By RUSSELL FOX Insight Kansas

I recently read the manuscript of a soon-to-be-published scholarly book looking at one of Kansas’s major cities. It was filled with sharp observations and smart ideas; when it’s published, I’ll buy copies of it for all my local representatives, in hopes that they’ll read it and learn something. But there’s one point in the manuscript that I can’t get out of my head.

When the author–who, like me, is not a Kansas native–arrived in the Sunflower state, they were struck by how the city they were moving to seemed to sprout out of the ground without warning. Flying into a Kansas airport, the book suggests, you look around, seeing nothing but farmland, and then suddenly a city is there, seemingly at random. The point being that Kansas’s urban areas--with Kansas City’s agglomeration of Overland Park and Olathe, Leavenworth and Lenexa, being the sole exception–are stand-alone entities, the product of geographic happenstance or boundary-line-drawing rooted decades, or even centuries, in the past.

Cities everywhere are both products and providers of connectivity; making connections and pursuing opportunities is why people congregate together, why businesses and investment capital flow to urban areas. So when you see a solitary city or town standing in an otherwise entirely rural space, there is the temptation to wonder how “real” a place it actually is.

Given that global trade and internet communication means that no city or town, no matter how small, is truly disconnected any longer, this kind of wondering is more a matter of perception than reality. Unless, of course, the perception becomes a self-imposed trap, and thus accidentally, or perhaps preemptively, sets the terms for the real-world decisions that follow.

That kind of self-referential trapping is not unusual in Kansas, I fear. There are positive aspects to it, of course; it can encourage people to focus on their local resources, adding to the culture of our state by supporting and celebrating the creativity that can be found in local places. But too often this dynamic takes a negative tone, whether it be a defiant pride in disconnection, or a hopelessness that dismisses new connections and possibilities before they’ve even been tried.

Look at Kansas politics through this frame, and you can see examples everywhere. State policies that could be easily adapted to Kansas’s population–like Medicaid expansion, legal medical marijuana, and more–face opposition from political interests that mostly offer a simple “it won’t work here” rather than any serious policy argument. Counties with farmers looking to bring in additional income and companies happy to pay them to install solar arrays face onerous regulations instead, because otherwise “people will complain.” Cities trying to manage their slow growth by establishing more reliable revenue streams, reconsidering the costs of an overbuilt infrastructure, free parking, and mill levies that haven’t been touched in decades, shy away from moving forward, fearing that Kansans are “too cheap” to ever pay for improving public goods.

Obviously such perceptions don’t explain everything about these disputes; political disagreements, backed by powerful partisan interests, are real, and simple boosterism won’t change that. But pushing back against the idea that certain things just “can’t happen in Kansas” is nonetheless important, I think, because that’s a perception rooted in an assumption based on Kansas’s spatiality, its supposed disconnectedness, and not on our common resources and will.

The fact that there are, and always have been, many throughout Kansas’s cities and towns willing to do that kind of pushing back is evidence enough that the political powers that be aren’t the whole story. That’s my hopeful perception, at least.

