Some people have the mistaken idea that farmers and ranchers are harming our environment. You hear it everywhere: at the coffee shop, church, public forums, even in the grocery store where people buy the food farmers and ranchers produce for us to eat.

Children arrive home from school and tell parents about “harmful” practices farmers use. It’s easy to understand why folks think the way they do about today’s agriculture.

Few businesses are as open to public scrutiny as a farm or ranch in the United States but the only picture many have of agriculture is what they read in newspapers or see on television. Even fewer people have set foot on a modern farm.

The fondest wish of most farmers and ranchers is to pass their land on to their children. They work years to leave a legacy of good land stewardship. Most farmers learned about conservation and respect for the land from their parents.

Today’s farmer and ranchers are doing their part to protect and improve the environment. They use such practices as early planting, pest control, good soil fertility conservation tillage and many other innovations that help grow more food while protecting the land, water and air.

Farmers adjust practices to meet individual cropping conditions. Such practices can vary from farm to farm – even from field to field.

As in any other business, farmers and ranchers must manage their operations on a timely basis and use all the technology available to improve quality and productivity. If they don’t they will not be able to stay in business for long.

Today’s farmer has drastically cut chemical use during the last couple of decades. Many no longer apply chemicals before planting. Instead, as the crop matures, farmers gauge potential weed growth and apply herbicides only if needed.

Farmers handle chemicals with care and according to instructions on the label. They realize they can be toxic or harmful to people and the environment, and they are the first to come in contact with them.

From planting through harvest, farmers battle weather, weeds, insects and disease. Efficiency is their best defense against unstable world markets, political barriers and fringe groups who may attack their farming methods.

Yes, farmers and ranchers must live in the environment they create. They know all too well the importance of keeping the ground water clean. More often than not, farmers drink from wells on their land. They understand that their family drinks from the water they pump from the ground every day.

Farmers and ranchers can and will do more to improve their environment. They can continue to rely less on herbicides, insecticides and fertilizers. Agricultural producers can also conserve more water, plug abandoned wells, monitor grassland grazing and continue to implement environmentally sound techniques that will ensure preservation of the land.

Production agriculture works, and will continue to work because it is flexible enough to accept and adapt to change. No agricultural system – or any other system for that matter, is perfect.  Farmers and ranchers will continue to search for better ways to farm and ranch through research and education.

In the meantime, farmers and ranchers will continue to take their stewardship seriously. They’ve devoted their lives to safeguarding their farms and families, while providing us with the safest food in the world.

John Schlageck, a native of Hoxie, is a leading commentator on agriculture and rural Kansas. Born and raised on a diversified farm in northwestern Kansas, his writing reflects a lifetime of experience, knowledge and passion.        

U.S. Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kan. released the following statement on the Obama administration’s latest delay of the Affordable Care Act employer mandate:

“The president continues to ignore the reality of how damaging Obamacare is for American individuals and families. The Administration can’t delay away the devastating effects of his law. Following the report last week from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office confirming that his signature legislative accomplishment is causing even more damage to our economy than previously forecasted, the President is again acting without Congress to unilaterally change the law in order to give Democrats political cover in an election season.

“Obamacare’s problems run much deeper than a poorly-functioning website and badly-executed implementation. The true issue is the flawed underlying basis for the provisions of the law: the idea that the government must determine what coverage is acceptable for Americans, regardless of what Americans want for themselves. I believe the entire law should be repealed to protect individuals, families and businesses from the disasters created by Obamacare. We must replace it with practical reforms that are workable and will actually reduce health care costs.”

The further delay of the employer mandate is just the latest in a series of delays, miscalculations and policy shifts by the president on his signature domestic legislation. Implementation of the ACA has not lowered costs or increased access as promised. Individuals, families and employers face increasing health insurance costs, new taxes overseen by a politically-biased IRS, burdensome mandates, and massive uncertainty because of this flawed law.

