We have a brand new updated website! Click here to check it out!

Politics and perils of Muslim bashing on the campaign trail

Charles C. Haynes is director of the Religious Freedom Center of the Newseum Institute.
Charles C. Haynes is director of the Religious Freedom Center of the Newseum Institute.

According to conventional presidential campaign wisdom, loose talk denigrating a religious tradition practiced by millions of Americans would seriously damage — if not sink — a candidate’s bid for the nomination of either major party.

But in what is already the most unconventional presidential primary contest in modern history, Republican presidential hopefuls Ben Carson and Donald Trump continue to rise in the polls despite statements suggesting that American Muslims are somehow dangerous and un-American.

Not only has anti-Islam rhetoric become politically acceptable in this campaign, it may actually be good politics in the fight for the Republican nomination.

Carson — leading the field in the most recent national poll — made headlines this month when he declared that Muslims should be barred from the presidency unless, as he clarified later, they “reject the tenets of Islam.”

Not to be outdone, Donald Trump, who is close behind Carson in the polls, let it be known during a television interview that he would consider closing some mosques as part of his anti-ISIS effort.

When pressed about a mosque-closing strategy because of something called religious freedom, Trump said: “It depends, if the mosque is, you know, loaded for bear, I don’t know. You’re going to have to certainly look at it.”

Trump and Carson are echoing a false and disturbing message about Islam disseminated over the past decade by a small number of anti-Muslim groups: Islam is America’s enemy — not extremists acting in the name of Islam, but Islam itself.

Much like the nativists of the 19th century who warned that Roman Catholicism is incompatible with American principles, nativists of the 21st century are sounding the alarm about Islam in the United States. “Islam,” argues Ben Carson, “is not consistent with the Constitution.”

Propaganda demonizing an entire faith community has consequences, especially when reinforced by leading candidates for the presidency.

It’s worth recalling that in the heyday of anti-Catholicism in America discredited rumors about the evils of convent life and “papist” plots to take over the country fueled widespread animus towards Catholics. Over a period of several decades, fear and hatred of Catholicism sparked periodic riots resulting in the loss of life and destruction of Catholic churches.

More than one hundred years later, American Muslims are the new Catholics. Mosques are frequently vandalized, Muslims are facing workplace discrimination, and hate groups are organizing anti-Islam campaigns.

Last spring, the anti-Muslim frenzy was on full display outside a mosque in Phoenix, Arizona. Hundreds of anti-Muslim demonstrators attended what they called a “patriotic” protest; most of them carrying guns and wearing profanity-laced T-shirts. Similar anti-Muslim protests were held outside mosques across the country this fall.

Of course, these attacks on Islam are not undertaken in a vacuum. Violent terrorists and extremists calling themselves “Muslims” have done much to fuel the blanket condemnations of Islam by anti-Muslim groups in the United States.

But propaganda only works when people are susceptible to the message. In addition to horrific world events, religious illiteracy, fear of the unknown and changing demographics are powerful drivers of prejudice.

Ben Carson is simply wrong about Islam in America. Millions of American Muslims are simultaneously faithful followers of Islam and patriotic Americans.

And Donald Trump is wrong about the danger of mosques in America. The hundreds of mosques and Islamic centers that dot the American landscape today are not hotbeds of terrorism. On the contrary, they are places where people of faith are actively engaged in serving the community, promoting understanding across faiths, and preventing radicalization among young people.

Here’s the good news: When it comes to building bridges across religious divides, familiarity breeds understanding and respect.

According to various studies, people who actually know a Muslim or take time to visit a mosque are far more likely to have favorable views of Islam.

As reported last spring in The Washington Post, Jason Leger — one of the protesters outside the Phoenix mosque wearing a hate message on his T-shirt — accepted an invitation to join the evening prayer inside the mosque.

“It was something I’ve never seen before,” Leger told the Post. “I took my shoes off. I kneeled. I saw a bunch of peaceful people. We all got along. They made me feel welcome, you know. I just think everybody’s points are getting misconstrued, saying things out of emotion, saying things they don’t believe.”

Anyone who is serious about being president of “We the People” — including Ben Carson and Donald Trump — should visit a mosque, talk to the Americans worshipping there, and find out the truth about Islam in America.

Charles C. Haynes is vice president of the Washington-based Newseum Institute and executive director of the Religious Freedom Center. [email protected]

INSIGHT KANSAS: The end of the beginning

“Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.” — British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, (1942)

No one should confuse 2015 Kansas with 1942 Europe, but Churchill’s trenchant turn of phrase might well apply to our politics and policy, five years into the administration of Governor Sam Brownback.

Burdett Loomis
Burdett Loomis

The governor, along with his legislative allies, has enjoyed an historic run, turning Kansas sharply to the right turn since 2010. No modern Kansan has had more impact on the state’s political make-up and its policies.