Dr. Russell Arben Fox teaches politics at Friends University in Wichita, KS.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/7/1690389122282.jpeg" alt="" />
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure>By RUSSELL FOX Insight KansasI recently read the manuscript of a soon-to-be-published scholarly book looking at one of Kansas’s major cities. It was filled with sharp observations and smart ideas; when it’s published, I’ll buy copies of it for all my local representatives, in hopes that they’ll read it and learn something. But there’s one point in the manuscript that I can’t get out of my head.When the author–who, like me, is not a Kansas native–arrived in the Sunflower state, they were struck by how the city they were moving to seemed to sprout out of the ground without warning. Flying into a Kansas airport, the book suggests, you look around, seeing nothing but farmland, and then suddenly a city is there, seemingly at random. The point being that Kansas’s urban areas--with Kansas City’s agglomeration of Overland Park and Olathe, Leavenworth and Lenexa, being the sole exception–are stand-alone entities, the product of geographic happenstance or boundary-line-drawing rooted decades, or even centuries, in the past.Cities everywhere are both products and providers of connectivity; making connections and pursuing opportunities is why people congregate together, why businesses and investment capital flow to urban areas. So when you see a solitary city or town standing in an otherwise entirely rural space, there is the temptation to wonder how “real” a place it actually is.Given that global trade and internet communication means that no city or town, no matter how small, is truly disconnected any longer, this kind of wondering is more a matter of perception than reality. Unless, of course, the perception becomes a self-imposed trap, and thus accidentally, or perhaps preemptively, sets the terms for the real-world decisions that follow.That kind of self-referential trapping is not unusual in Kansas, I fear. There are positive aspects to it, of course; it can encourage people to focus on their local resources, adding to the culture of our state by supporting and celebrating the creativity that can be found in local places. But too often this dynamic takes a negative tone, whether it be a defiant pride in disconnection, or a hopelessness that dismisses new connections and possibilities before they’ve even been tried.Look at Kansas politics through this frame, and you can see examples everywhere. State policies that could be easily adapted to Kansas’s population–like Medicaid expansion, legal medical marijuana, and more–face opposition from political interests that mostly offer a simple “it won’t work here” rather than any serious policy argument. Counties with farmers looking to bring in additional income and companies happy to pay them to install solar arrays face onerous regulations instead, because otherwise “people will complain.” Cities trying to manage their slow growth by establishing more reliable revenue streams, reconsidering the costs of an overbuilt infrastructure, free parking, and mill levies that haven’t been touched in decades, shy away from moving forward, fearing that Kansans are “too cheap” to ever pay for improving public goods.Obviously such perceptions don’t explain everything about these disputes; political disagreements, backed by powerful partisan interests, are real, and simple boosterism won’t change that. But pushing back against the idea that certain things just “can’t happen in Kansas” is nonetheless important, I think, because that’s a perception rooted in an assumption based on Kansas’s spatiality, its supposed disconnectedness, and not on our common resources and will.The fact that there are, and always have been, many throughout Kansas’s cities and towns willing to do that kind of pushing back is evidence enough that the political powers that be aren’t the whole story. That’s my hopeful perception, at least.Dr. Russell Arben Fox teaches politics at Friends University in Wichita, KS.

INSIGHT KANSAS: The problem of Kansas’s self-perception

For decades, the 1984 Chevron Doctrine gave unelected D.C. bureaucrats the power to bury Kansas businesses—especially our oil fields, farms, and ranches—in unnecessary regulations. Thankfully, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the Chevron decision just a few weeks ago, finally reining in those powers.&nbsp;

This is a significant win for Kansas’ economy. Bureaucrats will no longer have free rein to impose extreme environmental regulations that stifle economic growth while offering little progress towards leaving this world cleaner than we found it. Under the Chevron Doctrine, businesses were legally powerless to fight back against these Washington-imposed rules. Federal agencies held all the cards, leaving our elected representatives with little say.&nbsp;

But those days are over. The legal playing field has now been leveled, giving Kansans a fair chance to challenge regulations that threaten their livelihoods. Federal agencies’ unchecked power has been curtailed, slowing down the regulatory assault on businesses across Kansas—from our fields and factories to Main Street.&nbsp;

The Chevron Doctrine was responsible for harmful regulations like the Obama and Biden Administrations’ Waters of the United States rule, which absurdly classified a puddle on a farm as federal water. It also allowed for overbearing, costly rules that hindered medical treatments and burdened workplaces with unnecessary safety regulations. Now, these kinds of federal rules can be legally scrutinized, delaying or even stopping them before they take effect.&nbsp;

This Supreme Court decision is a win for voters, too. It returns some power to our elected officials, ensuring that Washington’s bureaucratic class is more accountable to the people. Unelected agents still hold considerable regulatory power, but now they must adhere more closely to the laws written by Congress—the voice of the American people.&nbsp;

This is a victory for Kansas industries and the companies that call our state home. Reducing overregulation will spur economic activity, create good-paying jobs, and lower the cost of living.&nbsp;

We all want clean water, clean air, and to protect endangered species. But it’s Congress, not unelected bureaucrats, that should define what those terms mean.&nbsp;

— Sen.&nbsp;Roger Marshall, R-Kan.

