A friend quipped to me recently how he was slightly embarrassed to be a part of the Republican party. I said I understood and we moved on. Hopefully he understands me as I claim that I’m embarrassed to be part of the Democratic party.

While there are Democratic politicians in our nation’s capital worthy of criticism, they are not the cause of my current embarrassment. The source is the Ellis County Democratic Party.

The race for State Representative of the 111th District between incumbent Eber Phelps and challenger Barb Wasinger ended election night extremely close. 32 votes separated the candidates when the initial votes were counted. With an incredibly tight margin between the two, a recount was appropriate. After another day of counting votes, Wasinger was ahead 35 votes.

And, before we move on, let’s acknowledge that registered Republicans outnumber registered Democrats over 2:1 in our county. In fact, there are more registered Independent voters in Ellis County than Democrats. For Eber Phelps to have been only 35 votes shy of Wasinger, a candidate well-established in local politics, and to have served the district for 18 years says something about the idea-focused, rather than party-focused, nature of the electorate in the 111th.

Accepting a close loss tends to be more difficult than being blown out of the water. 35 votes is less than .2% of the 17,667* registered voters in Ellis County. With so few votes making the difference, could an extra three hours of knocking on doors changed the outcome? One more speaking engagement? A few extra phone calls encouraging supporters to get out the vote? Tiny changes in Phelps’s campaign could have made the difference.

However, since the recount, local Democratic leaders have decided to lay the blame on electronic voting machines.

Are the machines outdated? According to the Secretary of State’s office: yes.

Should concerns have been raised before the election? Absolutely.

To bring forth questions about the trustworthiness of voting machines only after your party’s candidate loses reeks of pettiness, only to be amplified by claiming you only seek the true will of the people.

When Phelps wrote a letter signifying he would abide by the 35 vote loss and asked his supporters to suspend any further action in order for Representative-elect Wasinger to focus on the coming legislative session, the matter seemed behind us all. The suit filed in hopes of an outside agency auditing the machines speaks to how a certain group of Phelps supporters truly feel about their candidate.

Just as Rep.-elect Wasinger should be focused on her coming role in Topeka and not a lawsuit, or trying to raise $20,000 for lawyer fees, Ellis County Democrats should be focused on the future instead of playing petty politics in a district that will have none of it.

In two years another election will take place for the 111th seat. With a Presidential election happening on the same ballot, voter-turnout will be even higher, giving an immediate edge to the Republican candidate. I suggest the Democratic party, my Democratic party, start finding a strong candidate and creating an even stronger campaign plan if they want a chance at winning the seat back.

*Unofficial number provided by the Office of the Secretary of State.

Zach Woolf, Hays

Recently, I have been relating some lessons from a vacation my wife and I took this summer. We spent a couple weeks in the mountains of Colorado.

While there, we had a rotation of visitors. They included friends and family members.

I enjoy hiking. I have an old backpack that I keep packed for hikes. It includes a water bottle, water filtration system, compass, map, matches, and other survival items. During our stay in Colorado, one of my sons led a hike of some friends into the mountains. He “borrowed” my backpack, which was fine.

Several days later, I decided to go up a mountain trail. As I was about to start my hike, I put on my backpack, but it seemed strangely light. I discovered that the water filtration system, my jacket, and map were missing. Later, I had a talk with my son.

After our vacation to Colorado, I met with a family. In 2012, they set up an estate plan. When I met with them in November of 2018, their “estate plan” included a Tupperware container of documents.

What did I discover? Land and other assets were not in their trust (which would end up requiring a probate). They had children that helped them invest some of their money, but did not consider their estate plan in that process. As a result, the money in the investments was not properly titled in a trust, nor were the funds going where the family intended on their death. As I asked questions I kept getting blank looks from my clients and their family.

Keep in mind that in 2012 their plan was in order. Now they did not even know what they had. Part of the problem was things had been taken out; and other things were put in or intended to be put in.

And now, mom was sick; dad was burned out; they were trying to stay at home; and they wondered what to do next and whether they had what all they needed.