Still, “the end of the beginning” of the Brownback era is at hand. Aside from his lame-duck status, evidence for this claim comes from various sources, starting with the recent statewide Docking Institute survey from Fort Hays State University.

In that poll, just 18 percent of the respondents were “very” or “somewhat” satisfied with the governor’s job performance. Remarkably, only 38 percent of self-identified strong Republicans approved, while 45 percent disapproved.

Moreover, 61 percent of Kansans viewed his tax cuts as an economic-policy failure (30 percent a “tremendous failure”), while just seven percent viewed them as a success (.2 percent a “tremendous success”).

With such free-fall in public opinion, it is no great surprise that solidly conservative Kansas legislators, such as state senators Jeff King (R-Independence) and Jim Denning (R-Overland Park) are questioning the long-term wisdom of core Brownback policies.

What’s telling is that King and Denning are addressing two separate policies, taxes and Medicaid expansion, in similar ways, but from very different career perspectives.

King’s willingness to revisit Medicaid expansion derives from a local issue – the prospective closing of his hometown hospital – and his own, considerable ambition.

At 40, with degrees from elite universities, including Yale Law School, King – much like Secretary of State Kris Kobach – wants to advance, but the Kansas GOP field is very crowded, and the opportunities are limited.

It’s a measure of Brownback’s weakness that King is willing to take him on regarding Medicaid expansion. In a recent newsletter he states, “My point is that our health care system failed Independence and it is failing tens of thousands of hardworking Kansans. I don’t have all of the answers, but saying no to everything isn’t an option. I look forward to exploring the benefits of a conservative, Kansas-focused Medicaid expansion based on private insurance.”

In short, Jeff King’s local politics, his own ambitions, and the problematic nature of current Kansas policies have combined to move him, the Vice-President of the Senate, to reconsider a major policy option.

Jim Denning could not be less like Jeff King, save for his solid conservative GOP credentials. At age 59, with a background in accounting and as a former business CEO, his low-key style contrasts sharply with his colleague’s. Still, like King, he has consistently supported the Brownback policy agenda.

From his vice-chairmanship of the Senate Ways and Means Committee, Denning plays a major role in making and monitoring tax policy, and he has observed firsthand the plunge in Kansas revenues, with the many negative implications for bond ratings as well as policies ranging from education to foster care.

In particular, he finds fault with the income-tax exemption for independent Kansas businesses: “When you look at what we’ve done, it’s so unreasonable, so amateurish. There’s 1.5 million taxpayers in Kansas, and we’ve decided that 333,000 don’t have to pay tax.”

For a hard-headed CEO/accountant, there could scarcely more powerful insults than calling something “unreasonable” and “amateurish.”

To be sure, Sam Brownback retains many allies and still holds the veto pen, but when he starts losing senators like Jeff King and Jim Denning, “end of the beginning” may be at hand.

Burdett Loomis is a professor of political science at the University of Kansas.

Now That’s Rural: Brad Hamilton, ‘God, family, America and freedom’

Ron Wilson is director of the Huck Boyd National Institute for Rural Development at Kansas State University.
Ron Wilson is director of the Huck Boyd National Institute for Rural Development at Kansas State University.

By RON WILSON
Huck Boyd National Institute for Rural Development

“God, family, America and freedom.” Those are the priorities that rural entertainer Brad Hamilton believes in living, celebrating, and promoting. He also believes in public service, both in civic life and in the military.

Brad Hamilton is an educator and entertainer in northeast Kansas. His family came from Jewell County originally. Part of his ancestry is Native American Indian. Brad’s father played football, ran track, and was on the wrestling team at Kansas State. Brad’s dad went on to become the superintendent at Lovewell Reservoir.

Brad grew up with a love of music and of cowboy life. His grandfather had a farm and Brad rode whenever he could. “I grew up in the Roy Rogers era and those good guys were your heroes,” Brad said. He learned to spin guns and do rope tricks. His grandfather also loved the song “Wings of a Dove” and he asked Brad to sing along with it every chance he could.

Brad’s father served in the National Guard and then was transferred to Salina when Brad was nine.

One day while in grade school at Salina, Brad was seated next to a young man who would become a longtime friend. This young man’s name was Bill Graves.

Brad and Bill Graves went through Salina schools together and then to Kansas Wesleyan. After Brad’s football career ended due to injury, he got a teaching degree. He also played in bands and sang while in college. Bill Graves went into politics and was eventually elected Secretary of State.

Brad taught for a time and then worked 20 years for Kansas Social and Rehabilitation Services.  He met and married a Native American woman during that time and was involved in the activities of the Kansas tribes.

