The Kansas Supreme Court cannot be accused of ducking tough issues.

Last week the Court ruled that the Bill of Rights in the Kansas Constitution protects Kansans’ “right of personal autonomy,” including a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy. Then, on Monday, the Court hears the latest round of litigation on school funding, the most fundamental obligation of state government.

Debate on the Court’s engagement in the abortion issue will continue for some time. On school finance, however, the Court should sign off on school funding approved by a bipartisan legislative coalition and Governor Laura Kelly and stand down on future litigation.

The history of school finance litigation stretches back over 50 years and stems from a complete rewrite of the Education Article of the Kansas Constitution proposed by state lawmakers and adopted by voters in 1966. This revision says simply “the legislature shall make suitable provision for finance of the educational interests of the state.”

Since 1966, lawmakers, state courts, and school districts have engaged in six cycles of litigation over what exactly “suitable provision” means. In the current cycle, which began in 2010, lawmakers are making their seventh trip to the Court to settle the lawsuit. In other words, in six prior attempts—once in 2014, twice in 2016, twice in 2017, and once in 2018—lawmakers fell short in meeting the Court’s view of suitable funding.

In the most recent cycle, the first three trips to the Court, led by former Governor Brownback and his far-right legislative allies, were not credible. They chose to ignore established funding guidelines, threaten the Court, campaign to oust Court justices, and enact multi-billion dollar cuts in state income taxes. Kansas voters rejected these tactics in the elections of 2016.

Beginning in 2017 a bipartisan coalition of state lawmakers has taken the Court’s orders seriously and crafted credible steps toward settling the litigation.

Why is school finance so hard? Imagine, if you will, allocating $5 billion among 300 school districts in ways that are adequate in meeting educational goals and equitable across widely diverse rural, urban, and suburban schools.

Even so, after nearly ten years of lawsuit drama, Kansans should expect these cycles of litigation to end.

The Kansas Supreme Court has the power to establish a higher bar for itself and lower state courts in considering future complaints on the suitability provision of the Kansas Constitution. Through prior rulings, the Court has established standards for adequacy and equity in school funding; it could order that only a substantial departure from those standards by state lawmakers would qualify for judicial review. An expression of heightened restraint by the Court in applying those standards could usher in an era free of litigation over school finance.

A “substantial departure” could, of course, be in the eye of the beholder, as “suitable” has been, but the justices can certainly find the right words. Obviously, the dramatic cuts in base funding and block-grant chicanery during the Brownback era represented flagrant deviations from funding guidelines and deserved judicial attention.

Judicial restraint on challenges to school funding could send powerful messages to school districts and state lawmakers: First, that school districts should focus their attention on demonstrating how additional funding leads to improved student performance, particularly for students most in need. And second, that state legislators keep school funding in line with established standards for adequacy and equity and assure that school districts are held accountable for student performance.

As high drama on abortion politics resurfaces, the Court should clear the way for a litigious-free path on school finance.

H. Edward Flentje is professor emeritus at Wichita State University and served with former Kansas Governors Bennett and Hayden.

What is inflammation? Inflammation comes from the Latin words “into the flame” like how moths are drawn to sustaining warmth of a springtime campfire and harmful self-destruction if they get too close. Inflammation is a natural phenomenon that can encourage sustaining healing but also harmful destruction, like a moth into the flame.

During my first years of medical school, I was honored to spend my summers with multiple doctors practicing in Watertown, South Dakota. There, pediatrician Ebehardt Heinrichs, M.D., taught me about inflammation while we were examining a young child with acute juvenile arthritis. He pointed out how her hands showed four characteristics of inflammation famously described by Celsus, a Roman who lived at the time of Jesus. Dr. Heinrichs explained, “These are the cardinal signs of inflammation: rubor (redness), tumor (swelling), calor (heat) and dolor (pain).”

That summer, a red, swollen, hot, and painful joint found with juvenile arthritis was not the only medical condition I saw resulting from inflammation run amok. Other destructive examples included asthma, poison ivy, psoriasis, Lupus, and rheumatoid arthritis. Those years ago, I learned that we had anti-inflammatory medications to help patients with such unfortunate conditions, although side effects were considerable. In contrast, I also saw examples of how inflammation can be beneficial in fighting off invading infections such as skin abscesses, appendicitis, tonsillitis, meningitis and sinusitis.