It was kind of like my backpack – originally it contained all the tools they needed to travel safely, or in the event of an emergency. But now my clients were lost; they looked in their “backpack” and did not know what was there, what should be there, and whether they had what they needed for their journey.
This is what happens many times: people set up a plan for a given trip. Then they deal with their family, accountant or investment person, creating changes. Or something happens that is a significant event (death, marriage, illness, etc.).

But those changes do not make it back into their plan or their plan is not adjusted as a result of those changes.

The result is their backpack is not ready for their journey.

What do you do? First, realize certain events may require changes to what is in your backpack; or may even require a brand new backpack.

Second, be careful with people that may modify what is in your backpack, without actually knowing what was in your backpack and what was intended to stay in your backpack. It could have a significant effect.

Third, review your backpack often (every year). Be sure it has in there what you think it has, and that it will take you on your journey.

I do not make these comments lightly. I know I have to look in my own “backpack” every so often. When do I do it? I usually do it at tax time. In addition, every couple years I ask my law partner to look over what is in my backpack to be sure I am not missing anything.

My law partner asks me some good questions: “Are there any family dynamics?” “Have you opened any new accounts?” “Can I look at your tax return to see what accounts you have?” You would be surprised how often she finds something that I need to fix. Usually it is a little thing, but it is something that by fixing it now makes it a lot cheaper later on.

Have someone look through your backpack with you. And do not let people take stuff out of your backpack without your knowledge and without your understanding the implications.

Randy Clinkscales of Clinkscales Elder Law Practice, PA, Hays, Kansas, is an elder care attorney, practicing in western Kansas. To contact him, please send an email to [email protected]. Disclaimer: The information in the column is for general information purposes and does not constitute legal advice. Each case is different and outcomes depend on the fact of each case and the then applicable law. For specific questions, you should contact a qualified attorney.

Agriculture continues to lose producers. No one will argue that point, but larger, more efficient producers are replacing those lost in this highly competitive industry.

While this is not necessarily a desirable trend, it is one that has continued for decades – maybe since the beginning of this profession. That said, it is also a trend that is not confined to agriculture but has affected nearly every sector of the U.S. and world economies.

Regardless of this ongoing change, care for the land and this critical resource continues to improve. Today’s farmers are increasing the amount of organic matter in their soil. With no-till and reduced tillage farming, farmers continue to build organic matter and improve the soil tilth. There is no reason to believe this practice will be discontinued.

Today’s modern farmer is not exhausting the land. Just the opposite is true.

Without question scarce water is always a concern, especially in Midwestern states where rainfall is limited, and people use plenty of it. Farmers constantly chart rainfall amounts and monitor weather conditions. In Kansas, agricultural producers are aware of changes in the Ogallala Aquifer.

Farmers are very much tuned into water and the conservation of this vital resource. Some are concerned about the potential of a long-term climate change.

Barring a major shift in our climate, crops will continue to be planted in western Kansas. Production could be less than now, but this land will be farmed and farmed wisely.

At the same time, the world’s population is exploding. Some say the greatest growth in the history of our world is underway.

World population is projected to reach 9.7 billion by 2050. The current world population of 7.3 billion is expected to reach 8.5 billion by 2030 and 11.2 billion in 2100. Most of these people will be born in the hungry parts of the world.

As a result, pressure on the world’s economic and natural resources for food will become intense. Such demand for food will mean opportunity for farming and ranching. It will also become critical for public/private enterprise to ramp up food production.

There is nothing to suggest yields will not keep up with population growth. Even countries with marginal soil and more severe climates than our own are growing crops today. We have better yield potential and better food value today and with new genetics and technologies coming on line, there is no reason to believe the world won’t be able to feed itself in the future.

American agriculture is up to the task. This country can continue producing for the world.

The United States farmer and rancher can compete with other nations, if they aren’t shackled by government regulations that cause production costs to soar and trade tariffs that continue to push some out of business.

Even the most efficient farmers in America can’t make it with regulatory restrictions. Any regulations must be science based and uniform across the board for producers around the world.

If there is a level playing field, where all producers have the same health and safety restrictions, U.S. agriculture will compete. Give farmers and ranchers the same opportunity, as others around the world and bountiful, wholesome food will continue.

Winston Churchill said many years ago, “Give us the tools and we will get the job done.” The same can be said for agriculture in this country.

John Schlageck is a leading commentator on agriculture and rural Kansas.