The opinions expressed in this Op-Ed are solely those of Senator Stabenow, Chairwoman of the Senate Committee on Ag

 

House Republican leaders are waging a relentless assault targeting the nation’s hungry.

This week, they are bringing a bill to the floor that would cut food assistance by a whopping $40 billion and kick nearly 4 million people off the program in the next year, including children, seniors, veterans and disabled Americans.

We have never before seen this kind of partisanship injected into a farm bill. What the House GOP is voting on will never become law, but it seriously jeopardizes the chances a farm bill will pass.

Conservative ideologues vilify beneficiaries of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) as “welfare queens” gaming the system. But the real faces of food assistance are seniors struggling to buy groceries. They’re veterans who bravely served our country. They’re children who are hungry through no fault of their own.

In fact, half of those who get food from SNAP are children; Eighty-five percent are children and their parents, people with disabilities and senior citizens.

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) says the Republican plan is about requiring food assistance recipients to work, but most people receiving food assistance who can work already do. More than 80 percent of families on SNAP with an adult who can work did work in the year before or after receiving food assistance. For families with children, the number is almost 90 percent.

The reality is that in the aftermath of the recession, many people trying hard to find a job still can’t. There are still three Americans looking for work for every job opening. For those out of work, food assistance is a short-term lifeline to keep food on the table while they try to find a job. The average recipient receives assistance for only 10 months or less.

In a cruel irony, Cantor’s bill would cut worker training and job placement programs for people who are trying to get back to work and get off SNAP. It would also eliminate or reduce assistance to many working families and would mean 210,000 children would lose school lunches.

And the Cantor bill offers cash-strapped states a truly perverse incentive, allowing them to keep half of the federal money that would have been spent on food whenever they kick someone off the program!

We all want to spend less on food assistance, but the right way to do that is to strengthen our economy, not attack hungry people. Spending for food assistance is already going down as the economy improves. About 14 million fewer people are projected to be on SNAP in the coming years as the economy comes back — a roughly 30 percent reduction! — and $11.5 billion less will be spent because more people are finding jobs.

We can also save money by addressing fraud. Like in every program, there are a small number of individuals who seek to abuse SNAP. The bipartisan Senate farm bill includes strong reforms to crack down on program misuse, and we achieved that with bipartisan support — without kicking families truly in need off the program. For example, we stopped lottery winners from continuing to get benefits, and liquor stores can’t accept food stamps when they don’t sell much food.

But the Republican plan goes far beyond program abuse, taking food away from millions of truly struggling families.

The GOP approach is like saying we’re tired of spending so much fighting wildfires, so we’ll just cut the budget for the fire service. That isn’t going to work. The fire will rage on.

It’s a shame Cantor and his allies would do this now, threatening all the bipartisan progress we’ve made on a farm bill. America’s farmers, ranchers, rural communities and the 16 million Americans whose jobs depend on agriculture do not deserve this.

We have a long history in America of making sure that hunger is kept in check. Former President Reagan understood this: He said, “As long as there is one person in this country who is hungry, that’s one person too many, and something must be done about it.”

It’s time to stop the political games. It’s time to work together to pass a farm bill, grow the economy and reduce the need for food assistance the right way: by making sure every American has the opportunity to have a good-paying job so they can feed their families.
Sen. Stabenow is Chairwoman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry.

John Maday, Managing Editor, Drovers CattleNetwork 

Results of research in the United Kingdom suggest using E. coli vaccines in cattle could reduce the incidence of human sickness from E. coli O157 by as much as 85 percent.

