Make saving a priority to help cushion the impact of financial emergencies.

According to an annual survey conducted by Bankrate.com more than a quarter of Americans have no emergency savings. Of those who do have savings, 67 percent have less than six months worth of expenses saved. Having access to just $500-1,000 in savings could help most people meet unexpected financial challenges, said K-State Research and Extension family resource management specialist Elizabeth Kiss.

The purpose of emergency savings is to have money on hand when disaster strikes or money is tight, but those funds need to be replaced as soon as a household is able to after the emergency occurs.

Kiss said savers should try to have three to six months worth of living expenses on hand to combat any unforeseen expenses.

“It’s living expenses, not income, so it’s likely less than your total income,” she said. “Regardless of the amount, most of us would probably do better to save more.”

Car repairs, home maintenance, storm damage repair, and unexpected medical bills are common unanticipated expenses and reasons to have emergency savings on hand. While putting money away for the unknown may make saving difficult, having cash on hand allows for less dependence on credit cards and other sources of funding in case of emergency.

The first step in saving for emergencies is to keep a small amount of cash or traveler’s checks in a secure location at home.

“If the power is out in your community, the ATMs may not work,” Kiss said.  “If you don’t have cash, you might not be able to buy things you need, because stores may not be taking cards. You want to have a bit of cash somewhere safe.”
Next, set up an account for your emergency savings.

Make a habit of putting money into your emergency fund each month. Decide on a dollar amount, and move it to your emergency fund account each time you receive a paycheck.

“Think about how much you can realistically save every month, and think of it as putting money aside for future uses, rather than just saving for the sake of saving,” Kiss said. “You might also transfer some money for retirement or other long-term goals that you have, and then you know what you have left to pay monthly bills.”

What if you don’t have $25-50 to save each month? Kiss advised to watch for “spending leaks”– small, regular purchases like morning lattes, soda, candy bars, eating out and trips to the vending machine– and save some of that money instead.

“It doesn’t mean you have to go without,” she said. “Think of ways you can meet those needs, but pay less. If you like to drink pop, buy it at the store. Make coffee at home.”

Homeowners can look for ways to save on fixed expenses such as heating and cooling, Kiss said. Small changes, including setting the thermostat a few degrees higher in the summer or lower in the winter can curtail those expenses, leaving more for saving.

The ultimate goal is to make saving a priority, Kiss said. Think of an emergency fund as you would any monthly utility.

“You need it just like you need heating, cooling and water,” she said. “Put it in with your bills, and think of it as a regular expenditure.”

The greatest advantage to having an emergency fund is having something to fall back on when the need arises. It provides great peace of mind.

If you need motivation to start saving, or to save more, call me to schedule my group  presentation on “Saving Dollars When You Don’t Have a Dime to Spare” for your club or group meeting.  Individuals should  check out the resources at www.americasaves.org where you can find helpful saving resources and sign up to receive saving messages by email or text.

For more information, call the Ellis County Extension Office at (785) 628-9430.

Linda K. Beech is Ellis County Extension Agent for Family and Consumer Sciences.

Dear Dave,
Can you explain the “asset allocation” theory when it comes to investing?
Matthew

Dear Matthew,
The asset allocation theory is one touted by lots of people in the financial community. It’s also a theory with which I disagree.

In short, the asset allocation theory means that you invest aggressively while you’re young. Then as you get older, you move toward less aggressive funds. If you follow this theory to the letter, you’re left pretty much with money markets and bonds by the time you’re 65.

The reason I don’t believe in this theory is simple. It doesn’t work. If you live to age 65 and are in good health, there’s a high statistical likelihood that you’ll make it to 95. The average age of death for males in this country is now 76, but that includes infant mortality and teenage deaths.

So, a healthy 65-year-old man in America can look at having another quarter century on earth. If you move your money to bonds and money markets at age 65, inflation is going to kick your tail. Your money will grow slower than it will devalue, and you’ll have little purchasing power. That’s the problem with the asset allocation methodology.

I advise investing in good, growth stock mutual funds that have strong track records of at least five to ten years. Spread your money across four types of funds: growth, growth and income, aggressive growth and international. These groups provide diversification across risk, as well as a little splash overseas.