In a report released last week, the CBO found that the health care law would lead some workers – particularly those with lower incomes – to limit their hours to avoid losing federal subsidies that Obamacare provides to help pay for health insurance and other health care costs. The CBO estimates the decrease in hours worked “translates to a reduction in full-time-equivalent employment of about 2.0 million in 2017, rising to about 2.5 million in 2024, compared with what would have occurred in the absence of the ACA.” The CBO earlier predicted 800,000 fewer fulltime jobs by 2021. CBO’s analysis also echoes the concerns of numerous job creating businesses in Kansas and across the country who say the costs of this mandate will decrease their business’ demand for workers – resulting in wage cuts and hour reductions for their employees.

Dear Dave,
I’m 26, and I just started a new job making $50,000. I’ve also been offered a 401(k) with no match. Should I put money into the 401(k) or open a high-yield CD?
Crystal

Dear Crystal,
I’ve got another idea. I’d open a Roth IRA with good growth stock mutual funds inside and fund it up to $5,500 a year. Make sure these mutual funds have been open at least five years—preferably 10 years or more—and have performed well. Mathematically, this investment, growing tax-free, will be superior to a non-matching 401(k).

Then, if you want to invest more than $5,500, you could put some additional money into the 401(k) offered by your company. Again, make sure you’re invested in good growth stock mutual funds with long, successful track records.

Congratulations, Crystal. And good luck!
—Dave

Dave Ramsey is America’s trusted voice on money and business. He’s authored four New York Times best-selling books: Financial Peace, More Than Enough, The Total Money Makeover and EntreLeadership. The Dave Ramsey Show is heard by more than 6 million listeners each week on more than 500 radio stations. Follow Dave on Twitter at @DaveRamsey and on the web at daveramsey.com.

Gay marriage opponents — some churches and apparently wedding cake bakers — have stirred one of the strangest bills that Kansas legislators have dealt with in years.

The issue is relatively simple. Gay marriage is not recognized in Kansas, even if the couple has gone to a state that allows gay marriage, wed, and returned to Kansas. When that couple returns to Kansas to live and work, and presumably do that “consumption spending” that will balance the state budget, they won’t necessarily get the same government services that boy/girl married couples get under terms of the bill.

Now, if a private firm doesn’t want to deal with same-sex married couples — sell them those wedding, or probably more accurately, anniversary party cakes — that’s one thing.

But if an employee of a governmental entity—that’s the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of state government, and any and all agencies, boards, commissions, departments, districts, authorities, or other entities, subdivisions or parts whatsoever of state and local government—doesn’t care to deal with gay married couples for whatever reason, that’s something else.

Key to the bill that the House is considering is that gay marrieds can’t sue the government or its agents for discrimination. There’s no state law, apparently only an ordinance in Lawrence, of course, that prohibits discrimination against gays — single or married — which would give rise to lawsuits for discrimination.

So, cakes aside, it really appears to come down to the simple issue that Kansas doesn’t recognize gay marriage, and isn’t likely to unless or until the state’s constitutional prohibition of gay marriage is repealed or overridden by the U.S. Supreme Court.

That’s the landscape.

The bill says that if a government employee, who has sincere religious or other convictions against gay marriage, refuses to perform his/her job if it involves dealing with gay marrieds, the agency is supposed to find someone in the agency who will, “as long as it doesn’t cause undue hardship.”

Governmental agencies, of course, can’t ask employees’ religion or whether they have convictions that would prevent them from doing the job they were hired for if it involves dealing with gay marriage, domestic partnership, civil union or similar arrangements.

And we doubt whether a governmental employer can require those workers to wear a tag or maybe just one of those colorful plastic wrist bracelets so gay marrieds can move to the next window to pay their property taxes without a fuss. Wonder what happens if the manager of a governmental agency has those sincerely held convictions? Hmmm…

Now, this isn’t going to come up a lot, we presume. But when it does, well, could it be impossible in some places for gay marrieds to get their dog licensed or the water turned on at their home?

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.

Harun Al-Rashid, Caliph of Baghdad, supposedly donned a disguise to wander among the populace to find out what was really going on in his kingdom. Tales of this same strategy are told in nearly all major cultures. And it has returned to mainstream America in the recent television series: “Undercover Boss.” Why is this theme so universal?

