A month has passed since the top management committee of the Kansas Legislature — the Legislative Coordinating Council — decided that it is OK to allow concealed carry of guns into the Statehouse.

So far, just four visitors with concealed-carry licenses have brought their guns into the Capitol. And, so far, nothing untoward has happened. That’s a good thing.

But this is summertime, and we Statehouse habitués are wondering just what the fall and next legislative session will bring.

The LCC based its decision — or more accurately, its decision not to make a decision on concealed carry in the Statehouse — on the basis that the building has great security. Visitors have to go through metal detectors; anyone carrying a concealed gun would set off alarm buzzers, and they would either have to prove that they are licensed to carry that concealed gun or they don’t get into the building.

Sounds reasonable. If you have a concealed-carry permit, you’re trained, and probably safe to carry it around. If you don’t have a permit, you don’t get to wander around the building where legislators are making high-profile, controversial decisions on legislation that will effect Kansans’ lives or pocketbooks or child-support payments.

There were months of angst about the decision on concealed carry by visitors to the Statehouse. Lawmakers and others with offices in the building who have permits can conceal-carry; it’s just the visitors who are checked.

This appears to work so far, when most of the visitors to the Statehouse are vacationers or Kansans just wanting to see how the $300 million renovation of the Statehouse has turned out. Not a lot of concealed-carry opportunities for the shorts and T-shirt crowd.

This winter, it’ll be a different deal, and it’s up to security to make sure that if people have guns under their jackets or in their purses, they are licensed.

But there are still concerns. In the olden days, security and police officers always liked to be the only ones in the room with a firearm. That was for their protection, because most everyone with a firearm has a uniform or a badge on, and you knew who they were — before concealed carry.

While the Statehouse’s security cadre knows the employees, the lobbyists, the legislators and the “regulars” in the building, the folks who they don’t have to worry about, there’s always the chance that if something happens — say just a shouting match or some other relatively minor disturbance — local law enforcement officers would come into the Statehouse to help quiet things down. Those cops don’t know who’s who, so the licensed concealed-carry folks become distractions for them.

Law enforcement officers know to flash their badges conspicuously so other law enforcement can concentrate on other people. It’s going to be hard to flash a driver’s license with a concealed-carry checkmark or the concealed-carry license in an attention-drawing way to make law enforcement believe you are not a threat.

Now, the real test of how this concealed-carry in the Statehouse is going to work will probably come when the Legislature starts in January and the halls are packed with visitors, and those folks who aren’t carrying concealed weapons wind up in the same line with concealed-carry visitors at the entry gates. At some point, those “regulars” are going to be delayed in entering while the carriers haul out their certificates. Those unarmed visitors may miss a hearing on a bill or an appointment to visit a lawmaker, and there will be some carping at the entry points.

Concealed carry in the Statehouse? So far, so good, with the real policy road test yet to come.

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.

Kansas is in the midst of determining the future of water over the next 50 years.

As the old saying goes, better 30 years late than never.

A Water Vision team, organized at the behest of Gov. Sam Brownback, has recently completed its statewide tour with the first draft of its water conservation plan. It was seeking additional input before offering what it hopes will be a final proposal later this year.

While the Water Vision plan is fairly specific in its goals, it’s purposely vague on how it wants to get there. The Water Vision Team made it clear that this plan is to be driven from the bottom up and that public input will be the driving force in how the state achieves its ultimate goals in preserving and conserving its water resources.

It would lend one to think that the state and its citizens have made tremendous progress in our view of water resources over the past three decades.

While living in Kinsley, we would ride with a friend on occasion while he would check irrigation wells on what was then known as Circle K Ranch. It was a 7,000-acre corporate farming operation in the sandhills south of the Arkansas River.

The absentee owners, in their infinite wisdom, had the land broken out of native grass and they tried to plant corn. Either through gross mismanagement or poor soil conditions, they had an extremely difficult time getting corn to grow in the area. It was common to see sprinkler systems that were operating for the sole purpose of keeping the loose soil from blowing into Nebraska.