Their research report, titled “Predicting the public health benefit of vaccinating cattle against Escherichia coli O157,” is published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
The authors note that E. coli O157, which can cause serious and sometimes fatal gastrointestinal illness, is difficult to control, partly due to poor understanding of of transmission dynamics across species boundaries. Vaccines for E. coli O157 in cattle are available but not widely used for a number of reasons:
Conflicting responsibilities of veterinary and public health agencies.
Economic drivers.
Clinical trials cannot easily test interventions across species boundaries.
Lack of information on the public health benefits.
The researchers examined transmission risk across the cattle–human species boundary and found three key results.
Supershedding of the pathogen by cattle is associated with the genetic marker stx2.
By quantifying the link between shedding density in cattle and human risk, we show that only the relatively rare supershedding events contribute significantly to human risk.
This finding has profound consequences for the public health benefits of the cattle vaccine.
“A naïve evaluation based on efficacy in cattle would suggest a 50 percent reduction in risk,” the authors note. “However, because the vaccine targets the major source of human risk, we predict a reduction in human cases of nearly 85 percent. By accounting for nonlinearities in transmission across the human–animal interface, we show that adoption of these vaccines by the livestock industry could prevent substantial numbers of human E. coli O157 cases.”

A man referred to as a modern day Will Rogers is coming to Hays.

The Big First Tea Party will host Eric Golub, a humorist and entertainer at 6 p.m on Tuesday, September 24 at Thirsty’s Brew Pub and Grill, 2704 Vine.

After Tuesday, Golub will have made appearances in all 50 states.

A Kansas City Chiefs fan, Trenton Karlin, didn’t get to see much of Sunday’s game. Police say they received a call saying Karlin was drunk and had been pouring beer on fans in the stands.  Police asked Karlin to go to the concourse to talk and that is when the fight started.

The video begins after Karlin reportedly assaulted a police officer. Police say they used a stun gun in stun mode because Karlin was resisting arrest.
WARNING: GRAPHIC LANGUAGE

One officer received a cut to the head. At one point in the video, an officer appears to be punching Karlin.

The police department is reviewing the incident.

Karlin was charged with assault on a police officer and resisting arrest.

 

By John Schlageck, Kansas Farm Bureau

Talk to anyone in farm country and next to concerns about the need for more rain, the farm bill remains at the top of the list of things Congress must do before the end of the year.

Unfortunately, the farm bill doesn’t seem to be a priority in our nation’s capital. At the present time Congress is mired firmly in the matter of whether we use military action in Syria.

With every passing day, the likelihood of a farm bill extension increases. The current extension of 2008 farm program authority expires September 30.

The fly in the ointment has become the continued debate over whether the bill must include nutrition programs and the formation of a conference committee to work out differences between the Senate and House versions of the proposed bills.

Kansas Sen. Pat Roberts told a full house at the Farm Bureau leadership breakfast during last week’s State Fair the farm bill debate is a perfect storm.

“The Senate won’t pass a farm bill without what they consider to be an appropriate food stamp program,” he said.

Roberts promised to do what he can to protect, preserve and strengthen crop insurance and to stop using it as a bank for other programs.

Allowing the current extension to expire is not an option, he added. This would leave the 1949 farm bill to fill the void. If that happens, farmers and consumers will be in trouble because programs from conservation to research will disappear.

Policy reforms, such as a larger role for crop insurance as part of the farm safety net, more equity across crops and increased support for fruit and vegetable growers, will not be possible if the current farm bill is extended.

In addition, some commodity prices could soar because they would be tied to farm productivity from the 1940s. Milk, as an example, could double or triple at the supermarket.

“I don’t want to go back down the road where farmers plant for the government rather than planting for the market,” Kansas’ senior senator said.

A new farm bill will provide farmers the certainty they need to plan their crops and obtain financing. This is the number one reason a new farm bill must be hammered out in Washington. Another extension will not do so.

Additionally, a new farm bill provides stability to an industry buffeted by volatile weather conditions, erratic world commodity prices and international trade scenarios that cause spikes and valleys in world food markets.

It also helps ensure this nation’s domestic food supply. Every U.S. citizen benefits from quality, affordable food.

Consumers understand deep in the pocket what it feels like to be dependent on oil from the Middle East. The farm bill ensures Americans can depend on American farmers to feed them.

Since the Second World War, nearly all nations help their farmers in one way or another. The United States does so with its farm bill.

“We need a bill, we’ll get a bill, rest assured, with your help we’ll live to fight another day,” Roberts said. “We’ll try to make this farm bill more market oriented as we go down the road.”

John Schlageck 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.

