Most Kansans realize that March through September are the storm-season months in our state. Living in Kansas can mean beautiful sunsets and wonderful views, but it can also mean damaging winds, hail, flooding, earthquakes and tornadoes.
Our staff at the Kansas Insurance Department has the following checklist for situations before or after a weather event strikes. Since the basis for insurance is managing risk, we want you to be prepared.
• Having the proper insurance coverage for your property is your best protection against damage caused by natural disasters. Check with your insurance agent or company about the proper limits for coverage, and make sure you update them as your needs grow.
• Make a personal home inventory before disaster strikes to keep track of your belongings. You can download the My Home Scr.App.book mobile application on your smartphone or tablet, where you can store photos of your items. Inventory booklets are also available for download on our Kansas Insurance Department website. See our department video on YouTube or Facebook for more information.
• Contact your insurance agent company immediately to report losses. Get instructions from your company’s adjuster before repairing or replacing damaged property. Remember: Your insurance company’s visual inspection of your loss may be required before claims are paid.
• Make temporary or emergency repairs only as needed to protect your property from further damage. Take photos of the damaged property first.
• Take notes about your conversation with your insurance company representative. Write down the time and date, the representative’s name and a summary of the call.
• Be wary of questionable or unfamiliar contractors. Get more than one bid, and hire a local, reputable contractor to make the repairs.
• If you must move out of your home, keep your receipts for hotel bills and meals. Your policy may reimburse you for these additional living expenses.
• Finally, don’t accept an unfair settlement. If you can’t reach an agreement with your insurance company, call the Kansas Insurance Department’s Consumer Assistance Hotline at 800-432-2484.
Knowing these tips ahead of time can provide peace of mind when a weather event occurs.
Look for more tips about coverage before and after the storm on our website, www.ksinsurance.org; through our publications listed there; and on Facebook at www.facebook/KansasInsuranceDepartment. Our department booklet “Homeowners and Renters Insurance and Shopper’s Guide” also has some useful information regarding claims. You can print that from our website.
The U.S Constitution is a remarkable example of resilience. Changed an average of once a decade, the two-century-old document has adapted to the times.
Chapman Rackaway is a Professor of Political Science at Fort Hays State University.
Or has it? Compromises on the slave trade pushed an inevitable conflict back until civil war was necessary. Millions had civil rights denied because of a lack of Constitutional protections. Today, the argument has shifted to a federal government so liberated from constraints it regularly tyrannizes states and expands its already overstretched appetite for power. State legislatures get short shrift and engage in marginal politics because of their second-rate status under a dominant federal government. Into that fray enters a group seeking to engage in an exercise in democracy that might substantively change American politics.
The group, Convention of States, has developed unified language and presented it to thirty-five state governments for review and possible passage. To do so would trigger what is known as an Article 5 Convention, a national meeting to discuss possible revisions to the Constitution or even a replacement document. While similar efforts have been introduced twice before in American history, neither attempt met the threshold of 34 states to empanel a new Convention.
An Article V Convention could be tricky – after all, there are reasons one has not been successfully called since 1787. The last time a convention revised a governing document, it presented an entirely new government. The Articles of Confederation needed replacement, of course. Today, there is no need for such drastic change but an imperative desire for significant adjustment. Writing a call that restricts the Convention from becoming a runaway is vital if possible, and the narrow language of the application to convention suggests the promoters of the movement have anticipated that possibility.
In the proposed convention, each state’s legislature could send as many delegates as it wanted, but each state would receive only one vote. For states like Kansas, having the security of not being dominated by states with larger populations is significant.
There are important concerns to note. Many details, such as the selection process for delegates and the kinds of amendments that could be offered at the convention are not elaborated on, which would give the delegations freedom to consider a wide swath of issues and reform proposals. The process by which any proposed changes would be ratified is potentially problematic.
The Constitution provides the option of three-quarters of state legislatures or three-quarters of public state conventions for ratification. The text of the convention call specifies state legislatures would have final approval for any changes, while a series of state conventions would involve the general public as a method of having true public buy-in. State conventions would also avoid a state legislative power play at the expense of the federal government’s interests over that of the general public. Considering the lack of faith and engagement the public holds at the moment, though, keeping the populace out might be the most constructive design for the convention.
The issues brought up by convention proponents are as wide-ranging as the scope of the proposed convention itself. While issues like a federal Balanced Budget Amendment and restrictions on federal regulatory authority suggest a conservative bias behind the move, posts on the convention support website suggest liberal preferences such as reining in defense spending. The fact that states like Democratic New Jersey have signed on along with more Republican states like North Dakota means there is mutual and bipartisan desire to open up the Constitution to a modern-day re-reading and interpretation. Could the states be resurgent under a new model of power sharing? Democratic reform may just be well-served by a revival of the Spirit of 1787.
