Once again, farmers and ranchers are scratching their heads about how the new CDL (commercial driver’s license) regulations will impact them when they transport livestock and crops to market.

Kansas transportation regulations already impose an extensive array of documentation, testing, certification, inspection and record keeping on the trucking industry. These regulations are further complicated when farmers and stockmen operate their vehicles across state lines where other states may have different rules than Kansas.

Agricultural producers received help in July 2012 with the announcement of expanded exemptions from federal and state rules, says Mike Irvin, legislative counsel for Kansas Farm Bureau.

“Farmers and ranchers may be exempt from the requirements of commercial driver’s license drug testing, physical examination or hours of service regulations if their farm vehicles meet certain criteria,” Irvin says.

First, the vehicles must be operated by a farm or ranch owner, an employee or family member of the farmer.

Secondly, the vehicles must be used to transport agricultural products, machinery or supplies from a farm.

Third, farm or ranch vehicles cannot be operated for hire (hauling for others for compensation0.

Fourth, vehicles of 26,000 pounds or less can be operated anywhere in the United States.

Finally, farm or ranch vehicles, between 26,000-80,000 pounds can operate in Kansas and may also operate across state lines within 150 air miles of the farm or ranch.

All CDL holders must apply for medical self-certification with the Department of Revenues Driver’s License Agency when they receive, renew, upgrade or transfer their CDL no later than January 30 of each year, Irvin says.

Unfortunately, the manner, time, implications, and consequences of these proposals have made it difficult for farmers and ranchers to fully understand and participate.

“We believe extension of the certification process will help alleviate some of the fears farmers and ranchers are having over these requirements,” Irvin says.

John Schlageck, a Hoxie native, is a leading commentator on agriculture and rural Kansas. He writes for the Kansas Farm Bureau.

OK, we’ve heard lots of talk about the Interstate Health Care Compact bill that Gov. Sam Brownback signed into law last week with no formal ceremony where he could write his name while surrounded by fans of the measure.

He might have signed it in his car—it’s not texting, after all—or maybe on his way out the door to lunch, but he signed it and now we get to see whether it was worth the ink.

Key is that several other states have enacted laws to join that compact, which is supposed to cajole Congress into essentially giving up its authority over Medicare and Medicaid (we call it KanCare in Kansas now) and just send the states a check each year for what the federal government would have spent in Kansans for health care that is federally funded. That’s Medicare and Medicaid, but not anything that is related to the Veterans Administration or the Department of Defense or Native Americans.

Now, that’s probably a tipoff, the exclusion of the military and veterans and Native Americans. If there is a group of Americans that no politician is going to risk upsetting, it’s veterans. They defended the country—at federal expense—and no state-level politician is going to even appear to meddle in their affairs. It’s easier to rail against Congress for not taking care of veterans than to manage their health care and treat them like non-veteran Americans. Native Americans? They have their own reservations in the state, where some state law doesn’t even apply.

If the compact, which Congress is unlikely to approve, won’t deal with veterans’ health issues, does it make anyone wonder how those states will deal with the health issues of other Americans? Best estimates are that the federal government spends about $7 billion in Kansas—that’s more than Kansas spends from its general fund on everything else.

But a key maybe that the compact gives legislatures the authority to suspend federal laws dealing with health care and substitute its own laws. Would that be like KanCare which is aimed at the poor, or would it be something different? Would there still be “gap” coverage, those individually purchased policies to fill the needs that Medicare doesn’t cover?

Remember, for KanCare, there are still waiting lists for services to some who have disabilities. Any Medicare recipients who paid into that program for most of their working lives who want to be on a waiting list for services that Medicare provides now?

It’s tricky, this compact business: While state rights are politically attractive in Kansas, so is the health of Kansans. There are already lawmakers who voted against the compact who wonder whether, if something expensive happens in Kansas, could some of that health-care money be scooched into other programs?

Now, this might, if Congress approves and the Legislature gets more authority over money it doesn’t now control, turn into a good deal that will provide Kansans who depend on federal programs better health-care services. It’s possible.

But you have to wonder why lawmakers won’t put veterans into the compact. Is there something to be learned here…?

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.

No one can deny that voting is a civic duty, right?