The answer is simple. Humans in a chain of command have a tendency to shade the truth as they pass the effects of policy up the line—the “yes man” effect. When the top echelon passes the question down—“how is that new policy we implemented working?—the result is predetermined. Whether in the military, industrial factory, or educational line-of-command, the strategy is the same. Those in the trenches truthfully report that the result has been a product that is [I shall be polite] “excrement.”  The sergeant, foreman or chair reports it up as “manure.” And by the time it goes through a half dozen more steps to the top, it has morphed into fertilizer and the best thing for growth that has come along. While each level “shaded” the truth only a little bit, black turns into white and bad policy into good.  We tell the boss what we think the boss wants to hear.

State policy boards therefore have a responsibility to keep many lines of communication open.

Our Kansas State Board of Education is elected. That puts them out in the public arena where they have to discuss and defend their perspectives on policies, past actions and future goals at least every four years. They have an open forum at each monthly meeting where any stakeholder can come before them and present concerns, reveal weaknesses in prior policy, and urge change. When it comes to actually inspecting schools within their district, well that becomes awkward. They call ahead and when they show up, they are elbow-to-elbow in tow with a superintendent or principal. That curtails any forthright discussion with teachers and staff.  (Some KSBE members have held open house so educators can come discuss K-12 issues more freely.) No vocation is more politically sensitive than teaching.

But it is in higher education that Kansas education policy is discussed and decided in an isolated echo chamber. Our Kansas Board of Regents are appointed. They do not need to discus their education policy in public.

In addition, the regents have not had a public open forum as part of their regularly-scheduled monthly meetings for over a decade.

All reports come to them through defined channels of communication: university presidents, vice presidents, faculty and student governance. And the super-polite pussyfooting that occurs in this arena is stupefying. You might suspect that the words to our state song—“where never is heard, a discouraging word”—was written to describe the Board of Regents.

And when regents do get out into the universities of Kansas, they are again in tow with administrators and in a climate where the possibility of program discontinuance can silence tenured professors.

Evidence of a disconnect with the day-to-day world of Kansas university life is in the minutes of many KBOR meetings. It was most blatant in a recent meeting of one regent with faculty, where the regent asserted that all decisions on course equivalencies were completely in faculty hands. But the KBOR’s own transfer and articulation committee representative had told biology faculty from across Kansas that certain courses would keep coming back again and again until we approved them—100 percent the opposite of what the regent understood. This is but one clear case of messages changing as they rise to the top.

Access to the KBOR is also critical for the Board’s perspective because how problems are posed to them often predetermines how they will address them. Without opening up to genuine public input, our increasing problems in educational quality will never be solved in the current echo chamber.

The best-qualified Board of highest integrity cannot do their job well unless there is an avenue for them to hear teachers, staff and the public who are willing to speak truth to power.

John Richard Schrock is a professor at Emporia State University. [email protected]

Submitted by SARAH LITTLE
Communications Director, U.S. Sen. Pat Roberts

The New York Times wrote a hit piece on Senator Pat Roberts and Kansas today that contains several untruths.

To say that Pat Roberts “is desperate to re-establish ties to Kansas” and that he doesn’t have a residence are false.
Also false is the statement that Senator Roberts “acknowledged he does not have a home of his own in Kansas.” Senator Roberts told the reporter just the opposite, both verbally and in writing.
Senator Roberts long has owned a home in Dodge City. It currently has a tenant; he also pays rent at a residence where he stays when he is in Dodge City. He pays Kansas state tax and property tax. His three children attended college in Kansas. He is a Kansan. He lives in Dodge City by every measure of residency.

Fortunately, this story is so far from reality that Kansans won’t believe it. They know how long and hard Pat has worked for the state. They know it is his home. They see him there regularly. When the story was written, he was in Salina. When he read the story today, he was in Wichita.

Reporter Jonathan Martin came to us with a clear agenda. In an interview with the Senator, Martin scoffed at the fact Pat is proud to call Dodge City home. Martin even told us he didn’t understand why Pat bothered to live in western Kansas when it was so far away. He suggested Pat should live in Kansas City.

Martin did not let facts stand in the way of his agenda.

The reporter found two people who said they did not know Senator Roberts. Martin did not bother to find thousands of others who know the Senator well.

The story is so slanted and so far from the truth that Kansans will not take it seriously. They know better.

