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.
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.
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
2024 · Kansas: 8.5% · Rank #17 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 8.2% · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Kansas Uninsured rate · all ages history
Period
Kansas
Compare
2014
10.2%
2015
9.1%
2016
8.7%
2017
8.7%
2018
8.8%
2019
9.2%
2020
Not available
2021
9.2%
2022
8.6%
2023
8.4%
2024
8.5%
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
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Texas
16.7%
—
#2
Georgia
12%
—
#3
Oklahoma
11.5%
—
#4
Nevada
11.4%
—
#5
Alaska
11%
—
#6
Florida
10.9%
—
#7
Arizona
10.3%
—
#7
Wyoming
10.3%
—
#9
New Mexico
10.1%
—
#10
Mississippi
9.7%
—
#10
Tennessee
9.7%
—
#12
Arkansas
9.4%
—
#13
Idaho
9.2%
—
#14
South Carolina
9%
—
#15
Montana
8.8%
—
#16
North Carolina
8.6%
—
#17
Kansas · your comparison
8.5%
—
#18
Utah
8.3%
—
#19
Alabama
8.2%
—
#20
South Dakota
8.1%
—
#21
Colorado
7.9%
—
#22
Louisiana
7.7%
—
#22
Missouri
7.7%
—
#22
New Jersey
7.7%
—
#25
Indiana
7.5%
—
#26
Nebraska
7.1%
—
#27
Delaware
6.9%
—
#27
Illinois
6.9%
—
#27
Virginia
6.9%
—
#30
Kentucky
6.8%
—
#31
Ohio
6.7%
—
#32
Washington
6.5%
—
#33
Maryland
6.3%
—
#34
North Dakota
6.1%
—
#35
California
5.9%
—
#36
Connecticut
5.8%
—
#36
Pennsylvania
5.8%
—
#36
West Virginia
5.8%
—
#39
Maine
5.5%
—
#40
Iowa
5.4%
—
#41
Wisconsin
5.3%
—
#42
Oregon
5.2%
—
#43
Michigan
5.1%
—
#43
Minnesota
5.1%
—
#45
New York
5%
—
#46
Rhode Island
4.6%
—
#47
New Hampshire
4.5%
—
#48
Vermont
4.2%
—
#49
Hawaii
3.5%
—
#50
Massachusetts
2.8%
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
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.
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
2020 · Kansas: $9,408 · Rank #34 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $10,191 · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Kansas Personal healthcare spending per resident history
Period
Kansas
Compare
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
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
New York
$14,007
—
#2
Alaska
$13,642
—
#3
Massachusetts
$13,319
—
#4
Delaware
$12,899
—
#5
West Virginia
$12,769
—
#6
Vermont
$12,756
—
#7
South Dakota
$12,495
—
#8
Connecticut
$12,489
—
#9
Maine
$12,077
—
#10
New Jersey
$11,868
—
#11
New Hampshire
$11,793
—
#12
Rhode Island
$11,694
—
#13
Pennsylvania
$11,603
—
#14
North Dakota
$11,301
—
#15
Wyoming
$10,989
—
#16
Minnesota
$10,846
—
#17
Maryland
$10,839
—
#18
Indiana
$10,517
—
#19
Louisiana
$10,515
—
#20
Nebraska
$10,514
—
#21
Ohio
$10,478
—
#22
California
$10,299
—
#23
Hawaii
$10,291
—
#24
Kentucky
$10,257
—
#25
Montana
$10,212
—
#26
Illinois
$10,190
—
#27
Oregon
$10,071
—
#28
Wisconsin
$9,982
—
#29
Missouri
$9,921
—
#30
Michigan
$9,897
—
#31
Florida
$9,865
—
#32
Iowa
$9,789
—
#33
Oklahoma
$9,444
—
#34
Kansas · your comparison
$9,408
—
#35
Mississippi
$9,394
—
#36
Arkansas
$9,338
—
#37
Tennessee
$9,336
—
#38
Alabama
$9,280
—
#39
Washington
$9,265
—
#40
Virginia
$9,195
—
#41
North Carolina
$8,917
—
#42
New Mexico
$8,902
—
#43
South Carolina
$8,766
—
#44
Georgia
$8,758
—
#45
Arizona
$8,756
—
#46
Colorado
$8,583
—
#47
Texas
$8,406
—
#48
Nevada
$8,348
—
#49
Idaho
$8,148
—
#50
Utah
$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.
