Kansas · individual fact

Kansas health

Insurance coverage, personal healthcare spending, longevity, mortality, health risks, and provider shortages.

Uninsured rate · all ages8.5%2024 · #17 of 50 · highest first
Uninsured rate · under age 6510.3%2024 · #16 of 50 · highest first
Private coverage · under age 6577.4%2024 · #4 of 50 · highest first

Kansas over time

Explore Kansas readings, major events and reviewed actions on the same date scale. Kansas officeholders appear in separate lanes. National event evidence describes national context; it does not measure a Kansas effect.

Major events & context · A curated selection, including uncertain effects. Milestone dates do not establish that an event caused a Kansas change.

Enacted / issuedDid not proceedPending / in progressStatus unclear

Colors show the latest recorded status. Passing one chamber is not enactment. A number groups actions with the same date, body and status.

Uninsured rate · all ages Kansas · source units
KansasPublished U.S. benchmark

Move across the chart to inspect the nearest observation. Click or tap to keep a reading selected, or focus the chart and use the arrow keys. Hover over or focus a marker to explore; click or tap to pin. Press Escape to clear.

Uninsured rate · all ages2024: 8.5%7.2%9.2%11.2%Kansas, 2014: 10.2%Kansas, 2015: 9.1%Kansas, 2016: 8.7%Kansas, 2017: 8.7%Kansas, 2018: 8.8%Kansas, 2019: 9.2%Kansas, 2021: 9.2%Kansas, 2022: 8.6%Kansas, 2023: 8.4%Kansas, 2024: 8.5%201420192024
✦ Major events & context · 33National context · Affordable Care Act signed · 2010-03-23ACA signedNational context · Supreme Court makes ACA Medicaid expansion optional for states · 2012-06-28Medicaid expansion rulingNational context · ACA Marketplace coverage and main Medicaid expansion begin · 2014-01-01ACA coverage beginsNational context · Opioid crisis declared a national public-health emergency · 2017-10-26Opioid emergencyKansas · Governor’s Council on Medicaid Expansion · 2019-09-04Governor’s Council on Medicaid ExpansionNational context · COVID-19 characterized as a pandemic · 2020-03-11COVID-19 pandemicNational context · Pandemic Medicaid continuous-enrollment condition enacted · 2020-03-18Medicaid coverage protectionKansas · Commission on Racial Equity and Justice · 2020-06-24Commission on Racial Equity and JusticeNational context · FDA authorizes the first COVID-19 vaccine for emergency use · 2020-12-11First COVID vaccine EUANational context · American Rescue Plan expands Marketplace premium assistance · 2021-03-11Marketplace aid expandedKansas · Ending selected COVID-19 emergency orders · 2021-06-14Ending selected COVID-19 emergency ordersNational context · No Surprises Act billing protections begin · 2022-01-01Surprise-billing protectionsNational context · Supreme Court overturns Roe and Casey in Dobbs · 2022-06-24Dobbs abortion rulingNational context · 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline launches nationwide · 2022-07-16988 crisis line launchesNational context · Inflation Reduction Act signed · 2022-08-16Prescription-drug lawNational context · Medicare Part D insulin cost-sharing cap takes effect · 2023-01-01Part D insulin $35 capKansas · Early Childhood Transition Task Force · 2023-01-10Early Childhood Transition Task ForceNational context · Medicaid coverage terminations can resume · 2023-04-01Medicaid terminations resumeNational context · Federal COVID-19 public-health emergency ends · 2023-05-11COVID health emergency endsKansas · South Central Regional Psychiatric Hospital advisory panel · 2023-08-25South Central Regional Psychiatric Hospital advisory panelKansas · Psychiatric-hospital panel reporting deadline amendment · 2024-05-15Psychiatric-hospital panel reporting deadline amendmentNational context · Medicare Part D out-of-pocket cap begins · 2025-01-01Part D $2,000 cap (2025)Kansas · Kansas child-care law signed · 2025-04-24Kansas child-care law signedKansas · Kansas child-care law general effective date · 2025-07-01Kansas child-care law general effective dateNational context · 2025 reconciliation law changes Medicaid and funds rural care · 2025-07-04Medicaid and rural-care lawKansas · Kansas early-childhood transition team announced · 2025-08-12Kansas early-childhood transition team announcedNational context · Rural Health Transformation awards announced for all 50 states · 2025-12-29Rural health awardsNational context · Temporary enhanced Marketplace premium tax credits end · 2026-01-01Enhanced ACA credits endNational context · First negotiated Medicare drug prices take effect · 2026-01-01Negotiated drug prices beginNational context · CMS issues Medicaid community-engagement implementation rule · 2026-06-01Medicaid eligibility ruleKansas · Uniform Fire Code Task Force · 2026-06-29Uniform Fire Code Task ForceKansas · Kansas Office of Early Childhood opening · 2026-07-01Kansas Office of Early Childhood openingKansas · Kansas Early Childhood Advisory Council · 2026-07-01Kansas Early Childhood Advisory Council● Kansas Legislature · 32● U.S. Congress · Kansas delegation · 5◆ Governor · 1623■ Kansas agencies · 0No reviewed actions match these filters.2010-03-012026-07-31

24 of 24 reviewed Kansas actions match · 20 date markers shown. 33 major events shown separately.

Kansas · 2024: 8.5% · Rank #17 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 8.2%

FactVote uses the Census Bureau's HIC-4_ACS historical table. Rates and 90% confidence margins of error are the published ACS 1-year estimates for the civilian noninstitutionalized population. ACS annual estimates, all ages. Standard ACS 2020 one-year data were not released; the chart leaves a gap. Survey ranks describe point estimates and do not establish significant differences. Annual observations use December 31; monthly observations use the first of the month. Lines connect consecutive readings and do not supply values between them. Missing observations break the lines.

View observations and export data
Kansas Uninsured rate · all ages · source units
PeriodKansasRankU.S. benchmark
20248.5%#17 of 508.2%
20238.4%#17 of 50Not available
20228.6%#14 of 50Not available
20219.2%#17 of 50Not available
2020Not availableUnavailableNot available
20199.2%#19 of 50Not available
20188.8%#19 of 50Not available
20178.7%#20 of 50Not available
20168.7%#19 of 50Not available
20159.1%#23 of 50Not available
201410.2%#26 of 50Not available
How major events are selected

The timeline combines the corresponding national fact’s reviewed event catalog, labeled National context, with individually reviewed state milestones. State events use primary sources and distinguish signing, effective and filing dates. Each milestone keeps its source-check date, geographical limits and evidence limits. This curated selection is not a complete history.

Date ranges affect events and actions. Action type, status and official-name search affect government records only. Events remain separate from action counts. An event after the latest observation extends context without creating a new reading.

Kansas · state comparison

Who has health coverage?

Compare ACS annual estimates for all ages or people under 65. Coverage categories can overlap and do not sum to the insured share.

Kansas · 20248.5%
Kansas rank#17among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark8.2%Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Uninsured rate · all ages

FactVote uses the Census Bureau's HIC-4_ACS historical table. Rates and 90% confidence margins of error are the published ACS 1-year estimates for the civilian noninstitutionalized population.