Great question, Matthew!
—Dave

Dave Ramsey is America’s trusted voice on money and business. He has authored five New York Times best-selling books: Financial Peace, More Than Enough, The Total Money Makeover, EntreLeadership and Smart Money Smart Kids. The Dave Ramsey Show is heard by more than 8 million listeners each week on more than 500 radio stations. Follow Dave on Twitter at @DaveRamsey and on the web at daveramsey.com.

I love groups with the gumption to take on big tasks and do what needs to be done — can-do groups that can, and do.

But, uh-oh, here comes The Little Train That Couldn’t. I’m talking about Congress.

Since the earliest days of our US of A, the most basic task of this legislative body has been to keep our national house in good repair. That requires tending to roads, bridges, rail systems, airports, school buildings, parks, Internet access, etc.

Yet, with a toxic mix of anti-government ideology and fiscal foolishness, Republican members of Congress have recently been blocking every serious proposal to reinvest in America’s collapsing infrastructure.

The result is an inexcusable drop in maintenance, even as our population has expanded dramatically and the wear and tear on all parts of the infrastructure has created disasters-waiting-to-happen. As one lawmaker says of our increasingly ramshackle house, “I’ve been here seven and a half years. We have not solved one single problem. It’s just so frustrating.”

That was no tax-and-spend liberal Democrat talking — it was a penny-pinching Republican, Bob Corker of Tennessee. Indeed, it wasn’t that long ago that most Republicans understood and funded infrastructure — from Abe Lincoln to Teddy Roosevelt to Dwight Eisenhower, and even Ronald Reagan, who called such common sense maintenance “an investment in tomorrow that we must make today.”

Gail Collins, the superbly sensible New York Times columnist, recently noted that, “In a perfect world, Congress would figure out a serious, long-term plan to fix bridges, (etc.).” Yes, but I would amend her observation with this: It shouldn’t take “a perfect world” — even a Congress in a halfway-mediocre world ought to be able to do that job.

Actually, thanks to GOP obstinacy, Congress isn’t the Little Train That Couldn’t. It’s the choo-choo that could, but won’t.

OtherWords.org columnist Jim Hightower is a radio commentator, writer and public speaker.

Proponents of organic, labor-intensive farming contend we should go back to the days when every family owned 40 acres, farmed with hay burners (horses) and used no chemicals.

You remember the good ol’ days when people were self-sufficient, owned a couple milk cows, tilled a garden and butchered 40 or 50 fryers each spring.

Some of these zealots propose each nation should also strive for self-sufficiency. No imports. No exports.

Should such events occur, you may want to prepare yourself for milking each morning instead of enjoying that piping hot mug of coffee. Forget about sliced bananas on your bowl of corn flakes. These goodies we import into this country, and a lot more, won’t be on the kitchen table any more. Count on it.

God forbid we adopt these policies. If we cave in to those who spread hysteria about unsafe food and giant farms, be prepared to do without the services of carpenters, painters, nurses, doctors, teachers, writers and musicians. In case you haven’t heard, labor-intensive farming doesn’t permit time for many other pursuits. Neither does production agriculture.

Farmers run non-stop, from early morning to late at night, planting and harvesting crops, tilling the soil, feeding and caring for livestock. Their work seldom ends. It’s foolish to assume everyone would want to leave his or her jobs in the city to move to the farm. It ain’t all Green Acres out there folks.

And who’s to say all these people from other professions would become productive farmers?

A city friend remarked to me he does not want to be a farmer. He contends he couldn’t feed himself, much less the rest of the country or world.

“I’d starve to death and so would the rest of us,” he told me. “If you want to till the soil, go for it. But that doesn’t mean the rest of us want to, thank you.”

If we return to a system where everyone farms, brace yourself for even more uncertain economic times. Manual labor and animal power could spell the return of food shortages and famine. A nation of farmers translates to a nation even more vulnerable to depressions and hunger. A drought, plague of insects or disease could trigger such tragedies because we’d have no chemicals to fight them with.