Well, that depends on who you are. The reality is that many powerful people don’t want certain folks to vote. They go to extremes to discourage those folks from voting and even harass them to keep away from the polls.

In 2012, Florida’s highest officials disgraced their offices by engaging in this thuggish electoral thievery. Republican Gov. Rick Scott and his party’s legislative henchmen officially rammed voter suppression into law, targeting Latino, African-American, student, elderly, and other voters likely to favor candidates running on the Democratic Party’s ticket.

Florida officials are making such people use broken-down voting machines and purging them from voter rolls. Many folks in Democratic-leaning precincts faced procedural chaos and up to six-hour waits. That rigmarole deterred at least 200,000 Floridians from casting their ballots.

But now this discouragement has hit a new low.

Advocates for people with disabilities had asked whether restrooms in Miami-area polling places would be accessible to voters in wheelchairs or having other physical needs. They expected to get “yes” for an answer, as required by the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Instead they got this jaw-dropping response: “In order to ensure that individuals with disabilities are not treated unfairly, the use of restrooms by the voters is not allowed on election day.”

Yes, in a perverted twist of logic, “fairness” to people with special needs will be assured by treating everyone unfairly. Thus, the biological need to pee will trump the political right to vote. This is no small matter, given that some Floridian voters waited in line six hours or more during the 2012 elections.

It seems to me that what Florida needs is a couple of good kindergarten teachers to take over the state’s election system. At least they appreciate the importance of potty breaks.

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

Chances are your life has been touched by cancer — whether you, a parent, friend or even a child has been diagnosed. While cancer can leave us feeling helpless, the good news is that there are measures you can take to help prevent the disease. Your diet is one of the most important factors under your control.

This year, more than half a million Americans will lose their lives to cancer, and more than 1.6 million men and women will be diagnosed with this devastating illness. Lifestyle changes, along with early detection, can prevent nearly half of all cancer deaths.

The American Cancer Society says that for most Americans who do not use tobacco, the most important cancer risk factors that can be changed are body weight, diet, and physical activity. One-third of all cancer deaths in the United States each year are linked to diet and physical activity, including being overweight or obese.

Eating well can help you prevent and beat cancer in a variety of ways. A healthy diet can lower your risk for developing cancer. And, if you have been diagnosed, eating well can positively support treatment and help you live well after treatment.

Here are some general dietary guidelines to help reduce your cancer risk from the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics and their website www.eatright.org:

1.  Maintaining a healthy weight is key to reducing your risk of cancer and other diseases. Being overweight or obese is likely to raise your risk for developing more than 13 types of cancer. Obesity can negatively affect inflammation in the body, the immune system, the way in which body cells grow and levels of certain hormones. Regular physical activity can help to maintain a healthy weight, or help you lose weight, if needed.

2.  Eat fewer foods that are high in calories and fat and low in nutrients. Foods with added sugars and fats can cause weight gain and leave little room for more healthful, cancer-preventive foods. Minimize intake of highly-processed foods, refined sugar, solid fats, and salted, charred, cured or smoked foods.

3.  Eat plenty of fruits and vegetables which are full of healthful vitamins, minerals, fiber, phytochemicals and antioxidants to help your body fight off cancer-causing substances. Include at least 2 cups of beans each week.  The antioxidants in fruits, vegetables and beans may help protect your body’s cells from the damage caused by unstable free-radical molecules – damage that can lead to cancer. Beans also are an excellent source of fiber, which has been linked to lower risks of colorectal, pancreatic and breast cancers. And since the color pigments provide some of the nutritional benefits, fill half your plate each meal with a colorful variety of naturally nutrient-rich fruits and vegetables.

4.  Limit alcohol. Evidence suggests all types of alcoholic drinks may increase your risk of a number of cancers, including mouth, throat (pharynx), voice box (larynx), esophagus, liver, breast, colon and rectum. It’s unclear exactly how alcohol affects cancer risk. It is considered more harmful when combined with smoking. If you drink at all, limit alcoholic drinks to no more than one drink daily for women and two for men.

Although genetics influence our risk of cancer, most of the difference in cancer risk between people is due to factors that are not inherited. Avoiding tobacco products, staying at a healthy weight, staying active throughout life, and eating a healthy diet may greatly reduce a person’s lifetime risk of developing or dying from cancer.