ACS annual estimates, all ages. Standard ACS 2020 one-year data were not released; the chart leaves a gap. Survey ranks describe point estimates and do not establish significant differences.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Kansas
Uninsured rate · all ages history in Kansas7.9%9.2%10.5%20142024
2024 · Kansas: 8.5% · Rank #17 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 8.2% · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Kansas Uninsured rate · all ages history
PeriodKansasCompare
201410.2%
20159.1%
20168.7%
20178.7%
20188.8%
20199.2%
2020Not available
20219.2%
20228.6%
20238.4%
20248.5%

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Kansas stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Kansas has a dark outline.

Lower value · 2.8%Higher value · 16.7%Striped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Kansas · 8.5%2024 · Rank #17 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Kansas with every state · 50 ranked
Uninsured rate · all ages · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Texas16.7%—
#2Georgia12%—
#3Oklahoma11.5%—
#4Nevada11.4%—
#5Alaska11%—
#6Florida10.9%—
#7Arizona10.3%—
#7Wyoming10.3%—
#9New Mexico10.1%—
#10Mississippi9.7%—
#10Tennessee9.7%—
#12Arkansas9.4%—
#13Idaho9.2%—
#14South Carolina9%—
#15Montana8.8%—
#16North Carolina8.6%—
#17Kansas · your comparison8.5%—
#18Utah8.3%—
#19Alabama8.2%—
#20South Dakota8.1%—
#21Colorado7.9%—
#22Louisiana7.7%—
#22Missouri7.7%—
#22New Jersey7.7%—
#25Indiana7.5%—
#26Nebraska7.1%—
#27Delaware6.9%—
#27Illinois6.9%—
#27Virginia6.9%—
#30Kentucky6.8%—
#31Ohio6.7%—
#32Washington6.5%—
#33Maryland6.3%—
#34North Dakota6.1%—
#35California5.9%—
#36Connecticut5.8%—
#36Pennsylvania5.8%—
#36West Virginia5.8%—
#39Maine5.5%—
#40Iowa5.4%—
#41Wisconsin5.3%—
#42Oregon5.2%—
#43Michigan5.1%—
#43Minnesota5.1%—
#45New York5%—
#46Rhode Island4.6%—
#47New Hampshire4.5%—
#48Vermont4.2%—
#49Hawaii3.5%—
#50Massachusetts2.8%—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

People under 65 without health insurance

10.3%2024 ACS annual estimate

Share of Kansas’s civilian noninstitutionalized residents under age 65 who lacked comprehensive health-insurance coverage at the time of the ACS survey.

This source snapshot keeps its own definition and period. A rank shown elsewhere applies only to that comparison’s measure and period.

Method and limitations

U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts estimate derived from the American Community Survey.

  • This excludes people age 65 and older and is a annual survey estimate rather than a current enrollment count.
  • Insurance status does not measure affordability, provider availability, coverage adequacy, or quality of care.
Kansas · state comparison

Where do healthcare dollars go?

State spending is reported for 2020, the latest year available in this CMS state series. Choose a service to compare Kansas with every state.

Kansas · 2020$9,408
Kansas rank#34among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$10,191Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Personal healthcare spending per resident

Personal health care expenditure per resident, assigned to the state where the patient resides.

2020 is the last year in this CMS state series. Personal health care excludes administration, public health, and investment included in national health expenditures. This is spending by all payers, not a household bill.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Kansas
Personal healthcare spending per resident history in Kansas$6.94K$8.78K$10.61K20142020
2020 · Kansas: $9,408 · Rank #34 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $10,191 · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Kansas Personal healthcare spending per resident history
PeriodKansasCompare
2014$7,368
2015$7,634
2016$7,845
2017$8,060
2018$8,381
2019$8,745
2020$9,408

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Kansas stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Kansas has a dark outline.

Lower value · $7.52KHigher value · $14.01KStriped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Kansas · $9,4082020 · Rank #34 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Kansas with every state · 50 ranked
Personal healthcare spending per resident · 2020 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1New York$14,007—
#2Alaska$13,642—
#3Massachusetts$13,319—
#4Delaware$12,899—
#5West Virginia$12,769—
#6Vermont$12,756—
#7South Dakota$12,495—
#8Connecticut$12,489—
#9Maine$12,077—
#10New Jersey$11,868—
#11New Hampshire$11,793—
#12Rhode Island$11,694—
#13Pennsylvania$11,603—
#14North Dakota$11,301—
#15Wyoming$10,989—
#16Minnesota$10,846—
#17Maryland$10,839—
#18Indiana$10,517—
#19Louisiana$10,515—
#20Nebraska$10,514—
#21Ohio$10,478—
#22California$10,299—
#23Hawaii$10,291—
#24Kentucky$10,257—
#25Montana$10,212—
#26Illinois$10,190—
#27Oregon$10,071—
#28Wisconsin$9,982—
#29Missouri$9,921—
#30Michigan$9,897—
#31Florida$9,865—
#32Iowa$9,789—
#33Oklahoma$9,444—
#34Kansas · your comparison$9,408—
#35Mississippi$9,394—
#36Arkansas$9,338—
#37Tennessee$9,336—
#38Alabama$9,280—
#39Washington$9,265—
#40Virginia$9,195—
#41North Carolina$8,917—
#42New Mexico$8,902—
#43South Carolina$8,766—
#44Georgia$8,758—
#45Arizona$8,756—
#46Colorado$8,583—
#47Texas$8,406—
#48Nevada$8,348—
#49Idaho$8,148—
#50Utah$7,522—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Kansas · state comparison

Health outcomes

Use age-adjusted mortality to account for different age distributions; life expectancy summarizes period death rates.

Kansas · 202276.5 years
Kansas rank#32among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark77.5 yearsSame measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Life expectancy at birth

FactVote uses CDC National Center for Health Statistics annual complete life-table estimates for the total Kansas population. Values are rounded to the published tenth of a year.

The latest published comparable state series ends in 2022, even though newer national life-expectancy estimates may be available. Period life expectancy summarizes current mortality rates; it is not a forecast of how long a particular person will live. The 2020 and 2021 estimates reflect the mortality shock during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Kansas
Life expectancy at birth history in Kansas75.7 years77.1 years78.5 years20182022
2022 · Kansas: 76.5 years · Rank #32 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 77.5 years · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Kansas Life expectancy at birth history
PeriodKansasCompare
201878 years
201978.2 years
202076.4 years
202176 years
202276.5 years

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Kansas stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Kansas has a dark outline.

Lower value · 72.2 yearsHigher value · 80 yearsStriped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Kansas · 76.5 years2022 · Rank #32 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Kansas with every state · 50 ranked
Life expectancy at birth · 2022 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Hawaii80 years—
#2Massachusetts79.8 years—
#3New Jersey79.6 years—
#4New York79.5 years—
#5Connecticut79.4 years—
#6California79.3 years—
#6Minnesota79.3 years—
#8Rhode Island79.2 years—
#9Utah79 years—
#10New Hampshire78.7 years—
#11Colorado78.5 years—
#12Idaho78.4 years—
#12Washington78.4 years—
#14Nebraska78.3 years—
#14Vermont78.3 years—
#16Wisconsin78.1 years—
#17Florida77.9 years—
#17Iowa77.9 years—
#17North Dakota77.9 years—
#20Maryland77.8 years—
#21Oregon77.7 years—
#22Illinois77.5 years—
#22Virginia77.5 years—
#24Montana77.3 years—
#24Pennsylvania77.3 years—
#24South Dakota77.3 years—
#27Texas77.1 years—
#28Michigan76.8 years—
#28Wyoming76.8 years—
#30Arizona76.7 years—
#31Maine76.6 years—
#32Delaware76.5 years—
#32Kansas · your comparison76.5 years—
#34Nevada76.4 years—
#35Georgia75.9 years—
#35North Carolina75.9 years—
#37Alaska75.8 years—
#38Ohio75.6 years—
#39Indiana75.4 years—
#40Missouri75.2 years—
#41South Carolina75.1 years—
#42New Mexico74.5 years—
#43Arkansas73.9 years—
#44Alabama73.8 years—
#44Louisiana73.8 years—
#44Oklahoma73.8 years—
#44Tennessee73.8 years—
#48Kentucky73.6 years—
#49Mississippi72.6 years—
#50West Virginia72.2 years—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Kansas · state comparison

Chronic illness and health risks

Compare age-adjusted adult prevalence using the same survey year and definition.