Library Events September 16-21

CHILDREN AND YOUNG ADULT (YA) PROGRAM

Monday, Sept. 16

10:00 AM Storytime

11:00 AM Storytime

4:00 PM Games

4:00-4:40 PM Bal-A-Vis-X (Preregister at www.hayspublib.org or 785-625-5916)

6:30 PM Storytime

Tuesday, Sept. 17

10:00 AM Storytime

11:00 AM Storytime

3:30 PM Video Game League (YA)

4:00 PM Mini Mites

Wednesday, Sept. 18

10:00 AM Storytime

10:00 AM Hora De Leer en Espanol

10:45 AM Lapsit

3:30 PM Wavering Wednesdays (YA)

4:00 PM Kids in the Kitchen: Pudding Pops

4:00 – 4:40 PM Bal-A-Vis-X (preregister at www.hayspublib.org or 785-625-591)

Thursday, Sept. 19

10:00 AM Storytime

11:00 AM Digital Storytime

3:30 PM Make-n-Take

4:00 PM Lego Club

Friday, Sept. 20

10:00 AM Cre-8-tive Moments-Music Sparks with JoAnn Jordan

4:00 PM Chess Club

Saturday, Sept. 21

10:00 AM Lego Club

ADULT PROGRAMS AND EVENTS
Monday, Sept. 16

6:00 PM Movie Mondays

Tuesday, Sept. 17

5:30 PM read2reel

Wednesday, Sept. 18

12:00 PM Feed and Film
6:30 PM Tea and Trouble: A Cozy Mystery Book Club

Thursday, Sept. 19

6:00 PM Book Speed Dating I

6:00 PM Computer Class

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Chuck Jolley, a veteran food-industry journalist and commentator.