Chapman Rackaway is a Professor of Political Science at Fort Hays State University.
John Richard Schrock is a professor at Emporia State University.
The current debate to censor sex education in Kansas rests upon the incorrect assumption that what is obscene in public is likewise obscene in all other settings. The arguments reference “community standards,” a court ruling that not only recognized that the definition of obscenity varied from community to community, but that context does matter.
In 1964, the U.S. Supreme Court was faced with the case of Jacobellis vs. Ohio. and Justice Potter Stewart explained clearly why context mattered.
Justice Stewart wrote: “I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description [“hard-core pornography”], and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it….”
That statement—that there is no simple way to define obscenity but “I know it when I see it”—has become one of the most famous statements from our Supreme Court. For over 50 years, it has been an acknowledgment that laws must be realistic and the meaning of legislation must take into account the context.
Therefore, in Kansas Statute 21-6401, there is a checklist of what can constitute obscenity. But this longstanding Kansas statute likewise recognizes that what may be obscene in one setting may be quite appropriate and even required in another. It exempts from prosecution both medical practitioners and teachers when: “…an exhibition in a state of nudity is for a bona fide scientific or medical purpose, or for an educational or cultural purpose for a bona fide school, museum or library.”
Senate Bill 56 removes this exemption from prosecution (or “affirmative defense”) from teachers but not from medical workers. Graphic reproduction materials that a doctor uses with patients are clearly obscene if posted outside on the street, but are very appropriate and not obscene in the doctor’s office. This protection will remain for doctors but would no longer be allowed for teachers.
Removal of this clause will most definitely shut down sex education in Kansas. A teacher’s license is revoked for felony conviction. Use of the same sex education materials a doctor would use with a patient would become a potential crime for teachers under SB 56. Arguments that any use for literature or science would be allowed ring hollow. That would be a courtroom argument, and teachers are not going to risk arrest in the first place.
Some folks fear that American society has become more promiscuous with higher divorce rates and other related ills. There may be many reasons for this, including the rise of the Internet, social media, and relatively unregulated cable television. But the minimal sex education provided in public schools is not part of the problem. There is not one bit of causative evidence that sex education contributes to immorality. But many studies show that sex education answers the right questions at the right time in students’ lives.
Ironically, this last week saw the case of a state legislator in Idaho who, during discussion of telemedicine, asked if it would be possible to accomplish the standard ob/gyn pelvic exam remotely by having a patient swallow a camera. Yes. Really.
Now, we may tell little children that they may soon have a baby brother or sister because mommy has a baby in her “tummy.” But that error should hopefully be cleared up before students are 18 years old, and certainly before they become legislators.
Kansas legislators have not made the Idaho mistake. My guess is that they all know the difference between the digestive and reproductive systems. And where babies come from. And they all learned it before age 18. The next generation of legislators need to have that opportunity too.
The Legislature has made it past “Turnaround Day” and that’s a relatively big deal.
Turnaround is the process of getting bills from most House and Senate committees approved and sent across the Statehouse rotunda to the opposite chamber.
The first month and a half of the session has been…distracting comes to mind.
We’ve seen the debates over carrying guns, over teacher contract negotiations and abortion procedures, and they have produced lots of headlines and stories to read. Those issues are important to a lot of Kansans to be sure, but so far, likely because of those issues and the separate deadlines for appropriations bills, we’ve learned very little about how this state is going to be operated for the next two years.
That’s two years when state revenues are going to be at least $600 million less than we’re used to because of massive income tax cuts back in 2012 that haven’t encouraged the “discretionary spending” that Gov. Sam Brownback has said will be possible because of lower income taxes and more money for us to spend on other things that will yield tax revenues.
Here’s hoping you had a good time watching the high-profile, little-cost issues being debated. That’s because most of those bills that were in the headlines don’t cost the state any significant amount of money but also don’t save the state any significant amount of money.
The real stuff—that’s appropriations and tax policy—wasn’t considered with any real finality. The appropriations process that builds the state budget for the next two fiscal years has barely started in any public manner. Oh, there have been subcommittees examining the governor’s budget proposal, and in both chambers the governor has seen his recommendations adopted probably more than 90 percent of the time, but it was mostly small agencies.
The real budget—which means financing of K-12 education—is still virtually secret. We’ve heard about eliminating the complicated school finance formula and putting the state’s school districts on a block grant program for two years while the bosses figure out a simpler—and simpler means very simply less money—formula for getting money to schools.