Today’s mechanized farmer provides us with the safest, most abundant food in the world. He works closely with crop consultants when applying herbicides, insecticides and fertilizers. He has cut his uses significantly in recent years – up to 50 percent in some cases.

Farmers work years to leave a legacy of beneficial soil practices. Most of the farmers I know would give up farming rather than ruin their land. They are proud of the crops they grow and the land they work.

Farmers continue to work to conserve water, plug abandoned wells, monitor their grassland grazing and adopt sound techniques that will ensure preservation of the land. Urban residents should also look at new ways to protect the environment where they live.

There’s an old saying that rings true today: “You can never go home.” Yes, we can never return to the good ol’ days. Besides, were they really all that good?

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

Yes, much of the recent press was about the Kansas Supreme Court overruling law professor/Secretary of State Kris Kobach’s assertion that Democrat U.S. Senate primary election winner Chad Taylor had inadequately professed that he was incapable of serving in the U.S. Senate.

The case, still being wrung out before a Shawnee County District Court three-judge panel, may determine whether a Kansas City Democrat was disenfranchised by Taylor’s removal from the November ballot — and goes several other ways in the politics of the Kansas Statehouse.

And, yes, we’re going to see some battling between the Legislature, possibly the governor, and the courts no matter how that matter finally turns out.

Because, well, the Legislature is the Legislature and, because the Legislature writes the check for the Supreme Court operations, it doesn’t like to be overruled — especially when it is run by Republican lawmakers who have little tolerance for their Republican secretary of state being overruled.

The high court may have dodged an initial bullet when Supreme Court Chief Justice Lawton Nuss cannily got a unanimous decision from his court that Kobach was wrong, that Taylor was right and that Taylor, who is Shawnee County District Attorney, didn’t have to actually carve into stone the word “incapable” to get off the November general election ballot.

A split decision would have identified justices who — regardless of the actual basis for a ruling — voted for Kobach or voted against Kobach. That’s a sharp divide and if Kobach wins re-election, he’ll be around to encourage sanctions of some sort against the court, or at least those justices who opposed him and, by implication, three-term U.S. Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan.

It could be as simple as the Legislature just cutting the court’s budget, reducing justices to driving economy cars to the Judicial Center, where they might lose their indoor private parking spaces. Or, it could be a little stealthier, possibly putting a mandatory retirement age on justices, which could force retirements or resignations.

Or — and this is the one to watch for — a proposed constitutional amendment on the 2016 ballot that would let the governor select his own appointees to the court without the intervention of the nonpartisan, lawyer-heavy Supreme Court Nominating Commission, which vets applicants for high court vacancies and sends the governor a list of three from whom to choose.

That means, essentially, that a sitting governor could over time pack the court with politically and philosophically like-minded jurists who would shape life in Kansas for decades.

Or, it might even go to requiring justices to run for office … a tack that would essentially evaporate the relatively nonpolitical fog in which the court operates.

Yes, the high court has ruled against the Legislature occasionally — take the spate of school finance decisions in recent years — but those decisions have been of a different nature, against the entire Legislature and bills signed into law by the governor, while this off-the-ballot decision, well, it has a different feel. It’s a decision that changes the politics of the state, an area where the Legislature doesn’t like to see the court meddling.

What’s gonna happen?

Something … count on it. Probably less dramatic action taken against the court if Roberts is re-elected, probably more if Roberts loses and independent candidate Greg Orman is elected with a margin that can be statistically attributed to not having another candidate (besides Libertarian Randall Batson of Wichita) on the ballot.

We’ll see what the district court panel does, but at this point, the Supreme Court has put itself in the bull’s-eye.

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.

Dear Dave,
What’s your advice to a couple when they’re both Free Spirits with money?
Steve

Dear Steve,
Being a Free Spirit just means you don’t major in details. You’re not the number cruncher, and you don’t wear a pocket protector. But being a Free Spirit doesn’t mean you can’t be a grown up. Maturity isn’t what I’m talking about here, and neither is initiative. I’m just talking about your personality style, and how you address life in general.