For the last half dozen years, the weather and market conditions have treated the U.S. cattle industry with all the tenderness given to Rocky Balboa’s face in the early rounds of that famous boxing match in the first Rocky movie. Battered first by an epic drought, it was bloodied by the highest feed costs cattlemen have ever seen.
Taking the worst hits were the southern plains; Texas, Oklahoma and southern Kansas gave new meaning to the term “high desert country.” Herd liquidation was unprecedented in those areas as many cattlemen got out of the business or moved their herds north.
You’ve heard that phrase, “There are old pilots and bold pilots but no old, bold pilots?” Well, this business is a little tougher than that. We have old cattlemen, bold cattlemen and even a few old, bold cattlemen – anybody seem Paul Engler, lately? But the weather and feed prices have taken the starch out of some of the best of them.
A turn-around is on the horizon, though, and it’s time to take a serious look at the future of the industry. Rebuilding will happen and Dr. Peel thinks it could come much quicker than usual. He’s one of the sharpest observers of the industry and has a great vantage point at the Department of Agricultural Economics at Oklahoma State University in Stillwater. He looked at the horizon and didn’t see a haboob – one of those massive and horrendous dust storms that have pounded Phoenix lately. It looked more like opportunity to him.
Drovers/CattleNetwork published his thoughts last week. I read it and had a bunch of questions. So I contacted him and asked a few. Here are his responses.
Q. Derrell, there has been a lot of discussion about the size of the herd today and most of it has been of the gloom and doom variety. Although you agreed with the data that it’s the smallest it has been since the early 1950’s, you seemed to be optimistic about the future, citing an increase in replacement heifers during the recent drought-driven cull. What effect will those heifers have on herd size and how quickly can a significant increase happen?
A. In the years 2009-2011, the number of heifers entering the herd was increasing despite the fact that the January 1 inventory of replacement heifers was falling and despite the fact that elevated beef cow culling was more than enough to result in declining herd inventories. This suggests that, while external factors such as severe input market shocks and recession were forcing net herd liquidation, producers perceived those shocks to be short term and they continued to invest in more replacement heifers.
In 2012, the opposite occurred, the January 1 heifer inventory was higher, a more overt indication of expansion plans, but the drought resulted in a small percentage of those heifers entering the herd. January 1, 2013 posted another increase in heifer inventories and we don’t yet know how many of those heifers are entering the herd. I suspect that some replacement heifers were diverted into feeder markets in the first half of the year but it appears that heifer retention is likely expanding in the second half of the year as retention restarts with more “new crop” heifer calves this fall. Overall, I expect that the number of heifers entering the herd in 2013 is above average but less than it would have been without the residual drought effects and the winter impacts in the first half of the year.
Historically, cattle cycles have exhibited one or two years of little or no growth – stabilizing the herd, if you will – prior to two or three years of more rapid expansion. It takes time to build momentum for expansion. I believe that, despite the drought impacts, much of this stabilization has taken place or is happening in the last part of 2013. More herd liquidation has likely occurred in 2013 making January 1, 2014 another herd inventory low but, with favorable forage conditions, herd growth in 2014 could be relatively rapid, perhaps as much as two percent. This relatively rapid rate of expansion in not a certainty but is possible given the demographics of the beef cow herd.
Q. Quite a few people have told me that one of the potential barriers to rebuilding the herd size is the aging population of our ranchers. The theory is that a lot of ranchers who are 65+ years old will look at the financial risks involved in a multi-year rebuilding process and decide it isn’t worth the effort. Could that be an accurate assessment?
A. The demographics of the cattle producer population is an important issue in herd rebuilding and the future of the cattle business. Among a continually aging U.S. farmer population, cattle producers are among the highest average age of any farm sector. Many of the older producers gradually reduce production as capabilities decline and they essentially retire in place. These producers are not likely to initiate new investment in cow herds regardless of potential opportunities. However, as time marches on, there will inevitably be a significant turnover in production assets in the cattle industry.
At the same time, the challenges for young producers to get started in the cattle business have arguably never been greater. High asset values make the capital requirements unreachable for many young producers, especially with much tighter lending requirements that are now in place. It is increasingly unrealistic for young producers to borrow enough to buy all the assets they need from the outset, as has been the traditional model for the cattle business.
I believe that markets work and, if the opportunities offered in the cattle business are great enough, a new generation of producers will emerge. However, the manner in which that happens is likely to be somewhat different in the future. Young producers need to recognize the critical difference between asset control and asset ownership. Leasing, contracting and managerial arrangements may play a much bigger role in the future of the cattle business. Older producers, who hold most of the equity, need to understand farm business transition alternatives and be encouraged to participate in withdrawing their retirement from the business in a way that facilitates the entry of young producers. There may be tax and other policy changes that would provide better incentives and opportunities simultaneously for older producers and new producers.
Q. One of the major problems faced by the industry was the cost of feed. Corn was flirting with $8 bushel coupled with scarce forage, especially in the Southern belt has been devastating to many cattle ranchers. One of the outcomes was a massive cull in states like Texas and Oklahoma and the “center of the population” moving northward. Will those states be able to rebound or will our herd be centered in more northern areas?
A. Two factors have had a significant impact on the regional distribution of cow-calf production in recent years. The drought has taken a relatively bigger toll on herds in the Southern Plains and has shifted herd inventories a bit more to the north. At the same time, high crop prices have made forage relatively less competitive for land use and resulted in a loss of pasture and hay production in crop production areas. The epicenter of these crop impacts is the Midwest with impacts diminishing westward into the drier areas of the Great Plains. These east-west factors may be more important than the north-south factors. High crop prices imply a long term shift of cow-calf production out of crop production regions and more into the drier areas where crop production competes less with forage production.
There are time issues as well. The native range areas of the western Great Plains and Rocky Mountain regions have endured significant stress and damage to the native forage base during the drought. These regions will take several years to recover and will require careful management to return to full production capability. The cow herds will rebuild in the Southern Plains, more quickly in the eastern side where there are more introduced forages and higher rainfall and more slowly in the western regions of native range.
Q. To quote your article published last week in Drovers/CattleNetwork, “Most of the cow herd liquidation that has occurred since 2001, including the aborted herd expansion of 2004 and 2005, were the result of external factors including input market shocks that reduced cow-calf profitability; a U.S. and global recession that tempered cattle prices and producer expectations; and severe drought since 2011. This means that the last 3.4 million head decline in the beef cow herd was not due to typical cattle cycle factors.”
Are those typical cattle cycle factors a thing of the past and are we facing some new norms that will change the way we manage our herd size? Do we have to pay a lot more attention to drought conditions that might be much longer term than in the past and will the financial uncertainties of the world market continue to have a bigger impact?
A. The factors that have always caused cattle cycles: producer reluctance to change production; rigidities of the forage base; and the biology of cattle (long lags in production and single offspring) have not changed and will continue to influence the beef industry. That said, the unprecedented shocks that have overwhelmed cyclical factors for the past six years may play a bigger role in accelerating, diminishing, amplifying, or offsetting cyclical tendencies in the future.
While future drought conditions are impossible to predict, other factors seem to have changed. For example, the remarkable stability of feed and energy prices for much of four decades prior to 2007 has likely been permanently replaced by more volatile input markets. Compared to the relative ease of identifying cattle cycles historically, future cycles may have a lot more noise around them and be more variable; but I think the cyclical tendencies will still be there and will be important.
Q. You suggested that we now have one of the youngest and most productive herds which could lead to a faster that usual expansion. Talk me through the numbers and the time frame needed to get back to the size we had before the recent downturn. And is a return to those numbers necessarily a good thing?
A. There are two questions here: How fast can we grow and how big does the industry need to be? The second question is one that has not been addressed much at all through the long liquidation but will be very important once expansion actually begins. Keeping in mind that a multitude of factors could change along the way, let’s look at herd expansion in several steps. I project that the January 1, 2014 beef cow herd will be just over 29 million head. That means it will take about 1.75 million head of expansion just to get back to herd levels on January 1, 2011, prior to the drought. That level of expansion seems to me to be an absolute minimum. Even with relatively rapid growth in 2014, it likely takes two-and-a-half to three years to recoup just what has been lost in the drought.
Beyond that it becomes much more speculative. The 2004 level of 32.5 million beef cows was the previous level at which the industry tried to expand so maybe we need to go back at least to that level. That’s an additional 1.7 million cows, which likely takes another three or so years. Can the industry sustain upwards of six years of herd expansion? I believe it is possible given that the industry has been through 17 years of nearly continuous liquidation, much of which was caused by shocks that forced the industry today to be significantly smaller than it intended or needed to be.
Q. Consumer demand, of course, is the real driver behind the future of the cattle industry and the price of a pound of beef is, for most people, the ultimate decision-maker. There is some research that suggests higher beef prices in the supermarket are causing some tradeoffs to other protein resources. Will prices become more competitive soon?
A. Demand is, indeed, the answer to the previously posed question about how big the industry needs to be. It will depend on demand, both domestic and international. U.S. beef demand is mature and not likely to grow rapidly though it will likely grow, perhaps more in value terms, but also modestly in quantity terms. There is, I believe, significantly greater demand potential in the global market. Does the U.S. beef cow herd need to be 31 million head? 33 million head? 35 million head? Many dynamic factors will be affect the answer, but my guess now would be 31 million head at a minimum, with 33 million a distinct possibility. Beyond that….?
In the meantime, the current squeeze on cattle numbers and initial impacts of herd expansion mean that beef production will decrease into 2015, at least, and perhaps into 2016. Beef prices will remain very high and the challenges to beef demand during that period will be unlike any we have ever seen.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Chuck Jolley, a veteran food-industry journalist and commentator.