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
2022 · Kansas: 76.5 years · Rank #32 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 77.5 years · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Kansas Life expectancy at birth history
Period
Kansas
Compare
2018
78 years
2019
78.2 years
2020
76.4 years
2021
76 years
2022
76.5 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
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Hawaii
80 years
—
#2
Massachusetts
79.8 years
—
#3
New Jersey
79.6 years
—
#4
New York
79.5 years
—
#5
Connecticut
79.4 years
—
#6
California
79.3 years
—
#6
Minnesota
79.3 years
—
#8
Rhode Island
79.2 years
—
#9
Utah
79 years
—
#10
New Hampshire
78.7 years
—
#11
Colorado
78.5 years
—
#12
Idaho
78.4 years
—
#12
Washington
78.4 years
—
#14
Nebraska
78.3 years
—
#14
Vermont
78.3 years
—
#16
Wisconsin
78.1 years
—
#17
Florida
77.9 years
—
#17
Iowa
77.9 years
—
#17
North Dakota
77.9 years
—
#20
Maryland
77.8 years
—
#21
Oregon
77.7 years
—
#22
Illinois
77.5 years
—
#22
Virginia
77.5 years
—
#24
Montana
77.3 years
—
#24
Pennsylvania
77.3 years
—
#24
South Dakota
77.3 years
—
#27
Texas
77.1 years
—
#28
Michigan
76.8 years
—
#28
Wyoming
76.8 years
—
#30
Arizona
76.7 years
—
#31
Maine
76.6 years
—
#32
Delaware
76.5 years
—
#32
Kansas · your comparison
76.5 years
—
#34
Nevada
76.4 years
—
#35
Georgia
75.9 years
—
#35
North Carolina
75.9 years
—
#37
Alaska
75.8 years
—
#38
Ohio
75.6 years
—
#39
Indiana
75.4 years
—
#40
Missouri
75.2 years
—
#41
South Carolina
75.1 years
—
#42
New Mexico
74.5 years
—
#43
Arkansas
73.9 years
—
#44
Alabama
73.8 years
—
#44
Louisiana
73.8 years
—
#44
Oklahoma
73.8 years
—
#44
Tennessee
73.8 years
—
#48
Kentucky
73.6 years
—
#49
Mississippi
72.6 years
—
#50
West Virginia
72.2 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.
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
2023 · Kansas: 10.5% · Rank #23 of 48, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 10.7% · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Kansas Diagnosed diabetes · age adjusted history
Period
Kansas
Compare
2019
9.9%
2020
10.1%
2021
10.1%
2022
10.2%
2023
10.5%
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
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Mississippi
15.1%
95% CI: 13.7–16.6
#1
West Virginia
15.1%
95% CI: 13.9–16.3
#3
Louisiana
14.6%
95% CI: 13.4–15.8
#4
Alabama
14%
95% CI: 12.7–15.3
#5
Arkansas
13.1%
95% CI: 12–14.3
#6
South Carolina
12.7%
95% CI: 11.9–13.6
#6
Tennessee
12.7%
95% CI: 11.7–13.8
#8
Texas
12.1%
95% CI: 11–13.3
#9
Indiana
11.7%
95% CI: 11.1–12.4
#10
Georgia
11.5%
95% CI: 10.7–12.3
#10
Ohio
11.5%
95% CI: 10.8–12.2
#12
Oklahoma
11.3%
95% CI: 10.5–12.1
#13
Delaware
11.1%
95% CI: 9.8–12.6
#14