In my house, I’m the Nerd and my wife is the Free Spirit. I’m a naturally detail-oriented person who likes a solid, well-reasoned plan. My wife enjoys a plan, and she doesn’t mind sticking to one, but that’s not her default button. It doesn’t mean you’re not a grown up just because your default button doesn’t go straight to spreadsheets.

And just because you’re like that doesn’t mean you can’t lay out a game plan and say, “Hey, we make too much money to waste it all. We have too much coming in every month to be deep in debt and broke!”
Being a Free Spirit just means you have to concentrate a little harder on the details, because those kinds of things just aren’t your nature. I mean, you have to pay attention to enough of the basic details if you want to win with money, but that’s true with almost any endeavor.

Want to know something else I’ve noticed about Free Spirits? In most cases, they’re extremely generous people. When they care about something or someone, they really care. And the fact that you’re thinking about these things leads me to believe you’re going to be all right. Just be intentional, Steve.

Do it with a goal and a plan in mind, and do it on purpose!
—Dave

Dave Ramsey is America’s trusted voice on money and business. He has authored five New York Times best-selling books: Financial Peace, More Than Enough, The Total Money Makeover, EntreLeadership and Smart Money Smart Kids. The Dave Ramsey Show is heard by more than 8 million listeners each week on more than 500 radio stations. Follow Dave on Twitter at @DaveRamsey and on the web at daveramsey.com.

In the Orwellian world of many college and university campuses, all faiths are welcome — but some faiths are more welcome than others.

Just this month, for example, California State University “derecognized” InterVarsity Christian Fellowship, an evangelical student organization with more than 900 chapters at colleges and universities across the country.

In plain English, this means InterVarsity will no longer be a recognized student club at any of the 23 schools in the CSU system.

InterVarsity can still meet on campus — but minus the benefits accorded recognized student organizations, including access to meeting rooms and official university events.

Not only will InterVarsity now have a difficult time reaching students, an InterVarsity spokesman estimates that losing these benefits will cost each chapter up to $20,000 annually.

De-recognition of conservative religious groups is happening at many other schools, an exclusionary process that is affecting student organizations representing evangelicals, Mormons, Catholics and others.

Why are colleges and universities — places of higher learning supposedly committed to the free exchange of ideas and beliefs — withdrawing recognition from these groups?

For one simple reason: InterVarsity and other conservative religious clubs require student officers to affirm the faith of the group they lead.

College and university officials argue that their non-discrimination policies prohibit student organizations from imposing a faith-based requirement for leadership. Any student must be eligible to lead any group — whatever his or her beliefs.

In other words, in what can only be described as Newspeak, many universities now define “non-discrimination” as requiring discrimination against conservative religious groups.

But aren’t policies barring student clubs from imposing faith-based eligibility criteria for leadership unconstitutional violations of religious liberty and freedom of association — at least at public universities where the First Amendment applies?

Not according to the U.S. Supreme Court. In 2010, a deeply divided Court held in Christian Legal Society v. Martinez that so-called “all comers” policies are constitutional. As a result, public colleges and universities are now free to require all student clubs to allow any student to be eligible for leadership of the group.

Since that ruling, Intervarsity and other conservative Christian organizations have been “derecognized” at a growing number of public universities. And some private universities have invoked the reasoning behind the High Court’s decision to defend their exclusion of some religious groups from recognition.

Students of faith on many campuses are now faced with the cruel choice of either compromising their faith by permitting any student to be eligible for leadership (which often includes leading worship and scripture study) or following their conscience and losing the benefits of being a recognized student club.

The move toward “all comers” policies directed at conservative religious groups has been triggered by what many perceive as a clash between religious claims and LGBT rights — a clash that is, of course, at the heart of many other culture war battles today.

Until this culture war fight erupted, few questioned the reasonableness of allowing the Republican club to require that their leaders be Republican or the environmental club to require that their officers be environmentalists.

But the growing commitment of colleges and universities to ensure non-discrimination for LGBT students — a commitment I strongly applaud — has been accompanied by a backlash against those religious groups whose views on sexuality are reflected in their requirements for leadership.

It should be underscored that such faith-based requirements are not aimed at excluding LGBT students from leadership roles, but rather intended to ensure that whomever is selected to lead the club — a form of ministry — adheres to the core convictions of the faith.