Beyond this older and established knowledge, researchers have recently learned that beneficial muscle growth comes as a response to localized mild inflammation that follows exercise. Other studies show that low-intensity training, like walking, can reduce harmful chronic inflammation. All-in-all not only can our bodies be harmed when self-destructive inflammation turns against our own cells, but our bodies can be protected and even sculpted by the yin and yang of balanced and healthy inflammation.

Recently, researchers have learned of another yin and yang. We know that our bodies can recognize and remove, by inflammation, tiny cancers that pop up periodically. On the other hand, certain cancers can grow because of inflammation. This later finding has allowed for even more new therapies.

There have been great improvements in medicines relating to inflammation, compared to what we had during those early years in med school. We can now, more effectively and with fewer side-effects, turn off harmful targets of inflammation, cool crippling arthritis, sooth devastating rashes and even, when used correctly, shrink certain cancers.

Rubor, tumor, calor, dolor . . . like a moth attracted to a sustaining or harmful springtime campfire.

For free and easy access to the entire Prairie Doc® library, visit www.prairiedoc.org and follow The Prairie Doc® on Facebook, featuring On Call with the Prairie Doc® a medical Q&A show streaming live most Thursdays at 7 p.m. central.

By GREG DOERING
Kansas Farm Bureau

While driving through the Flint Hills one evening recently I saw the most brilliant sunset. The day had been mostly overcast, with a gentle breeze from the northwest. It was a perfect day for prescribed burning in the nation’s largest patch of tall grass prairie.

I watched as flames licked at last year’s growth, stretching skyward as the sun dropped toward the horizon. The clouds broke, but the smoke-filled air dispersed purple, red and orange hues. It looked as if the burning prairie had ignited the entire sky.

It was a beautiful sight, and just a small part of the 2.5 million acres farmers and ranchers have ignited in the Flint Hills this spring. There are still a few days left in the season, which typically runs into early May.

Stretching from just south of the Nebraska border down into northern Oklahoma, the Flint Hills are home to the remains of an ecosystem that once covered much of the Great Plains. The rocky terrain saved nearly 10,000 square miles of tallgrass from being plowed under.

While I know the benefits of prescribed burning, it’s one agricultural practice that’s often misunderstood.

Fire is a vital tool to preserve this patch of grass. Without it, cedar trees and weeds take over robbing the grass of the nutrients and water it needs.

“We try to burn every year, so we have new fresh grass,” Lyon County rancher Jacquelyne Leffler said. “We do it for weed control, but we also want that fresh grass that gives us optimal gain for our cattle as well. We’re in the market to be profitable, too.”

Leffler and her family run a stocker operation that places 600-pound cattle on grass around mid-April.

“Hopefully when we pull them off in August, we’ll have around 2.2 to 3 pounds of gain per day,” Leffler said.

While fire is friendly to ranchers’ bottom line, it’s also good for the environment. Controlled burns kill weeds, nourish the soil, destroy parasites living in dead grass and help preserve the prairie ecosystem. Fire is vital to wildlife like prairie chickens and other grassland birds. Most of that can be achieved through other means, but Leffler said, those aren’t nearly as efficient as fire.

“It’s cheaper to be able to light a match and just have some water to control it,” Leffler said. “It makes it so our land is sustainable for the future generations that will be here.”

Safety is a key component of prescribed burns, Leffler said. And that starts with knowing where you’re burning.
“Our ground isn’t necessarily flat and smooth, so we try to make sure everybody knows where the bigger ditches are, Leffler said, noting that helpers also carry tools to cut fence if they need a quick escape route.

“We leave at least a 50-foot backburn anywhere we want the fire to stop.” she said. “Once we do that, we make sure everyone’s accounted for, and then we go into the process of lighting the head fire.”

Pushed by the prevailing wind, the head fire clears the land of cedars and other woody plants.

“That means more grass is going to be able to come up, so that means more feed for our cattle, which is going to contribute to those better gains,” Leffler said.

“Insight” is a weekly column published by Kansas Farm Bureau, the state’s largest farm organization whose mission is to strengthen agriculture and the lives of Kansans through advocacy, education and service.

The hay field was awash in morning dew, making me glad I’d worn my rubber boots. I knew there would be a gobbler roosted somewhere on the far side of the field, but lack of proper scouting left me guessing where. All was unusually quiet and calm for a Kansas morning, allowing me to hear plainly the waking sounds of songbirds punctuated by the occasionally “bob-white” of a quail. When Mr. Gobbler finally made his presence known, I was much too close, a problem I often have when hunting turkeys in the morning. It took me back to a morning turkey hunt years ago.