Sitting together at the family dinner table may seem hard to manage with the busy lives people lead these days. However, a family meal helps cultivate an environment where parents can have a conversation with their children. And that family interaction is an important factor to protect children from the dangers of smoking, drinking and drugs.
This month, the Ellis County Extension Office is teaming up with Papa Murphy’s and the Hays Kiwanis Club to offer a make-and-take pizza activity to encourage families to cook and eat together. Families will have the opportunity to assemble a pizza from provided ingredients and take home a low-cost meal to enjoy together.
Family Make and Take Pizza Night will be held on Monday, September 30 from 4:15-6:15 pm at the Ellis County Extension Office meeting room, 601 Main Street in Hays. (Enter the rear door from the north parking lot.) The cost is only $1.00 per pizza, with a limit of two pizzas per family. Quantities are limited, so registration is accepted on a first-come, first-served basis. Register and pay fees at the Ellis County Extension Office, 785-628-9430.
Papa Murphy’s will donate up to 70 crusts for the make-and-take event and toppings are supported by funding from the Hays Kiwanis Club and Ellis County Extension. We’ll also provide a bag of baby carrots and a few pieces of fruit to balance your healthy family meal.
Volunteers are needed to assist with this event. Call the Extension Office if you can help during one or both shifts: 4:00-5:15 pm and 5:15-6:30 pm.
The goal of Family Pizza Night is to create awareness that regular conversations between parents and children are an important prevention tool to help safeguard Kansas youth and that family meals are an important way to regularly engage in those conversations.
Parental influence is known to be one of the most crucial factors in determining the likelihood of substance abuse by teenagers. Research done by The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse consistently finds that the more often children eat dinner with their families, the less likely they are to smoke, drink or use drugs. The statistics reveal that teens who almost always eat dinner with their families are 31 percent LESS likely than the average teenager to smoke, drink or use drugs, while teens who virtually never eat dinner with their families are 72 percent MORE likely than the average teenager to use illegal drugs, alcohol and cigarettes.
Kids like to eat dinner with their families, too. When a recent survey asked teens about family meals, 84 percent said they prefer to have dinner with their families than to eat alone.
Additionally, research shows that children who eat dinner often with their families are more likely to be emotionally content, do well in school, have positive peer relationships, have lower levels of stress and be bored less often. What amazing benefits from something as simple as a family meal!
This month, plan to make and take a pizza on September 30 and think of ways you can schedule more family time to talk about what’s going on in your child’s world. After all, what your kids really want at the dinner table is YOU!