North Carolina
11%
95% CI: 9.8–12.3
#15
Illinois
10.9%
95% CI: 9.9–12.1
#15
Maryland
10.9%
95% CI: 10.2–11.7
#15
Michigan
10.9%
95% CI: 10.1–11.8
#18
Nevada
10.8%
95% CI: 8.9–13
#18
New Mexico
10.8%
95% CI: 9.3–12.6
#20
Missouri
10.7%
95% CI: 9.9–11.7
#20
South Dakota
10.7%
95% CI: 8.9–12.8
#22
California
10.6%
95% CI: 9.8–11.4
#23
Kansas · your comparison
10.5%
95% CI: 9.7–11.3
#24
Virginia
10.4%
95% CI: 9.5–11.4
#25
Florida
10.1%
95% CI: 9.1–11.1
#26
Rhode Island
10%
95% CI: 9.1–11
#27
Arizona
9.9%
95% CI: 9.2–10.7
#27
Iowa
9.9%
95% CI: 9.2–10.7
#29
Nebraska
9.7%
95% CI: 9–10.3
#30
Wisconsin
9.6%
95% CI: 9–10.2
#31
Hawaii
9.5%
95% CI: 8.7–10.5
#31
New York
9.5%
95% CI: 8.9–10.1
#31
Oregon
9.5%
95% CI: 8.7–10.5
#34
Wyoming
9.4%
95% CI: 8.5–10.5
#35
Minnesota
9.3%
95% CI: 8.6–10
#36
New Jersey
9.1%
95% CI: 8.4–9.9
#37
Maine
9%
95% CI: 8.4–9.7
#38
North Dakota
8.9%
95% CI: 8.1–9.7
#39
Idaho
8.7%
95% CI: 7.9–9.6
#40
Washington
8.6%
95% CI: 8.2–9
#41
Massachusetts
8.5%
95% CI: 7.8–9.4
#42
Connecticut
8.4%
95% CI: 7.6–9.3
#43
Alaska
8.2%
95% CI: 7.4–9.2
#44
Utah
8.1%
95% CI: 7.5–8.7
#45
Colorado
8%
95% CI: 7.3–8.7
#46
Montana
7.9%
95% CI: 7.2–8.7
#46
New Hampshire
7.9%
95% CI: 7.1–8.8
#48
Vermont
7.8%
95% CI: 7–8.7
—
Kentucky
Not available
No comparable published observation for this period; excluded from rank.
—
Pennsylvania
Not available
No 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.
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
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
New Jersey
83.2%
—
#2
Vermont
82.6%
—
#3
South Carolina
79.4%
—
#4
New Hampshire
74.8%
—
#5
Rhode Island
74.3%
—
#6
Louisiana
72.1%
—
#7
Hawaii
67.1%
—
#8
Utah
65.4%
—
#9
Wisconsin
65.2%
—
#10
Alabama
63%
—
#11
Connecticut
60.3%
—
#12
Massachusetts
58%
—
#13
Tennessee
58%
—
#14
Virginia
57.2%
—
#15
Pennsylvania
56.7%
—
#16
Maine
56%
—
#17
Minnesota
55.4%
—
#18
Wyoming
54.4%
—
#19
Indiana
54.2%
—
#20
California
53.2%
—
#21
Arkansas
52.6%
—
#22
Texas
49.8%
—
#23
Ohio
49.7%
—
#24
Nebraska
49.1%
—
#25
Alaska
48.9%
—
#26
North Carolina
48.1%
—
#27
Colorado
47.5%
—
#28
Michigan
44.9%
—
#29
Oregon
43.9%
—
#30
Idaho
43.9%
—
#31
Washington
42.4%
—
#32
Illinois
41.5%
—
#33
Nevada
41.5%
—
#34
Arizona
41.2%
—
#35
Kansas · your comparison
41.1%
—
#36
Iowa
40.5%
—
#37
Florida
39.7%
—
#38
Georgia
39.1%
—
#39
Montana
38.5%
—
#40
West Virginia
38.3%
—
#41
North Dakota
36.5%
—
#42
New York
35.3%
—
#43
South Dakota
34.6%
—
#44
Mississippi
34.1%
—
#45
Maryland
31.6%
—
#46
New Mexico
31.4%
—
#47
Kentucky
30.8%
—
#48
Oklahoma
28.6%
—
#49
Missouri
23.7%
—
#50
Delaware
11.2%
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
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