Everyone knows wild turkeys MUST be hunted from the ground. Sitting on the ground or on a five gallon bucket until your butt and both legs are numb is just part of the turkey hunting experience, and NOT to do so would certainly be as un-American as eating pizza without potato chips, or owning a corvette with an automatic transmission. Yet here I stood, gazing longingly up the ladder of the landowners tree stand thinking what a perfect spot it would be to call-in the gobbler that roamed this wood lot. But I must persevere and not break turkey hunting protocol!

In the blackness of the morning I scaled the ladder up and into the stand, all the while remembering the gobbler and his tiny harem that had shunned me here the night before. This tree stood barely three feet into the woodlot from the edge of the crop field; if I fell out, I’d land in the bean stubble. I figured the gobbler to be roosted at the end of the crop field and along the river, some distance away. Usually you can hear a gobbler even in the dark, as he’ll often gobble at every barking dog or hooting owl, but this morning the woods was unusually quiet. Perhaps that wasn’t good; perhaps I had misdiagnosed where he roosted and would be left high and dry.

Trying not to shatter yet another turkey hunting rule of “calling very sparingly while the turkeys are still roosted,” I watched and waited as daylight slowly poured itself across the landscape around me. I yelped softly with the box call and a gobble erupted beside me along the river probably seventy yards away; the rascal was roosting where I had not even considered. For thirty minutes he gobbled away, and I tried to find a good balance between calling back to let him know I was still interested and playing hard to get to make him come find me. For those thirty minutes he seemed not to move, and suddenly he was silent. I called softly a couple times but heard nothing in return. My heart dropped to my toes; what had I done wrong or not done right?

As I tossed the situation around in my mind, a gobble broke the stillness again, this time directly in front of me not far away; he had snuck quietly through the trees and was in the bean stubble where I knew he would see my plastic decoy “jezebels.” Soon I saw him strutting his way toward me in the open field. I put the call aside and brought the shotgun around into position. He got so close I heard him spit each time he fanned out, and could hear the scratching noise as each wingtip drug across the ground. I could see him well, but too many tree limbs were in the way for a sure shot. Like a target in an arcade he marched back and forth but would not come any closer.

I had just read an article where the author warned about placing decoys too close and creating just such a situation. It became another standoff as he remained behind too many limbs for a safe killing shot. I decided it was time for a plan “B”; if he would just step a little closer to the edge of the trees during his little show, he would momentarily be in a small clear spot for a shot. Finally he appeared to stray a little closer to the trees, so as his back was toward me as he turned, I swung the shotgun around and leaned out around the tree trunk in front of me. He saw or heard me move and immediately dropped his tail feathers to run, but the twelve gauge nailed him to the ground before he could take more than a couple steps.

If I’ve left some of you turkey hunting purists shaking your heads, I apologize. I’ve never been one to worry much about protocol. Maybe more of you have shot turkeys from tree stands than I know, but if not and the situation presents itself, give it a try. If you try it, access your shooting lanes and place your decoys appropriately to draw the gobbler past you and to put him in a position for a clear shot if he hangs up a ways out. Continue to Explore Kansas Outdoors!

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

By JOHN P. TRETBAR

Baker Hughes reported a steep drop in its weekly active rotary rig count on Friday to 991 active rigs. That’s down 20 oil rigs and one seeking natural gas. The count in Texas was down nine rigs, North Dakota was down three. Canada was down three to just 63 active rigs.

Independent Oil & Gas Service reported an increase of five active rigs in western Kansas last week, to 27. East of Wichita there were four active rigs, down two.

In mid-morning trading Monday, the benchmark Nymex crude futures contract was down 19 cents to $63.11 per barrel. London Brent was down 20 cents to $71.95.

Regulators approved 21 new permits to drill across the last week, 11 in eastern Kansas and ten west of Wichita, including one in Barton County. So far this year, operators have received 28 permits for drilling at new locations in The Sunflower State.

Independent Oil & Gas Service reported 46 newly-completed wells in Kansas last week, 517 so far this year. There were 18 in the eastern half of the state and 28 in Western Kansas, with one new completion reported in Barton County.

The Energy Information Administration last week reported an increase in U.S. crude-oil inventories, up five and a half million barrels to 460.6 million barrels. U.S. stockpiles are at their highest level since October of last year. Inventories are still about equal to the five-year seasonal average.

EIA said imports were up more than a million barrels to 7.1 million barrels per day for the week. Imports have averaged about 6.6 million barrels per day over the last four weeks, or nearly 20% less than the same four-week period a year ago.