Today, that same land is owned by the City of Hays which is still trying to figure how it can transfer water 60 miles north over the legal objections of Edwards County.

What was happening to a valuable water resource on that Circle K operation some 35 years ago was unconscionable, but it wasn’t criminal – though it should have been.

At least we’re more conscientious about such behavior today. But, in reality, we may not have progressed as far as we’d like to think.

State Rep. Don Hineman, who also farms in Lane County, offered some insight into the issue during the Vision Team’s recent stop in Dighton. He pointed out that a farmer who elects to use less water by choice, rather than necessity, doesn’t directly benefit from that decision.

Maybe his children or grandchildren will. Perhaps even his neighbor will benefit from less drawdown in his irrigation well. But what benefit does that farmer realize in the short term by using less water, resulting in lower production and less profit?

That’s a legitimate question.

A 20 percent reduction in water usage isn’t likely to reduce income by 20 percent, but it’s reasonable to assume it will have some impact. And still unaddressed are guidelines regarding limited irrigation’s impact on crop insurance.

Is the farmer who balks at taking that step voluntarily any less socially conscious than the person who won’t buy a Prius, even though it will help reduce our dependence on foreign oil, or the person who won’t purchase LED bulbs for the home because they’re more expensive?

Jay Garetson, a Sublette farmer and former member of the Kansas State Board of Agriculture, has raised a similar question, but from a different perspective. While a strong advocate of the need to conserve water for future generations, he says that same moral conviction isn’t shared by all bankers and absentee landowners who are more interested in getting what you can while you can.

What happens 20 or 30 years from now is for someone else to worry about, right?

So what’s the answer?

That, of course, is the dilemma.

Rep. Hineman suggests financial incentives should be patterned after programs which have been successful in encouraging soil conservation. But that would require a considerable amount of money which Kansas is notoriously lacking and financial aid isn’t likely to come from the federal government for a Western Kansas Ogallala Aquifer preservation effort.

And what’s the likelihood of something happening voluntarily given the recent LEMA vote in GWMD No. 1?

Even without the lopsided opposition in Wallace County, a 20 percent reduction in water usage only received little more than half the votes in the other four counties.

This is the same 20 percent reduction being proposed by the Vision Team in an area where we’re already seeing wells shut down because of a sharply declining aquifer. If there isn’t enough grassroots support under those circumstances, just how much support is there going to be across the entirety of Western Kansas and, in particular, Southwest Kansas where the aquifer runs deeper?

The Vision Team emphasizes that a conservation program won’t come as a directive from the top, given Brownback’s philosophy of less government. But if a clear majority of stakeholders around the state aren’t willing to buy into a plan is Brownback and the legislature simply going to throw their collective arms into the air and proclaim, “Well, at least we tried”?

A grassroots-driven effort sounds wonderful, but that may be easier said than done. And, quite frankly, it’s difficult to imagine such a plan gathering wide support when the Vision Team unveils a final proposal later this year.

It’s not a matter of whether we should do something. We were clearly past that point long ago.

How to get enough stakeholders to voluntarily buy into a plan without legal or financial incentives from the state well . . . that’s where things get a little blurry.

Rod Haxton can be reached at [email protected]

The 4-H motto is “To make the best better!” — 4-H bakers certainly exhibited their best in the 4-H Foods division at the 2014 Ellis County Fair.

This week, I highlight more award-winning recipes from the fair, including the “Best 4-H Cookie” and a decadent cheesecake which was the senior reserve champion exhibit. I hope you enjoy these prize-winning recipes and will join me in congratulating the exhibitors.

• • •

Heather Befort of the Good Hope 4-H Club earned the “Best 4-H Cookie” award with these beautiful and healthful meringue cookies. These eye-catching cookies will be a popular addition to cookie trays now and through the holiday season — and at only 33 delicious calories each, you can enjoy several without feeling guilty.