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Alaska
$8,635
—
#2
New York
$8,177
—
#3
New Hampshire
$7,991
—
#4
Vermont
$7,868
—
#5
Wyoming
$7,743
—
#6
Nebraska
$7,611
—
#7
South Carolina
$7,516
—
#8
Connecticut
$7,501
—
#9
Maine
$7,496
—
#10
Massachusetts
$7,452
—
#11
Washington
$7,440
—
#12
New Mexico
$7,424
—
#13
Illinois
$7,376
—
#14
New Jersey
$7,373
—
#15
Maryland
$7,352
—
#16
Rhode Island
$7,326
—
#17
Indiana
$7,319
—
#18
Delaware
$7,280
—
#19
Wisconsin
$7,250
—
#20
Pennsylvania
$7,246
—
#21
North Dakota
$7,216
—
#22
Colorado
$7,206
—
#23
Missouri
$7,179
—
#24
California
$7,173
—
#25
Florida
$7,078
—
#26
South Dakota
$7,070
—
#27
Oklahoma
$7,058
—
#28
Hawaii
$7,040
—
#29
North Carolina
$7,036
—
#30
Texas
$7,017
—
#31
West Virginia
$6,993
—
#32
Ohio
$6,989
—
#33
Kentucky
$6,949
—
#34
Iowa
$6,932
—
#35
Virginia
$6,928
—
#36
Oregon
$6,917
—
#37
Minnesota
$6,910
—
#38
Georgia
$6,876
—
#39
Montana
$6,860
—
#40
Idaho
$6,744
—
#41
Louisiana
$6,713
—
#42
Michigan
$6,683
—
#43
Kansas · your comparison
$6,675
—
#44
Arizona
$6,612
—
#45
Utah
$6,593
—
#46
Mississippi
$6,561
—
#47
Nevada
$6,493
—
#48
Tennessee
$6,485
—
#49
Arkansas
$6,414
—
#50
Alabama
$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.
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
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Oregon
31.6%
—
#2
Vermont
29.1%
—
#3
West Virginia
28.1%
—
#4
Washington
27.9%
—
#5
New Hampshire
27.7%
—
#6
Tennessee
27%
—
#7
Utah
26.7%
—
#8
Maine
26.7%
—
#9
Arkansas
26.6%
—
#10
Colorado
26.4%
—
#11
Rhode Island
25.8%
—
#12
Missouri
25.7%
—
#13
Montana
25.6%
—
#14
Indiana
25.3%
—
#15
Kentucky
25.3%
—
#16
Georgia
25.2%
—
#17
Iowa
25%
—
#18
Massachusetts
24.9%
—
#19
Wyoming
24.7%
—
#20
Nevada
24.6%
—
#21
Arizona
24.6%
—
#22
Wisconsin
24.6%
—
#23
Idaho
24.5%
—
#24
Nebraska
24.1%
—
#25
Louisiana
24.1%
—
#26
Alaska
24%
—
#27
Pennsylvania
23.9%
—
#28
New Mexico
23.9%
—
#28
Ohio
23.9%
—
#30
Connecticut
23.7%
—
#31
Kansas · your comparison
23.7%
—
#32
Michigan
23.6%
—
#33
Virginia
23.1%
—
#34
Alabama
23%
—
#35
North Dakota
23%
—
#36
Maryland
22.7%
—
#37
Oklahoma
22.6%
—
#38
Minnesota
22.6%
—
#39
Illinois
22.2%
—
#40
Delaware
22.1%
—
#41
New York
21.9%
—
#42
South Dakota
21.8%
—
#43
California
21.6%
—
#44
North Carolina
21.4%
—
#45
Florida
20.8%
—
#46
Texas
20.7%
—
#47
Mississippi
20.5%
—
#48
Hawaii
19.8%
—
#49
South Carolina
19.8%
—
#50
New Jersey
18.1%
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Explore current officeholders and explicitly reviewed historical executive officials, labeled at the time of their actions. Timeline dates, action type, status and search also filter this list. Read any record’s summary, latest recorded status and official evidence below, or open it beside the timeline.
