President Donald Trump on Monday defended U.S. Sen. Roger Marshall’s history of suing patients over unpaid medical bills as Marshall tries to withstand a stormy reelection bid.

Trump’s claim is legally dubious. No federal or state law requires medical providers to turn patients with outstanding balances over to collections. There is also no law requiring debt collectors to request that judges issue arrest warrants for defendants who fail to appear in court.

In Kansas, the interest rate Roger Marshall charged on medical bills makes a bad story worse

I'll try to put a screenshot of the FB post in a comment.

Charmin Toilet Paper is now $45.00 - I found this old Short from 2022, and the price was under $20.00! All of this is due to the president's power-trip with Canada, resulting in huge tarrifs with our closest neighbor. Republican Senators like Roger Marshall are supposed to act as a check against the power of the president, but he and his peers have been cowards!! I'm voting to get these losers out of office. #dumptrump

I saw this article regarding some recent polling but it only polled 750. Out of the 10's of thousands of voters that seems incredibly small. https://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article317296687.html

Also back on the 8th of September Nate Silver stated that Cindy had a 3% lead. Yet the above poll says that Masterson now has a 7% lead in less than a fortnight that is a incredible adjustment. ( Nate Silvers Outline here: https://www.natesilver.net/p/nate-silver-2026-midterm-election-polls-model?r=6cj25j&triedRedirect=true )

Thoughts?

We, the undersigned, are concerned members of the community, current and former employees, and individuals who have firsthand experience with Lawrence Community Shelter (LCS). We are requesting that the LCS Board of Directors convene a formal board meeting to review concerns regarding the organization’s financial practices, administrative operations, human resources practices, and overall leadership.

A growing number of individuals have expressed serious concerns about transparency, accountability, financial management, workplace practices, and the effectiveness of current administrative leadership. These concerns deserve to be reviewed objectively and addressed with appropriate oversight.

We are asking the Board of Directors to conduct a thorough review of the actions and decisions of the Executive Director and Human Resources Director and to determine whether current leadership has adequately fulfilled its responsibilities to the organization, its employees, its guests, and the Lawrence community.

This petition is not about any one individual grievance. It is a request for transparency, accountability, responsible stewardship, and meaningful oversight of an organization that serves some of the most vulnerable members of our community.

We respectfully ask the Board to take these concerns seriously, provide an opportunity for stakeholders to be heard, and take appropriate action based on the findings of its review.

Every signature represents a request for accountability and transparency. Please add your name and help ensure that these concerns receive the attention they deserve.

For the public:

https://www.change.org/p/public-call-for-a-vote-of-no-confidence-at-lawrence-community-shelter?recruiter=1370925095&recruited_by_id=a16fbb00-1487-11f0-9c72-f957248f9f7c&utm_source=share_petition&utm_campaign=starter_onboarding_share_personal&utm_medium=copylink&share_id=HRwhzL86js

Current and former staff:

https://www.change.org/p/current-former-staff-call-for-a-vote-of-no-confidence-at-lawrence-community-shelter?recruiter=1370925095&recruited_by_id=a16fbb00-1487-11f0-9c72-f957248f9f7c&utm_source=share_petition&utm_campaign=starter_onboarding_share_personal&utm_medium=copylink&share_id=dZ2SwjMJ79

Current and former Guests

https://www.change.org/p/current-former-guests-call-for-a-vote-of-no-confidence-at-lawrence-community-shelter?recruiter=1370925095&recruited_by_id=a16fbb00-1487-11f0-9c72-f957248f9f7c&utm_source=share_petition&utm_campaign=starter_onboarding_share_personal&utm_medium=copylink&share_id=GfBdWFYMNt

We, the undersigned, are concerned members of the community, current and former employees, and individuals who have firsthand experience with Lawrence Community Shelter (LCS). We are requesting that the LCS Board of Directors convene a formal board meeting to review concerns regarding the organization’s financial practices, administrative operations, human resources practices, and overall leadership.