Chocolate-Dipped Strawberry Meringue Roses
3 egg whites
1/4 cup sugar
1/4 cup freeze-dried strawberries
1 package (3-oz) strawberry gelatin
½ teaspoon vanilla extract, optional
1 cup 60% cacao bittersweet chocolate baking chips, melted

Place egg whites in a large bowl, let stand at room temperature 30 minutes. Preheat oven to 225 degrees. Place sugar and strawberries in a food processor; process until powdery. Add gelatin; pulse to blend. Beat egg whites on medium speed until foamy, adding vanilla if desired. Gradually add gelatin mixture, one tablespoon at a time, beating on high after each addition until sugar is dissolved. Continue beating until stiff, glossy peaks form. Cut a small hole in the tip of a pastry bag or in the corner of a food-safe plastic bag; insert a #1M star tip. Transfer meringue to bag. Pipe 2-inch roses 1 ½ inches apart onto parchment paper-lined baking sheets. Bake 40-45 minutes or until set and dry. Turn oven off (do not open oven door), leave meringues in oven 1 ½ hours. Remove from oven, cool completely on baking sheets. Remove meringues from parchment paper. Dip bottoms in melted chocolate, allow excess to drip off. Place on waxed paper and let stand until set, about 45 minutes. Store in an airtight container at room temperature. Makes about 3 ½ dozen; each cookie contains 33 calories and 1 gram of fat.

• • •

The senior division reserve champion entry comes from Nate Walters of the Buckeye Junior Farmers 4-H Club. This rich and delicious cheesecake is sure to please those who love German Chocolate Cake.

Cheesecake Germania
Crust:
1 3/4 cup graham cracker crumbs
1/3 cup sugar
6 Tablespoons butter

Combine crust ingredients; press onto bottom of 9-inch springform pan. Bake at 325 degrees for 10 minutes.

Filling:
3 8-ounce packages cream cheese, softened
3/4 cup sugar
1/4 cup cocoa
2 teaspoons vanilla
3 eggs

Combine cream cheese, sugar, cocoa and vanilla, mixing at medium speed on electric mixer until well blended. Add eggs, one at a time, mixing well after each addition. Pour over crust. Bake at 350 degrees for 35 minutes. Cool before removing rim of pan. Chill.

Topping:
1/3 cup evaporated milk
1/3 cup sugar
1/4 cup margarine
1 egg, beaten
½ teaspoon vanilla
½ cup chopped pecans
½ cup flaked coconut

In a small saucepan, combine milk, sugar, margarine, egg and vanilla; cook, stirring constantly until thickened. Stir in pecans and coconut; cool. Spread on cheesecake. Makes 10 to 12 servings. Keep refrigerated.

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

How does the First Amendment get caught up in a controversial death penalty case where the means of execution — not the conviction — was the final issue?

The answer is “the right to petition.” The least-known of the five freedoms of the First Amendment, it’s most often associated with individuals, groups or lobbyists. Petition provides each of us the power to ask our government “for redress of grievances.”

Joseph Wood was executed on July 23 for the 1989 murders of his estranged girlfriend Debra Dietz, and her father Eugene Dietz. Wood’s death attracted national attention because he took more than two hours to die after receiving a lethal injection of two chemicals — and it was that process that was the focus of Wood’s First Amendment argument.

In the days before his death, Wood cited a series of U.S. Supreme Court decisions that set out the public’s right to observe court proceedings and executions, and to have certain kinds of access to public records, seeking details about Arizona’s latest plan for lethal injections, the suppliers of the drugs and handling after manufacture, and the qualifications of those participating in the execution.

Death penalty opponents hope to find flaws in the execution process, and in particular the experimental “cocktails” of lethal drugs now being used in the latest executions. They may use such information to raise claims that the method, or the death penalty itself, violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition of “cruel and unusual punishments.”

Wood’s legal challenge was rejected by a district court, but the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued a stay, saying he at least raised a valid legal question. However, the Supreme Court refused to consider Wood’s petition and the execution proceeded.