In 1994, Bill Graves was elected governor. When he took office, he called on his longtime friend and experienced state worker, Brad Hamilton, to join him as a policy advisor. One of Brad’s primary duties was to serve as a liaison with the Native American tribes in Kansas.

Brad had moved to Jackson County by this time. After serving on the governor’s staff during all eight years of the Graves administration, Brad was elected a Jackson County commissioner. He served two terms and even was elected president of the Kansas County Commissioners Association.

One day one of his fellow commissioners heard Brad humming a song while working at the courthouse. The commissioner thought he sounded pretty good and encouraged him to sing at the newly opened Red Rock Guest Ranch which was producing a weekly cowboy music show. Brad laughed it off, but the guest ranch owner cornered him and insisted that he come sing. “Okay, I’ll go and get this over with,” Brad thought. “Do you know any of these songs?” the owner asked Brad. “I know The Auctioneer,” Brad said. After he sang it, the next question was: “Can you come sing here next Saturday night?”

It went so well that Brad became a featured performer every weekend at the guest ranch.  Eventually he became the entertainment manager there.

Brad ultimately produced a CD of his cowboy songs. The guest ranch no longer offers regular shows, but Brad continues to sing and perform around Kansas while serving as a substitute teacher in the Royal Valley school district. He lives near the rural community of Hoyt, population 573 people. Now, that’s rural.

Brad now produces a show called 4 Points West, featuring his four core values which he says are “God, family, America, and freedom.” One day a friend came to Brad and told him how much his granddaughter enjoyed Brad singing “God bless the USA.” He encouraged Brad to produce a CD of patriotic music, which Brad released in the summer of 2015.

“I do lots of shows for kids,” Brad said. “We need to expose our kids to western culture, lifestyle and beliefs.”

“God, family, America, and freedom.” We salute Brad Hamilton for making a difference by sharing these beliefs with others through music, celebration of cowboy heritage, and his service to the citizens of Kansas and Jackson County. He makes some great points.

SCHROCK: Any external assessment is too much

John Richard Schrock is a professor at Emporia State University.
John Richard Schrock is a professor at Emporia State University.

President Obama’s proposal to cap external assessments at two percent of student class time is seven years late and two percent too much. It does not end the educational disaster of 14 years of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) over-testing. It does not bring back the art and music classes that were lost because they were not tested and therefore did not count. Nor does it address the concerns of growing number of parents who are opting their child out of testing. And it does nothing to re-professionalize teaching.

Every rural Kansan knows that the more time you spend weighing them, the less time you have to feed them. But reducing testing to two percent does not mean that a teacher will have 98 percent of class time for teaching. While the last 14 years of assessments only consumed a week each spring, the months before the test were often filled with pre-tests, practicing for the tests, and every form of coercion imaginable to get students to score higher. With teachers and administrators still under-the-gun to raise test scores, this teaching-to-the-test will continue. Indeed, in most states the current mandated assessments only take up 2.7 percent of class time. But preparation for that test consumes the months beforehand. Reducing the actual testing to two percent of class time does nothing to eliminate the test-prep.

To weigh the effect of NCLB on the teaching profession, consider what it would do to the medical profession if this standardization was imposed on doctors. Previously, physicians treated each patient who came in with unique needs and left with individualized cures. And teachers taught students who came in unique and left unique.

But teachers are restricted to scores on language arts and math. That is like forcing doctors to only use temperature and blood pressure to rate a patient’s health. As a result, patients get no attention to lung and kidney and other problems. And students are shortchanged in art, music, science and social studies.

With temperature and blood pressure the only indicator of health, and heavy penalties on doctors and hospitals that don’t improve those measures, physicians would load their patients up on aspirin and blood pressure medicine. Similarly, teachers have to teach-to-the-past-tests and raise assessment scores. Of course, the overall effect is sicker patients. And despite increased assessment scores, the genuine measurements of student abilities on the NAEP, SAT and ACT go down.

The ACT and SAT have been around far longer than the NCLB testing mania. So why weren’t they just as bad as current assessments? The ACT and old SAT are aptitude tests, not achievement tests. They measured a students aptitude or general ability. Generally, a teacher cannot teach-to-the ACT or SAT tests, so it did not distort their classroom teaching. These tests do not promote memorization and drillwork.

But the government-mandated assessment tests are achievement tests that do respond to memorization and drillwork. State boards of education latch onto standards that profess fanciful creative-thinking goals. But teachers under pressure don’t teach-to-the-standards; they await the release of the first round of tests and they teach-to-that-test.

To treat patients as unique patients, physicians must have the total professional judgement call on what tests to use—period.

And to treat our students as the unique students they are, teachers must regain their professional right to be the sole testers of their students. There should be no external test that requires them to teach-to-that-test. Not two percent, Mr. President. Zero percent.