24 of 24 reviewed Kansas actions · newest first
Jul 1, 2026 · Executive Order 26-05 · Kansas Early Childhood Advisory Council · health coverage, healthcare costs, access to care and public health · Issued · historical policy contextGovernor · Executive Order 26-05
Kansas Early Childhood Advisory Council · health coverage, healthcare costs, access to care and public health
Jul 1, 2026 · Issued · historical policy context
Gov. Laura Kelly · Issued
Reviewed Kansas signed original · selected provisions
EO 26-05 rescinds EO 20-02 and establishes an Early Childhood Advisory Council chaired by the Office of Early Childhood director. It directs statewide needs assessment, funded-program coordination, participation and data recommendations, educator development, learning standards and a public statewide strategic plan. Paragraph 9 makes the council purely advisory with no administrative authority over public funding. The needs assessment includes early-childhood development programs and access from birth to school entry. It does not establish expanded medical eligibility, delivered treatment or improved child-health outcomes. Issued July 1, 2026 and immediately effective until rescinded. The order permits consolidation of nonstatutory bodies, not abolition of statutory councils. It references the Office created under 2025 HB 2045; this order does not itself create that Office. The earlier order, referenced state and federal law, strategic-plan submission, appointments and subsequent implementation require independent review. The signed order establishes historical policy context. Advice, report deadlines, forecasts and authorizations do not establish implementation, delivered benefits, spending, jobs or a measured change in this chart. Later amendments and present operation require separate evidence.
Issued July 1, 2026 and immediately effective until rescinded. The order permits consolidation of nonstatutory bodies, not abolition of statutory councils. It references the Office created under 2025 HB 2045; this order does not itself create that Office. The earlier order, referenced state and federal law, strategic-plan submission, appointments and subsequent implementation require independent review.
Why this record is included
EO 26-05 rescinds EO 20-02 and establishes an Early Childhood Advisory Council chaired by the Office of Early Childhood director. It directs statewide needs assessment, funded-program coordination, participation and data recommendations, educator development, learning standards and a public statewide strategic plan. Paragraph 9 makes the council purely advisory with no administrative authority over public funding. The needs assessment includes early-childhood development programs and access from birth to school entry. It does not establish expanded medical eligibility, delivered treatment or improved child-health outcomes. Issued July 1, 2026 and immediately effective until rescinded. The order permits consolidation of nonstatutory bodies, not abolition of statutory councils. It references the Office created under 2025 HB 2045; this order does not itself create that Office. The earlier order, referenced state and federal law, strategic-plan submission, appointments and subsequent implementation require independent review. The signed order establishes historical policy context. Advice, report deadlines, forecasts and authorizations do not establish implementation, delivered benefits, spending, jobs or a measured change in this chart. Later amendments and present operation require separate evidence.
Retained Kansas evidence context: health coverage, healthcare costs, access to care and public health · reviewed Kansas policy context · unemployment, jobs and workforce issues · reviewed Kansas policy context · schools, learning, college costs and educational attainment · reviewed Kansas policy context · budgets, government spending, deficits and public debt · reviewed Kansas policy context. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
early childhood education and development programs
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑Jun 29, 2026 · Executive Order 26-04 · Uniform Fire Code Task Force · health coverage, healthcare costs, access to care and public health · Issued · historical policy contextGovernor · Executive Order 26-04
Uniform Fire Code Task Force · health coverage, healthcare costs, access to care and public health
Jun 29, 2026 · Issued · historical policy context
Gov. Laura Kelly · Issued
Reviewed Kansas signed original · selected provisions
EO 26-04 establishes a task force to review a proposed fire prevention code, evaluate implementation and fiscal issues, and provide advisory findings to the State Fire Marshal. It also directs recommendations for a long-term code-review process to the governor and 2027 Legislature. The order itself does not adopt the proposed fire code. The review includes residential-care facilities and hospital-sector participation. It does not establish adoption of a new care-facility code or a measured health result. Code-review recommendations were due August 15, 2026; administration, enforcement and training recommendations September 30; a final report and proposed legislation November 30. Issued June 29 and immediately effective until rescinded. Those deadlines do not prove recommendations were delivered or regulations adopted. The separately reviewed HB 2739 enrolled reference retains legislative ratification and a 120-day attorney-general review condition for submitted proposals; actual submission, review and ratification remain unverified. The signed order establishes historical policy context. Advice, report deadlines, forecasts and authorizations do not establish implementation, delivered benefits, spending, jobs or a measured change in this chart. Later amendments and present operation require separate evidence.