Kansas · 202310.5%
Kansas rank#23among 48 states with data
U.S. benchmark10.7%Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Diagnosed diabetes · age adjusted

Adult self-reported prevalence, age-adjusted to a common population.

Published CDC 2019–2023 series. Missing or suppressed estimates remain unranked. Confidence intervals describe sampling uncertainty; point ranks are not significance tests.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Kansas
Diagnosed diabetes · age adjusted history in Kansas9.8%10.4%10.9%20192023
2023 · Kansas: 10.5% · Rank #23 of 48, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 10.7% · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Kansas Diagnosed diabetes · age adjusted history
PeriodKansasCompare
20199.9%
202010.1%
202110.1%
202210.2%
202310.5%

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Kansas stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Kansas has a dark outline.

Lower value · 7.8%Higher value · 15.1%Striped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Kansas · 10.5%2023 · Rank #23 of 48, highest first95% confidence interval: 9.7% – 11.3%Selected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Kansas with every state · 48 ranked, 2 unavailable
Diagnosed diabetes · age adjusted · 2023 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Mississippi15.1%95% CI: 13.7–16.6
#1West Virginia15.1%95% CI: 13.9–16.3
#3Louisiana14.6%95% CI: 13.4–15.8
#4Alabama14%95% CI: 12.7–15.3
#5Arkansas13.1%95% CI: 12–14.3
#6South Carolina12.7%95% CI: 11.9–13.6
#6Tennessee12.7%95% CI: 11.7–13.8
#8Texas12.1%95% CI: 11–13.3
#9Indiana11.7%95% CI: 11.1–12.4
#10Georgia11.5%95% CI: 10.7–12.3
#10Ohio11.5%95% CI: 10.8–12.2
#12Oklahoma11.3%95% CI: 10.5–12.1
#13Delaware11.1%95% CI: 9.8–12.6
#14North Carolina11%95% CI: 9.8–12.3
#15Illinois10.9%95% CI: 9.9–12.1
#15Maryland10.9%95% CI: 10.2–11.7
#15Michigan10.9%95% CI: 10.1–11.8
#18Nevada10.8%95% CI: 8.9–13
#18New Mexico10.8%95% CI: 9.3–12.6
#20Missouri10.7%95% CI: 9.9–11.7
#20South Dakota10.7%95% CI: 8.9–12.8
#22California10.6%95% CI: 9.8–11.4
#23Kansas · your comparison10.5%95% CI: 9.7–11.3
#24Virginia10.4%95% CI: 9.5–11.4
#25Florida10.1%95% CI: 9.1–11.1
#26Rhode Island10%95% CI: 9.1–11
#27Arizona9.9%95% CI: 9.2–10.7
#27Iowa9.9%95% CI: 9.2–10.7
#29Nebraska9.7%95% CI: 9–10.3
#30Wisconsin9.6%95% CI: 9–10.2
#31Hawaii9.5%95% CI: 8.7–10.5
#31New York9.5%95% CI: 8.9–10.1
#31Oregon9.5%95% CI: 8.7–10.5
#34Wyoming9.4%95% CI: 8.5–10.5
#35Minnesota9.3%95% CI: 8.6–10
#36New Jersey9.1%95% CI: 8.4–9.9
#37Maine9%95% CI: 8.4–9.7
#38North Dakota8.9%95% CI: 8.1–9.7
#39Idaho8.7%95% CI: 7.9–9.6
#40Washington8.6%95% CI: 8.2–9
#41Massachusetts8.5%95% CI: 7.8–9.4
#42Connecticut8.4%95% CI: 7.6–9.3
#43Alaska8.2%95% CI: 7.4–9.2
#44Utah8.1%95% CI: 7.5–8.7
#45Colorado8%95% CI: 7.3–8.7
#46Montana7.9%95% CI: 7.2–8.7
#46New Hampshire7.9%95% CI: 7.1–8.8
#48Vermont7.8%95% CI: 7–8.7
—KentuckyNot availableNo comparable published observation for this period; excluded from rank.
—PennsylvaniaNot availableNo comparable published observation for this period; excluded from rank.

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Kansas · state comparison

Where are healthcare workers in short supply?

Compare coverage of need, practitioners needed, or affected population for each discipline.

Kansas · June 30, 202641.1%
Kansas rank#35among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark47.4%Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Primary care · need met

HRSA-designated shortage areas; measures describe need within those areas, not the entire state population.

National report totals can include territories. Designation rules and populations differ by discipline; do not add disciplines. Absolute population and practitioner ranks also reflect state size.

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Kansas stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Kansas has a dark outline.

Lower value · 11.2%Higher value · 83.2%Striped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Kansas · 41.1%June 30, 2026 · Rank #35 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Kansas with every state · 50 ranked
Primary care · need met · June 30, 2026 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1New Jersey83.2%—
#2Vermont82.6%—
#3South Carolina79.4%—
#4New Hampshire74.8%—
#5Rhode Island74.3%—
#6Louisiana72.1%—
#7Hawaii67.1%—
#8Utah65.4%—
#9Wisconsin65.2%—
#10Alabama63%—
#11Connecticut60.3%—
#12Massachusetts58%—
#13Tennessee58%—
#14Virginia57.2%—
#15Pennsylvania56.7%—
#16Maine56%—
#17Minnesota55.4%—
#18Wyoming54.4%—
#19Indiana54.2%—
#20California53.2%—
#21Arkansas52.6%—
#22Texas49.8%—
#23Ohio49.7%—
#24Nebraska49.1%—
#25Alaska48.9%—
#26North Carolina48.1%—
#27Colorado47.5%—
#28Michigan44.9%—
#29Oregon43.9%—
#30Idaho43.9%—
#31Washington42.4%—
#32Illinois41.5%—
#33Nevada41.5%—
#34Arizona41.2%—
#35Kansas · your comparison41.1%—
#36Iowa40.5%—
#37Florida39.7%—
#38Georgia39.1%—
#39Montana38.5%—
#40West Virginia38.3%—
#41North Dakota36.5%—
#42New York35.3%—
#43South Dakota34.6%—
#44Mississippi34.1%—
#45Maryland31.6%—
#46New Mexico31.4%—
#47Kentucky30.8%—
#48Oklahoma28.6%—
#49Missouri23.7%—
#50Delaware11.2%—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Kansas · state comparison

Employer coverage costs

Premium comparisons use a published historical all-state employer survey. Total premiums combine employer and employee payments.

Kansas · 2020$6,675
Kansas rank#43among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$7,149Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Single coverage premium · all firms

Average total annual employer-plan premium per enrolled employee at private-sector establishments offering coverage.