Ivory tower educationists rail that math and English are universal across the U.S. and therefore the tests must be universal. But teaching is about students as much as about the subject. City kids do not have the same experience base as rural students.

American teachers were unique in the world because we had the professional right and responsibility to teach different students differently. To restore our profession, we must regain that right. Our students come to us unique; they should leave our classrooms unique.

No more standardization means no more external testing.

MOVIE REVIEW: ‘Steve Jobs’ is brilliant

James Gerstner reviews movies for Hays Post.
James Gerstner reviews movies for Hays Post.

I have an Apple Watch. When I raise my wrist and spin the Digital Crown, my watch “time travels” into either the future of the past. My next appointment changes, the current temperature changes based upon forecasts and with a simple push, everything snaps back to the present. Steve Jobs, the man, could do that same thing. Seemingly at-will, he could look into the future, see what was going to be, and then snap back to the present to build it.

Real artists, the inescapable ones, have that quality – the ability to crystallize a moment in time, be it the past, present or future and transcribe it in their respective medium for the world. Jobs was an artist that work in silicon, aluminum and glass. Writer Aaron Sorkin, known for his work on “The Social Network,” “The West Wing” (which I’ve finally started watching now that I’m living in D.C.), and “The Newsroom” is an artist who paints with witty, fast-paced dialogue has composed one of his many masterpieces.

steve-jobs-movie-poster-800px-800x1259

“Steve Jobs” is set in primarily three scenes – backstage before the original Macintosh launch, backstage before his NeXT launch and backstage before the launch of the iMac. It’s a very unique structure, but it serves the intent of the story brilliantly – this is a story about the complicated, visionary Steve Jobs, not about the company he willed into existence. This isn’t a story about the company Apple. As much as you might expect to have the product launches be the turnkey scenes, the actual stage presentations are omitted – because on-stage Steve Jobs was not representative of the troubled, compulsive, yet undeniably brilliant Jobs that this story, based on the biography from Walter Isaacson, is telling.

Speaking of artists, director Danny Boyle, best known for his work on “Slumdog Millionaire” brings a fantastic vibrancy and believability to an unbelievable story. His partnership with the lead actors, all of whom deliver spectacular performances, is evident. The combination of Boyle’s direction and Michael Fassbender’s performance really did invoke the “Reality Distortion Field.” There were a couple of moments in the film that I forgot I was watching a movie. I thought, if only briefly, that I was watching a live stream of the real Steve Jobs backstage. That is something special, and no mistake.

Unfortunately, I jumped the gun buying my tickets to “Steve Jobs,” because of an AMC Stubs contest that offered Apple products as a grand prize. I didn’t win. Regardless, “Steve Jobs” isn’t playing in Hays, and that’s unfortunate because it’s the only movie I saw this week. If and when this movie comes to Hays, it’s a must-see. It’s unique, brilliant, harrowing and focusing – much like Jobs himself was.

6 of 6 stars

SCHLAGECK: Student teachers learn about agriculture

John Schlageck writes for the Kansas Farm Bureau.
John Schlageck writes for the Kansas Farm Bureau.

Inside the Kansas State University classroom all eyes were riveted on the guest speakers. By the end of the two, one-hour training sessions the future teachers were well equipped to tell the story of the state’s number one industry.

Kansas Farm Bureau and Kansas Foundation for Ag in the Classroom partnered to provide agricultural resources to future Kansas teachers studying in the College of Education.

Serita Blankenship, KFB agriculture education and Cathy Musick, Kansas Foundation for Ag in the Classroom conducted workshops about farming and ranching and explained the importance of agriculture in people’s lives.

“If you eat, wear clothes or drive a vehicle, you are connected with the number one industry in the state of Kansas – agriculture,” Musick says.

The Kansas State University session grew out of a long-standing partnership between the two ag organizations.

After student teachers attend these workshops, they’ll be confident teaching agriculture in the classroom, Blankenship says.

“We shared resources, contact information and we’ll be there for them when they begin teaching,” she adds.

One of the sources the team shared was the website www.myamericanfarm.org. My American Farm is a place eager, young learners can explore and discover information about food, fiber and energy. The site also includes free games and other educational resources.

In addition to the educational materials on myamericanfarm.org, the Kansas State University students learned about the latest agricultural facts and statistics including:

• Less than 2 percent of the U.S. population is made up of farmers and ranchers. They represent a diverse vocation growing conventional, biotech and organic crops.
• One U.S. farm feeds 168 people
• Nearly 100,000 of the 3.2 million U.S. farm operators are Spanish, Hispanic and Latinos
• African American farmers total nearly 45,000
• American Indian approximately 58,500
• Women nearly 970,000
• 97 percent of U.S. farms are owned by families
• 3 percent are owned by non-family corporations
• Every year, farmers produce more food with fewer inputs like labor, seeds, feed and fertilizer.