For more information, see the nutrition links for cancer and other chronic diseases from K-State Research and Extension Human Nutrition at https://tinyurl.com/mc578cw.

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

So, what part of the First Amendment, or the law around it, would you want to change?

For most of us, the answer is an academic exercise at best. For a few legislators, lawyers and litigants, the response is proposed legislation or lengthy briefs and pointed legal arguments.

But when the words involve justices of the U.S. Supreme Court, it is cause for special attention.

Justices Antonin Scalia and Ruth Bader Ginsburg in a recent public appearance, and retired justice John Paul Stevens in a new book, opine on subjects ranging from a landmark 50-year old libel law decision to the current hot-button topic of campaign finance laws.

Scalia and Ginsburg appeared together April 17 at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., for a discussion about First Amendment freedoms. Scalia would repeal the Supreme Court’s 1964 decision in New York Times v. Sullivan which set out the principle that public officials — later expanded to public figures — have to prove “actual malice” to win a libel lawsuit.

The 9-0 ruling in 1964 involved a lawsuit brought by Montgomery, Ala., police commissioner L.B. Sullivan against the newspaper and a group of civil rights advocates over a full-page advertisement critical of local police actions. The ad contained factual errors.

To allow for the widest possible debate on matters of public interest, the Court held that the First Amendment protects even erroneous statements about the conduct of public officials, except when made with knowledge that the statements are false, or with reckless disregard of the truth.

Scalia maintained that libel law historically was set at the state level, outside the purview of the U.S. Constitution, and the court was wrong to change that circumstance. “It was nine lawyers who decided that is what the Constitution ought to mean, even though it had never meant that,” he said.

He also said, “I think George Washington, I think Thomas Jefferson, I think the Framers would have been appalled at the notion that they could be libeled with impunity.” Scalia said that “If you are a public figure, you cannot sue somebody for libel unless you can prove, effectively, that the person knew it was a lie. So long as he heard from somebody, you know, it makes it very difficult for a public figure to win a libel suit.”

For her part, Ginsburg noted that the situation facing the court did not exist in colonial times, where libel law could have been used “as a way of squelching the people who were asserting their freedoms.” She said the Times decision empowered the press to report fully on the civil rights movement, and that the ruling “is now well accepted.” She added, “I suspect if the Founding Fathers were around to see what life was like in the 1960s, they would have agreed with that” decision.

Televising the Supreme Court’s proceedings, currently banned by court rule rather than law, found no support from either Ginsburg or Scalia. Both said they have reservations about allowing cameras in their courtroom.

“If the American people watched our proceedings from gavel to gavel, they would be educated,” Scalia said. The justices said their fear is that by watching only portions of arguments before the court, or “man-bites-dog” clips used in brief news reports, the public would be misinformed rather than better-educated about what they do.

Retired Justice Stevens, in a new book published April 22, “Six Amendments: How and Why We Should Change the Constitution,” calls for a return to spending limits by corporations in political campaigns. Stevens dissented in the landmark 2010 Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision that eliminated a ban on corporate and union campaign spending.

In his latest book, the 94-year-old jurist argues for “reasonable limits” on campaign spending, to be set by Congress or the states. In a New York Times interview published April 21, Stevens said Citizens United and later decisions — likely including the recent removal of caps on the total amount corporations and individuals can spend in federal elections — are “really wrong.” The result, he said, is that “the voter is less important than the man who provides money to the candidate.”

Justices Ginsburg and Scalia declined to comment on whether reporters involved in recent disclosures of National Security Agency surveillance programs merited their recent Pulitzer Prize.

But Ginsburg, in speaking about the news media’s historical role, said, “The press has played a tremendously important role as watchdog over what the government is doing. That keeps the government from getting too far out of line. Yes, there are excesses in the press, but we have to put up with that.”

And of that view, I suspect, Washington, Jefferson and the Founders would be proud.

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]

By RON WILSON
Huck Boyd National Institute for Rural Development

“Road trip!” That’s a phrase which makes me want to hit the highway. But think back to a time when our ancestors did not have traversable highways between their communities. Visionary leaders led the effort to create better roads, including one known at the time as the Kansas White Way. Now another set of visionary leaders is honoring that heritage today, with – what else? – a road trip.