Code-review recommendations were due August 15, 2026; administration, enforcement and training recommendations September 30; a final report and proposed legislation November 30. Issued June 29 and immediately effective until rescinded. Those deadlines do not prove recommendations were delivered or regulations adopted. The separately reviewed HB 2739 enrolled reference retains legislative ratification and a 120-day attorney-general review condition for submitted proposals; actual submission, review and ratification remain unverified.
Why this record is included
EO 26-04 establishes a task force to review a proposed fire prevention code, evaluate implementation and fiscal issues, and provide advisory findings to the State Fire Marshal. It also directs recommendations for a long-term code-review process to the governor and 2027 Legislature. The order itself does not adopt the proposed fire code. The review includes residential-care facilities and hospital-sector participation. It does not establish adoption of a new care-facility code or a measured health result. Code-review recommendations were due August 15, 2026; administration, enforcement and training recommendations September 30; a final report and proposed legislation November 30. Issued June 29 and immediately effective until rescinded. Those deadlines do not prove recommendations were delivered or regulations adopted. The separately reviewed HB 2739 enrolled reference retains legislative ratification and a 120-day attorney-general review condition for submitted proposals; actual submission, review and ratification remain unverified. The signed order establishes historical policy context. Advice, report deadlines, forecasts and authorizations do not establish implementation, delivered benefits, spending, jobs or a measured change in this chart. Later amendments and present operation require separate evidence.
Retained Kansas evidence context: health coverage, healthcare costs, access to care and public health · reviewed Kansas policy context · schools, learning, college costs and educational attainment · reviewed Kansas policy context · budgets, government spending, deficits and public debt · reviewed Kansas policy context · housing, rent, homeownership and borrowing costs · reviewed Kansas policy context. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑Apr 27, 2026 · SB 82 · Providing tax credits for expenditures for lockable gun and ammunition storage and the retail sale of higher ethanol blends of fuel, discontinuing the tax credit for qualified alternative-fueled motor vehicle property or fueling station expenditures, repealing the agritourism liability insurance, assistive technology contributions, declared disaster capital investment, owners promoting employment across Kansas and swine facility improvement tax credits and expanding the eligibility for applicable expenses under the child day care services assistance tax credit. · SignedGovernor · SB 82
Providing tax credits for expenditures for lockable gun and ammunition storage and the retail sale of higher ethanol blends of fuel, discontinuing the tax credit for qualified alternative-fueled motor vehicle property or fueling station expenditures, repealing the agritourism liability insurance, assistive technology contributions, declared disaster capital investment, owners promoting employment across Kansas and swine facility improvement tax credits and expanding the eligibility for applicable expenses under the child day care services assistance tax credit.
Apr 27, 2026 · Signed
Gov. Laura Kelly · Signed
FactVote reviewed summary
Laura Kelly signed SB 82. The reviewed section 1 of SB 82 creates a Kansas resident income-tax credit for tax years 2026–2028 equal to 25% of qualifying lockable gun and ammunition storage purchases, capped at $250 per taxpayer per year, with unused credit carried forward. It concerns storage costs; it is not a cash payment to every gun owner or evidence of reduced mortality.
Approved by Governor on Monday, April 27, 2026. Enactment, effective dates, implementation and current enforceability are distinct.
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.