The ag duo also discussed potential careers in agriculture and shared other agricultural games designed for elementary students.

The student teachers’ obvious curiosity and excitement about the classroom resources bode well for the future of agriculture education.

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

HAWVER: Athletic funding comes under scrutiny in school funding fight

martin hawver line art

Remember your mother telling you that there are some things you just don’t ask about?

You never ask about now much money people make, or why that diet apparently just isn’t working…or, how much money the local board of education pays the football coach.

Those are just off-limits sorts of things that…wait…that last question got asked last week at a meeting of the K-12 Student Success Committee.

The committee which is studying school finance—but probably more particularly whether school districts are spending state aid money the way that conservative legislators want it spent—raised that question.

The panel is trying to figure out a formula to provide suitable—and constitutional—levels of state aid to the nearly 280 unified school districts in Kansas. It’s a fresh start operation because last session, lawmakers literally erased the 20-plus year old school finance formula that appeared to provide adequate and constitutional levels of financing to school districts. Key is that every K-12 school student in Kansas has the opportunity to receive a quality education regardless of the taxable wealth of their district. It’s an equalizing process in which the state evens-up the money available for those students’ education.

Apparently that old formula worked until the Legislature didn’t appropriate enough money to provide that equal educational opportunity to pupils without regard to whether they lived in a property tax rich district or a property tax poor district.

So, while awaiting a decision from the Kansas Supreme Court on whether the state is providing enough money to districts to provide that suitable education statewide, legislators are looking for ways to provide that support at rock bottom prices.

That’s where the expenditures approved by locally elected school boards come into play…and whether the state has a responsibility to pay for not only the math and science and English classes, but maybe the football and basketball and cross-country coaches.

Mom would have said don’t ask that question because in most school districts, even patrons who don’t have a potential gold-plated quarterback at school want their sports teams to excel. And, they want a way to spend Friday nights watching football games in which their teams whip their neighboring high schools.

Now, districts don’t just hire coaches. They hire a teacher who may teach a little math or physical education—or a full day of teaching conventional subjects—and receive a bonus or stipend for the extra hours spent as a coach.

The amount of that supplemental contract likely varies widely—we’ll learn next month when Kansas Department of Education grinds the coaching stipends out of local school boards—and Kansans will learn who gets paid what.

It’s unlikely that the education department is going to have a chart that shows the coaching stipend along with the won-loss record of the team, but we’re figuring that sportswriters around the state will do the math. Not sure that legislators are going to be able to compute what a winning football team means for enhancing pride in one’s school or the willingness of patrons to support those schools.

Starting to look like one of those questions that deals with an admittedly minute portion of the school finance issue, but one that will flare up, see school districts defending their decisions on important local social issues…having the best team in the league or in the state, or maybe just in the county.

There may be amazing numbers next month on those coaching salaries.

But, at least no legislator asked about whether schools and the state could save money…if cheerleaders’ skirts were shorter…

Syndicated by Hawver News Co. of Topeka, Martin Hawver is publisher of Hawver’s Capitol Report. To learn more about this nonpartisan statewide political news service, visit www.hawvernews.com.

Exploring Kansas Outdoors: Getting permission should be your mission

BullCityBlack500x125 (1)

Steve Gilliland
Steve Gilliland

One particular landowner who has allowed me to trap for several years always asks me where on his land I will be trapping, and my answer has always been “Wherever your crops and cattle will allow it; I will always work around you.”

This year however he asked his son who told me he wanted no traps on the place as he wants to hunt and shoot the coyotes himself. I was a bit stunned as he had never faltered in giving me permission before, but I chatted with the owner awhile, thanked him and drove away.

Very few farmers deny trapping on their land unless they do hunt or trap themselves, but it is their land and they do have the right to control access to it. The point I want this column to drive home is how important it is to us hunters and trappers and to the future of our sports to create and to maintain a good relationship with the farmers and ranchers on whose land we hunt and trap.
Hunting and trapping should be seen by us as a privilege, and with privileges come certain responsibilities. Here are a few suggestions that will help create and maintain good relationships with the farmers and ranchers who own the land where you hunt and trap.

Landowners should be contacted each year no matter how long you have been granted access to their land. Stop and see them in person when possible. There are landowners that are just fine with a phone call and you will learn who they are with time, but if in doubt, see them in person. I traded pickups this year, so I have tried to stop and see all landowners just to show them what truck I will now be driving.

Pay special attention to any specific requests by the landowner. I accidentally left an electric fence hotwire unhooked one time and a few of the owners cows got out. He was none-too-happy, but we are friends and I apologized profusely and all was well. Make certain to close all gates, stay off the property if it’s wet enough to make ruts where you drive, and always leave the property as you found it.