By Gene Policinski

There’s nothing good to find in the current standoff between the Syrian government and the United States – people there are dying as diplomats ponder, politicians posture and nations take strategic sides.

But consider the value of “free press” and “free speech” in taking to an amazing new level the public debate in the United States over what to do next – a process that in many nations surely would have been a secretive discussion.

From town halls of the air to halls in real towns, from Sunday talk shows on TV to curbside talk on Main Street, from mobile devices to desktop computers, Americans of all ranks and views are engaged in what is a historic – at least, by virtue of being largely electronic – national discussion over national priorities and military options.
The discussions were prompted by the near-universal and immediate availability of information from Syria, including horrifying images of victims of gas attacks. President Obama’s Tuesday speech to the nation brought out immediate social media commentary from the powerful to the passionate, from videos on Vine to thoughts on Twitter.

The blog SocialTimes reported this week that the key word “Syria” hit a peak of about 11,498 tweets per minute just as the speech was wrapping up. Some samples:

On Fox News’ HOT Twitter Box: this from “Matt Drudge” (with 221,000 “followers,” possibly the well-known blogger): “Doesn’t everyone realize America deserves Obama? He IS us. He perfectly mirrors our confusion and division. In the end, it wasn’t about him.”

On MSNBC’s site, this tweet from House minority leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.: “Pres. Obama’s leadership brought diplomatic solutions back to the table, shows his willingness to exhaust every remedy before use of force.”

Twitter reported that the White House turned to the Twittersphere to tout Obama’s upcoming remarks, sending out about 11:15 a.m. ET: “Tonight at 9 pm ET, President Obama will address the nation on #Syria. Tune in here —> https://wh.gov/syria , pic.twitter.com/wJHvk1Y1P2.” And, Twitter noted, British prime minister David Cameron took to tweeting recently that “I’ve just spoken to @BarackObama again on #Syria developments. Details at my Liaison Committee appearance at 4 p.m.”

Where once Twitter’s 140-character limit was held in low regard among those shaping public opinion, it’s now the venue of choice for immediate reaction and commentary. Even the Pope took to Twitter, on Monday, to join in the debate over the proper response to alleged chemical weapon use by the Bashar Al-Assad regime: War never again! Never again war!”