New Section 1. (a) For tax years 2026 through 2028, there shall be allowed a credit against the tax liability of a resident individual imposed under the Kansas income tax act in an amount equal to 25% of the expenditures made by the individual during such tax year to purchase lockable gun and ammunition storage that is designed primarily for gun and ammunition storage . The amount of such credit allowed each tax year shall not exceed $250 for any taxpayer. (b) If the amount of the credit allowed by subsection (a) exceeds the taxpayer's income tax liability imposed under the Kansas income tax act for the tax year in which the credit is allowed, the amount of credit that exceeds such tax liability may be carried forward for deduction from the taxpayer's income tax liability in the next succeeding tax year or years until the total amount of the credit has been deducted from tax liability.
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑Apr 10, 2026 · 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. · Died in committeeKansas 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.
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑Apr 10, 2026 · 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. · Died in committeeKansas 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.
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑Apr 9, 2026 · HB 2501 · Senate Substitute for HB 2501 by Committee on Federal and State Affairs - Providing for immunity from civil liability to federal firearms licensees for returning a firearm to the firearm owner at the termination of a firearm hold agreement, removing the criminal prohibition against firearm suppressors and shotgun barrel length qualification requirements and providing enhanced penalties for certain felonies committed while using a firearm suppressor or short-barrel shotgun. · SignedGovernor · HB 2501
Senate Substitute for HB 2501 by Committee on Federal and State Affairs - Providing for immunity from civil liability to federal firearms licensees for returning a firearm to the firearm owner at the termination of a firearm hold agreement, removing the criminal prohibition against firearm suppressors and shotgun barrel length qualification requirements and providing enhanced penalties for certain felonies committed while using a firearm suppressor or short-barrel shotgun.
Apr 9, 2026 · Signed
Gov. Laura Kelly · Signed
FactVote reviewed summary
Laura Kelly signed HB 2501. Laura Kelly signed HB 2501. The reviewed section 1 of HB 2501 provides civil immunity to federal firearms licensees for specified temporary firearm storage and return under voluntary hold agreements. It preserves discretion to decline storage, preempts additional local agreement requirements, and generally requires destruction of agreement records within 90 days after termination and return unless federal law requires retention. It does not demonstrate an effect on firearm deaths. On termination, the licensee must return the firearm without unreasonable delay or extra fees if its owner may lawfully possess it, except as expressly agreed. The act preserves the owner’s contract or property remedies for wrongful retention.
Approved by Governor on Thursday, April 9, 2026. Enactment, effective dates, implementation and current enforceability are distinct.
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.
New Section 1. (a) As used in this section, unless the context requires otherwise: (1) "Federal firearms licensee" means any person or entity licensed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 923. (2) "Firearm" means the same as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 921, as in effect on July 1, 2026. (3) "Firearm hold agreement" means a private agreement between a federal firearms licensee and an individual firearm owner in which the licensee takes physical possession of the owner's lawfully possessed firearm at the owner's request, holds the firearm for an agreed period of time and returns the firearm to the owner according to the terms of the agreement. If the firearm hold agreement does not provide for the disposition of a firearm abandoned by the owner, state law providing for the disposition of abandoned property applies. (4) "Municipality" means any city, county and consolidated city- county. (b) The individual firearms owner shall provide the make, model and serial number of each firearm to be held as part of the firearm hold agreement. The agreement shall also contain an option for the firearms owner to list a second person to contact in the event of the death or serious illness of the firearms owner. (c) Notwithstanding any other provision of federal or state law, a federal firearms licensee conducting business in this state that has entered into a firearm hold agreement with a firearm owner shall be immune from any claim or cause of action of any kind under theory of liability, including, but not limited to, statutory claims or common law claims arising from tort or contract for any act or omission concerning, arising out of or related to the temporary storage of the firearm on the federal firearm licensee's licensed business premises or the return of a firearm to the individual firearm owner pursuant to the firearm hold agreement, including, without limitation, claims related to personal injury of death of a person resulting from the return of a firearm to the firearm owner at the termination of the firearm hold agreement. (d) Nothing in this act shall be construed to require a federal firearm licensee to accept a firearm for temporary storage on the licensee's premises at the request of the owner as a condition of such licensee's license, thereby allowing federal firearm licensees to have complete discretion in refusing to