“Petition” follows last in the public’s collective memory behind the other core rights protected by the First Amendment: religion, speech, press and assembly. In the 2014 “State of the First Amendment” survey released last month, just under one-third of Americans could not name a single freedom, and of those who could, just one percent identified “petition.”

But the roots of our right to petition are deep, going all the way back to the Magna Carta, which in 1215 established the right of 25 noblemen to seek relief from the King for perceived injustices, without fear of punishment. In 1689, that freedom was formally extended to all, in the English Bill of Rights.

Ironically, it was that “every Englishman’s right to petition” that was embodied in 1776 in the U.S. colonies’ Declaration of Independence, which took King George III to task in 27 separate indictments according to the Encyclopedia of the First Amendment.

In the U.S., petition was confirmed as a basic right in 1876 in United States v. Cruickshank, when the Supreme Court observed that “the very idea of a government, republican in form, implies a right on the part of its citizens to meet peaceably for consultation in respect to public affairs and to petition for a redress of grievances.”

While many Americans may think of “petition” only in terms of a paper with signatures, it’s much more — in substance and practice. Among the first uses in the U.S. were signed petitions in the early 1800s against slavery. But the right encompasses demonstrations and protests, lobbying and individual letters to public officials.

Which brings us back to Wood’s novel use of the First Amendment in challenging his execution. In effect, his argument was that in order to effectively challenge the government’s plans, he needed full and complete disclosure of records and information associated with government’s process — an argument, absent the inherent drama built into capital punishment cases, that is a fundamental principle of Freedom of Information laws.

And like its “partner-in-law” the freedom of assembly and other amendments in the U.S. Bill of Rights, petition is non-partisan: We need only look to modern day efforts like the Tea Party protests and Occupy Movement demonstrations to see the scope of fellow citizens intent on telling government officials what changes should be made or decisions reversed.

In the end, the First Amendment won’t settle the controversy over the death penalty. But as the nation’s founders intended, the core freedoms it protects can provide the means for the self-governed to effectively debate and decide issues facing our nation.

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

Life experiences teach plenty to those willing to learn. From the time I was a small boy, I remember my dad, uncles and grandfather talking and debating the issues of the day whenever we visited one another.

As I grew older, I began to hear some of what they said. I began to understand what they were talking about. But it has taken me several decades to process, learn from and use what my elders were saying about the issues of their days.

About the time I was half way through high school, something he said finally sunk in. Grandpa Bert always said when you know a little about an issue, it’s easy to form an opinion. When you learn a little more, it becomes a little more difficult to make a decision. And when you learn even more about an issue, your decision becomes, “just plain hard.”

Lately, I’ve been thinking a lot about the issue of farmers and ranchers who often toil long days away by themselves. Sometimes they feel isolated with their backs against the wall. More than one farmer has expressed a feeling of, “It’s me against the world.”

Never before in agriculture has it been more important for farmers to express their basic wants, hopes and needs. Things like protection of personal property, a sound education for their children and a responsible, nonintrusive federal government, water usage to mention a few.

Never before has there been such an opportunity to express agriculture’s needs. Today there are hundreds of satellites in orbit around our globe. Our cable system is loaded with hundreds of networks. The information highway continues to speed forward, and we can communicate with people around the world instantly.

Today’s technology allows individuals to access videos, music, news, weather, markets and consumer information – literally anything happening in our world today.

It’s been more than three decades since newspapers entered the era of national and international publications. In this country, Christian Science Monitor and the Wall Street Journal pioneered the way.

Magazines and newspapers from all over the world are online today, available for anyone with the time and desire to read them. Of course, they are still being shipped by mail. You can also read news, weather, markets and sports and screen after screen on your computer.

And that’s not even mentioning all the data out there on social media – you know Twitter, Facebook, Pinterest – you name it, there’s data out there. All you really need is time.

With all of these different information avenues at your fingertips, it may also be easy for some to tune out and turn off. Farmers, ranchers, businessmen, bankers and professionals cannot afford to do that. We must utilize these communication tools to tell our story.