Lori Parker is the person who told me about the Kansas White Way Car Run. Lori was born in Nevada. She met her husband Tom in New Mexico before relocating to Denver, where they lived for 26 years. In 2000, Lori and Tom decided to move to the area where her mother had grown up near Blue Rapids, Kansas. “The people who have welcomed us here have been incredible,” Lori said. Tom continues with his writing and photography career.

Lori is a history buff. She enjoys reading the historical accounts of yesteryear as printed in the local newspapers. One such account told of an effort to develop an improved east-west roadway. To publicize this need, local citizens in 1914 organized a car run. Drivers from Atchison on the east and Concordia on the west agreed to drive toward each other and meet in the town of Frankfort.

Lori was intrigued by this concept. “This is back in the day when they didn’t have good roads between the towns,” she said. “They had mud.” Visionary citizens saw the need for improved roads for their communities. They used the car run to promote a connecting highway which was formed and called the White Way.

Lori contacted people in Concordia and Atchison to learn more and discuss how to honor and preserve this history. An idea was hatched to conduct a modern-day car run along the route of the old Kansas White Way, which is now Kansas Highway 9. The run was conducted successfully in 2006.

Now another Kansas White Way car run is scheduled for May 10, 2014, which will mark 100 years since the original organizational meeting to create the Kansas White Way. A century ago, some highways were designated with colors, such as the White Way, Blue Line, Red Line, and Golden Belt. Highway numbers didn’t come into use until 1926.

The Kansas White Way was a major route from northeast Kansas all the way across the state. In fact, the White Way extended from Chicago to Colorado. Everyone wanted the road to come through their towns. An old map shows the route from Atchison to Goodland, with a connecting leg to Kansas City.

Lori and Tom Parker did extensive research on the Kansas White Way, locating old-time pictures of White Way markers. At one time there were many businesses along the route with names like the White Way Café, White Way Barbershop, White Way Bakery, White Way Chevrolet, and more.

On May 10, 2014, citizens are invited to follow the route of the Kansas White Way just as their ancestors had done 100 years ago. One group will go east from Concordia and the other will go west from Atchison, with many others joining along the way. The cars will meet in Frankfort and have a ceremony at 2 p.m. Everyone is invited to participate. A $15 registration is requested. Both modern and antique vehicles are welcome and expected.

Of course, this route traverses rural Kansas. It passes through towns such as Goff, population 177; Barnes, population 148; and Palmer, population 105 people. Now, that’s rural.

“People are having a lot of fun with this,” Lori said. Many communities are offering food and places to stop. Some old-time gas stations will wash car windows for free.

For more information, go to www.kswhiteway.wordpress.com.

Road Trip! It’s a call to hit the highway, or in this case, the White Way. We commend Lori and Tom Parker and all those involved with the Kansas White Way Car Run for making a difference with this effort to honor and perpetuate our history. They are celebrating our communities and our heritage with this trip down the open road.

Dear Dave,
I think I made a big mistake when I bought my car. I’m having a hard time affording the $500 a month payments, because I only make minimum wage at my job and work 35 hours a week. My boyfriend, who was supposed to help me pay for it, has moved out and left me.

I owe $20,000 on the car, but I know it’s still worth about $19,000. What can I do?
Rachel

Dear Rachel,
Sell the car! You went car crazy and bought a vehicle that was way out of your league.

Right now, your entire financial world is wrapped up in paying for this thing. And depending on a boyfriend to help make the payments was a big mistake, too. When he left, so did the financial support.

At this point all you need is enough to cover the hole you dug. Go to your local bank or credit union and try to get a very small loan from them—about $3,000. I hate debt, but you really don’t have a lot of options here. Then, if the car will sell for $19,000, get it sold and use $1,000 to cover the difference.

After that, take the remaining money and buy yourself a little beater. I’m talking about basic, ugly transportation. The next step is to pick up a part-time job on the side, and work like crazy for a few months to get that loan paid back as quickly as possible. Don’t ever do this kind of thing again, Rachel!
—Dave

Dave Ramsey is America’s trusted voice on money and business. He has authored four New York Times best-selling books: Financial Peace, More Than Enough, The Total Money Makeover and EntreLeadership. His newest book, released April 22nd and written with his daughter Rachel Cruze, is titled 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.