Now, some of those bills that made it through the Turnaround Day sieve for consideration in the opposite house are intriguing. They range from pro-lifers’ relatively clever move to prohibit some of the earliest-term abortions that the state has ever tried to regulate to letting many folks over age 21 carry concealed guns to moving local office elections from the spring to the fall of odd-numbered years.
All are of interest, of course, but don’t cost the state any money and don’t really mean much of a change in the lives of most Kansans.
But…they do give supporters of those measures something to talk about, opponents something to talk about, and provide an excellent diversion while the state prepares for the real issue: Taxes and state government spending.
Do those measures give us any idea of which way the Legislature is going to go in taxes or in spending? Anyone think limiting abortions is going to save the state any money? Or that letting more people carry more guns more places is going to mean we’ll need a few less cops around, or that moving spring elections to the fall is going to get your streets plowed more easily or that fall-elected school boards are going to improve either reading or math or even basketball scores?
Nope, but we’ve provided a great cover for the budget and financial decisions that won’t become clear for at least a couple weeks, maybe a month. And, that’s why Turnaround Day was worth marking—it got legislators a five-day weekend to enjoy—but as far as solving any state budget/spending problems? Nada.
Better enjoy what you’ve seen so far…
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.
Good “Con Man” stories are harder and harder to make these days. In my experience, a movie like “Focus” has to balance two very different desires from audiences. On one hand, they have to create situations wherein the true purpose isn’t initially apparent. On the other, they need to leave enough clues for viewers to follow the bread crumbs and come up with their own theories. Half of the fun is in being fooled and the other half of the fun is in trying to figure it out.
The first act, or first third, of “Focus” receives high marks for both fooling me and giving me enough information to be churning away at my own ideas. The problem for “Focus” is when it ironically loses the laser focus of the first act. The second act is hallow and uninteresting and the final act is a cheap knockoff of the first.
I was still having fun guessing at what might be coming down the pipe, but what is actually delivered is a far cry from the scenarios that I had cooked up in my head. That’s a difficult judgement to lay at the feet of a spectator sport like film, but nevertheless it’s how audiences react and think when watching this type of movie and thus is, in my opinion, noteworthy.
Speculations and double reverses and lies within lies aside, “Focus” is a decent effort with a strong cast that crumbles under its end-heavy structure. Objectively, there’s a lot of flash and a lot of sleight of hand, but the con isn’t long enough or convincing enough to ensure me.
3 of 6 stars
Billed as “Nearly everything an agribusiness professional would need or want,” this year’s 54th edition of the Western Farm Show lived up to its slogan.
Each year thousands of farmers, ranchers, school children, FFA youngsters and urbanites attended the two-day event at the American Royal Complex in Kansas City.
Farmers and ranchers spend hours walking around the 400,000 square feet of displays of machinery, buildings, livestock equipment, tools, feed and seed and the more than 500 exhibits.
Veteran Doniphan County farmer Neil Coufal has attended the farm show since he was a kid nearly 60 years ago. Like so many of his peers, he attends the annual event to walk around and see what’s new. He drove 70 miles to the show.
Coufal likes to look at and learn about new farm and ranch products. It’s also a day to leave the farm behind and visit with those attending the show.
“It’s a lot of fun,” Coufal says. “It’s an opportunity to see friends and neighbors.”
The Doniphan County farmer/stockman spends most of the day at the Western Farm Show. He takes his time and it usually takes hours to see all he wants to see.
A couple years back, Coufal purchased a chopper for his combine. Equipment dealers at the show often run specials.
At the 2015 edition, Coufal visited the Abilene Machine display. Here he inquired about side mirrors for his tractor.
“I pull a grain cart behind my tractor and it’s difficult to see around the sides of the cart driving down the road,” he says.
While visiting with a salesperson at the exhibit, Coufal asked for a quote and plans to buy the mirrors.
Hardi North America from Davenport, Iowa displayed their sprayers at this year’s show. The company, which originated in Ontario, specializes in sprayers.
Sprayers range from small pull type units to the large 1,300 gallon self-propelled machine with 132-foot booms. Hardi’s target audience ranges from small farmers to commercial applicators.
Jeremy O’Hare, Hardi rep., says the show offers a “terrific” venue to showcase their equipment.
While most of the farm show-goers include farmers and ranchers from Iowa, Kansas, Missouri and Nebraska, approximately 3,000 high school students affiliated with FFA attend the two-day event as do people from the Kansas City area.
Many of the city dwellers grew up on a farm or still have parents farming. Some are still interested in seeing and learning about what’s happening in agriculture.