One way to help do this is by becoming active in the farm organizations and commodity groups of your choice. They can provide the vehicle to help you tell agriculture’s story while developing sound farming policy that must be communicated.

Agriculture finally arrived as a headliner during the farm crisis of the mid-‘80s. Every day, newspapers, radios, televisions and computers are chock full of stories on agriculture. Subjects range from food additives in processing to agricultural chemicals. Stories include animal welfare, cholesterol in the diet, sugar-less foods, the farm bill and finding ways to increase agricultural trade.

Remember, farmers and ranchers must continue to voice their message in the public information arena. Agriculture must utilize this medium to promote and persuade others to bring about change – change that will benefit agriculture and a society that relies on U.S. farmers and ranchers for the safest and most abundant food source in the world.

A Kansas citizen said it best more than 90 years ago, “This nation will survive, this state will prosper, the orderly business of life will go forward only if men can speak in whatever way given them to utter what their hearts hold – by voice, by postal card, by letter or by pres

William Allen White wrote this in his Emporia Gazette during the post World War I recession in 1922. These words ring true today.

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

In the 1984 presidential campaign, Democratic candidate Walter Mondale declared that, if elected, he would raise taxes.

During his acceptance speech at the Democratic Convention, Mondale said: “By the end of my first term, I will reduce the Reagan budget deficit by two‑thirds. Let’s tell the truth. It must be done, it must be done. Mr. Reagan will raise taxes, and so will I. He won’t tell you. I just did.”

The Minnesota senator was subsequently pummeled in the general election, losing every state but his own and the District of Columbia. Ronald Reagan won re-election in one of the biggest landslides in political history.

Maybe Mondale would have lost to Reagan anyway. But the lesson wasn’t lost on politicians. Voters say they want honesty from their politicians but, in reality, they don’t.

Some politicians are delusional. They are unable to accept the facts for what they are. Reaganomics is a failed policy. Only someone who continues to believe that man roamed the earth with dinosaurs and that climate change is a giant hoax continues to believe otherwise.

Mondale knew what he was talking about. As president, Reagan raised taxes in seven of his eight years in office, including four times in just two years. Former GOP Senator Alan Simpson pointed out that, “Ronald Reagan raised taxes 11 times in his administration – I was there.”

Reagan added $1.86 trillion to the national debt while he was in office – a time when $1 trillion was real money. By the time Reagan left office the debt had nearly doubled from when he was first elected.

Yet that hasn’t stopped every conservative Republican over the past 15 years from declaring themselves a tax-cut disciple of Reagan while ignoring his true record and the economic toll inflicted by Reaganomics at the federal and state levels.

Why the history lesson?

In the three decades since that 1984 presidential election, candidates in both political parties have been careful not to repeat Mondale’s mistake. Tax increases are the third-rail in politics. You can’t talk about them, even as your state or your nation are sinking in red ink.

Just ask Democrat Paul Davis who will likely be challenging Gov. Sam Brownback in the general election.

Davis has been critical of Gov. Brownback’s tax policies because they are not sustainable. Kansas is digging itself into a fiscal hole that is undercutting education, our state’s infrastructure, aid to children in low-income families and assistance to our elderly.

This isn’t some wild-eyed theory. It’s a fact.

While granting tax cuts to our wealthiest citizens and to corporations, the Brownback Administration’s solution to those who have seen cuts in food and child care assistance is simple: “Get a job.” Or if you already have a job, “Get a better job.” Unfortunately, since the Kansas Legislature has been reshaped in the image of Gov. Brownback, thanks to the Tea Party insurgency and considerable financial backing of the Koch brothers, there’s very little room for debate on the state’s fiscal policy.

Bringing reality back into Kansas politics has to begin with the Democratic wing and its gubernatorial candidate.

Davis obviously knows what must be done. In a recent economic message, he said that, if elected, he will stop automatic income tax reductions already passed by the legislature, but not yet in effect. That is only part of the solution. It would only prevent us from sliding deeper into debt.