Handshakes and smiles, saved-for-the-occasion anecdotes and ample libations opened the Hays Area Chamber of Commerce annual banquet — a three-hour celebration of the business community and the men and women who make Hays run.

Making business run is something the featured speaker knows all about. Mayo Schmidt is a farmer to the Nth degree — companies he has helmed feed the world.

Schmidt, 56, turned the world of commodities on its ear since 2000, engineering a hostile takeover of a much-larger rival in the ingredients industry and taking a floundering company from ruin to riches — an American businessman in Canada forcing his will upon the corporate world.

Scratch that, a Hays businessman.

Schmidt is an alum of Thomas More Prep-Marian High School, where his father, Marion, was the longtime football coach. Marion and his wife, Donna, are the proprietors of Blue Sky Miniature Horses outside Hays.

Mayo Schmidt walked the crowd through the highs and lows of his journey: watching his massive ships of grain arrive in India only to be hauled away on the backs of the poor; days of despair as financial deals appeared to be hopeless; convincing investors his plan was worth the risk of massive amounts of capital; a machine gun tap on the window on a dark country road as Pakistanis searched for bombers; consoling a mother who had lost a son to an industrial accident; signing the pink slips of more than 2,000 workers as he reorganized a failing company; leading that company back from the brink.

Two words repeatedly rang out from Schmidt’s address to the Hays business community — ethics and integrity.

Judging from his own tales, and accounts in the Canadian media, one should not confuse either of those words with benevolence.

“He earned a reputation as a hard-ass along the way,” Canadian Business wrote in a 2009 article naming Schmidt the nation’s top CEO.

Ethics. Integrity.

These are tall words. Few can claim never to have fallen short of their meaning.

During Schmidt’s address, my thoughts, as they often do when faced with enormity, went to my children. In a world too often filled with doom and gloom, every parent in the Memorial Union ballroom had a reason to be optimistic.

Mayo Schmidt, progeny of the northwest Kansas classroom and family farm, ran a multibillion-dollar company. He traveled the world, making decisions that impacted not only people, but entire socioeconomic systems. He sat across from world business and political leaders as a peer. He left Victory Gate and become a titan.

And he used those lessons learned in Hays as the guiding principles behind every decision.

Mayo Schmidt was not satisfied with being good. He sought great. And he both challenged the Hays business community to strike out on the same climb and offered a sense of optimism that peak was attainable.

Ethics. Integrity. The words were still ringing in my ears as I kissed my 6-year-old daughter’s forehead when her head hit her pillow last night, still ringing when I tussled the 9-year-old boy’s hair and told him “Bed. Now. Love you.”

The Hays area created Mayo Schmidt and countless others who refused to stop at good in the pursuit of great.

She can be great. He can be great.

And that opportunity is good enough.

Ron Fields is news and information director at Eagle Communications.

Related story: Chamber hands out annual honors.

This month when you recognize loved ones with Valentines is also a good time to remember the importance of health practices to keep your heart in good shape.

By following a few simple guidelines, you can improve your health and lower your risk of coronary heart disease, which can lead to heart attacks and strokes.

The National Institutes of Health say more than one million Americans will suffer heart attacks this year.

You probably already know that you increase your chances of heart disease if you are overweight, have diabetes or don’t get regular exercise.

But the three major risk factors, the ones that send your chances soaring, are smoking, high blood pressure and high blood cholesterol.

Fortunately, you can do something to decrease these threats. If you smoke, don’t think it’s too late to quit. By stopping now, your risk of coronary heart disease will decline dramatically during just one year.

Giving up smoking also reduces the risk of mouth, throat and lung cancer and diseases such as bronchitis and emphysema.

Since you may have high blood pressure without knowing it, you should have it checked periodically by a health professional.  High blood pressure is the leading risk factor for stroke and a major contributor to other coronary heart diseases.

Losing weight, getting more exercise, reducing the amount of alcohol, table salt and sodium you consume may be enough to lower blood pressure.  If not, medication prescribed by a physician may be called for.

Like high blood pressure, a high blood cholesterol level increases your chance of heart disease. If your blood cholesterol is over 200, it may be wise to work with your doctor to try to bring it down.