For decades, the 1984 Chevron Doctrine gave unelected D.C. bureaucrats the power to bury Kansas businesses—especially our oil fields, farms, and ranches—in unnecessary regulations. Thankfully, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the Chevron decision just a few weeks ago, finally reining in those powers.&nbsp;This is a significant win for Kansas’ economy. Bureaucrats will no longer have free rein to impose extreme environmental regulations that stifle economic growth while offering little progress towards leaving this world cleaner than we found it. Under the Chevron Doctrine, businesses were legally powerless to fight back against these Washington-imposed rules. Federal agencies held all the cards, leaving our elected representatives with little say.&nbsp;But those days are over. The legal playing field has now been leveled, giving Kansans a fair chance to challenge regulations that threaten their livelihoods. Federal agencies’ unchecked power has been curtailed, slowing down the regulatory assault on businesses across Kansas—from our fields and factories to Main Street.&nbsp;The Chevron Doctrine was responsible for harmful regulations like the Obama and Biden Administrations’ Waters of the United States rule, which absurdly classified a puddle on a farm as federal water. It also allowed for overbearing, costly rules that hindered medical treatments and burdened workplaces with unnecessary safety regulations. Now, these kinds of federal rules can be legally scrutinized, delaying or even stopping them before they take effect.&nbsp;This Supreme Court decision is a win for voters, too. It returns some power to our elected officials, ensuring that Washington’s bureaucratic class is more accountable to the people. Unelected agents still hold considerable regulatory power, but now they must adhere more closely to the laws written by Congress—the voice of the American people.&nbsp;This is a victory for Kansas industries and the companies that call our state home. Reducing overregulation will spur economic activity, create good-paying jobs, and lower the cost of living.&nbsp;We all want clean water, clean air, and to protect endangered species. But it’s Congress, not unelected bureaucrats, that should define what those terms mean.&nbsp;— Sen.&nbsp;Roger Marshall, R-Kan.

Marshall: Overturning Chevron delivers regulatory relief for Kansas’ economy 

By MARK R. JOSLYN University of Kansas Professor Political Science

For over a century, Johnson County residents voted for Republican presidential candidates.

Even during periods of Democrat strength, including Franklin Roosevelt’s landslide victory in 1932 and Lyndon Johnson’s overwhelming triumph in 1964, the county stayed true to its Republican identity.

Woodward Wilson was the last Democrat to win Johnson County, achieving this feat way back in 1916.

But in 2020 Joe Biden put an end to the extraordinary run.

Two years later, nearly 60 percent of Johnson County voters supported Governor Kelly’s reelection bid and the county’s state House and Senate Democrat delegations increased considerably. Democrats in fact now consider Johnson County a crucial battle ground in the 2024 elections.

So, we have arrived at an important crossroad.

Are Democrat gains in Johnson County a harbinger of things to come? Or are they a temporary break in an otherwise robust trend of Republican dominance?

The answer can be attributed to changes in demographics. Johnson County’s population is increasingly urban, college-educated, and wealthy – trends that favor the Democratic Party.

Moreover, Democrat-leaning industries – education, health care and scientific professionals – now account for roughly 40 percent of the county’s employment base. Accordingly, the proportion of Johnson County voters registered as Democrats has increased from 20 percent in 2000 to 32 percent today.

But these changes cannot fully account for the shifts in voting behavior. After all, the percentage of voters in Johnson County registered as Republican has remained above 40 percent.

What has changed is the Republican party. It has failed to offer candidates that appeal to moderates and those unaffiliated with either party.

In the 2018 gubernatorial race, for example, Laura Kelly prevailed over Kris Kobach by 5 points statewide.