This show provides a great opportunity to talk to manufacturers and suppliers without experiencing the pressure of buying such equipment. It kind of blows some of us away seeing what’s going on in this industry today.
John Schlageck, a Hoxie native, is a leading commentator on agriculture and rural Kansas.
Property tax on Kansas farmland has been a hot topic recently. Perhaps it is time to review why use-value appraisal is appropriate. There are some very legitimate reasons why the Kansas constitution was changed in 1986 to value agricultural land for property tax purposes based on its income-producing ability rather than its market value.
Land has traditionally been regarded as a store of value and a safe haven for capital in uncertain economic times. The reason for that is relatively simple: God isn’t making any more land. That characteristic sets ag land apart from all other classes of property. If market forces indicate a demand for more office buildings, strip malls, or apartment complexes, then someone will build more of them. And when those developments occur, additional land is frequently taken out of agricultural production and converted to those alternative uses… once again diminishing the supply of ag land.
So whenever a parcel of ag land comes up for sale there are plenty of eager bidders. Neighboring farmers frequently bid because it presents a rare opportunity to expand their operation. Farmers farther away may bid because there are no expansion opportunities close to them. Investors frequently bid because they view ag land as a safe place to “park” some cash as they wait for better investment opportunities elsewhere. The market price of agricultural land is so disconnected from its income-producing potential that the buyer is forced to subsidize the income from the land in order to make the mortgage payments.
Because of those inflationary pressures on ag land, market prices and income-producing ability of the property are not as strongly linked as they are with other classes of property. Consider the following chart, which was constructed with data provided by KS Department of Revenue’s Property Valuation Division.
For the years 1993-2013 it displays average market price for dryland and irrigated land in Kansas (divided by 100 to scale it for display purposes) and average price for wheat and corn in Kansas. Land prices have steadily increased over that time without any decline. But grain prices have varied considerably, both rising and falling. Data for productivity (yield per acre) also show wild fluctuations from year to year, because productivity is highly dependent on weather.
If we were to develop similar charts for other classes of property, we would see much closer correlation between market price and income-producing ability of the property. The obvious reason is that the supply of such properties is elastic, and is constantly being adjusted to meet market forces of supply and demand.
https://www.ksrevenue.org/pdf/finalreport.pdf contains a report from the InternationalAssociation of Assessing Officers regarding use-value appraisal in Kansas. Here is a pertinent excerpt:
“Property tax is an ad valorem tax, or a tax based upon value of the property, not on the ability of a property owner to pay, but rather a wealth tax. There are two commonly used valuation standards in ad valorem tax systems—market value and use value. Appraisers commonly use market value, whether determining a value for a mortgage, estimating the net worth of a company, or even trying to sell real estate. Use value, when applied in the valuation of agricultural land, attempts to determine a value based upon the actual production of the land and removes other influences that affect the market value of real estate. A survey of all fifty states revealed that forty-three employ some version of use value, rather than a market value standard, for determining agricultural land values for property tax purposes.”
Here is another excerpt: “Based on the goals articulated for use value in Kansas and the thirty states included in the review, the current Kansas system is the best system in the United
States.”
Certainly there is an advantage to the farmer or rancher to valuing ag land based on its productive capability, but there is also value to the taxing entity, as it produces a more consistent valuation from year to year and greater certainty for the budgeting process.
An additional advantage of use-value appraisal is as a tool to prevent urban sprawl. If agricultural land were valued on its market value, then farmers on the edges of cities would see their valuations (and taxes) skyrocket as developers bid up the price of neighboring land. That would then force the farmer to sell to developers when he can no longer to afford pay the taxes. Thus use-value can function to halt the tendency of urban areas to spread out into the adjoining countryside, and it can serve to preserve urban green space.
Senate Bill178 proposes to raise the assessed valuation of ag land by an average of 473% statewide. The impact on taxes paid by ag land owners would vary widely from county to county, depending on how large ag land’s share is of total assessed valuation. Statewide, SB 178 would increase the property taxes on ag land by an astounding $716 million per year! And that assumes that all local elected officials don’t take advantage of that new-found “wealth” to increase their budgets, but instead reduce the local mill levy accordingly. That assumption is probably not valid.
For many farmers and ranchers, their investment in land represents their retirement account, and they are required to pay property tax annually on that investment. Our urban counterparts, who typically have their retirement accounts invested in stocks or bonds, avoid that tax at the present time. Are we to believe that stocks and bonds don’t represent wealth? Property tax is in essence a tax on wealth, and somehow that doesn’t seem equitable.