In response to the de-recognition and exclusion of student clubs like InterVarsity, a number of states — including North Carolina, Idaho, Virginia and Ohio — have enacted laws ensuring that student groups at public universities have the right to adopt eligibility criteria for its officers consistent with their religious beliefs.

But it shouldn’t take legislation to get colleges and universities to uphold religious liberty and freedom of association by creating an open and welcoming environment for a broad range of beliefs and faiths.

When colleges and universities enforce “inclusion” by excluding some religious voices, they cripple the spirit of free inquiry and robust debate that should be at the heart of their mission. The “marketplace of ideas,” it should be remembered, is not confined to the “marketplace of ideas we like.”

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

By RON WILSON
Huck Boyd National Institute for Rural Development

San Jose, Calif., is located in the Silicon Valley, home to some of the nation’s largest high tech companies. But the website for the city of San Jose is not designed by any of those. Instead, it was designed and is hosted by a company half a continent away in Kansas.

Ward Morgan is the CEO of CivicPlus, the software company which created this website. Ward has roots in rural Kansas. He comes from Oberlin and spent summers on his grandparent’s farm near Atwood. He worked on a custom wheat harvesting crew and followed the harvest from Oklahoma to Canada. Then he worked in carpet cleaning and auto mechanics.

Ward went to K-State and got a degree in business. One day in Aggieville, he met Brenda. The two ultimately were married.

Ward served as a business consultant with a Salina accounting firm where he met Tony Gagnon.  The two decided to go into business together. They created a dial-up Internet access business in Manhattan called Networks Plus which they sold in 2000.

They had also created some websites during this time so they decided to begin a website and software business. They named the new business CivicPlus.

CivicPlus set out to build websites for city and county governments. Ward eventually bought out Tony and continued to grow the business. He also co-owns a telecommunications company called The Phone Connection.

“Local governments hire us to build or redesign a website,” Ward said. “Our team will consult with the community and then do the graphic design and train local employees on how to use it.”  CivicPlus created the software and hosts the sites.

“These websites are for communication, not for selling something,” Ward said. The websites engage the public and inform citizens about services and civic leaders. “We design the site so users can move quickly to exactly where they want to be.”

The user-friendly websites became so popular that business grew across the nation. Today the company provides website solutions for 1,700 local governments coast to coast, plus in Canada and Australia. The company has won more than 250 website awards for its clients.

As business grew, Ward purchased and remodeled several older buildings in downtown Manhattan to house his employees.

“We were approached about moving to other states,” Ward said.  “Fortunately we were able to work with the city of Manhattan, Kansas Department of Commerce, and Manhattan Chamber to remain in the community.”  In order to bring its employees together under one roof, CivicPlus is building a new, five-story, $11 million building in downtown Manhattan.
“We like the vibrancy of downtown,” Ward said. He is encouraging new retail operations and is relocating restaurants into downtown Manhattan. These include Hibachi Hut and Della Voce.  Plans call for a brew pub with a rooftop bar on one building and a speakeasy-themed restaurant in the basement of another.

“There’s a downtown renaissance happening,” Ward said.

One of his restaurant partners is his cousin Mark Edwards. Unbeknownst to them at the time, the decision to go into the restaurant business together may have been carrying on a family tradition.  One day Mark was cleaning out his grandmother’s house and found a license that had been issued by the Kansas Hotel Commission in 1928. The license was issued to Mark and Ward’s great-grandmother Etta Bosler to operate Bosler’s Café in the rural community of Ludell, Kansas, with a population of perhaps 25 people. Now, that’s rural.

Perhaps Etta Bosler’s great-grandsons picked up her interest in the food business.

“We want restaurants and shops on the first floor of our buildings so there’s more people downtown,” Ward said. Such business benefits the quality of life of the community as well as CivicPlus employees who now number more than 185 people.

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

It’s time to leave San Jose, California, where a website from Kansas is serving this high-tech community. We commend Ward Morgan and all those involved with CivicPlus for making a difference with high-tech entrepreneurship and a commitment to revitalizing downtown – from Silicon Valley to the Kansas River valley.