In Johnson County, Kelly thumped Kobach by a whopping 17 points.

Also, in 2018 Democrat Sharice Davids unseated incumbent Republican Kevin Yoder in the race for Kansas’ third congressional district – which includes Johnson County.

Davids skillfully managed a centrist image and has been able to hold the seat comfortably even after the district’s boundaries were redrawn to eliminate Democrat advantages.

In 2016, Trump resonated with centrist voters. He secured majority support from independents and suburban voters across the nation and extended the Republican streak in Johnson County.

Four year later, Biden seized the ideological center winning 64 percent of moderates and 54 percent of Independents.

He convincingly won Johnson County, garnering an unprecedented 53 percent of the vote.

The meaning is clear: Centrism thrives in Johnson County.

The county’s demographics do suggest a supportive environment for Democrats. This alone implies Kamala Harris is poised to win Johnson County.

However, a better explanation is that county residents like centrist candidates.

Neither Harris not Trump, at this point, are centrists.

And their vice president picks merely energized core supporters, prioritizing base maximization strategies over appeals to on-the-fence moderates.

Despite centrism’s successful track record of winning elections, reaching out to moderate voters if often met with disapproval. Passionate partisans steer candidates away from the middle ground in favor of more extreme policy agendas.

Should Harris resist progressive pressures and concentrate on moderate voters, she will be in a strong position to take Johnson County and may very well be the next president.

The views and opinions expressed in this editorial article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Salina Post or Eagle Communications.

eThe editorial is intended to stimulate critical thinking and debate on issues of public interest and should be read with an open mind. Readers are encouraged to consider multiple sources of information and to form their own informed opinions.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/9/1695215697316.png" alt="Mark Joslyn" />
 <figcaption>Mark Joslyn</figcaption>
 </figure>By MARK R. JOSLYN University of Kansas Professor Political ScienceFor over a century, Johnson County residents voted for Republican presidential candidates.Even during periods of Democrat strength, including Franklin Roosevelt’s landslide victory in 1932 and Lyndon Johnson’s overwhelming triumph in 1964, the county stayed true to its Republican identity.Woodward Wilson was the last Democrat to win Johnson County, achieving this feat way back in 1916.But in 2020 Joe Biden put an end to the extraordinary run.Two years later, nearly 60 percent of Johnson County voters supported Governor Kelly’s reelection bid and the county’s state House and Senate Democrat delegations increased considerably. Democrats in fact now consider Johnson County a crucial battle ground in the 2024 elections.So, we have arrived at an important crossroad.Are Democrat gains in Johnson County a harbinger of things to come? Or are they a temporary break in an otherwise robust trend of Republican dominance?The answer can be attributed to changes in demographics. Johnson County’s population is increasingly urban, college-educated, and wealthy – trends that favor the Democratic Party.Moreover, Democrat-leaning industries – education, health care and scientific professionals – now account for roughly 40 percent of the county’s employment base. Accordingly, the proportion of Johnson County voters registered as Democrats has increased from 20 percent in 2000 to 32 percent today.But these changes cannot fully account for the shifts in voting behavior. After all, the percentage of voters in Johnson County registered as Republican has remained above 40 percent.What has changed is the Republican party. It has failed to offer candidates that appeal to moderates and those unaffiliated with either party.In the 2018 gubernatorial race, for example, Laura Kelly prevailed over Kris Kobach by 5 points statewide.In Johnson County, Kelly thumped Kobach by a whopping 17 points.Also, in 2018 Democrat Sharice Davids unseated incumbent Republican Kevin Yoder in the race for Kansas’ third congressional district – which includes Johnson County.Davids skillfully managed a centrist image and has been able to hold the seat comfortably even after the district’s boundaries were redrawn to eliminate Democrat advantages.In 2016, Trump resonated with centrist voters. He secured majority support from independents and suburban voters across the nation and extended the Republican streak in Johnson County.Four year later, Biden seized the ideological center winning 64 percent of moderates and 54 percent of Independents.He convincingly won Johnson County, garnering an unprecedented 53 percent of the vote.The meaning is clear: Centrism thrives in Johnson County.The county’s demographics do suggest a supportive environment for Democrats. This alone implies Kamala Harris is poised to win Johnson County.However, a better explanation is that county residents like centrist candidates.Neither Harris not Trump, at this point, are centrists.And their vice president picks merely energized core supporters, prioritizing base maximization strategies over appeals to on-the-fence moderates.Despite centrism’s successful track record of winning elections, reaching out to moderate voters if often met with disapproval. Passionate partisans steer candidates away from the middle ground in favor of more extreme policy agendas.Should Harris resist progressive pressures and concentrate on moderate voters, she will be in a strong position to take Johnson County and may very well be the next president.The views and opinions expressed in this editorial article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Salina Post or Eagle Communications. eThe editorial is intended to stimulate critical thinking and debate on issues of public interest and should be read with an open mind. Readers are encouraged to consider multiple sources of information and to form their own informed opinions.