This is a special week for those who are involved with the production of food and fiber. It marks the 44th observance of Earth Day on Tuesday.

The original premise of Earth Day was to promote the conservation of our natural resources. It is only fitting that on this day we showcase the progress of the Kansas farmer and rancher – but is there really any question most people who live on the planet Earth support its survival?

To help put Earth Day in perspective, this celebration of our planet really began gathering steam at the beginning of the ‘90s. It became a very “in” thing to bang the environmental drum.

Back then, I remember “Fortune” magazine proclaiming for the first time the environment was a cause worthy of saving. Others shouted from the mountaintops that while Motherhood, apple pie, baseball and the flag all may be subject to controversy – saving our planet was beyond debate.

This same idea is back in vogue today. In this perfect world, people will fully understand the tools they use, and some believe they can provide for themselves without depending on the professionals and specialists.

Life would slow down and be viewed as a whole. This ideology offers a sense of place – of being rooted. Ancient wisdom and grassroots democracy are essential. Quality and equality of life are where it’s at. Much is said about ends but little about means. This ideology speaks poetically about much – plainly about little.

So what happens after Earth Day passes?

Most folks go about their daily lives and forget about Earth Day. Some will focus on small things like recycling or changing their shopping habits. Some fringe environmentalists may be forced to re-think their radical positions of imminent apocalypse.

Protecting and caring for this old world we call home is often a struggle. Like each day’s sunrise and sunset, we often take it for granted. Conservation of our planet can be a challenge because some regard the land as a private commodity.

Others, including farmers, ranchers and those who make their living from the land, view this planet as a community to which they belong. They love, respect and care for the land. They adhere to an ethic, which enlarges the boundaries of their community to include soils, waters, plants and animals.

There is no other way for the land to survive the impact of modern man. We must always remember while our land yields fruits, vegetables and grains, it also yields a cultural harvest – one we as inhabitants all share and must nurture.

Let’s remember throughout the year, not only on Earth Day, that land is used right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability and beauty of the living community. It is used wrong when it tends to be otherwise.

The bulk of all land relations hinges on investments of time, forethought, skill and faith, rather than only investments of capital. We have continually modernized our farm equipment, plant foods, herbicides and other production inputs. We are proud of the abundance of the crops we produce.

We can never throw away or limit the tools which have provided so much for so many. Let’s remember throughout the year our commitment to the successful and wise use of our life-giving land. Let’s remember that we have not outgrown the land.

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

There’s been a lot of media discussion lately about the cost of food. Yes, the cost of food has gone up noticeably in the past couple of years. No, it probably isn’t going to get better anytime soon.

I doubt that most folks understand everything that goes into the cost of the food that you buy at the grocery store. One thing that we need to get straight, though, before we go any further is that roughly for every dollar you spend at the grocery store, about 12 cents ends up getting back to the farmer. It varies from product to product, but when you average it out over the whole grocery cart, it’s about 12 cents. That’s for what you buy in the grocery store. You don’t even want to know about the cost of your restaurant meals!

When you are dealing with growing plants and animals you are in for some challenges. Every homeowner and gardener knows that. The same thing goes for farmers and ranchers. But sometimes the impact on the price is a ways beyond the situation that created it. Drought, floods, temperature extremes all create challenges. Some farmers can irrigate their crops, but much of the land is non-irrigated or dryland farming. In Kansas we have around 21 or 22 million acres of cropland and about 3 million of that is irrigated. While irrigation can remove the risk of not enough moisture, it can’t do anything about high or low temperatures or too much rainfall during the growing season.

Just like you and I driving our cars, rising petroleum prices hit ag production and hit it hard. Tractors and other farm equipment use a lot of fuel. Most of the insecticides and herbicides are petroleum based. Much of the nitrogen that is used in fertilizer comes from natural gas. The trucks that haul the raw commodity to be processed, the equipment that processes the food and the trucks that get the food to the grocery store all use the same energy. So when oil and energy prices go up, expect an impact on food costs!

