cattle business, being involved in the cattle business. The things that
the President are saying are not accurate. We have. And my father in
law, an avid Trump supporter, voted for him three times.
Yeah. Has for the last 12 years during this
drought, has painstakingly continued the
operations to feed America. Has cut staff,
has extended the life of equipment far past when they
should have, and he's gone into debt to make sure that he could produce
beef for America now that the cattle market has changed. The
drought has ended for the most part, and now the cattle market
is good for these ranchers. What he's not doing is sticking a bunch of money
in his pocket. You know what he's doing? He's hiring back staff at the ranch.
He is buying new equipment and benefiting the economy.
He is paying down debt is what he's doing. And he's investing back into
our family operation. And to know that, and when the President made
comments that the only reason that the industry is going well now is tariffs and
we need to infiltrate Argentina Beef and import this
into the country, it deeply offended my father in
law and many of his friends. Are they still Trump supporters? I'm
certain that they probably are. But this is what happens when
we lack conservative principles about free markets and we work
into populist movements. This is a result of some of those things.
And again, I, I think I understand kind of what President Trump was trying to
allude to. And, and he cares very deeply about, you know, the price of
beef and some of these things for the consumers. But you know, American first policies
were good enough for the auto industry. Right? American first policies were
good enough for other trades and other manufacturing in the steel
industry. But apparently American first policies aren't good for our good old-fashioned ranchers.
And that's frustrated a lot of people. Conservatives like myself
need to be honest and hold everyone accountable that violate principles of
conservatism. So I'll never be someone that checks the box Just for a
Trump supporter or Republican supporter, I'm a concern. I'm a Christian first and a
conservative second. And I'll just an example of how even ranchers
today in Kansas are very frustrated at some of these things.
I got two questions. Yeah. I've learned so much from you today in regards
to Leading Kansas and really what moves you and motivates you? What's the future
of Leading Kansas? You have 1700 people in this email list. You.
Everywhere I go, I see people in Leading Kansas shirts. Now you're
showing up at political rallies and marches and things like, what's
the movement of this thing? Where are we heading?
I do not have a crystal ball. Right? That's a good
question. I mean, if you would have told me seven months ago where we'd be
now, and I mean, we made a list the other day of everything that we've
done in the last seven months. And you know, I know the news
covers, the hands off rally or the no Kings march, but
you know, we've done town halls, we've held constitutional law
forums, we've held a vigil on Constitution Day to read the
Constitution, make sure everybody remembered that. Coffee and conversations. We're about
to start up our coffee and conversations right here in CD4.
So I think we just want to. Keep.
Building a community of civically engaged people.
And for me personally, that includes cross
partisan dialogue. Because you know what? I can't learn anything in my own echo chamber.
Right. And yeah. And the only way I firmly
believe that the best decisions are made with differing opinions in the room. I
mean, I think of, I think of Abraham Lincoln and his team of
rivals. I mean, he surrounded himself with people that disagreed with him. Right.
Because that's how you come to the best decision. And so you see my Lincoln
bobblehead doll. Oh, yes, that is exactly what it is. Council member Mike
Holheisel gave me the bobblehead doll. Oh, that's awesome. Yeah. Yes. Team of
rivals. But I think so for the future of lean in Kansas.
We want to continue to grow the movement. We have members
across the state. We just held an event last Thursday,
our first meeting in Lawrence at the Lawrence Art Center. Some
wonderful people in the room, some folks on the ground there that want to, want
to get busy there doing grassroots work too. So I
look forward to continuing to grow it. But I have no idea where this is
going to go. Get some conservatives in the movement. Oh, there are.
There are. There absolutely are. I think
there are true conservatives like you're talking about.
Right. Rule of Law, free trade, conservatives, but
that maybe don't support this populist movement that has
happened. I am overtaken the conservative party. Really curious.
And I love engaging these types of conversations and learning and
listening. I, I said this a number of times. We need more communication, not less.
Absolutely. You and I. I do believe you when you say that you are, you're
a nonpartisan person. You are. I believe that based
on conversations we've had and I appreciate that work you're doing in the community in
many regards. I, I, I'm really curious, though, how this movement
continues to go. I think, I think the tug will be for
you to maintain and attention will be to maintain
nonpartisanship. I think it's going to be really hard for you and people
in your movement not to want to endorse candidates. Sure. We look at
endorsements. Maybe there's only Democrats that are being endorsed. I think that'll be, I would
encourage you to really try to keep this a nonpartisan movement and talk about the
rule of law and some of these things. My last question. Well, just to respond
to that, I mean, as long as I'm, you know, part of the crew
at the helm of this ship, it will be because I feel
very strongly that we have to learn to talk to each other
again. Thank you for that. Yeah. What's your political future?
As I spit out my coffee. No, seriously, Katy, listen.
Okay. You're a Stanford grad, you're a law
grad. You work in family business, you understand small business. You, you
have a really interesting past, I believe. And if you told me Indian affairs and
okay, and now you're really involved in grassroots movements. You obviously have a political
flair about you. Is there something that, I mean, you have an interest
in politics in the future? I think I will always have an interest
in politics just because I'm passionate about this stuff.
I, you know, got bit by the bug when I was in Washington, D.C.
straight after out of college. But
to answer your question, right now my work with Leading Kansas has
taken precedence over everything. I've also been
told that you can't not be.
I mean, I wouldn't know where to go right. If I were to run for
office because I'm not a Republican, I'm not a Democrat, and I've been told that
independents have nothing, no plan, no place except for to
ruin elections. And so I don't really have a home. So my home is with
Leading Kansas, and that's where I'm going to stay. Stay for right now. Well, you're
very accomplished you have a beautiful young family, too. Well, thank you. You're doing a
lot of work, and I appreciate the dialogue. I appreciate the civility. And. And
we'll stay in touch because I. I really am curious about where this movement is
going and how we can continue to grow conversations and civility in this community.
And best of luck to you. Thank you. I appreciate you having me.
00:58:46,150 --> 00:58:50,770