← Election Series · All senate races

Our verdict

Marshall, narrowly, with the lawsuit record on the table

Election Day is November 3. Advance in-person voting in Kansas began October 14 and runs through noon November 2. This is the whole race — the platforms, the records, the worst claims against each candidate, and what the sources actually show. Kansas has not elected a Democrat to the Senate since 1932, and this race is a dead heat anyway. LiberalMind endorses Roger Marshall — narrowly, and with the hardest fact in his record stated in full below. Read the research.

How Kansas got here

On paper, this race should not exist. Kansas last sent a Democrat to the U.S. Senate in 1932. Democrats, as the Associated Press puts it, "haven't come within 10 points of winning a Senate race in more than 50 years." President Trump carried the state by 16 points in 2024. Incumbent Sen. Roger Marshall, a Republican elected in 2020 by about 11 points, won his August 4 primary with 79.8% of the vote.

And yet: Cook Political Report moved the race from Lean Republican to Toss Up on October 6. Sabato's Crystal Ball moved it to Toss-up on October 14. Inside Elections, the most cautious of the three, shifted to Tilt Republican. The Democratic nominee, the Rev. Adam Hamilton, has raised roughly three and a half times Marshall's money. The Senate Leadership Fund has committed $14 million to a rescue, the president has rallied in the state "in Roger's honor," and a top operative from Trump's 2024 super PAC operation joined Marshall's campaign for the final three weeks. Cook's diagnosis names the three causes: "a stronger-than-expected Democratic challenger who has a moderate message and credentials; an incumbent who was slow to wake up to the real threat both his opponent and the environment pose; and erosion in Trump's support on the ground rooted in the agriculture economy's struggles over high fuel and fertilizer prices and distrust over beef imports."

Hamilton won an eleven-candidate Democratic primary on August 4 with just under 35% of the vote — a plurality in a fractured field, which means nearly two of three Kansas Democrats chose someone else, a fact his general-election strength should be weighed against. Libertarian David Graham is also on the ballot.

Why this seat is in play

The challenger is the story. Hamilton, 61, is the founding pastor of the United Methodist Church of the Resurrection in Leawood — the largest United Methodist congregation in the country, which he and his wife LaVon started 36 years ago "with four people and a dream." His submitted biography describes a church whose members "are equal parts Republicans, Democrats, and independents," and which became "the largest source of donated food in Kansas City after the regional food bank" and gave away "thousands of beds to children who didn't have one." Two former Republican governors of Kansas — Bill Graves and Mike Hayden — have endorsed him over the Republican incumbent. On October 19, the same day Trump rallied for Marshall near Wichita, Hamilton released a video telling Kansans: "If you voted for the president, you also have a place in my campaign."

The incumbent is the other story. Marshall was an obstetrician-gynecologist in Great Bend who delivered, by his count, more than 5,000 babies before Kansas sent him to the House in 2017 and the Senate in 2021. In September, the New York Times published an investigation of his medical career that landed in this race like a shell. It is the center of the campaign now, and we take it in full below.

A note on the numbers in this race: one polling firm, Wedgewood Polls, admitted in October that it had no real data behind the vast majority of its releases after an analyst found its raw data was fraudulent. Its surveys have been struck from the averages. In a race this close, Kansas voters should treat any too-convenient poll as what that one was.

Roger Marshall (Republican)

His platform: Marshall runs as "Doc" — the OB-GYN and Army Reserve veteran. On agriculture, his signature issue work is a package of five bipartisan fertilizer bills "to break up the monopolies, expand domestic production, and get real competition back in the market," plus permanent bonus depreciation, higher estate-tax exemptions for family farms, and stronger crop insurance. On healthcare, his Patients Deserve Price Tags Act would force hospitals and insurers to disclose negotiated prices up front. On social policy he is unambiguous and legislatively active: he co-sponsored the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act and introduced the Defining Male and Female Act, saying, "As an OB-GYN who delivered over 5,000 babies, I can tell you with full confidence: boys are boys and girls are girls." He voted for the 2025 tax law and carries the president's endorsement.