Historical 2020 published all-state table; not a current quote. Includes both employer and employee contributions, rather than just a worker’s payment. Survey estimates and small firm samples carry uncertainty. Missing estimates remain unavailable.

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Kansas stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Kansas has a dark outline.

Lower value · $6.39KHigher value · $8.64KStriped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Kansas · $6,6752020 · Rank #43 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Kansas with every state · 50 ranked
Single coverage premium · all firms · 2020 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Alaska$8,635—
#2New York$8,177—
#3New Hampshire$7,991—
#4Vermont$7,868—
#5Wyoming$7,743—
#6Nebraska$7,611—
#7South Carolina$7,516—
#8Connecticut$7,501—
#9Maine$7,496—
#10Massachusetts$7,452—
#11Washington$7,440—
#12New Mexico$7,424—
#13Illinois$7,376—
#14New Jersey$7,373—
#15Maryland$7,352—
#16Rhode Island$7,326—
#17Indiana$7,319—
#18Delaware$7,280—
#19Wisconsin$7,250—
#20Pennsylvania$7,246—
#21North Dakota$7,216—
#22Colorado$7,206—
#23Missouri$7,179—
#24California$7,173—
#25Florida$7,078—
#26South Dakota$7,070—
#27Oklahoma$7,058—
#28Hawaii$7,040—
#29North Carolina$7,036—
#30Texas$7,017—
#31West Virginia$6,993—
#32Ohio$6,989—
#33Kentucky$6,949—
#34Iowa$6,932—
#35Virginia$6,928—
#36Oregon$6,917—
#37Minnesota$6,910—
#38Georgia$6,876—
#39Montana$6,860—
#40Idaho$6,744—
#41Louisiana$6,713—
#42Michigan$6,683—
#43Kansas · your comparison$6,675—
#44Arizona$6,612—
#45Utah$6,593—
#46Mississippi$6,561—
#47Nevada$6,493—
#48Tennessee$6,485—
#49Arkansas$6,414—
#50Alabama$6,393—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Kansas · state comparison

Mental health and treatment

Adult statewide estimates use the same SAMHSA model and survey period. Treatment use is a share of all adults, not a share of adults with mental illness.

Kansas · 2023–202423.7%
Kansas rank#31among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark23.1%Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Any Mental Illness · adults 18+

Civilian noninstitutionalized adults age 18+, past-year prevalence or treatment use, estimated by small-area survey models.

Mental illness and depression estimates pool 2023–2024; treatment use covers 2024 only. Definitions and model-based uncertainty differ from the national page’s annual 2025 survey estimates. Point-estimate ranks do not establish significant differences. Serious mental illness is a subset of any mental illness, so their percentages must not be added.

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Kansas stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Kansas has a dark outline.

Lower value · 18.1%Higher value · 31.6%Striped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Kansas · 23.7%2023–2024 · Rank #31 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Kansas with every state · 50 ranked
Any Mental Illness · adults 18+ · 2023–2024 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Oregon31.6%—
#2Vermont29.1%—
#3West Virginia28.1%—
#4Washington27.9%—
#5New Hampshire27.7%—
#6Tennessee27%—
#7Utah26.7%—
#8Maine26.7%—
#9Arkansas26.6%—
#10Colorado26.4%—
#11Rhode Island25.8%—
#12Missouri25.7%—
#13Montana25.6%—
#14Indiana25.3%—
#15Kentucky25.3%—
#16Georgia25.2%—
#17Iowa25%—
#18Massachusetts24.9%—
#19Wyoming24.7%—
#20Nevada24.6%—
#21Arizona24.6%—
#22Wisconsin24.6%—
#23Idaho24.5%—
#24Nebraska24.1%—
#25Louisiana24.1%—
#26Alaska24%—
#27Pennsylvania23.9%—
#28New Mexico23.9%—
#28Ohio23.9%—
#30Connecticut23.7%—
#31Kansas · your comparison23.7%—
#32Michigan23.6%—
#33Virginia23.1%—
#34Alabama23%—
#35North Dakota23%—
#36Maryland22.7%—
#37Oklahoma22.6%—
#38Minnesota22.6%—
#39Illinois22.2%—
#40Delaware22.1%—
#41New York21.9%—
#42South Dakota21.8%—
#43California21.6%—
#44North Carolina21.4%—
#45Florida20.8%—
#46Texas20.7%—
#47Mississippi20.5%—
#48Hawaii19.8%—
#49South Carolina19.8%—
#50New Jersey18.1%—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

What candidates are saying

Explore statements about health coverage, healthcare costs, access to care and public health from FactVote’s Kansas candidate profiles. Compare candidates within each recorded race, with each person’s matching statements kept together. These are candidate and campaign statements, not verified outcomes.

27 statements from 12 candidates

2026 Kansas Attorney General — General Election

2 candidates with matching statements · 4 statements

Chris Mann

3 statements

Democratic · Attorney General · KS

Care & public health

The leading cause of death for Kansans aged 10 to 17 is suicide, well above the national average. This is one of the most urgent crises facing Kansas youth. As Attorney General, Chris will put real resources, staffing, and support into teen suicide prevention, because our kids deserve to stay alive.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Prioritize and expand the AG's Division of Youth Suicide Prevention

Candidate campaign source

The leading cause of death for Kansans aged 10 to 17 is suicide, well above the national average. This is one of the most urgent crises facing Kansas youth. As Attorney General, Chris will put real resources, staffing, and support into teen suicide prevention, because our kids deserve to stay alive.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Chris Mann — candidate-owned primary source 3 ↗
View 2 more statements from Chris Mann
Care & public health

During the 2026 legislative session, the Legislature cut $6 million for a statewide program that provides students with access to licensed mental health professionals within their schools. More than 80 districts across Kansas were benefiting from this program, providing customized services to studen…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Health care and public health

Candidate campaign source

During the 2026 legislative session, the Legislature cut $6 million for a statewide program that provides students with access to licensed mental health professionals within their schools. More than 80 districts across Kansas were benefiting from this program, providing customized services to students and their families to support the well-being of our kids. This funding cut is unacceptable.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Chris Mann — candidate-owned primary source 3 ↗
Care & public health

Chris will fight for increased access to mental health support for our officers. Kansas does not recognize PTSD as an eligible workers’ compensation claim – we must change this. Because officers are not able to receive job-related mental health benefits, many forgo care, leading to mental health iss…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Economy, taxes, spending, and affordability

Candidate campaign source

Chris will fight for increased access to mental health support for our officers. Kansas does not recognize PTSD as an eligible workers’ compensation claim – we must change this. Because officers are not able to receive job-related mental health benefits, many forgo care, leading to mental health issues that can be debilitating. As Attorney General, Chris will advocate for legislation that adds PTSD as an eligible workers’ compensation claim, because we cannot let our first responders suffer in silence.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Chris Mann — candidate-owned primary source 3 ↗

Kris Kobach

1 statement

Republican · Attorney General · KS

Health coverage

Sued to stop federal provision of Affordable Care Act benefits to undocumented immigrants.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Public Benefits

Candidate campaign source

Sued to stop federal provision of Affordable Care Act benefits to undocumented immigrants.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