enter into a firearm hold agreement. (e) (1) Municipalities are preempted from imposing any regulation or additional terms on firearm hold agreements or from creating any civil course of action involving the parties to a firearm hold agreement. (2) The provisions of this act preempt any local statutes, laws or regulations that require or impose obligations on a federal firearm licensee to receive a firearm by a lawful owner for temporary storage pursuant to a firearm hold agreement that are beyond the requirements of this act. (f) A federal firearms licensee shall destroy and not retain in any form, including digital or electronic records, any firearm hold agreement, list of such agreements or identifying information related thereto, not later than 90 days after the termination of the agreement and return of the firearm to the owner, unless required to retain such records by federal law. Destruction shall be in a manner that prevents reconstruction of such records. (g) The voluntary exercise by a firearm owner of the right to temporarily transfer possession of a lawfully owned firearm pursuant to a firearm hold agreement and the subsequent exercise of the right to reclaim possession of such firearm shall be deemed the lawful exercise Senate Sub for HOUSE BILL No. 2501—page 2 of a property right and not give rise to: (1) Any presumption of negligence, fault, recklessness or foreseeability; (2) any inference that the firearm owner lacked the legal capacity or fitness to possess a firearm; or (3) any duty, obligation or expectation that the firearm owner continue, extend or delay reclaiming possession of the firearm beyond the terms of the agreement. (h) The existence of a firearm hold agreement, the decision to enter into such agreement or the timing of a firearm's return pursuant to the agreement shall not be used to diminish, condition or burden a firearm owner's lawful right to possess property and, standing alone, not be admissible to establish a standard of care, breach of duty or comparative fault in any civil action against the firearm owner. (i) (1) Except as expressly agreed by the parties in a firearm hold agreement, a federal firearms licensee shall return the firearm to the firearm owner without unreasonable delay upon termination of the agreement and without any additional penalties and fees if the owner is not prohibited by law from possessing the firearm at the time of return. (2) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to impair, waive or limit a firearm owner's right to recover possession of property or pursue relief for wrongful retention under contract or property law.
Records come from published fact relationships or reviewed topic records with official supporting evidence and verified Kansas officeholder attribution. Historical executive officials require evidence tied to the action date and are excluded from incumbent proposals. Inclusion follows an explicit topic review, a related state fact, or the action’s title and supporting evidence. Explicit topic reviews take priority; repeated actions use the most recent explicit review for this topic. Duplicate actions attached to several facts appear once. This topic match is not a new finding that an action caused a result, and the reviewed collection is selective. Collection reviewed Oct 6, 2026.
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
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
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 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
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
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
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
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 proposalView proposals from Rep. Barbara BallardKansas 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.
Kansas House of Representatives, District 80 · R–KS
1 proposalView proposals from Rep. Bill RhileyKansas 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.
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.
Kansas House of Representatives, District 101 · R–KS
1 proposalView proposals from Rep. Joe SeiwertKansas 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.
Kansas House of Representatives, District 114 · R–KS
2 proposalsView proposals from Rep. Kevin SchwertfegerKansas 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.
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.
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;
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.
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;
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.
Sources & methods
Every section retains its primary sources, units, reporting periods and comparison limits. Maps, graphs and tables use the same observation and cohort. All 50 states are listed; D.C. and territories are excluded. Missing and suppressed values remain unavailable and never become zero.
#1 is the highest measured value. Equal source values share a rank and leave gaps (1, 2, 2, 4). Ranks use source precision and are descriptive, not a score of the state. Survey uncertainty and reporting coverage can limit comparisons. Published U.S. benchmarks are used where available; a state average is not substituted.
Kansas snapshots and fiscal sources keep their own dates and accounting scope. National events and federal distribution explainers describe national context. Actions and statements are filtered to Kansas, retain their reviewed evidence, and do not establish that a policy caused a measured change.
Retained state source collections assembled October 5, 2026. Original review and source dates remain visible. Refreshing this page does not refresh an official data release.