The worst claim — and the record:

Claim: As a doctor, he sued more than 700 of his own patients, and dozens were arrested. This is the hardest claim in this series to write, because unlike most of them, the core of it is documented. The New York Times' Sarah Kliff analyzed Kansas court records and found that Marshall and the obstetrics practice he owned or co-owned filed lawsuits against more than 700 patients over unpaid bills during his medical career. Balances ranged from $101 to several thousand dollars. The practice routinely charged 18% annual interest, garnished wages and bank accounts, and — in 81 of the cases — patients were arrested after missing court dates in the collections process. In 13 more suits, his lawyers sought arrest warrants; whether arrests followed is unclear. One case from the Times' account: Joe Vasquez, whose wife's emergency hysterectomy left a $4,561 bill. The couple missed a court date; on Easter weekend 2007 a police car came to their home, and they spent two days in jail before their son borrowed the bond money. "We had no money to pay," Vasquez said.

Marshall's defenses, in his own words, deserve the same space. He called the Times investigation "a political hit job" — while also telling Fox News he had not read it. He says the practice waited a year before sending any account to litigation, that the lawsuits were a common business practice, and that "each year, our hospital gave away millions of dollars of charity care" and "we wrote off hundreds of people's bills every month." At the State Fair debate in Hutchinson, he said one in five of his patients received free care. Those two things can both be true: a practice can write off most of its bad debt and still sue 700 patients. The question for voters is which fact describes the man's judgment. Hamilton's campaign built its defining ad on one patient, Meischa Zimmerman, who says she was arrested and handcuffed in front of her two-year-old while eight months pregnant after missing a $50 payment. Marshall's lawyers fired back a cease-and-desist letter — obtained by the Kansas Reflector — arguing the ad's message, that he "caused a pregnant patient to be arrested and jailed for missing a single $50 payment," is "false in every material respect." The specific vignette is genuinely disputed. The aggregate record — 700 suits, 81 arrests, 18% interest, bills as small as $101 — is the Times' reading of the court files, and Marshall has not disputed the numbers, only the framing.

Claim, from his own president: the law made him do it. Defending Marshall at the October 19 rally, President Trump said Marshall was "mandated by law to request, strongly, money owed from patients… if he didn't make these requests, he would be breaking the law… and he would be subject to criminal arrest." CNN's fact-check desk examined the claim and found it false: no law required Marshall to sue his patients. Federal and state law give doctors and hospitals wide latitude to forgive debts, negotiate, or use gentler collection methods. The president's defense of his senator invents a legal compulsion that does not exist — and, politically, it may be the most damaging sentence spoken about Marshall this fall, because it concedes the lawsuits need a compulsion to excuse them. Marshall's actual defense — charity care, write-offs, a year of patience first — is the honest one, and his campaign should have stuck to it.

The flaw, plainly: Marshall's Senate record aligns with this publication's values on essentially every line — taxes, agriculture against the fertilizer monopolies, price transparency in medicine, the sex-based protections he has put his name on. His flaw is pre-Senate and it is character-adjacent: a medical practice that treated its poorest patients' debts as a litigation portfolio, with arrests at the end of the process. It does not make him corrupt — no court has found wrongdoing, and debt collection is lawful — but 81 arrests of patients is a fact about how a man uses the power a system hands him. Kansas voters must decide how much it weighs against six years of Senate votes. We weigh it, and it is heavy. It is not heavier than the alternative's program.

Adam Hamilton (Democratic)

His platform: Hamilton calls it an Affordability Agenda: "end the self destructive policies coming out of Washington like tariffs and war, crack down on the price-gouging and anti-competitive behavior that push up your bills," build more housing, and "push for trade and tax policies that help Kansas families, farmers, and small businesses." On healthcare he would "reverse the disastrous cuts to Medicaid that threaten our rural hospitals," restore the expired ACA premium credits — whose lapse, he says, raised the typical Kansan's premium by more than half — and expand Medicare drug-price negotiation. His reform plank is genuine reformer fare: term limits and age limits for all three branches, a ban on congressional stock trading, no pay during shutdowns, no corporate PAC money (his campaign takes none), and an in-person town hall in Kansas every year. He has said he would not favor Chuck Schumer returning as Senate Democratic leader if elected.