Farmers and ranchers, for the most part, don’t set the prices for what they sell. They are at the whims of the free market. The markets still respond to supply and demand. If there is a shortage in supply and demand remains constant, prices will go up. If there is a surplus of a commodity, price will go down. If you like bacon, you have noticed how it is costing more. There is a new pig disease making the rounds that is going to create a shortage in hogs going to slaughter. Pork prices are expected to increase more!

Parts or all of Kansas and many other regions of the country have been in a drought for the past three years or more. When there’s a drought, pastures don’t produce as much grass (or any in some cases) and alternate feeds for livestock also become short in supply. When this happens, ranchers sell off more cattle than normal and the breeding herd, those cows that have calves, shrinks meaning the supply of cattle to slaughter becomes smaller because of that lack of feed. Even when droughts are over and there’s more feed available, it takes two years to get a calf raised up to be a cow and have its first calf. That shortage will be around for a while!

Ultimately, we are spoiled in the US. As a population, we spend less of our paycheck on food, even with the recent increases, than any other country. Sure, the rising prices are going to hit some folks harder than others. Most of us will be looking for cheaper cuts of meat and probably not eating as much of some foods as we may like. But please remember that even still, we have the largest, safest and cheapest food supply of anywhere in the world!

Furthermore according to the Human Development Index is a comparative measure of life expectancy, literacy, education, standards of living, and quality of life for countries worldwide the USA is ranked third behind Australia and Norway. We indeed have much to be thankful for in this country.
Stacy Campbell is Ellis County agricultural agent with K-State Research & Extension.

Kansas tax revenues appear to have bottomed out after the massive income tax cuts of 2012.

That might be the biggest news from the latest Consensus Revenue Estimate released last week. The consensus reports are released twice a year, generally in April and November.

It took a full tax year of the cuts—remember, almost 200,000 Kansans no longer pay state income tax if their small businesses or corporations are structured just right—to establish that baseline of revenues the state can expect to receive this year and next.

While that discussion of tax rates and revenues is pretty esoteric, we’re probably at the place now where we can actually start looking at what Kansans expect from their state government.

The estimate of revenues, after falling 6 percent (that’s about $320 million) in the current fiscal year which ends June 30, is now predicted to rise by a half-percent, or about $32 million, in the fiscal year which starts July 1, after all the under-the-sheets shifting and juggling of money among funds are done.

The latest estimate is important because we’ve had a full tax year of the new lower rates, and presuming that everyone has adjusted his/her withholding, we probably are at the point where any growth in revenue will be the result of more people working or higher salaries or Kansans taking their tax savings and spending it on taxable things, ranging from groceries to smokes to paint for their houses.

The state now has a pretty firm revenue base from which to work.

If there ever was a time that the state has a chance to actually study what it needs to do for Kansans and what it wants to do for Kansans and what it doesn’t believe Kansans need—or will miss—we’re there.

Lawmakers have spent the past two years paring the state budget and now they’re at a point where anything new will have to have an identifiable source of money to pay for it. That ranges from all-day Kindergarten to more Kansas Highway Patrol officers to aid for communities to increase their populations.

Politically, Republican Gov. Sam Brownback says his tax-cut plan is working—or will at least through the fall campaign. His goal, of course, is eventually to eliminate state income taxes, freeing up Kansans to spend that tax savings on expanding businesses, new technologies and maybe just spending more money on things the state taxes.

His likely Democratic challenger, Rep. Paul Davis, D-Lawrence, says the state has cut funding for important services to absorb those income tax revenue losses. He believes this reduction in revenues means the state can’t invest in education that will be vital to new businesses, jobs and population growth.

Financially, the state will make it through the campaign season, and we’re betting neither Brownback nor Davis is going to start talking on the campaign trail about raising taxes so the state has more money to spend on things voters might want.

Syndicated by Hawver News Company LLC of Topeka; Martin Hawver is publisher of Hawver’s Capitol Report—to learn more about this nonpartisan statewide political news service, visit the website at www.hawvernews.com

Kansas school administrators are trampling over each other to be first to embrace “one-to-one” computing. They are going “paperless.” U.S. Department of Education Secretary Arne Duncan calls for all schools to replace printed textbooks with digital devices. Tech companies call for schools to embrace the “digital revolution.” They all declare that this is environmentally much better than using paper.