The government reported domestic crude-oil production of 12.17 million barrels per day for the week ending April 19. That’s up about half a million barrels per day from the week before.

EIA predicts domestic production will average 12.4 million barrels per day for the year 2019 and 13.1 million barrels per day next year. The government estimates production in March was 12.1 million barrels per day.

The government is predicting slightly lower gasoline prices this summer driving season than we had last year. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration’s Short Term Energy Outlook, pump prices will average $2.76 a gallon from April through September, compared the $2.85 a gallon in 2018.

Oil by rail traffic continues to spike in U.S., due mainly to the inadequate pipeline capacity in the large producing basins in Texas and North Dakota. The American Association of Railroads reports a nearly 38% increase in such traffic for the week ending April 20 compared to the same week last year. About 12,900 rail cars conveyed petroleum and petroleum products. The year-to-date total was up 23.6% compared to the same period in 2018. Canada’s oil-by-rail traffic also continues to rise, up more than 26% compared to the same week last year.

Exxon Mobil is the latest company to raise concerns that a stockpile of U.S. government crude is tainted with poisonous gas. Bloomberg reports the energy giant is the fourth buyer to complain to the government about “extremely high levels” of hydrogen sulfide in a cargo purchased last year from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Emails obtained under the Freedom of Information Act note that in some cases, the gas levels were 250 times higher than U.S. safety standards.

The government said it is working with Exxon to resolve concerns. An Energy Department spokesman disputes come of the claims, claiming the high levels were the result of contamination during shipping. But officials acknowledge spending about one million dollars to clean up a contaminated cargo sold to PetroChina. The prospect of tainted crude in the reserve complicates future sales of U.S. oil, a key tool for funding government programs. The government plans to sell 226 million barrels from the reserve over the next eight years.

On Easter, a series of coordinated bombings in Sri Lanka killed more than 350 people. The attacks took place at three churches and three hotels in three separate cities. Sri Lankan officials have stated that the attacks were carried out by a local radical Islamist group, with help from international militants, and that they were intended as retribution for attacks on two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand in March.

In the wake of this act of terrorism, the Sri Lankan government temporarily blocked citizens’ access to several major social media platforms, including Facebook, WhatsApp, YouTube and Snapchat to stop the spread of false news reports. Government officials cited fears that misinformation about the attacks could incite further ethnic and religious violence.

Is this an example of a government taking a dramatic and necessary step to ensure the safety of its people? Or is it a misguided act of censorship on the part of a government that doesn’t have the best track record on press freedom in the first place?

As a free speech advocate, my first inclination is to say that shutting down ways for people to communicate with each other is never the right way to respond to a crisis and that the citizens of Sri Lanka are better off with more information, even if some of it is false, than they are with none at all (or to be more precise, only the information provided by state-sponsored media outlets). That’s a knee-jerk reaction in me. But then, I run an organization called the First Amendment Center, so that’s not all that surprising.

But reading arguments from people who support Sri Lanka’s decision has caused me to consider my initial response more carefully. Don’t get me wrong: I still think that the Sri Lankan government shouldn’t have blocked access to social media in the aftermath of the attacks. For one thing, social media is often an invaluable tool for people to get in touch with each other in the wake of a disaster. As The Washington Post pointed out, the platform WhatsApp is “a chat app that more than 1.5 billion people around the world use monthly to text or make voice or video calls. Shutting off access to a primary means of communication during an emergency situation may leave those searching for friends and loved ones particularly vulnerable.” And of course, there’s the overarching concern that cutting off access to information in the name of national security is a step away from democracy towards authoritarianism.

But I was also struck by a comparison that tech journalist Noam Cohen made when he likened social media to gun ownership — something inherently dangerous that needs comprehensive regulation. “To fail to rein in social networks because of appeals to ‘freedom’ would be like allowing vague words written 250 years ago to get in the way of controlling guns.” This does not seem to be a knee-jerk reaction on Cohen’s part. As he puts it, “I’ve come slowly and in fits and starts to this view. Until recently, I’ve preferred to focus on the bad actors who misuse social networks — not only the hate peddlers but the Silicon Valley CEOs who profit from the networks’ misuse…But by focusing on those individuals’ shortcomings, wasn’t I buying into the argument that there was a good way for these social networks to operate, even during a time of crisis or during divisive elections? …In essence, I was replicating the tired defense of unrestrained gun ownership — social networks don’t kill people, people kill people. In point of fact, guns magnify the violence of their users, as do social networks.”