In the past two weeks I have heard from many of my constituents as well as other farmers and ranchers from all over the state. I have received a very consistent message: “Please leave our property taxes alone, and instead put us back on the income tax rolls.” Farmers and ranchers did not ask for the pass-through exemption in 2012 and were surprised when they learned that they no longer owed income tax to the state. Many have told me they feel guilty for no longer being asked to shoulder their fair share of the income tax burden.
A report in the Wichita Eagle last weekend revealed that the original projections from Kansas Department of Revenue for the number of entities which would qualify for the business pass-through income exemption in the 2012 tax cut missed the mark quite significantly. They estimated that 191,000 business entities would qualify for the exemption but in 2013 there were 333,000 Kansas tax returns filed which took advantage of the exemption.
I find that very troubling, and it is strong evidence that the entire concept of the business pass-through income tax exemption was poorly understood and too hastily adopted in 2012. It is truly too broad and not nearly targeted enough to have the intended stimulative effect on the Kansas economy. If our objective is to find additional revenue for the state, rather than punishing one segment of the Kansas economy, then it is time for legislators to work together to correct the over-reach of the pass-through exemption.
Considering the agendas of certain conniving politicians that would like nothing better than to (attempt) to take my guns away, or at very least, close all hunting seasons, I sometimes plan in my mind what I’ll do if the day ever arrives when the only LEGAL way for me to continue eating wild game will be to harvest road-kill. I would become a “Road-Kill Griller” in the purest sense of the phrase, and I’m bettin’ there are bunches more of you out there that are afraid to come forward.
Most things would be different in the life of a road-kill griller; for starters, the grilling utensils. Your spatula would become a flat ended shovel, preferably the short handled kind with the “D” shaped handle, allowing you to put maximum power behind your spatula when scraping meals from the asphalt. The fork normally used to turn steaks on the grill would become a pitchfork or potato fork, anything capable of holding your find while removing gravel with the shovel/spatula. Timing for harvesting road-killed meals would be an important issue. The five second rule would become the five day rule. You would want to either get to a kill while it’s fresh, or wait until it became jerky or pemmican. Cooking road-kill would be a whole new learning experience in itself and should definitely be done outside; the hotter the fire the better to quickly burn off hair and sterilize your meal.
Concerning recipes, you might as well plan to toss all your favorites and start anew. I’ll list a few examples: The rare find of a chicken that could once have become chicken tetrazzini, would now be chicken flattened by machinery. The closest you’d ever get to potatoes au’gratin would be opossum smells rotten. The internet fairly teems with road-kill recipes free for the reading. A few of my favorite main dishes were skunk skillet stew, shake’n bake snake, rack of raccoon, pavement possum and too-slow doe. Side dishes included square of hare, fork of stork and bowl of mole.
If you were to suddenly become unemployed, I’m quite sure a good living could be had by fixing up your old camping trailer and following the state fair or carnival circuit peddling road-kill on a stick. It wouldn’t matter what species it was; just cut it into chunks, skewer it with a stick, slather it in some sort of batter and fry it up in old french-fry grease. It you didn’t tell customers what it was, I’m sure they’d think it tasted just like chicken.
The driving habits of a true road-kill griller would be changed forever. While we’d once have avoided hitting critters on the roadway at all costs, especially deer, we now would strive to hit every critter possible, especially deer. No Hunting signs would become No Gleaning signs, and turf wars might break out as we all tried to protect our favorite back roads, swamps and river bridges where road-kill often abounds.
Now, in the style of Jeff Foxworthy, allow me to offer some criteria to help you decide whether or not you have the propensity to become a true road-kill griller.
If you have taught your kids to count road-killed raccoons rather than Volkswagen “slug-bugs” on a trip, you could easily become a road-kill griller.
If, after failing to fill your deer tag for the season, you drive your pickup off the road, across the ditch, and through a field of standing corn attempting to run down a deer, you probably have the makin’s of a road-kill griller.
And finally, if you smell only the savory essence of skunk skillet stew each time a skunk sprays your favorite coon hound, you’re probably already a true road-kill griller!
Note: No animals were actually road-killed for the writing of this story.
Steve Gilliland, Inman, can be contacted by email at [email protected].
Gene Policinski is senior vice president of the First Amendment Center
From Sean Penn and the Oscars to Keith Olbermann and Bill O’Reilly at their cable TV perches, and with a dash of national security issues for good measure, we’re “all atwitter” — literally.
Twitter — the 140-character social media phenom — is used by just 23% of adult Americans who are online, according to a 2014 Pew Research Center report. For teens, surveys say it’s about one-quarter of online regulars, and rising quickly.