Different media were at play some 215 years ago when sharp political commentary among newspapers in the U.S. over the possibility – and, for some, the desirability – of war with France led to the Sedition Act providing for the jailing of those openly critical of Congress and the White House.

Some 25 people were charged under the Act, with 11 convictions. But the move to suppress free speech left a sour public taste less than a decade after the First Amendment and the Bill of Rights were enacted – and the law was allowed to expire in 1801.

From draft protests during the Civil War to anti-war demonstrations, protesters took to the streets to express contrarian views about government policies. But today, among the most visible protest groups are ones like “Anonymous” and the “Syrian Electronic Army” – a shadowy group of pro-Assad government hackers—who launch so-called “denial of service” cyber-attacks that can effectively shut down a web site for a time, or mangle its content.

Unfettered by and unconcerned about government control, the e-debate in the U.S. over Syria rages openly and broadly. Citizens speaking their minds to the high and powerful.

The irony may well have escaped him, but even Russian President Vladimir Putin – busy putting down freely operating news media in own nation – took to the Op-Ed print and electronic pages of the New York Times, on Sept. 12, to make his case directly to American citizens for a non-military response to the Syrian civil war.

The power of a real “marketplace of ideas,” made possible by freedom of speech and press. And thus far, anyway, no one is calling for Sedition Act II.

Gene Policinski is chief operating officer of the Newseum Institute and senior vice president of its First Amendment Center. Email him at [email protected].

Book Review: Forever, Interrupted (author Taylor Jenkins Reid)
(reviews on Goodreads)

Ben and Elsie’s chemistry is instant and electric. Ben cannot even wait twenty-four hours before asking to see her again. Within weeks, the two are head over heels in love. By May, they’ve eloped. Only nine days later, Ben is out riding his bike when he is hit by a truck and killed on impact. Elsie hears the sirens outside her apartment, but by the time she gets downstairs, he has already been whisked off to the emergency room. At the hospital, she must face Susan, the mother-in-law she has never met—and who doesn’t even know Elsie exists.

Don’t take my word for it — many, many reviewers are big fans of this book. However, I found the dialogue to be poorly written and I didn’t particularly like either of the characters. Some of the “oh-so-romantic” things Ben says just make him sound like, well, a tool. Elsie is of course one of those women who of course is so attractive but is so down-to-earth that she doesn’t realize it and can’t get over her “clumsiness” and is so self-deprecating that it’s a turn-off. The connection between Susan and Elsie seems forced (maybe rightly so).

The circumstances surrounding Ben’s death are horrible and sad and heart-wrenching, but I was so removed from the story that the full impact never came.

2 out of 5 stars

Marleah Augustine is the Adult Department Librarian at the Hays Public Library

You can see more of her blog here https://hayspubliclibrary.wordpress.com

 

 

By John Schlageck, Kansas Farm Bureau

Rainfall during the end of July and the first week of August has provided hope for farmers and cattlemen across Kansas – even in the farm western corners of the state.

As southwestern Kansas farmers prepare for fall wheat seeding, there are more happy faces than during the last couple years, but that’s not to say some areas don’t need moisture.

“I don’t believe we’re out of the drought by any means,” says Stevens County farmer Ben McClure. “I know we haven’t gone back to a wet period. We were just blessed to have rain when we needed it badly.”

McClure received five inches of rain on his farm during the first week of August. Stevens County averages 17 inches of moisture annually. Most farmers in this county are still at least 12 inches shy and in many cases more.

The rains that fell in early August were spotty. A couple miles south of McClure’s fields, thirsty crops received half about two inches. Two miles north, even less.

For those dry-land wheat farmers in this region of Kansas, the rains have given them the prospect of planting wheat this fall. Many haven’t harvested a crop here in three years.

“Maybe we can get it up,” McClure says. “That wasn’t the case before the rain.”

If, and this is a big if, these wheat growers receive another half, three-quarters or even a full inch of rain between now and the end of October, dry-land wheat will have a good chance of getting up and going heading into the winter.