Offering to help a landowner with a project like building fence or clearing trees goes a long way toward assuring permission to hunt or trap his land. You can also give them a pheasant or some fresh venison now and then. Some hunters even send thank you cards to landowners each year. I recently read how one professional trapper out west once stopped to help a farmer get freshly baled hay into the barn just before a rain and because of his kindness was eventually granted sole permission to trap on over 15,000 acres of New Mexico land owned by the farmer’s cousin.

God is not making any more land these days, and good recreational land is often leased or purchased by wealthy groups or individuals for their own use. That leaves most of us outdoorsmen dependant on gaining permission to hunt and trap on privately owned land. So, obey the game laws, obey the landowner’s rules and by-all-means close the gates unless you’d rather chase cattle than hunt.

Continue to Explore Kansas Outdoors!

Steve Gilliland, Inman, can be contacted by email at [email protected].

BullCityBlack500x125 (1)

INSIGHT KANSAS: Don’t call it a comeback?

Politics is like a pendulum. It can swing as far to one side as possible, but eventually it makes its way back to center. Over the last three election cycles, Kansas politics has swung increasingly to the right. Just when we thought it could go no further after 2012, conservative Republican legislative victories in 2014 coupled with Governor Sam Brownback’s re-election showed that the pendulum could actually go further right.

Chapman Rackaway is a Professor of Political Science at Fort Hays State University.
Chapman Rackaway is a Professor of Political Science at Fort Hays State University.

So perhaps there is still room for conservatives to add more victories in the 2016 cycle. But more than likely, the pendulum should start moving back to center. To do that, center-right Republicans have to figure out their mission and develop their own alternative to the state party machinery.

A number of individual candidates have decided to run in the GOP primaries for 2016 versus conservative Republicans who have won office during the rightward swing Kansas has experienced since 2010. Dinah Sykes has already announced she is running against Greg Smith for Johnson County’s 21st District Senate seat and is running a very aggressive campaign.

Popular former Garden City mayor and current state representative John Doll is running against Larry Powell, who himself upended a moderate Republican in former Majority Leader Steve Morris during the 2012 primaries. More center-right candidates are likely thinking that their time to run is now. While most of the action appears to be in the Senate, others think centrists have a better chance of winning a governing coalition in the state House. While focus has been on those candidates, an important prerequisite for center-right Republicans to compete electorally is support.

The real test of moderate Republican strength will come in their ability to coalesce around a single organized leadership structure and message. One significant advantage Governor Brownback’s allies have had during the last three elections is a revived state GOP apparatus. From voter files to interest group connections, and from campaign plans to staffing, the Kansas Republican Party has been a support network for the legion of candidates that swept the legislature. Moderate Republicans and Democrats, by contrast, were either completely disorganized (the moderate GOP members) or playing catch-up (Democrats) with the new GOP machine in Topeka.

Regardless of structure, if more candidates like Sykes and Doll emerge we will at least see more competitive campaigns next year. But to win on a statewide basis, those center-right candidates will need a source of fundraising, voter data, and volunteers. Those vital sources tend to be provided by political party organizations. Moderates don’t have a state committee of their own right now to shore up their candidates’ efforts.

Center-right Republicans seem to be stuck in neutral today. No single group has emerged to become the organizational structure around which center-right candidates coalesce nor provided a unifying message for centrists. Republicans who oppose the state’s current rightward trajectory also seem to lack a vision of what they want to do beyond getting rid of Sam Brownback and his allies. Moderate groups’ online posts look eerily similar to Paul Davis’ message during the 2014 campaign, essentially saying everything Brownback does is wrong and little else. To emerge as the voice of moderate Kansas, centrists need to develop a message defining what they are beyond not being Brownback-style conservatives.

What, essentially, does it mean to be a centrist in the state of Kansas in 2015? Besides disagreeing with Brownback, we have little idea. Conservatives, by comparison, can unite behind a single brand and a popular message of tax reduction, giving them a significant advantage.

Without a strong message and stronger support, the pendulum will stay to the right in Kansas for some time to come.

Chapman Rackaway is a Professor of Political Science at Fort Hays State University.

Celebrate Free Speech Week: Speak up, speak out!

Gene Policinski is senior vice president of the First Amendment Center
Gene Policinski is senior vice president of the First Amendment Center

It’s Free Speech Week 2015 — and a major debate over free speech has just broken out.

Thanks to the First Amendment, we are free to compliment, cajole, deny or decry. And if you’re looking for something immediate that calls out for more free and unfettered discussion, join this newest national debate over anonymous speech on the Web.

On Wednesday, a coalition of women’s and civil rights groups announced a campaign to pressure colleges, through the U.S. Department of Education, to go on the offensive — pardon that reference — against anonymous social media applications like Yik Yak, which allows students to send social media messages within a specific university’s virtual community.