But the claim that electronic media are environmentally superior to paper is dead wrong!

Trees are the environmentally friendly resource.

Electronic media have a much larger carbon footprint and pose a “hazmat” nightmare when it comes to disposing of electronic waste.

First, paper comes from a renewable resource: wood. Paper is now grown from cloned softwoods that grow fast to provide pulp in a short time. It is farmed. It does not cause deforestation. This is a renewable resource because it is constantly renewed by sunlight through photosynthesis.

And recycling of paper in the United States is now routine. Nearly sixty percent of our paper is from recycled post-consumer sources. Thus, most books, magazines, newspapers and cardboard go to produce more new books, magazines, newspapers and cardboard.

And reading paper print uses no electrical energy at all.

But a person reading an eText is constantly drawing electrical power. Data compiled by the “Climate Group” shows that cell phones, computers, and all the equipment that drives the computers and social media being used for electronic reading are emitting over 830 million tons of carbon dioxide per year. That equals over two percent of the manmade carbon footprint worldwide. That exceeds the world’s aviation-generated carbon dioxide. Digital media are now our fastest-growing carbon polluter.

About one-fourth of the energy consumed by digital devices is in their manufacture. About three-fourths is spent during their use. The average US citizen uses 440 pounds of paper a year, produced by 500 kilowatt-hours. But one computer can use 500 kilowatt-hours in just five months, over twice the energy consumption. And that figure does not include the printers, servers, cell phones and school e-reader media.

Electronics has a terrible lifespan compared to paper. Both hardware and software turns over rapidly.  Software programs and apps rapidly go obsolete, costing people and institutions dramatically in both money and time for retraining.

Some Kansas principals proclaim that electronic media will be so much cheaper than textbooks. They obviously live on another planet.

According to BBC Research: “Every year we buy new, updated equipment to support our needs and wishes–in 2012, global sales of new equipment included…444.4 million computers and tablets, and 1.75 billion mobile phones. All of these electronics become obsolete or unwanted, often within one to three years of purchase. This global mountain of waste is expected to continue growing 8% per year, indefinitely.”

Electronic media generate a huge amount of hazardous waste that contains very toxic substances: cadmium, mercury, lead, arsenic, beryllium and brominated flame retardants. When burned at low temperatures—we usually ship this waste to poor third world countries—it creates some of the most toxic substances known.

The next time a techno-crazy brags they are “saving a tree” by going paperless, point to your printed books. In classrooms and libraries, our safe, clean, mostly re-cycled paper books are the sequestered carbon helping offset their larger, more costly and toxic electronic carbon footprint.

My guess is that Rep. Paul Ryan, the Republican Party’s highly touted budget guru, doesn’t have a very tight grip on the concept of irony.

Otherwise, why would he choose April Fools’ Day to release the latest version of what the GOP intends to do to federal programs (and to the people who count on them) if it takes total control of Congress? But there he was on April 1, declaring with a straight face that, “We [Republicans] believe that we owe it to the country to offer an alternative to the status quo. It’s just that simple.”

Sure it’s simple. He just Xeroxes the same stale budgetary flimflams that he always puts out, even though the public keeps upchucking at the sight of them. Ryan’s “alternative” to the status quo is taking Americans back to the harsh days before there were any programs to help unemployed, elderly, sick, and other people in need.

Ryan envisions turning Medicare into a privatized “WeDon’tCare” program. He wants to outright pull the plug on the new health care law that just extended coverage to millions of people, replacing it with, uh, nothing.

The Wisconsin Republican’s budget scheme also slashes job training, education, infrastructure repairs, medical research, public broadcasting, the arts, and pretty much anything else that regular people need.

Still, he claims that he’s “helping” — in an ideological, Republicany way. For example, Ryan explains that whacking food stamps “empowers recipients to get off the aid rolls and back on the payrolls.”

What payrolls, you ask? That’s not my problem, says the guy drawing $174,000 a year and a gold package of benefits from the government he pretends to despise.

Yeah, let ‘em eat right-wing ideology. I wish it were all an April Fools’ joke. But Ryan’s joke is on us.

OtherWords columnist Jim Hightower is a radio commentator, writer, and public speaker. He’s also editor of the populist newsletter, The Hightower Lowdown. OtherWords.org