But wherever the numbers fall, Twitter has become a free speech and free press touchstone. The once scorned-as-mere-gossip “Twittersphere” often sets the agenda for national chatter, serious discourse, press accountability and the occasional verbal-call-to-arms that once was the province of daily newspapers and, later, network television.
Most recently, ESPN’s oft-controversial commentator Keith Olbermann lost his TV chair for the rest of the week after a series of rants with and about Penn State students and the value of their education — tweets that wandered off into seeming criticism of student fundraising efforts that raised more than $13 million for pediatric cancer research.
Olbermann ultimately posted: “I apologize for the PSU tweets. I was stupid and childish and way less mature than the students there who did such a great fundraising job.” ESPN management wasted no time in reacting, saying management was “aware of the exchange Keith Olbermann had on Twitter last night regarding Penn State. It was completely inappropriate. … ESPN and Keith have agreed that he will not host his show for the remainder of this week.”
Fox provocateur-extraordinaire Bill O’Reilly used Twitter in a decidedly non-apologetic manner. On the offensive after an article in Mother Jones magazine attacked his claims to have reported from a “war zone” during the 1982 Falklands War, on Feb. 20 @oreillyfactor had this tweet: “Bill has decided to release Friday’s Talking Points Memo EARLY in order to address the Internet guttersnipes.” Two days later: “Bill calls in to Media Buzz with Howard Kurtz to address the left’s latest smear campaign against him.”
One of the most creative — and nonpartisan — Twitter comments on the controversy came from @lybr3: “I think they should have replaced O’Reilly about 10-12 years ago when he turned into angry grandpa. Mother Jones is a joke though.”
Actor Sean Penn caused one of the larger Twitter-spasms late Sunday when at the end of a long Academy Awards program, in announcing Best Picture winner Alejandro González Iñárritu, Penn said, “Who gave this son-of-a-bitch a green card?” Penn and others insisted it was dark humor between friends, and a self-deprecating joke aimed at fellow U.S. directors.
Backstage and later online, Iñárritu said he found the remark “… hilarious. Sean and I have that kind of brutal relationship.” But on Twitter, critics said the comment was offensive to immigrants regardless, and many chose to attack Penn by tweets referencing accounts of domestic abuse and violence in public from the actor’s past.
In fact, recent 87th Academy Awards show prompted a larger Twitter campaign — one aimed at the overall lack of diversity in the competition. In January, when nominations were announced, social media guru April Reign created the #OscarsSoWhite hashtag, which quickly gained a sizeable following. Reign moderated a live-tweet session during the Feb. 22 telecast, asking Twitter followers to “do anything” other than watch the Oscar show.
For those who did watch, there was another “Twitter” moment. “Citizenfour,” a film about NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden, took the “Best Documentary” award. Host Neil Patrick Harris remarked that “… Snowden could not be here tonight for some ‘treason’.” The pun drew tweets from many who consider the still-on-the-run Snowden to be a national hero for leaking secrets about government surveillance programs. One Twitter post said Harris “is now dead to me.” But @EricBoehm87 posted: “I laughed at the ‘treason’ joke. Snowden’s no traitor, but that was funny. And NPH also made fun of Meryl Streep. Nothing off limits.”
All of this is worth noting because of what we might call the “atmospherics” around the First Amendment’s protection of freedom of speech. None of the tweets noted — even those regarding Snowden — were likely to bring down government’s heavy hand of censorship. But such exchanges by thousands on a myriad of topics is a new kind of national dialogue, where uncomfortable issues are held up for comment, where public figures are held accountable and where millions can talk to each other in what are online Town Hall meetings.
A new kind of “marketplace of ideas” to be sure. But a valuable one. Even at a sentence or two at a time.
Gene Policinski is chief operating officer of the Newseum Institute and senior vice president of the Institute’s First Amendment Center. He can be reached at [email protected].
109th Dist. State Rep. Troy Waymaster, R-Bunker Hill
Troy L. Waymaster, R-Bunker Hill, State Representative, Kansas House District 109
TOPEKA–Turnaround Approaches
This Friday, February 27, marks the first major deadline of the legislative session, commonly referred to as “Turnaround.” All bills, aside from some exempt bills, must be passed by the chamber of origin by this deadline in order to be considered after today. If a non-exempt bill is not passed by its chamber of origin prior to this deadline, then it cannot be considered.
Committees only had until Wednesday to send non-exempt bills to the House floor, so a majority of the House’s work this week remained in committees. This week, long hours were spent on the House floor in order to move the non-exempt bills to the Senate for action in the second half of the session.