These groups asked the U.S. Education of Department to treat colleges’ failure to monitor anonymous social media comments, ranging from threats of rape and murder to insults using racial slurs or simply uncomplimentary references, as a violation of federal civil rights laws.

The groups’ letter to the department’s Office of Civil Right cites a number of examples, including “incidents at the University of Mary Washington, where female students were threatened with rape, murder and other abuse via Yik Yak, and at Clemson University where racially abusive Yaks appeared after a student march protesting the failure to indict the police officer responsible for the death of unarmed African-American teenager Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri.”

Absent the kind of directed, viable and proximate conditions required for a criminal charge, the examples raise concerns over atmospherics and ideas expressed on campuses — areas which traditionally gain the highest levels of First Amendment protections.

In fact, the coalition is critical of college administrators who it says cite “vague First Amendment concerns” in refusing to squelch Yik Yak and its kin. It calls on federal officials to mandate that universities use campus disciplinary powers, employ technological tools to block certain social media sites, ban the use of campus wi-fi to make objectionable posts, and conduct 24-7 monitoring of social media to spot the errant postings. It also asks for counseling for students traumatized by such online posts.

The groups have a worthy goal: to combat threats of violence and assault that terrorize a perceived victim. The pressing questions — particularly poignant during Free Speech Week, which this year is Oct. 19-25 — are what kind of speech rises to that level? And how do responsible tactics against such threats avoid becoming political correctness run amok and a latter-day, academic version of witch hunts?

Such questions are far from “vague concerns” over a core freedom. And, the “Yik Yak letter” is not the only arena in which we are debating old standards about free expression.

Various economic interests have pressed state legislators to consider or enact laws that aim to prevent activists from gathering information on animal cruelty or evidence that environmental laws are being ignored — attempting to use such so-called “ag-gag” statutes and claims of economic harm to silence those who would hold violators accountable in courts of law or the court of public opinion.

New laws citing privacy and property rights would limit the use and very presence of drones. And concerns over misuse of videos taken from body cameras worn by officers are stoking yet another area of concern in what once was seen as a positive means to empower citizens to speak out on police abuses.

But increasingly it’s college campuses — just a generation ago, the bastion of efforts aimed at tearing down the power of administrators to control student expression — at the forefront of the free speech fight.

Critics worry about overzealous requirements for so-called “trigger warning” of classroom topics that might possibly upset or insult someone or bans on speech that sometime offend even a single person that could gut academic freedom. Professors and administrators are labeled as racist or sexist over perceived “microagressions” — words or phrases linked to negative or disturbing meanings, far from the long-held legal standards of a “true threat,” but simply considered to be “unwelcome.”

According to figures compiled by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), at least 240 campaigns have been conducted in little more than a decade at U.S. universities to prevent speakers from appearing on campuses simply because some students or faculty members find the speakers’ views objectionable. College news outlets have been attacked because of satirical cartoons and clearly labeled op-ed pieces, all too often simply for expressing opinions some students found unsettling.

And then there’s an even a more subtle threat to the Web’s promise of a utopia for free speech. Just a few “clicks” can ensure one only sees sites that reinforce already-held views or limits social media contact only to those already in agreement.

Eliminating the serendipity of discovering other viewpoints or the intellectual challenge of confronting persuasive views that differ from our own drains both the meaning and value of free speech.

We’ve spent decades determining the legal stands for threatening speech, which includes requirements for immediacy and potential.

There’s no question that some ideas are repellent and frightening. Changing public opinion about those ideas is harder and takes more time than changing laws in an attempt to eliminate them. But the counter to speech we don’t like — or even speech we feel is detrimental to many — should be more speech, not less.

The value of free speech rests with reasoned response to the discord of differing views. America’s founders reasoned that ultimately, decisions and attitudes for the public good come from vigorous public debate.

History is replete with the failure to stop ideas by silencing a speaker. A nation rooted in dissent should not use the power of government to tell its citizens, colleges or even childish and juvenile websites to be silent in the name of comfort or a “vague notion” of making us safer by simply by not hearing or posting that which offends.

So speak up, speak out: It’s Free Speech Week.

Gene Policinski is chief operating officer of the Newseum Institute and senior vice president of the Institute’s First Amendment Center. [email protected]

Kansas business owners receiving workers compensation insurance rate relief

Ken Selzer, Kansas Insurance Commissioner
Ken Selzer, Kansas Insurance Commissioner

Many Kansas business owners will pay less for workers compensation insurance for 2016, according to Ken Selzer, CPA, Kansas Commissioner of Insurance.

The 2016 rate filing for the workers compensation rate shows a decrease of 11.6 percent in the voluntary base rate and a decrease of 10.4 percent for assigned risk workers compensation rates. The filing came from the National Council on Compensation Insurance, Inc. (NCCI).