Insight: Can Kamala Harris repeat Biden’s historic Johnson County performance?

By TRACEY MANN U.S. Congressman (KS-01)

Last week, I completed my fourth annual 60-county Mann Listening Tour. Each year that I have served in Congress, I have hosted at least one town hall in every county of the Big First District. If an issue matters to Kansan, it matters to me, and those of you who show up to my town halls give me valuable insights to best serve you in Congress.

Over the past eight months I have consistently heard Kansans’ concerns about passing a fiscally conservative Farm Bill, reining in the weaponization of our federal government, cutting our reckless government spending, protecting the integrity of our nation’s elections, and securing America’s wide-open borders. These concerns have been a guide to how I develop solutions in Congress, and they will continue to be my pilot light in Washington, D.C.

As I concluded my annual listening tour last week, I could not help but to think about how our nation’s capital could benefit from more Kansas values.

Senator Bob Dole once told me about the “Kansas approach”—honesty, hard work, respect for your roots, common sense, service, simplicity, and genuine, thoughtful care for people. That is the Kansas spirit that so many of our fellow Kansans want to see more of in the nation’s capital. Sadly, that approach has dwindled and been forgotten by too many over the years.

Since the Biden-Harris Administration was sworn in, more than 12 million illegal immigrants have illegally entered the country. America begged Congress to come up with a solution, so House Republicans drafted H.R. 2, the strongest border security legislation passed in decades. Rather than coming to the table and finding commonsense solutions, Senate Majority Leader Schumer buried the bill in his legislative graveyard and refused to work with House Republicans to develop a solution.

When Americans rightly expressed their concerns about illegal immigrants voting in our national elections, House Republicans passed the SAVE Act, which requires individuals to provide proof of citizenship when registering to vote in federal elections. 198 of my Democrat colleagues voted against this commonsense legislation, and President Biden and Vice President Harris came out against it.

The House Agriculture Committee heard the demands from farm country for a fiscally conservative Farm Bill that provides certainty as they work to feed, fuel, and clothe world. We passed the Food, Farm, and National Security Act of 2024 out of committee with bipartisan support, and again, our Senate Democrat colleagues have responded with silence and failed to develop their own Farm Bill.

When President Biden was sworn in, he inherited a strong economy from the Trump Administration. However, President Biden was hyper-focused on massive government spending and expansion. For the first two years, Washington Democrats shoved their partisan, reckless tax-and-spend packages through Congress, which ultimately led to skyrocketing inflation and a declining U.S. economy. They senselessly taxed hardworking Americans and spent those dollars in an irresponsible manner. They have ignored the financial burden this spending put on American families, all while implementing burdensome regulations that handcuff hardworking Americans and drive-up costs even further.

Rather than resolving these issues, the Biden-Harris Administration spent more time using the federal government as a weapon against its political opponents. From using federal agencies to register voters at official events to attacking former President Trump in our federal courts, President Biden and Vice President Harris have been more committed to abusing their power than serving the American people.