While being on the floor of the House all day on Wednesday and Thursday, we debated and voted on many bills with varying subject matter and impact to the state of Kansas. Here are some of the bills that were debated this week:
House Bill 2061 – Amending the powers and duties of the Kansas Department of Agriculture division of conservation and the state conservation commission;
House Bill 2228 – Allowing in-state tuition status for current and former military members;
House Bill 2104 – Elections regarding filling vacancies of nominations;
House Bill 2326 – Contract negotiations for certain professional employees, namely teachers. This bill was amended on the House floor on Wednesday by Representative Sue Boldra’s amendment, which removed language and inserted the contents of House Bill 2257.
These bills, and many others, were debated during the week and those that were passed will then be sent over to the Senate for its consideration. We will now most likely be working the Senate bills that will come across the rotunda to the House starting next week.
House Bill 2108: Straight Ticket Ballots
One of the bills that the House Elections committee passed out is a bill that would require a straight party ticket option to be placed on, and only on, a general election ballot. This method of voting would be defined as allowing voters to vote for all candidates of one party for all partisan offices by selecting a single party designation on the ballot. There would be an exception to allow the voter to select a single candidate in another party or cast a write-in vote, which of course would be counted.
The bill also specifies that if the voter does not wish to vote a straight party ticket, the party boxes may be left unmarked and the voter may select individual candidates. The ballot would distinguish the difference between a straight party ticket vote and a vote for judicial retention, nonpartisan offices, or ballot questions.
KPERS Bonding
The Pensions and Benefits House committee passed out House Bill 2095, which would authorize the issuance of $1.5 billion in bonds for the unfunded liability of the Kansas Public Employee Retirement System. The bonds would be subject to the approval of the State Finance Council and a maximum percentage rate on the bonds would be 5 percent.
The bill would also require adjustments to the fiscal year 2017 State and School Group employer contribution rate. The rate would be reduced by the amount of the debt service payment in 2017. The existing statutory cap of 1.2 percent would apply to future fiscal years.
According to KPERS and a cost study completed by KPERS’ consulting actuary, this bill could create a long-term KPERS employer contribution savings totaling $2.8 billion. For the fiscal year of 2015, the employer contribution rate was reduced to 8.65 percent, as a result of Governor Brownback’s allotment plan. For the fiscal 2016 year the rate would return to the statutory rate of 12.37 percent, which has been certified by the KPERS Board of Trustees. Then for fiscal year 2017 the rate would be reduced by 1.94 percent or the cost of the debt service payment on the bonds, which is estimated to be $90.3 million annually.
Personal Privilege, Shadow, Pages, and Contact Information
Each year, the Speaker of the House grants each representative two Points of Personal Privilege, which we can utilize to honor someone with a statewide recognition. This past Tuesday, I had the distinct pleasure of honoring Melinda Cross, who was selected as the 2014-2015 Dr. Earl Reum Kansas Advisor of the Year. It was a great honor for Melinda to be recognized for this achievement by the entire House of Representatives.
Also this week, I had the pleasure of having Larry Lambert, Smith Center, participate as a Legislative Shadow for me. He attended all committee meetings and House sessions to see what a day in the life of a legislator is like.
I also had six pages this week on Monday. Those that served as Legislative Pages were Whitley and Brooke Leiker, Jordynn Guenot and Lacey Nuss, all from Russell, and Ross and Reed McNett from Larned.
It is an honor to serve the 109th Kansas House District and the state of Kansas. Do not hesitate to contact me with your thoughts, concerns and questions. I appreciate hearing from the residents of the 109th House District and others from the state of Kansas.
Troy L. Waymaster,
State Representative
109th Kansas House
300 SW 10th
Topeka, KS 66612
Rep Joe Seiwert (R-Pretty Prairie) does not think we are funny.
Recently, the anonymously-authored HB 2234 arrived in the House Committee on Education. It would prohibit professors at state universities from using our official titles and affiliations in newspaper columns like this one. Advocates Seiwert and Rep. Virgil Peck (R-Tyro) report that they are tired of our columns criticizing the legislature’s and governor’s actions.
HB 2234 has been a boon for our consortium of professor-columnists called Insight Kansas. Our blog visits, Twitter following, and newspaper affiliates are rising. I appeared one Sunday on Wichita television stating that I “may, or may not be” a faculty member at a state university, while the host suggested I wear a paper bag over my head. The following week, my IK colleague Chapman Rackaway continued the comedy, mentioning Peck’s characterization of his critics as “fruitcakes” and asking, “is it something I said?”
Seiwert was not amused, writing “I felt like I watching a Saturday Night Live skit— a satire on the legislative process and legislators.”
