The University of Kansas may begin to see less money from the government if the Legislature passes an amendment that would restrict government spending.

Limiting government spending could limit the states’ ability to fund the University.

The Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights, or TABOR, limits the state government’s spending to the change in the inflation plus population growth.

If the government earns more than the amount allowed to collect, it would have to return the extra money to taxpayers.

It would also require a ballot vote for tax increases.

State Rep. Brenda Landwehr (R-Sedgwick) introduced House Bill 5015 on Feb. 24.

For the last 30 years, state spending has grown three times faster than the average Kansan’s wages, she said.

“We have a declining population and an aging population, which means there are less people to tax,” Landwehr said. “And we can’t keep raising taxes to cover the out of control spending.”

The Kansas chapter of Americans for Prosperity is also in favor of the amendment, according to its Web site.

But the idea of voter approval for tax increases and limited government spending does not come without consequences.

TABOR caused many problems for higher education in Colorado, said Carol Hedges, an analyst with the Colorado Fiscal Policy Center. She is also the author of Ten Years of TABOR, a study analyzing the effects of TABOR in Colorado.

Colorado saw a dramatic reduction of money available for higher education, she said.

“We are losing professors, it is taking students longer to graduate, buildings that are in bad shape cannot be repaired and the universities are unable to provide pay increases to faculty and staff,” she said.

Some University officials are also wary of the bill.

Steve Munch, student body president, said he heard about the negative effects of TABOR when he spoke with the student body president of the University of Colorado at the Big 12 Student Government Conference in October.

“I hope it doesn’t happen because it would mean bad things for KU and higher education as a whole,” Munch said.

Colorado governor Bill Owens was a big supporter of TABOR, but he recently suggested Colorado take a five-year break from it because of its effects on public services — including higher education, Hedges said.

Owens also suggested there be some changes to how TABOR is implemented when it is reinstated, Hedges said.

Owens asked a conference committee to complete work on the Economic Recovery Act and planned to send it to voters in November, according to an article published March 29 in the Fort Morgan Times.

Hedges said that while she thinks the five-year hiatus from TABOR is a positive step, she does not believe it will solve the problem.

“We know that most of the problems stem from the inflation plus population formula,” she said. “It didn’t work ten years ago, it isn’t working now, and we have no reason to believe it will be any different in ten years.”

Although the Kansas TABOR bill is modeled off of Colorado’s, Landwehr said it has been improved upon and shouldn’t be compared to Colorado’s TABOR.

The Kansas TABOR bill would have three major differences: An emergency fund, a budget stabilization fund, and it would ease the ratchet-down effect, which would allow TABOR to remain at the pre-recession line if there was a recession.

She said about 17 other states had introduced similar amendments. It was introduced in New York last week.

A two-thirds majority vote in both the House and Senate is required before the bill could be placed on a ballot.

Landwehr said she expected the House to vote on it next year, but that the Senate is not interested in the issue.