The worst claims — and the record:

Claim: He is a moderate who happens to be a Democrat. This is Hamilton's own central claim, and it is half true. The moderation is real in method: the cross-party endorsements, the courtship of Trump voters, the refusal to promise Schumer his vote, a congregation built half of Republicans. But on the contested substance of American politics, Hamilton does not break with his party — he represents it, in a pastor's voice. As Newsmax's reporting summarized, he "takes traditional liberal Democrat stands on social issues such as abortion and LGBTQ rights." His healthcare program enlarges the federal machinery — restore the subsidies, expand Medicare negotiation, reverse the Medicaid changes — rather than subjecting it to the market disciplines Marshall's price-transparency bill gestures at. The Manchin test this publication applies is not whether a Democrat sounds moderate; it is whether his record defies his party on the questions that define the two coalitions — life, the size of the state, the reach of Washington. Hamilton's defiance is of tone and of Schumer personally. On policy he is his party, gently spoken.

Claim: He mishandled an abuse scandal at his church's camp. Marshall's allies have pressed criticism of Hamilton's handling, two decades ago, of an abuse case at his church's camp: Hamilton relied on an internal investigation and reported the matter after identifying the person involved. Hamilton told the Kansas Reflector he would handle the situation differently now. The documented facts are those — an internal process, a report made, a retrospective concession — and the record contains no finding that he concealed the matter from authorities. It is a fair question about judgment in a crisis. It is not a cover-up on the evidence available. Marshall has also attacked Hamilton for owning property outside Kansas; Hamilton lives in Stilwell and owns two houses his daughters live in and a lake house in the Missouri Ozarks. Owning a lake house is not a scandal in Kansas or anywhere else.

The flaw, plainly: Hamilton's flaw is that the product does not match the packaging at the level that matters to a senator's actual work. A Senator Hamilton would be a reliable vote for his party's program on abortion, on healthcare expansion, and on the regulatory state — the affordability branding wraps a conventional liberal Democrat in uncommon personal credibility. Kansas has spent 94 years declining that offer. The only thing that has changed is the quality of the salesman, which is considerable: he is, by every account, the strongest Democratic candidate Kansas has fielded in generations. Strength of candidate is not, by itself, a reason to change the answer.

David Graham (Libertarian)

His platform: Graham, an Overland Park solo-practice attorney and the Libertarian Party of Kansas's vice chair, ran for the Senate in 2022 against Jerry Moran. His program is the most radical small-government document in this race: eliminate all taxes, abolish the Departments of Education and Energy, phase out public education, end mandatory minimum sentences, rewrite qualified immunity, legalize marijuana without a government-run regulatory industry, no subsidies to any private company, and healthcare left to the free market — "we've never tried pure capitalism, a free market economy in health care. I think we should try it." His campaign's stated priorities include voting no on "the bailouts, the pork and the unexplained agencies," releasing every Epstein file, and requiring a warrant for license-plate camera surveillance. Notably for a Libertarian, he is pro-life, endorsed by the Pro-Life Libertarian caucus. He polls between 2% and 7%.

The flaw, plainly: Graham's flaw is capability, the same as his Texas counterpart's: a program of abolition with no coalition to enact any of it, and a defense doctrine — oppose any war without an "existential interest" — that is a sentiment, not a strategy. His diagnosis of the federal government will sound familiar to readers of this publication. His prescription would require a Senate that does not exist.

The verdict: Marshall, narrowly, with the lawsuit record on the table

Three different offers. A pastor whose program is his party's, however graciously delivered. A Libertarian whose program is right in direction and impossible in scale. And an incumbent whose Senate votes align with our values nearly line for line — and whose medical career contains the single ugliest verified fact in this entire series: 700 patients sued, 81 arrested over debts, by the practice of a man who preached compassion from an exam room.

We do not wave that away, and voters who conclude it disqualifies him have the facts to act on; that is what the research is for. But the Texas standard asks who the man in the seat will be for six years. In the seat, Marshall has voted for lower taxes, against the fertilizer monopolies squeezing his own farmers, for price transparency in the industry he came from, and for the sex-based protections his party's base demanded. There is no judgment against him, no self-dealing, no conceded liability — and the loudest claim made in his defense, by the president himself, is false, which we have said here rather than repeated.

LiberalMind endorses Roger Marshall — narrowly, and with the lawsuit record counted as the price of the endorsement, not an exception to it. If the patient suits are the fact you cannot get past, Graham is the protest with principles; Hamilton, for voters who hold the Constitution, the free market, and the sanctity of life as we do, is not an option however fine a pastor he is.

Vote early. Research your candidates. Choose the best moderates, whatever their party — no extremism from either side. And encourage your friends and family to do the same.

Sources

AI-assisted article — but the sources are human, and the facts are very real.

← Back to the Election Series