He may be right. What is happening to Kansas is not funny.
The bad news comes daily. This week, we learned that the governor’s office may try to cover reduced pension-fund contributions by making higher-risk investments. This comes at the worst possible time: when the stock market may be nearing a peak and is likely to self-correct soon, risking millions in losses for KPERS.
That is not funny.
Nor is it amusing that the governor seeks to jettison the state’s school base funding formula, implemented about two decades ago to rectify spending disparities of more than three to one between the state’s wealthiest and the poorest, mostly rural school districts. It also weaned the state’s schools off their property tax dependency. Brownback’s move is almost certain to be ruled unconstitutional, so the governor’s response is to try to change the way judges are appointed, moving either to partisan political campaigns, or gubernatorial appointment with legislative confirmation but no other checks or balances.
We are not laughing.
Nor is there any mirth in the governor’s move against the state’s lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender employees. The governor repealed a 2007 executive order protecting state employees from bullying, intimidation, and harassment by supervisors due to their sexual orientation. Unrelated to other controversies, this is just a pure and simple authorization to discriminate.
Talk about not funny at all.
Then again, I did crack a smile at Kansas City, MO Mayor Sly James’ same-day response: a press release reaffirming the city’s protections for LGBT workers and encouraging those excluded in Kansas to head across the state line and bring their expertise, incomes and jobs with them.
That will at least bring a smile to those on Missouri side of the KC metro area, which is already experiencing economic growth four times that of the Kansas side these days— and that includes Johnson County.
Maybe Reps. Peck and Seiwert are right: time to ease up on the jokes. There is nothing funny about what they and their allies are doing to this state.
Michael A. Smith teaches political science somewhere in Kansas.
Agriculture is losing 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 noble 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 continues to improve. Today’s farmers are increasing the amount of organic matter in their soil. With the advent of no-till and reduced tillage farming, farmers continue to build organic matter and improve the soil. 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. Farmers constantly chart rainfall amounts and monitor weather conditions.
In Kansas, agricultural producers are aware of changes in the Ogallala Aquifer. They understand the navigable waters issue because of its wide-ranging impact on farmland and farming. They understand the importance of clean water and have long supported the need for clear jurisdictional lines and a common-sense approach to wetlands.
Farmers are very much tuned into water conservation. But agriculture has its naysayers.
Some are concerned about the potential of long-term climate change and its impact on food production.
Others believe crop yields will not keep up with population growth.
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.
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.
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 equal opportunity for everyone, 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, a Hoxie native, is a leading commentator on agriculture and rural Kansas.
Criminal justice reform is an idea whose time has finally come. Eighteen months after launching the Smart on Crime initiative, we can report that overall federal drug trafficking cases dropped by 6 percent in FY 2014.
There was a time when well-intentioned proponents of the “get tough” formula for fighting drugs would have been alarmed by this decline. But that was before U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and others began leading a drive to re-evaluate our criminal justice system. Their goal is to develop a fairer criminal justice system that deters serious criminal conduct, holds people accountable for crimes and utilizes incarceration more wisely. We want to punish, deter and rehabilitate – not merely confine and forget.
For the federal prosecutors in our office, the Smart on Crime initiative has meant putting sensible limits on when we seek stiffer sentences in drug cases. We are seeking fewer mandatory minimum sentences for non-violent drug offenders. That means we reserve stricter sentences for more serious offenders rather than trying to impose them in every case. After several years in a row that saw federal prosecutors pursue mandatory sentences in roughly two-thirds of drug cases, the rate in 2014 dropped to one-in-two.
Why did we need to make this change? America has an overreliance on incarceration. With only 5 percent of the world’s population, we produce 25 percent of the world’s prisoners. Federal prison population has grown almost 800 percent since 1980, while this nation’s population grew by only a third. As a result, roughly a third of the Justice Department’s budget goes to pay for operating prisons. Aside from the merely monetary costs, the human and moral toll of unrestrained incarceration is difficult to calculate.
We still have a lot of work to do. Our prisons remain overcrowded. Across the country, far too many people are trapped in cycles of poverty, criminality and incarceration. Law enforcement needs to work harder to build trust in the communities we are sworn to serve and protect. From critical improvements to the juvenile justice system, to a range of other criminal justice reforms, we must continue to advance promising bipartisan legislation to make our communities safer, treat individuals more justly and allow more efficient use of law enforcement resources.
We are working to strengthen re-entry programs aimed at reducing recidivism and advancing a host of targeted improvements such as drug courts. In this way, we are laying a strong foundation for a new era of American justice.
Barry Grissom is the United States Attorney for the District of Kansas.