Kris Kobach — Part 88 verified source ↗

2026 Kansas Commissioner of Insurance — General Election

1 candidate with matching statements · 1 statement

Dinah Sykes

1 statement

Democratic · Commissioner of Insurance · KS

Health coverage

Dinah understands that far too many Kansans are struggling under the weight of high health insurance costs - or worse, going without coverage at all because they simply can't afford it. She knows that our state can do better, and she is committed to making sure every single person in Kansas has acce…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Insurance regulation and consumer protection

Candidate campaign source

Dinah understands that far too many Kansans are struggling under the weight of high health insurance costs - or worse, going without coverage at all because they simply can't afford it. She knows that our state can do better, and she is committed to making sure every single person in Kansas has access to quality health insurance that doesn't break the bank.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 23, 2026

Dinah Sykes — candidate-owned primary source ↗

2026 Kansas Governor and Lieutenant Governor — General Election

1 candidate with matching statements · 3 statements

Cindy Holscher

3 statements

Democratic · Governor · KS

Health coverage

Cindy will protect these critical programs to ensure that no matter who you are or where you come from, you have the support to live a good life, stay healthy, and retire with dignity. She’s also determined to make Medicaid available to more low- and moderate-income Kansans, which Kansas GOP extremi…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Health care and public health

Candidate campaign source

Cindy will protect these critical programs to ensure that no matter who you are or where you come from, you have the support to live a good life, stay healthy, and retire with dignity. She’s also determined to make Medicaid available to more low- and moderate-income Kansans, which Kansas GOP extremists have refused to do over and over.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Cindy Holscher — candidate-owned primary source 3 ↗
View 2 more statements from Cindy Holscher
Health coverage

Fully fund Special Education using the savings from expanding Medicaid and new tax revenue from sales of medical marijuana.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Economy, taxes, spending, and affordability

Candidate campaign source

Fully fund Special Education using the savings from expanding Medicaid and new tax revenue from sales of medical marijuana.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Cindy Holscher — candidate-owned primary source 3 ↗
Care & public health

Every hard-working Kansan should be able to support their family. As Governor, Cindy will focus on keeping costs down on the essentials — like healthcare, childcare, groceries, and gas — so people don’t have to struggle so hard to get by. She’ll work to make essential family products like diapers ta…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Energy, utilities, and natural resources

Candidate campaign source

Every hard-working Kansan should be able to support their family. As Governor, Cindy will focus on keeping costs down on the essentials — like healthcare, childcare, groceries, and gas — so people don’t have to struggle so hard to get by. She’ll work to make essential family products like diapers tax-free, too.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Cindy Holscher — candidate-owned primary source 3 ↗
Race groups · Page 1 of 3
How statements are selected

This section matches specific health coverage, healthcare costs, access to care and public health terms in retained, attributed source text from published Kansas candidate profiles. A profile heading or biography alone does not qualify. The Florida geography is fixed; saved state preferences cannot change these results. A mention can concern a community or group rather than Florida’s statewide measure.

Matching is automatic and does not establish a candidate’s stance, the accuracy of a claim, or an effect on the measured result. Results are grouped by recorded race, then by candidate name. Within each candidate, the matching issue mentions appear first. Only candidates with matching retained statements are shown; this is not a complete race roster. Repeated identical text for the same candidate is shown once. Coverage follows the existing state profiles and is not a complete record of all candidates or everything they have said. Review dates are not statement dates.

Kansas incumbents

What incumbents are proposing

Explore reviewed bills sponsored by current Kansas legislators and Kansas’s congressional delegation, plus retained proposals from Kansas’s governor and agencies. Each record keeps its latest recorded status and official evidence.

13 matching sponsorships or proposals · 10 Kansas incumbents. These filters apply only to this section.

Rep. Barbara Ballard

Kansas House of Representatives, District 44 · D–KS

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Barbara Ballard
Kansas Legislature · HB 2198

Enacting the gun violence restraining order act to authorize the issuance of protective orders prohibiting the acquisition and possession of firearms by certain individuals.

Apr 10, 2026 · Died in committee

Rep. Barbara Ballard · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

HB 2198 would allow courts to issue firearm restraining orders when the specified risk-of-injury standards are met, barring purchase or possession for up to one year and permitting firearm seizure. The reviewed provisions distinguish ordinary orders from orders without notice and provide a route to seek a hearing. The bill died in committee.

Died in committee on 2026-04-10. This bill did not enact the reviewed proposal.

Why this record is included

Firearm mortality includes suicide, homicide and other intents. Firearm regulation or storage concerns a possible component of injury prevention; it does not establish a change in deaths. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.

Retained Kansas evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

Sec. 3. (a) In an action under section 2, and amendments thereto, the court may issue a gun violence restraining order if the court determines that there is reasonable cause to believe that the defendant poses a significant risk of personal injury to self or others by possessing a firearm. In determining whether reasonable cause exists, the court shall consider all of the following: (1) Testimony, documents, or other evidence offered in support of the request for the gun violence restraining order; (2) whether the defendant has previously inflicted or threatened to inflict personal injury on self or others; and (3) any other facts that the court believes are relevant. (b) If the plaintiff in an action filed under section 2, and amendments thereto, is not an individual described in section (2)(a)(1) through (6), and amendments thereto, the court shall not issue the gun violence restraining order unless the court determines that the plaintiff has a close enough relationship with the defendant to justify the issuance of the order. (c) The court in an action under section 2, and amendments thereto, may issue a gun violence restraining order without written or oral notice to the defendant if the court determines that clear and convincing evidence has been submitted under oath or affirmation that irreparable injury will result from the delay required to effectuate notice or that the notice will 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 HB 2198 3 itself precipitate adverse action before a gun violence restraining order can be issued. (d) A restrained individual under an order issued under subsection (c) may file a motion to modify or rescind the order and request a hearing. The motion to modify or rescind the order must be filed within 14 days after the order is served on the restrained individual or after the restrained individual receives actual notice of the order, unless good cause is shown for filing the motion after the 14 days have elapsed. (e) The court shall conduct a hearing on a motion under subsection (d) within 14 days after the motion is filed. If the restrained individual is an individual described in section 2(d), and amendments thereto, the court shall conduct a hearing on a motion under subsection (d) within five days after the motion is filed. Sec. 4. (a) If the court determines under section 3, and amendments thereto, that a gun violence restraining order is to be issued, the court shall include all of the following provisions in the order: (1) That the restrained individual shall not purchase or possess a firearm; (2) a statement that the restrained individual may file a motion to modify or rescind the order and request a hearing within 14 days after the restrained individual is served with or receives actual notice of the order and that motion forms and filing instructions are available from the clerk of the court, if such order is issued under section 3, and amendments thereto; (3) a statement that violation of the order will subject the restrained individual to immediate arrest and the civil and criminal contempt powers of the court; and (4) an expiration date that is not more than one year from the date of issuance. (b) In the discretion of the court, a gun violence restraining order may include an order to a law enforcement agency to seize firearms in the possession of the restrained individual. An order issued under this subsection shall specifically describe the firearms to be seized. The court may also order that a law enforcement agency seizing firearms under this subsection may seize any other firearms discovered that belong to or are in the possession of the restrained individual. (c) A gun violence restraining order is effective and enforceable immediately after it is served on the restrained individual or after the restrained individual receives actual notice of the order. The order may be enforced anywhere in this state by a law enforcement agency that receives a true copy of the order, is shown a copy of it or has verified its existence.
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Bill Rhiley

Kansas House of Representatives, District 80 · R–KS

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Bill Rhiley
Kansas Legislature · HB 2009

Prohibiting abortion procedures except when necessary to save the life of the pregnant woman and providing a private cause of action for civil enforcement of such prohibition.