Many of the approximately 65,000 Kansas businesses that pay workers compensation insurance will be affected by the decreases.

“This rate decrease means that many Kansas companies will pay less for the insurance they have to provide,” said Commissioner Selzer. “That means more money to grow their businesses.”

“Kansas has built a business environment that reduces costs and supports growth,” Kansas Commerce Interim Secretary Michael Copeland said. “Lower workers compensation rates allow companies to invest more in the economy and create jobs.”

Voluntary workers compensation base rates are used by all insurance companies writing workers compensation in the competitive market. Assigned risk rates are used for insured businesses in the Kansas Assigned Risk Plan, a state organization for those businesses who are unable to obtain coverage in the competitive market.

The filing applies to all insurance carriers writing workers compensation policies for businesses in the state. The new filings were approved by Commissioner Selzer and the insurance department staff for a Jan. 1, 2016, effective date.

NCCI prepares workers compensation rate recommendations and manages the nation’s largest database of workers comp information.

Ken Selzer, CPA, is the Kansas Commissioner of Insurance.

Now That’s Rural: Michael Daniel, Brooks Landscape

Ron Wilson is director of the Huck Boyd National Institute for Rural Development at Kansas State University.
Ron Wilson is director of the Huck Boyd National Institute for Rural Development at Kansas State University.

By RON WILSON
Huck Boyd National Institute for Rural

What do you see when you scan the landscape? It could be a virtual scan, or it might be actual trees, grass, woody plants and flowers. Today we will learn about a rural Kansas company which is working daily to improve the landscape.

Michael Daniel is owner of Brooks Landscape LLC and its retail store, Brookscape Gardens. Michael was born into a military family that traveled the country. When he was 12, his folks settled near Inman, Kansas. After service in the Navy, Michael took a position with the public utility in McPherson. At church, he met and ultimately married Arlene, who had grown up on a farm near Mullinville. She works at the refinery in McPherson and helps at the family business.

Michael and Arlene have four children. In 1997, he started a landscaping business on the side. It began with lawn mowing but developed into an outdoor design and improvement business. “My husband has a vision for these things,” Arlene said. “He can visualize the finished product.” Using an old family name, they called the business Brooks Landscape. They were storing materials at a shop in town.

One day Michael noticed a farm for sale along old Highway 81 south of McPherson. “I had driven by this place when I was a kid,” Michael said. He realized it could be a place to store their equipment, and maybe even become a retail outlet.

“We were buying plants anyway,” Arlene said. “We figured we could let people come out here and pick out their own.” In 2004, they bought the place, which included an abandoned farmstead.

“It was a total mess,” Arlene said. “We took several years to clean it up.” They chopped weeds, planted trees, and repaired buildings.

In 2007, Michael retired from the utility company and went full-time with Brooks Landscape. After years of work, he and Arlene opened their retail outlet on the farm in 2012. It is called Brookscape Gardens.

Today, an attractive native stone sign surrounded by pretty plants is displayed along old Highway 81 at the Brookscape Gardens entrance. The gardens display a wide variety of beautiful plantings. The old garage is now a retail store. The dairy barn has been converted into an office.

“We wanted to create a special place,” Michael said. A beautiful wooden pergola has been constructed along with attractive stone patio work. The old silo now has buckets from a grain elevator hung along the side, with pretty flowers growing in them. This old farmstead never looked so good.

Michael and Arlene’s two older sons went to K-State, and the youngest son is in high school. Their daughter Abigail became a nurse. When she got married, the site she chose was Brookscape Gardens.

Michael and Arlene continue to upgrade the location. They have acquired a former railroad baggage building which stands nearby. They plan to move it in and repair and repaint it to be a sandwich and coffee shop. Longer term plans could include a pond and an amphitheater.

The store is open from March until just before Christmas. Of course, products will change with the season. Last year Michael and one son drove to North Carolina to pick up the freshest Christmas trees.

Brookscape Gardens is located between McPherson and Moundridge at the rural community of Elyria. Elyria is an unincorporated community with an estimated population of 24 people. Now, that’s rural.

Michael and Arlene are proud of their state. “We love Kansas,” Michael said. “Kansas is awesome. We’ve met people who moved here from both east and west coasts and now call Kansas home; they think this is the greatest. It’s the gentleness of the landscape and its people who make it special,” he said.

For more information, go to www.brookscape.com.

What do you see when you scan this landscape? I see pretty flowers, shady trees, and attractive wood and stone accents. Beyond that, I see hardworking Kansans who care about their state and are enhancing their community. We commend Michael and Arlene Daniel of Brooks Landscaping and Brookscape Gardens who are making this attractive landscape even better.

Copyright Eagle Radio | FCC Public Files | EEO Public File