The first step may be to limit fats in your diet.  Choose very lean meats and low-fat dairy products and reduce fried and processed foods and high-fat baked goods. Keep all fats, particularly saturated fats, below 30 percent of a day’s calories.

Your doctor may recommend that you get regular exercise to improve your cholesterol numbers, too.  However, since cholesterol can be made by your body, diet and lifestyle changes may not be enough for some people — they may need medication to control their cholesterol level.

Let February be a time to give yourself a Valentine, by doing what’s best for your heart.

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

Russian President Vladimir Putin has spent more than $50 billion — more than all previous Winter Games combined — to unveil a “new Russia” at the Sochi Olympics.

But Sochi’s shiny new infrastructure is little more than a Potemkin village, an extravagant ruse designed to deceive the world about the true nature of Putin’s police state.

Much to Putin’s dismay, media coverage leading up to the Games has focused on the corruption, repression and security concerns that threaten to make the most costly Games the most unsavory since the Berlin Olympics in 1936.

Putin’s “new Russia,” it turns out, looks very much like the old Russia that denied freedom of expression, religious liberty and other human rights under both the Tsars and Soviets.

Consider, for example, two repressive measures Putin signed into law on the same day last June.

The better known of the two is the so-called “gay propaganda” law that has been widely condemned as a violation of free speech and freedom of assembly. Under the guise of protecting children from information about homosexuality, the law stigmatizes and silences LGBT Russians by preventing free speech, public gatherings and distribution of literature.

Since the bill’s enactment, harassment and violence directed at LGBT people has escalated in cities across Russia.

The second bill got fewer headlines, but it also raises alarms about the deterioration of freedom in Putin’s Russia.

Prompted by the punk band Pussy Riot’s protest in Moscow’s main cathedral in 2012, the Duma passed a law criminalizing insulting people’s “religious feelings” in public. As a result, anyone who dares offend the sensibilities of the faithful (and this usually means Russian Orthodox believers) could face 3 years imprisonment and a stiff fine.

The “gay propaganda” and “blasphemy” bills are the latest in a series of Russian laws passed in recent years limiting freedom of expression and belief while protecting the power and privilege of the Russian Orthodox Church.

According to a 2012 report issued by the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, a law banning unauthorized public gatherings has been used against minority religious communities, including a Protestant pastor fined for holding a religious service. Another law intended to counter “extremism” has been used to ban religious texts and treat as criminals people who prepare, store or distribute banned texts.

Evangelicals, Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Muslims and other groups in Russia have suffered discrimination and harassment under these and similar laws.

On paper, the 1993 Russian Constitution bars establishment of religion, recognizes all religions as equal before the law, and guarantees freedom of speech and religion. In practice, however, Putin’s government has an unholy alliance with the Russian Orthodox Church, an entanglement of church and state that contributes to repression of LGBT people and minority faiths.

Over the next few weeks, Putin will get his $50-billion moment in the sun. But we shouldn’t let the Olympic hype obscure the ugly truth about Putin’s rule.

At the Sochi Games, all that glitters is not gold.

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

In October 2009, President Obama reversed the policies of both President Bill Clinton and President George W. Bush by committing the United States to U.N. Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) negotiations. In the years that followed, the Senate made it clear to the president on numerous occasions that it will not ratify any arms treaty that does not secure our country’s sovereignty and protect our citizens’ individual freedoms. These issues have not been resolved. Yet, in October 2013, the Obama Administration signed the U.N. ATT in a direct dismissal of the American people and the bipartisan Senate majority that rejects this treaty.

Even though the treaty will never be ratified by the Senate, the fact that the administration signed the treaty in the face of such strong opposition by Congress gives us little faith they will not try to implement the Arms Trade Treaty in the absence of ratification. That is why in January, the Senate and House passed legislation which includes specific language prohibiting any funding of the U.N. Arms Trade treaty unless it is ratified by the U.S. Senate.

Throughout this process, it has been disturbing to watch the Administration reverse U.S. policies, abandon its own negotiation principles, admit publicly the treaty’s dangerous ambiguity, and hastily review the final treaty text.