Apr 10, 2026 · Died in committee

Rep. Brett Fairchild · Sponsored / Rep. Samantha Poetter Parshall · Sponsored / Rep. Bill Rhiley · Sponsored / Rep. Kevin Schwertfeger · Sponsored / Rep. Joe Seiwert · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

The reviewed introduced provisions of HB 2009 would prohibit abortion except when needed to preserve the pregnant woman’s life in a medical emergency, restrict specified abortion drugs, and use private civil enforcement with statutory damages. They exclude patient liability and treatment of miscarriage with misoprostol. The bill died in committee; these proposed rules were not enacted by this bill. Successful private plaintiffs would receive statutory damages of at least $10,000 per specified violation, injunctive relief and attorney fees and costs.

Died in committee on 2026-04-10. This bill did not enact the reviewed proposal.

Why this record is included

The fact counts abortions reported for Kansas residents, including reported out-of-state events and excluding Kansas procedures for nonresidents. Abortion regulation concerns the resident population without explaining the earlier count. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.

Retained Kansas evidence context: Abortions reported for Kansas residents. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

New Section 1. (a) It shall be unlawful for any person to knowingly perform or induce or attempt to perform or induce an abortion except when necessary to preserve the life of a pregnant woman in a medical emergency. (b) It shall not be a violation of this section if a physician provides medical treatment to a pregnant woman that results in accidental or unintentional injury to or the death of the unborn child. (c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to authorize the performance or induction of an abortion that is otherwise prohibited by federal or state law. New Sec. 2. It shall be unlawful for any person to manufacture, distribute, prescribe, dispense, sell, give or otherwise provide mifepristone, mifegyne, mifeperex or any other substantially similar generic or nongeneric abortifacient drug in this state for the purpose of inducing an abortion in violation of section 1, and amendments thereto. New Sec. 3. Nothing in section 1 or 2, and amendments thereto, shall be construed to: (a) Impose any liability against the woman upon whom an abortion is performed or induced or attempted to be performed or induced; or (b) prohibit the administration of misoprostol for the purpose of 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 HB 2009 2 treatment of a miscarriage. New Sec. 4. (a) Violations of section 1 or 2, and amendments thereto, shall be enforced exclusively through the private civil enforcement actions provided under section 5, and amendments thereto. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no enforcement of sections 1 and 2, and amendments thereto, may be taken or threatened by any state agency, political subdivision, county attorney or district attorney or any officer or employee thereof against any person. (b) Nothing in this section shall be construed to: (1) Render any of the conduct prohibited by sections 1 and 2, and amendments thereto, or by any other provision of law to be lawful; (2) limit or affect, in any way, the availability of any relief established under section 5, and amendments thereto; or (3) limit the enforceability of any other laws that regulate or prohibit abortion. New Sec. 5. (a) Except for the entities and individuals described in section 4, and amendments thereto, any person may bring a civil action against any person who: (1) Violates section 1 or 2, and amendments thereto; or (2) knowingly engages in conduct that aids or abets a violation of section 1 or 2, and amendments thereto, including paying for or reimbursing the costs of an abortion through insurance or otherwise, regardless of whether the person knew or should have known that the performance or induction of the abortion would violate section 1, and amendments thereto. (b) (1) Except as otherwise provided, if the party bringing a cause of action pursuant to this section prevails, the court shall award: (A) Injunctive relief sufficient to prevent the defendant from violating section 1 or 2, and amendments thereto, or engaging in acts that aid or abet violations of section 1 or 2, and amendments thereto; (B) (i) statutory damages in an amount of not less than $10,000 for each abortion that the defendant performed or induced or attempted to perform or induce in violation of section 1, and amendments thereto, and for each abortion performed or induced or attempted to perform or induce in violation of section 1, and amendments thereto, that the defendant aided or abetted; and (ii) statutory damages in an amount of not less than $10,000 for each violation of section 2, and amendments thereto; and (C) attorney fees and court costs.
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Brett Fairchild

Kansas House of Representatives, District 113 · R–KS

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Brett Fairchild
Kansas Legislature · HB 2009

Prohibiting abortion procedures except when necessary to save the life of the pregnant woman and providing a private cause of action for civil enforcement of such prohibition.

Apr 10, 2026 · Died in committee

Rep. Brett Fairchild · Sponsored / Rep. Samantha Poetter Parshall · Sponsored / Rep. Bill Rhiley · Sponsored / Rep. Kevin Schwertfeger · Sponsored / Rep. Joe Seiwert · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

The reviewed introduced provisions of HB 2009 would prohibit abortion except when needed to preserve the pregnant woman’s life in a medical emergency, restrict specified abortion drugs, and use private civil enforcement with statutory damages. They exclude patient liability and treatment of miscarriage with misoprostol. The bill died in committee; these proposed rules were not enacted by this bill. Successful private plaintiffs would receive statutory damages of at least $10,000 per specified violation, injunctive relief and attorney fees and costs.

Died in committee on 2026-04-10. This bill did not enact the reviewed proposal.

Why this record is included

The fact counts abortions reported for Kansas residents, including reported out-of-state events and excluding Kansas procedures for nonresidents. Abortion regulation concerns the resident population without explaining the earlier count. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.

Retained Kansas evidence context: Abortions reported for Kansas residents. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

New Section 1. (a) It shall be unlawful for any person to knowingly perform or induce or attempt to perform or induce an abortion except when necessary to preserve the life of a pregnant woman in a medical emergency. (b) It shall not be a violation of this section if a physician provides medical treatment to a pregnant woman that results in accidental or unintentional injury to or the death of the unborn child. (c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to authorize the performance or induction of an abortion that is otherwise prohibited by federal or state law. New Sec. 2. It shall be unlawful for any person to manufacture, distribute, prescribe, dispense, sell, give or otherwise provide mifepristone, mifegyne, mifeperex or any other substantially similar generic or nongeneric abortifacient drug in this state for the purpose of inducing an abortion in violation of section 1, and amendments thereto. New Sec. 3. Nothing in section 1 or 2, and amendments thereto, shall be construed to: (a) Impose any liability against the woman upon whom an abortion is performed or induced or attempted to be performed or induced; or (b) prohibit the administration of misoprostol for the purpose of 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 HB 2009 2 treatment of a miscarriage. New Sec. 4. (a) Violations of section 1 or 2, and amendments thereto, shall be enforced exclusively through the private civil enforcement actions provided under section 5, and amendments thereto. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no enforcement of sections 1 and 2, and amendments thereto, may be taken or threatened by any state agency, political subdivision, county attorney or district attorney or any officer or employee thereof against any person. (b) Nothing in this section shall be construed to: (1) Render any of the conduct prohibited by sections 1 and 2, and amendments thereto, or by any other provision of law to be lawful; (2) limit or affect, in any way, the availability of any relief established under section 5, and amendments thereto; or (3) limit the enforceability of any other laws that regulate or prohibit abortion. New Sec. 5. (a) Except for the entities and individuals described in section 4, and amendments thereto, any person may bring a civil action against any person who: (1) Violates section 1 or 2, and amendments thereto; or (2) knowingly engages in conduct that aids or abets a violation of section 1 or 2, and amendments thereto, including paying for or reimbursing the costs of an abortion through insurance or otherwise, regardless of whether the person knew or should have known that the performance or induction of the abortion would violate section 1, and amendments thereto. (b) (1) Except as otherwise provided, if the party bringing a cause of action pursuant to this section prevails, the court shall award: (A) Injunctive relief sufficient to prevent the defendant from violating section 1 or 2, and amendments thereto, or engaging in acts that aid or abet violations of section 1 or 2, and amendments thereto; (B) (i) statutory damages in an amount of not less than $10,000 for each abortion that the defendant performed or induced or attempted to perform or induce in violation of section 1, and amendments thereto, and for each abortion performed or induced or attempted to perform or induce in violation of section 1, and amendments thereto, that the defendant aided or abetted; and (ii) statutory damages in an amount of not less than $10,000 for each violation of section 2, and amendments thereto; and (C) attorney fees and court costs.
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Joe Seiwert

Kansas House of Representatives, District 101 · R–KS

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Joe Seiwert
Kansas Legislature · HB 2009

Prohibiting abortion procedures except when necessary to save the life of the pregnant woman and providing a private cause of action for civil enforcement of such prohibition.