But unless that plan is accompanied by tax increases, there is no way that the state can begin to restore much needed funding to programs that have suffered under Brownback and the GOP-controlled legislature.

And should Davis dare to mention tax increases – even though it’s the only reasonable solution that can bail us out of this disastrous course – one has to wonder if he would suffer the Mondale blowback?

To some degree it’s inevitable.

There will always be that part of the Republican base – the Tea Party wingnuts – who cheer efforts to shut down the IRS, who are opposed to government spending as long as it doesn’t affect their Social Security or Medicare payments and who don’t see the correlation between tax cuts to our wealthiest individuals while we increase property taxes to offset lost revenue.

Those individuals just don’t get it . . . never will.

There’s no reason we can’t treat the rest of the electorate in Kansas like adults.

It takes money to provide our children the best opportunities to succeed in the classroom, to make sure young children don’t have to go to bed hungry at night, to improve our highways and care for our elderly.

Doing what’s right and what’s best for our citizens comes with a price tag.

Conservative Republicans want you to believe they can keep marking down that cost like we’re in the bargain basement of a department store, but they’re wrong. They’re not just wrong . . . they’re lying to you. Those cuts come with a consequence to Kansas families and to our future.

Paul Davis should tell Kansas voters not what they want to hear, but what they need to hear.

Mondale paid the price for being honest. It’s time that ultraconservatives paid the price for being dishonest.

Rod Haxton is editor/owner of the Scott County Record. [email protected]

On a recent afternoon my husband, Lyn, and I decided to take a drive to enjoy some of the flowers growing in Hays.

We observed several beautiful residential yards and especially enjoyed the colorful flowers in front of the Historical Society at Main and 7th Street. We admired the colorful planters situated on the sidewalks in the business district along Main Street and the very interesting (and instructive) drought tolerant plantings located in front of the City Hall at 1507 Main Street.

We then toured Frontier Park, at the intersection of Main and the Highway 183 bypass, where, on the east side one sees Russian Sage and Slack-eyed Susan, two of my favorite perennials for our more arid area. More colorful flowers grace the entry of Frontier Park on the west side of Main.

We then ventured to Ekey Park, located at Holmes and 18th, where we again observed Russian Sage planted with Knockout Roses along with numerous Day Lilies that were blooming on that day. Sunrise Park, located at Lawrence and 29th Street, features numerous plantings of ornamental grasses as well as a planting of colorful geraniums. Elizabeth Polly Park, located west of Indian Trail between 26th and 27th Streets (east of Centennial Towers), contains several very attractive beds near the statue of Elizabeth Polly. This provides a serene quiet place to walk and enjoy nature.

We finished our tour observing the lovely flower beds, located in Seven Hills Park on the north side of 33rd Street along Canal Street, and the especially colorful and beautiful bed that is found at the intersection just south of 33rd Street on Canal Street as well.

These are just a few of the locations around our city where we all have the opportunity to “stop and smell the flowers” and enjoy the hard work of the people who work for the Hays Parks Department – especially Jo Ann Schroller. I encourage you to take an afternoon or an evening to observe these beautiful flower beds and the many opportunities for relaxation which are available in your city parks.

As one travels around this area of Kansas this summer, it is so refreshing to see water in the ponds and the green pastures which were not so green or ponds so full in recent years.

Since experiencing a wetter than normal June, we need to be aware that our area is a long way from receiving the moisture needed to replenish our water resources.

As of 8 a.m. on July 28th, the Hays area is 0.66 inches above normal for the year thanks to the rainfall that was received during June.

However, rainfall totals are 0.56 inches below normal for July.

When examining the drought period from January 2011 through July 28, 2014, the Hays area is still 12.66 inches below normal.

Even if our area were to receive the needed moisture to replenish our rainfall deficit, the Hays area is located in a more arid area of Kansas which requires us to be responsible in the ways that we use our valuable water resources.

For questions or comments regarding anything discussed in this article please contact the Hays Parks Department at 785-628-7375.

Janis Lee is vice chairwoman of Hays Beautification Committee.