“Just the possibility of planting, growing and harvesting a dry-land wheat crop would be great,” McClure says. “After three years of little, if any moisture, the early August rains allowed everything out here to take a deep breath.”

From a soil conservation point of view, these summer rains were a real “life saver.”

Farmers like McClure were able to go into fields that hadn’t grown a crop for three years and plant a crop to cover the bare soil. Watching the precious top soil blow during this three year drought has been especially painful with no residue to hold the soil in place..

Last winter the Stevens County farmer watched the soil blow down to the hardpan – a layer of soil so compacted that neither plant roots nor water can penetrate.

That’s gut-wrenching. It leaves a scar on a farmer and the land.

This year will be different, thanks to the summer rain.

“We planted some feed on some of our land after we received the moisture,” McClure says. “If we hadn’t received the rain, the crop wouldn’t have grown.”

Instead, the feed crop covers the land and stands between three and four feet high.

The pheasants are enjoying the feed and cover, McClure says. He’s hoping for a couple good hunts in November.

This year even the road sides sport green weeds. Last year was totally brown.

“The pigweed and kochia are doing well since the rain,” McClure says. “It’s even been nice to see some weeds grow in places.”

When’s the last time you heard a farmer talk about “liking” the looks of weeds on his land?

Troubled times and conditions lend themselves to unlikely conversation, especially in western Kansas during a prolonged drought. Let’s just hope and pray these farmers receive the much needed rain they are desperate for.

John Schlageck 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.

The views and opinions expressed in this post are solely those of the author. These views and opinions do not represent those of the Post News Network and/or any/all contributors to this site.
by JOHN HANNA, AP Political Writer

— Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback’s allies and critics have waged an intense debate over changes in picking state Court of Appeals judges.

But Kansans should soon have a real-world contrast between the new system and the one it replaced.

The state Senate last week confirmed Brownback’s chief counsel, Caleb Stegall, to a Court of Appeals seat under a law taking effect in July. He appoints the judges, subject to Senate confirmation.

But the Kansas Supreme Court still falls under the old system. It has an attorney-led nominating commission screen applicants for vacancies and name three finalists, with no role for legislators after the governor’s appointment.

And a state Supreme Court vacancy is likely next year because Justice Nancy Moritz has been nominated to a federal appeals court.

 

Library Events September 9-14

CHILDREN AND YOUNG ADULT (YA) PROGRAM

Monday, Sept. 9

10:00 AM Storytime

11:00 AM Storytime

4:00 PM Games

4:00-4:40 PM Bal-A-Vis-X (Preregister at www.hayspublib.org or 785-625-5916)

6:30 PM Storytime

Tuesday, Sept. 10

10:00 AM Storytime

11:00 AM Storytime

3:30 PM Video Game League (YA)

4:00 PM Music Sparks with JoAnn Jordan

Wednesday, Sept. 11

10:00 AM Storytime

10:00 AM Hora De Leer en Espanol

10:45 AM Lapsit

3:30 PM Wavering Wednesdays (YA)

4:00 PM Author of the Month: Joanne Cole (Magic School Bus Series)

4:00 – 4:40 PM Bal-A-Vis-X (preregister at www.hayspublib.org or 785-625-591)

Thursday, Sept. 12

10:00 AM Storytime

11:00 AM Digital Storytime

3:30 PM Make-n-Take

4:00 PM Infinity & Beyond (gifted student activities)

5:00 PM Mangako Anime Club (All Welcome)

Friday, Sept. 13

10:00 AM Cre-8-tive Moments- Banana Split Bites

4:00 PM Chess Club

ADULT PROGRAMS AND EVENTS
Tuesday, Sept. 10

4:00 PM HPL Board Meeting

Wednesday, Sept. 11

12:00 PM Feed & Film

5:30 PM Meat Free Meals- Green Bean Soup

Thursday, Sept. 12

5:00 PM Mangako Anime Club

6:00 PM Creative Writing Group

6:00 PM Computer Class

Saturday, Sept. 14

3:00 PM Live Music!- Australian Blues Musician Nick Charles