Apr 10, 2026 · Died in committee

Rep. Brett Fairchild · Sponsored / Rep. Samantha Poetter Parshall · Sponsored / Rep. Bill Rhiley · Sponsored / Rep. Kevin Schwertfeger · Sponsored / Rep. Joe Seiwert · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

The reviewed introduced provisions of HB 2009 would prohibit abortion except when needed to preserve the pregnant woman’s life in a medical emergency, restrict specified abortion drugs, and use private civil enforcement with statutory damages. They exclude patient liability and treatment of miscarriage with misoprostol. The bill died in committee; these proposed rules were not enacted by this bill. Successful private plaintiffs would receive statutory damages of at least $10,000 per specified violation, injunctive relief and attorney fees and costs.

Died in committee on 2026-04-10. This bill did not enact the reviewed proposal.

Why this record is included

The fact counts abortions reported for Kansas residents, including reported out-of-state events and excluding Kansas procedures for nonresidents. Abortion regulation concerns the resident population without explaining the earlier count. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.

Retained Kansas evidence context: Abortions reported for Kansas residents. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

New Section 1. (a) It shall be unlawful for any person to knowingly perform or induce or attempt to perform or induce an abortion except when necessary to preserve the life of a pregnant woman in a medical emergency. (b) It shall not be a violation of this section if a physician provides medical treatment to a pregnant woman that results in accidental or unintentional injury to or the death of the unborn child. (c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to authorize the performance or induction of an abortion that is otherwise prohibited by federal or state law. New Sec. 2. It shall be unlawful for any person to manufacture, distribute, prescribe, dispense, sell, give or otherwise provide mifepristone, mifegyne, mifeperex or any other substantially similar generic or nongeneric abortifacient drug in this state for the purpose of inducing an abortion in violation of section 1, and amendments thereto. New Sec. 3. Nothing in section 1 or 2, and amendments thereto, shall be construed to: (a) Impose any liability against the woman upon whom an abortion is performed or induced or attempted to be performed or induced; or (b) prohibit the administration of misoprostol for the purpose of 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 HB 2009 2 treatment of a miscarriage. New Sec. 4. (a) Violations of section 1 or 2, and amendments thereto, shall be enforced exclusively through the private civil enforcement actions provided under section 5, and amendments thereto. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no enforcement of sections 1 and 2, and amendments thereto, may be taken or threatened by any state agency, political subdivision, county attorney or district attorney or any officer or employee thereof against any person. (b) Nothing in this section shall be construed to: (1) Render any of the conduct prohibited by sections 1 and 2, and amendments thereto, or by any other provision of law to be lawful; (2) limit or affect, in any way, the availability of any relief established under section 5, and amendments thereto; or (3) limit the enforceability of any other laws that regulate or prohibit abortion. New Sec. 5. (a) Except for the entities and individuals described in section 4, and amendments thereto, any person may bring a civil action against any person who: (1) Violates section 1 or 2, and amendments thereto; or (2) knowingly engages in conduct that aids or abets a violation of section 1 or 2, and amendments thereto, including paying for or reimbursing the costs of an abortion through insurance or otherwise, regardless of whether the person knew or should have known that the performance or induction of the abortion would violate section 1, and amendments thereto. (b) (1) Except as otherwise provided, if the party bringing a cause of action pursuant to this section prevails, the court shall award: (A) Injunctive relief sufficient to prevent the defendant from violating section 1 or 2, and amendments thereto, or engaging in acts that aid or abet violations of section 1 or 2, and amendments thereto; (B) (i) statutory damages in an amount of not less than $10,000 for each abortion that the defendant performed or induced or attempted to perform or induce in violation of section 1, and amendments thereto, and for each abortion performed or induced or attempted to perform or induce in violation of section 1, and amendments thereto, that the defendant aided or abetted; and (ii) statutory damages in an amount of not less than $10,000 for each violation of section 2, and amendments thereto; and (C) attorney fees and court costs.
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Kevin Schwertfeger

Kansas House of Representatives, District 114 · R–KS

2 proposals
View proposals from Rep. Kevin Schwertfeger
Kansas Legislature · HB 2009

Prohibiting abortion procedures except when necessary to save the life of the pregnant woman and providing a private cause of action for civil enforcement of such prohibition.

Apr 10, 2026 · Died in committee

Rep. Brett Fairchild · Sponsored / Rep. Samantha Poetter Parshall · Sponsored / Rep. Bill Rhiley · Sponsored / Rep. Kevin Schwertfeger · Sponsored / Rep. Joe Seiwert · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

The reviewed introduced provisions of HB 2009 would prohibit abortion except when needed to preserve the pregnant woman’s life in a medical emergency, restrict specified abortion drugs, and use private civil enforcement with statutory damages. They exclude patient liability and treatment of miscarriage with misoprostol. The bill died in committee; these proposed rules were not enacted by this bill. Successful private plaintiffs would receive statutory damages of at least $10,000 per specified violation, injunctive relief and attorney fees and costs.

Died in committee on 2026-04-10. This bill did not enact the reviewed proposal.

Why this record is included

The fact counts abortions reported for Kansas residents, including reported out-of-state events and excluding Kansas procedures for nonresidents. Abortion regulation concerns the resident population without explaining the earlier count. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.

Retained Kansas evidence context: Abortions reported for Kansas residents. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