After signing the treaty, Secretary Kerry stated that “[t]his treaty will not diminish anyone’s freedom” and that it “reaffirms the sovereign right of each country to decide for itself… how to deal with the conventional arms that are exclusively used within its borders.” While the treaty does include a preamble referencing lawful firearm ownership, it is not binding and the treaty itself does not recognize the ownership and use of firearms or individual self-defense as fundamental rights.

Secretary Kerry says this treaty is about “keeping weapons out of the hands of terrorists and rogue actors.” However, North Korea, Syria and Iran – who most would agree are “rogue actors” – voted against the ATT. If 50 nations ratify the treaty it will take effect, but those rogue actors will not be a party to it and will not follow its provisions, leaving them free to continue dealing in arms. Meanwhile, the United States could find itself handcuffed when it comes to aiding our most vulnerable allies –  including Israel, Taiwan and South Korea – due to international pressure exerted under the guise of the Arms Trade Treaty.

Additionally, the export of firearms from the United States is already subject to a very strict and complex set of guidelines. The U.S. International Trade in Arms Regulations, which were written in accordance with the Arms Export Control Act, strictly limits the transfer or sale of firearms and has been doing so since the 1950s. Other nations, primarily our allies, have followed our lead, mirroring our controls because they are so comprehensive. Like gun control laws, even with the Arms Trade Treaty, bad actors will continue to act accordingly.

If the ATT could work, it would not be necessary. There is no reason to believe the ATT will succeed where past U.N. Security Council Arms Embargoes have failed. Smothering the world with law will not affect nations who choose not to respect the treaty, or are too ill-governed to enforce it.

In fact, the State Department itself has described the goals of the treaty as “ambiguous,” hardly instilling confidence that American rights will be secure. Good treaties are not ambiguous, and our constitutional rights are too important to be entrusted to a dangerous treaty drafted by nations hostile to the ownership of firearms by private citizens. That is why Congress stands in firm opposition to the treaty’s ratification. Just in case with this Administration that is not enough, the passage of language prohibiting any funding of the enactment of the treaty has made it unequivocally clear that Congress is committed to upholding the fundamental individual rights of Americans and rejects the U.N. ATT. We will not be bound by the treaty and we will not fund its implementation.

Sen. Jerry Moran is a Republican representing Kansas in the U.S. Senate.

By RON WILSON
Huck Boyd National Institute for Rural Development

A crime has been committed. The team of analysts is hard at work, extracting DNA from crime scene evidence. Is this a high tech lab at the FBI? Or maybe a scene from a Hollywood CSI show? No, none of the above. In this case, the crime was that somebody stole the cookies. The team of analysts is a group of students from rural Kansas. They are using real-world science on this project and learning a lot in the process.

Brenda Edleston is dean of the Geary County campus of Cloud County Community College. A lifelong educator, she was a teacher and administrator in Arkansas before coming to Kansas. Her husband, Rob Edleston, is president of Manhattan Area Technical College.

In 2006, Brenda came to the Geary County campus of Cloud County Community College and worked her way up to become dean. The campus in Junction City has been there since 1996. The central office for Cloud County Community College is in the rural community of Concordia, population 5,548 people. Now, that’s rural.

In 2010, the college joined a project called TRAC-7. TRAC is an acronym for Technical Retraining to Achieve Credentials. The 7 refers to the seven educational institutions that came together in this project: Washburn Institute of Technology, Cloud County Community College, Dodge City Community College, Salina Area Technical College, Garden City Community College, Flint Hills Technical College, and Highland County Community College.

This consortium received a $19.6 million grant from the U.S. Department of Labor Employment and Training Administration to help build a more skilled workforce statewide.

“They were looking for institutions with unique programs,” Brenda said. Each member of the consortium brought their unique programs to the table. The grant supported providing these unique courses online as well as through specialized mobile units for hands-on training.

Altogether, the consortium includes online classes in advanced systems technology, electrical power technician, power plant technology, environmental technology, food science, risk management, and agri-biotechnology. This last one is the one from Cloud County Community College, taught by Cathy Troupe.

In addition, the TRAC-7 grant provided for mobile labs to complement the online classes with experiential learning. “Watching and doing are two different things,” Brenda noted.  “Virtual participation in the classes is a precursor to the hands-on experiments in the mobile laboratory.”