A growing number of individuals have expressed serious concerns about transparency, accountability, financial management, workplace practices, and the effectiveness of current administrative leadership. These concerns deserve to be reviewed objectively and addressed with appropriate oversight.

We are asking the Board of Directors to conduct a thorough review of the actions and decisions of the Executive Director and Human Resources Director and to determine whether current leadership has adequately fulfilled its responsibilities to the organization, its employees, its guests, and the Lawrence community.

This petition is not about any one individual grievance. It is a request for transparency, accountability, responsible stewardship, and meaningful oversight of an organization that serves some of the most vulnerable members of our community.

We respectfully ask the Board to take these concerns seriously, provide an opportunity for stakeholders to be heard, and take appropriate action based on the findings of its review.

Every signature represents a request for accountability and transparency. Please add your name and help ensure that these concerns receive the attention they deserve.

For the public:

https://www.change.org/p/public-call-for-a-vote-of-no-confidence-at-lawrence-community-shelter?recruiter=1370925095&recruited_by_id=a16fbb00-1487-11f0-9c72-f957248f9f7c&utm_source=share_petition&utm_campaign=starter_onboarding_share_personal&utm_medium=copylink&share_id=HRwhzL86js

Current and former staff:

https://www.change.org/p/current-former-staff-call-for-a-vote-of-no-confidence-at-lawrence-community-shelter?recruiter=1370925095&recruited_by_id=a16fbb00-1487-11f0-9c72-f957248f9f7c&utm_source=share_petition&utm_campaign=starter_onboarding_share_personal&utm_medium=copylink&share_id=dZ2SwjMJ79

Current and former Guests

https://www.change.org/p/current-former-guests-call-for-a-vote-of-no-confidence-at-lawrence-community-shelter?recruiter=1370925095&recruited_by_id=a16fbb00-1487-11f0-9c72-f957248f9f7c&utm_source=share_petition&utm_campaign=starter_onboarding_share_personal&utm_medium=copylink&share_id=GfBdWFYMNt

Spent some time outside of the KC area today and saw several billboards with Trump and Masterson with a statement that Trump endorsed Ty. I didn’t expect this. Even in rural kansas I would expect Trump would be a net negative that it wouldn’t be worth reinforcing the tie between the two. Am I way off?

Really not trying to take sides or hear the partisan pro/anti Trump sides. Just thinking objectively it doesn’t seem like Trump is worth naming on the billboard verses just saying typical republican buzz words.

I despise political advertising as much as the next guy, but why am I being overwhelmed with Ty Masterson advertisements while literally not having seen a single, not one, Cindy Hoelscher advertisement? What the hell are the Democrats doing besides nothing at all?

Can independents show up and vote either party if they declare?

I would like to see Miss Vicky and either Democrat.
Her Lt governor Mr Joe is very capable also.
Very impressive team.

I just received a postcard in today's mail that says:

"VOTE YES. YOUR COURT. Electing Supreme Court judges is the most common system in the country. 22 states do it."

I'm trying to figure this out. If we have 50 states, how is it the most common if only 22 states do it?

It goes on to say:

"Only Kansas has an oddball system where lawyers, not voters, choose the judges."

• If it's so oddball, why are there 28 other states that do the same thing?
• How come judges are listed for voting out of their position every time I go to vote? Don't I still have the right to vote judges out if they underperform? This post card makes it so black-and-white.

I'm curious if I'm honestly missing something as to why voting "Yes" has any good for our state.

I'm conservative enough to not like change and would prefer to vote "No" to keep it as it is, but this post card advertisement seems to go against logic.

Is it better for a judge focus on interpreting the law and not worry about being voted in by laypersons as a popularity contest backed by money? I'm fine letting the people who are licensed lawyers select the candidates; I still have the power to vote them out, right?. I don't see any valid reason to pick "Yes" and the post card seems to be desperately trying to skirt human logic.

edit: spelling of lawyers typo