I see Cohen’s point. When you strongly believe in a principle, there’s a tendency to downplay its true cost. Those who advocate for unrestrained gun ownership often argue that stricter gun control laws wouldn’t actually deter crime. But that avoids a much more uncomfortable question: if stricter gun control laws did reduce crime, would you still believe that the right to bear arms is worth the lives put at risk by it?

Those of us who advocate for free speech often argue that censoring hateful speech doesn’t get rid of those ideas or make us any safer. But what if it did? Do the benefits of free speech and unfettered communication outweigh their very real human cost?

My answer is still yes, but there’s nothing knee jerk about it.

Lata Nott is executive director of the First Amendment Center of the Freedom Forum Institute. Contact her via email at [email protected], or follow her on Twitter at @LataNott.

BY RON WILSON
Huck Boyd National Institute for Rural Development

Sometimes it takes a spark to get something started. Today we’ll learn about a spark which is indeed starting something, but this spark is spelled SPARC with a C. The SPARC program was launched by an innovative community foundation to encourage and support vital economic development projects in the region.

Angie Muller is executive director of the Russell County Area Community Foundation, an affiliate of the Greater Salina Community Foundation. She told me about the SPARC grant program.

Angie is a native of Russell. She earned a degree in economics from Kansas State University and a master’s degree in defense studies from the University of Reading in England. She went on to work with federal agencies and then non-profit organizations in the Washington, D.C. area, but she had fond memories of home.

“I lived in exile (from rural Kansas) for about 18 years,” Angie said with a smile. In 2010, she and her husband decided to move back to Kansas to raise their family.

In doing so, they joined a surprising but growing trend of an increase in young people in rural Kansas. In general, demographic data have demonstrated long term population loss in the rural regions of the state. However, according to K-State sociology professor Matt Sanderson, data show that the population of those in the 20-30 age category and the 30-40 age category grew by about 4% in rural Kansas from 2010 to 2017. Angie is pleased to be part of that rural re-migration.

“Our kids are very happy, they live next door to their grandparents,” Angie said. “I love it.” When she moved back, she became executive director of the Russell County Area Community Foundation.
The foundation was formed in 2001 to create a permanent source of philanthropy to address current and future needs in the region through grant making and partnerships. “The foundation exists to preserve our rural way of life,” Angie said.

Today, the Russell County Area Community Foundation has more than $15 million in assets and 76 charitable funds created by various donors. The Kansas Health Foundation and the Dane G. Hansen Foundation of Logan have been key donors and partners in helping this foundation grow.

“Our board of directors got together and talked about how we could do even more,” Angie said. “We were giving out lots of smaller grants, but we wanted to think big and do something really meaningful.”

That led to the creation of a new grant initiative called SPARC: Strategic Partnership for the Advancement of Russell County. SPARC offered grants up to $175,000. “We had three goals: Significant economic development, community collaboration, and long term measured impact,” Angie said.

After proposals were submitted, two finalists emerged. In the end, the Russell County Area Community Foundation board decided to support both, at different levels and stages. The foundation awarded $175,000 to Russell Development Inc. to develop 20 acres of commercial real estate along Interstate 70. Russell County includes about 30 miles of I-70, from the rural town of Gorham, population 348, to Dorrance, population 185 people. Now, that’s rural.

The second project was not as far along and involved the development of a new tourism coalition for the Post Rock region of Kansas. The foundation decided to support that project with a $25,000 grant.

“Our goal is to make this a vibrant community for years to come,” Angie said. She is passionate about rural Kansas. “People are friendly, we have beautiful scenery and great schools. It’s a fantastic place to raise a family and it’s worth preserving,” she said.

For more information about the foundation, go to www.rcacf.net/

Sometimes it takes a spark to get something started. In this case, it was a program named SPARC which is stimulating economic development in the Russell region. We commend Angie Muller and all those involved with the Russell County Area Community Foundation for making a difference with creativity and philanthropy. I’m thankful for their creative spark.

And there’s more. As mentioned, one of the SPARC grants is supporting a new regional tourism initiative. We’ll learn about that next week.

By KARISSA NIEOFF
Executive Director of the National Federation of State High School Associations
and
BILL FAFLICK
Executive Director of the Kansas State High School Activities Association

We communicate on smart phones, drive smart cars, make purchases using smart cards and even drink smart water. But, really, how smart are we?