New Section 1. (a) It shall be unlawful for any person to knowingly perform or induce or attempt to perform or induce an abortion except when necessary to preserve the life of a pregnant woman in a medical emergency. (b) It shall not be a violation of this section if a physician provides medical treatment to a pregnant woman that results in accidental or unintentional injury to or the death of the unborn child. (c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to authorize the performance or induction of an abortion that is otherwise prohibited by federal or state law. New Sec. 2. It shall be unlawful for any person to manufacture, distribute, prescribe, dispense, sell, give or otherwise provide mifepristone, mifegyne, mifeperex or any other substantially similar generic or nongeneric abortifacient drug in this state for the purpose of inducing an abortion in violation of section 1, and amendments thereto. New Sec. 3. Nothing in section 1 or 2, and amendments thereto, shall be construed to: (a) Impose any liability against the woman upon whom an abortion is performed or induced or attempted to be performed or induced; or (b) prohibit the administration of misoprostol for the purpose of 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 HB 2009 2 treatment of a miscarriage. New Sec. 4. (a) Violations of section 1 or 2, and amendments thereto, shall be enforced exclusively through the private civil enforcement actions provided under section 5, and amendments thereto. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no enforcement of sections 1 and 2, and amendments thereto, may be taken or threatened by any state agency, political subdivision, county attorney or district attorney or any officer or employee thereof against any person. (b) Nothing in this section shall be construed to: (1) Render any of the conduct prohibited by sections 1 and 2, and amendments thereto, or by any other provision of law to be lawful; (2) limit or affect, in any way, the availability of any relief established under section 5, and amendments thereto; or (3) limit the enforceability of any other laws that regulate or prohibit abortion. New Sec. 5. (a) Except for the entities and individuals described in section 4, and amendments thereto, any person may bring a civil action against any person who: (1) Violates section 1 or 2, and amendments thereto; or (2) knowingly engages in conduct that aids or abets a violation of section 1 or 2, and amendments thereto, including paying for or reimbursing the costs of an abortion through insurance or otherwise, regardless of whether the person knew or should have known that the performance or induction of the abortion would violate section 1, and amendments thereto. (b) (1) Except as otherwise provided, if the party bringing a cause of action pursuant to this section prevails, the court shall award: (A) Injunctive relief sufficient to prevent the defendant from violating section 1 or 2, and amendments thereto, or engaging in acts that aid or abet violations of section 1 or 2, and amendments thereto; (B) (i) statutory damages in an amount of not less than $10,000 for each abortion that the defendant performed or induced or attempted to perform or induce in violation of section 1, and amendments thereto, and for each abortion performed or induced or attempted to perform or induce in violation of section 1, and amendments thereto, that the defendant aided or abetted; and (ii) statutory damages in an amount of not less than $10,000 for each violation of section 2, and amendments thereto; and (C) attorney fees and court costs.
Review official supporting evidence ↗
Kansas Legislature · HB 2413

Enhancing the criminal penalty for an offense committed with the intent to commit transnational repression, requiring the development of transnational repression recognition and response training, providing that theft of livestock or implements of husbandry is a severity level 5, nonperson felony, providing that the theft of grain or hay is a severity level 6, nonperson felony and providing that certain portions of the crime of cruelty to animals do not apply to any person who catches a feral cat to provide vaccination, spaying or neutering and returns such cat back to the location where such cat is caught.

Apr 9, 2026 · Enacted

Rep. Kevin Schwertfeger · Sponsored / Rep. Megan Steele · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

The reviewed theft amendment in HB 2413 sets severity level 5 nonperson-felony penalties for theft of cattle, horses or implements of husbandry, and level 6 for theft of defined grain or hay. The grain definition requires at least 400 bushels; hay requires at least 20,000 pounds. These thresholds and definitions limit the new categories. Existing firearm-theft and fuel-theft language reproduced in the section is not treated as a new policy.

Approved by Governor on Thursday, April 9, 2026. Enactment, effective dates, implementation and current enforceability are distinct.

Why this record is included

The FBI property-crime series includes burglary, larceny-theft and motor-vehicle theft, with incomplete and variable reporting coverage. A specific theft provision concerns one component. Fraud and identity theft are outside this series. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.

Retained Kansas evidence context: Reported property-crime rate. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

(9) property that is livestock or an implement of husbandry is a severity level 5, nonperson felony; and (10) property that is grain or hay is a severity level 6, nonperson felony. (c) As used in this section: (1) "Conviction" or "convicted" includes being convicted of a violation of K.S.A. 21-3701, prior to its repeal, this section or a municipal ordinance which that prohibits the acts that this section prohibits; (2) "grain" means at least 400 bushels of: (A) Barley, corn, flaxseed, oats, rye, sorghum, soybeans or wheat; (B) any other food grains, feed grains and oilseeds subject to standards under 7 U.S.C. Ch. 3, as in effect on July 1, 2026; or HOUSE BILL No. 2413—page 4 (C) any mix of the above; (3) "hay" means at least 20,000 pounds of alfalfa, brome, clover or prairie hays or all other grasses or plants that are harvested for forage; […] (4) "implement of husbandry" means the same as defined in K.S.A. 8-126, and amendments thereto; (5) "livestock" means cattle or horses;
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Megan Steele

Kansas House of Representatives, District 51 · R–KS

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Megan Steele
Kansas Legislature · HB 2413

Enhancing the criminal penalty for an offense committed with the intent to commit transnational repression, requiring the development of transnational repression recognition and response training, providing that theft of livestock or implements of husbandry is a severity level 5, nonperson felony, providing that the theft of grain or hay is a severity level 6, nonperson felony and providing that certain portions of the crime of cruelty to animals do not apply to any person who catches a feral cat to provide vaccination, spaying or neutering and returns such cat back to the location where such cat is caught.

Apr 9, 2026 · Enacted

Rep. Kevin Schwertfeger · Sponsored / Rep. Megan Steele · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

The reviewed theft amendment in HB 2413 sets severity level 5 nonperson-felony penalties for theft of cattle, horses or implements of husbandry, and level 6 for theft of defined grain or hay. The grain definition requires at least 400 bushels; hay requires at least 20,000 pounds. These thresholds and definitions limit the new categories. Existing firearm-theft and fuel-theft language reproduced in the section is not treated as a new policy.

Approved by Governor on Thursday, April 9, 2026. Enactment, effective dates, implementation and current enforceability are distinct.

Why this record is included

The FBI property-crime series includes burglary, larceny-theft and motor-vehicle theft, with incomplete and variable reporting coverage. A specific theft provision concerns one component. Fraud and identity theft are outside this series. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.

Retained Kansas evidence context: Reported property-crime rate. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

(9) property that is livestock or an implement of husbandry is a severity level 5, nonperson felony; and (10) property that is grain or hay is a severity level 6, nonperson felony. (c) As used in this section: (1) "Conviction" or "convicted" includes being convicted of a violation of K.S.A. 21-3701, prior to its repeal, this section or a municipal ordinance which that prohibits the acts that this section prohibits; (2) "grain" means at least 400 bushels of: (A) Barley, corn, flaxseed, oats, rye, sorghum, soybeans or wheat; (B) any other food grains, feed grains and oilseeds subject to standards under 7 U.S.C. Ch. 3, as in effect on July 1, 2026; or HOUSE BILL No. 2413—page 4 (C) any mix of the above; (3) "hay" means at least 20,000 pounds of alfalfa, brome, clover or prairie hays or all other grasses or plants that are harvested for forage; […] (4) "implement of husbandry" means the same as defined in K.S.A. 8-126, and amendments thereto; (5) "livestock" means cattle or horses;
Review official supporting evidence ↗
What sponsorship and proposal counts tell us

Only current Kansas officeholders retained in the reviewed collection qualify. Bills require a recorded primary sponsorship; cosponsors and signing officials are excluded from sponsorship counts. An official introducer recorded as acting by request is labeled “Introduced by request”; that procedural role does not establish personal policy endorsement. Governor and agency records qualify when recorded as proposed. A separately verified governor transmittal can also establish an original proposal whose latest status reflects its later outcome. Signing an enacted law alone does not establish a proposal. A record appearing under several facts is counted once per officeholder. A bill with multiple primary sponsors appears under each recorded sponsor.

Enacted bills, adopted resolutions and unsuccessful measures remain visible as proposal history. Passing one chamber is not enactment. These counts do not measure effectiveness or prove that an action changed a Kansas statistic. Collection reviewed Oct 6, 2026.