So Brenda and her staff set out to design a mobile lab for the biotechnology program.  “We started with a sheet of notebook paper and a ruler and a pencil with a good eraser,” Brenda said with a smile. They designed a laboratory on wheels – essentially, a camper with slide-out sides and high-tech equipment inside. New Horizons RV in Junction City was the successful bidder to construct the project.

“We were so pleased to be working with a local firm, and they have done a terrific job,” Brenda said. The mobile unit has twelve student work stations, each with linked computers and a microscope, plus two incubators and a fume hood. In this facility, students can do experiments such as extracting DNA from lab samples under the supervision of an instructor. One instructor designed a mock scenario where somebody took some cookies and the students are to analyze the DNA so as to identify the culprit. That might be useful around my house – except it would eliminate my deniability.

Currently the mobile unit is being taken around the state for demonstrations.  Microbiology and biotechnology lab classes will be taught in this facility beginning in fall 2014.

“Adult learners tend to be placebound,” Brenda said. “We can broaden everybody’s opportunities if we can go to where the students are.”

For more information, go to www.cloud.edu or www.trac7.org.

Ron Wilson is director of the Huck Boyd National Institute for Rural Development at K-State Research and Extension.

Dear Dave,
My parents co-signed on government loans so I could go to college. Would my forbearance or non-payment affect their credit if I don’t pay?
Tiffany

Dear Tiffany,
Yes, it would. I’m not trying to lay a guilt trip on you, kiddo, but you’ll be trashing your mom and dad’s credit if you don’t pay the bills on time. If they co-signed for you, they’ll start getting phone calls, too, if you don’t do the right thing and pay back these loans.

The truth is, your mom and dad shouldn’t have co-signed for you in the first place. There’s only one reason lenders want a co-signer, and that’s because they’re afraid the person taking out the loan won’t be able to pay back what’s owed.

My goal here isn’t to beat you up, Tiffany. It’s to give you information that you—and your parents—need in order to make different, smarter decisions in the future. We all do dumb things sometimes. In the past, I did some really dumb things with very large numbers attached. The goal is to grow, learn, and try to use what we learn in order to do fewer dumb things in the future.
—Dave

Dave Ramsey is America’s trusted voice on money and business. He’s authored four New York Times best-selling books: Financial Peace, More Than Enough, The Total Money Makeover and EntreLeadership. The Dave Ramsey Show is heard by more than 6 million listeners each week on more than 500 radio stations. Follow Dave on Twitter at @DaveRamsey and on the web at daveramsey.com.

In the ever-escalating competition to be the No. 1 big-time college football program in the nation, Ohio State University bulked up last fall with a monster recruit named Maxx.

Actually, it’s not the coaching staff that signed this brute, but the OSU campus police department. And the recruit’s full name is MaxxPro — not a football player, but a 19-ton armored fighting vehicle built by a Pentagon contractor to withstand “ballistic arms fire, mine fields, IEDs, and nuclear, biological and chemical environments.”

Wow, college games really have gotten rough.

But the campus police department, which received the MaxxPro as a gift from the Pentagon (i.e., us taxpayers), says it’s not just playing games. Maxx is available for big actions, like hostage scenarios, killers loose on campus, and extreme flooding of up to three feet.

Well, have such things been a problem at OSU? Uh … no.

Would a huge, slow, gas-guzzling vehicle designed for warfare be effective if any of the above were actually to occur? No one in the department wanted to tackle that question.

Oh, by the way, operating and maintaining these machines requires specially trained and licensed personnel. So, are any of OSU’s officers qualified? Again, no answer from headquarters.

Also, the vehicles are subject to frequent rollovers, and they lack the ability to go off-road or to maneuver in confined areas. That doesn’t sound ideal for a college campus. But the gendarmerie say they’ve adjusted Maxx to fit their needs. How? By removing the top gun turret and repainting the vehicle.

OSU police finally admitted that Maxx’s chief role would be to provide a police “presence” on football game days. Isn’t that great?

Police authorities now believe they need a show of military force to keep tailgaters in check.

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