Between college admission and internet privacy scandals, sexual misconduct investigations, stolen trade secrets and the growing concern about how we communicate and connect with each other, technology seems to be outpacing our capacity to understand the most responsible way to use it.

In other words, how are tomorrow’s leaders being groomed to make decisions that provide the perspective, balance and strength of character that today’s advanced world needs?

The answer is by participating in high school sports like the ones offered by the high schools in Kansas.

Most researchers agree that leaders are made, not born, through relationships with others. Human interaction and life experiences enable young men and women to develop leadership characteristics such as trust, mutual respect, integrity and accountability. These are the same values that are learned as a result of playing on a high school sports team.

And while club sports often have only a singular focus (the participant’s athletic abilities), research documents that high school sports programs have an unparalleled positive effect on the physical, academic and emotional growth of teens, including a more mature level of character development.

In other words, high school sports have a more profound role to play in society today than you may realize.

The high school sports and activity programs in Kansas—including music, speech, theatre and debate—typically account for only about one to three percent of a school’s overall budget, making them one of the wisest investments your community makes. You can help by attending as many games and events as possible, donating to the booster club and volunteering to work in the concession stand.

Most of all, encourage your children to participate in as many sports and activities as they can. Because when they do, they will be joining a new generation of leaders who are both technologically smart and ethically responsible.

And that’s exactly the kind of leadership our hyper-intelligent world needs.

Politics and poker, politics and poker
Shuffle up the cards and find the joker
Neither game’s for children; either game is rough
Decisions, decisions, like
Who to pick, how to play, what to bet, when to call a bluff.
Fiorello, 1959

Sixty years ago, Fiorello, the musical based on the career of New York city’s feisty Mayor, Fiorello LaGuardia, premiered on Broadway. It was a smash hit, and six decades later, “Politics and Poker” remains its most memorable tune, catchy and true.

Kansans can watch a classic poker game over the next couple weeks, a “Texas Hold’em” showdown between Gov. Laura Kelly and Sen. President Susan Wagle. The results of this high-stakes game will determine, at least for 2019, whether Kansas will expand Medicaid or continue to reject the financial benefits that come with it.

The governor and the senate president are worthy, veteran adversaries, with contrasting policy worldviews and very different political situations. Kelly, less than eleven months after announcing her candidacy for governor, won a clear victory over Kris Kobach, even though an independent siphoned off six percent of the vote.

Wagle observed that Kelly had not received more than half the vote, and thus had no mandate. Kelly smiled a knowing smile from Cedar Crest.

Wagle’s political imperative derives from her desire to become a U.S. senator, replacing the retiring Pat Roberts. With her Wichita base and conservative record, she may be viable, but no shoo-in. And here’s the rub. Medicaid expansion — in various polls, in a host of editorials from around the state, and given the results of a solid favorable vote in the Kansas House – is downright popular. Moreover, it’s likely that there are at least 21 votes, a constitutional majority, to pass expansion in the Kansas Senate. And its chances increased this past week when the governor allowed a Farm Bureau “non-insurance bill” to become law, thus potentially winning additional backing.

This is where another player comes into the game. Senate Minority Leader Anthony Hensley has essentially said, “let’s see what you’ve got,” by filing a motion to move the Medicaid bill out of committee. That takes 24 votes. No one knows if the votes are there, but governor Kelly, Lt. Gov. Lynn Rogers, and outside groups have pushed hard over the legislative recess to build support.

While Wagle seems a clear “no,” other Republican senators understand that, per Kelly’s win and Sharice Davids’ victory in the KS-3 House race, the context of the 2020 election is changing, especially in Johnson County. And other highly conservative states, such as Indiana and Arkansas, have expanded Medicaid. So perhaps some senators might hedge their bets, explaining how small-town hospitals and rural areas will benefit.

Moreover, Kelly is the state’s chief executive, with the ability to offer legislators inducements unrelated to Medicaid expansion. Overall, she holds better cards than does Sen. Wagle, whose only action is to obstruct.

As the last cards flop on the table, both leaders have a lot at stake, but not everything. Gov. Kelly can live to fight another day, given that she is just in the first few months of her tenure. More importantly, Sen. Wagle does not actually need to win on this issue. What’s central is the position she takes in the fight. She needs the support of far-right Republicans to win the nomination for the Senate. Win or lose, if she holds tight to her opposing position, she likely maintains this base.

Thus, there could be two winners: the governor on policy and the Senate president on politics. So, let’s see the cards.

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