Meanwhile, Kansans are just asking for some sort of commonsense policy solutions that bring them a degree of relief from the hardships of the past four years.

Ad Astra per Aspera, “to the stars through difficulty”. This isn’t just our state motto – it’s our way of life. Since our state’s founding, Kansans have endured and embraced hardships as we reached for the stars. We work hard to solve difficult problems, we keep our word, and we take pride in being a loyal and dedicated people. Our government would be a lot more productive and efficient if our nation’s capital embraced these values.

When I laid out my Commitment to the Big First District at the beginning of the 118th&nbsp;Congress, I promised Kansans to fight for an economy that’s strong, a future that’s built on freedom, a nation that’s safe, and a government that is accountable. Throughout my town halls it was clear – Kansans want me to continue that fight and to get our nation back on track.

I do not serve in Congress to be a caretaker in the slow demise of America- I serve to fight and work to make it stronger. I will not give up on bringing our conservative Kansas values to our nation’s capital or believing our brightest days are yet to come.

The views and opinions expressed in this op-editorial article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Salina Post or Eagle Communications. The editorial is intended to stimulate critical thinking and debate on issues of public interest and should be read with an open mind. Readers are encouraged to consider multiple sources of information and to form their own informed opinions.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/4/1713283946373.jpeg" alt="Tracey Mann Farm Bill April 15, 2024" />
 <figcaption>Tracey Mann Farm Bill April 15, 2024</figcaption>
 </figure>By TRACEY MANN U.S. Congressman (KS-01)Last week, I completed my fourth annual 60-county Mann Listening Tour. Each year that I have served in Congress, I have hosted at least one town hall in every county of the Big First District. If an issue matters to Kansan, it matters to me, and those of you who show up to my town halls give me valuable insights to best serve you in Congress.Over the past eight months I have consistently heard Kansans’ concerns about passing a fiscally conservative Farm Bill, reining in the weaponization of our federal government, cutting our reckless government spending, protecting the integrity of our nation’s elections, and securing America’s wide-open borders. These concerns have been a guide to how I develop solutions in Congress, and they will continue to be my pilot light in Washington, D.C.As I concluded my annual listening tour last week, I could not help but to think about how our nation’s capital could benefit from more Kansas values.Senator Bob Dole once told me about the “Kansas approach”—honesty, hard work, respect for your roots, common sense, service, simplicity, and genuine, thoughtful care for people. That is the Kansas spirit that so many of our fellow Kansans want to see more of in the nation’s capital. Sadly, that approach has dwindled and been forgotten by too many over the years.Since the Biden-Harris Administration was sworn in, more than 12 million illegal immigrants have illegally entered the country. America begged Congress to come up with a solution, so House Republicans drafted H.R. 2, the strongest border security legislation passed in decades. Rather than coming to the table and finding commonsense solutions, Senate Majority Leader Schumer buried the bill in his legislative graveyard and refused to work with House Republicans to develop a solution.When Americans rightly expressed their concerns about illegal immigrants voting in our national elections, House Republicans passed the SAVE Act, which requires individuals to provide proof of citizenship when registering to vote in federal elections. 198 of my Democrat colleagues voted against this commonsense legislation, and President Biden and Vice President Harris came out against it.The House Agriculture Committee heard the demands from farm country for a fiscally conservative Farm Bill that provides certainty as they work to feed, fuel, and clothe world. We passed the Food, Farm, and National Security Act of 2024 out of committee with bipartisan support, and again, our Senate Democrat colleagues have responded with silence and failed to develop their own Farm Bill.When President Biden was sworn in, he inherited a strong economy from the Trump Administration. However, President Biden was hyper-focused on massive government spending and expansion. For the first two years, Washington Democrats shoved their partisan, reckless tax-and-spend packages through Congress, which ultimately led to skyrocketing inflation and a declining U.S. economy. They senselessly taxed hardworking Americans and spent those dollars in an irresponsible manner. They have ignored the financial burden this spending put on American families, all while implementing burdensome regulations that handcuff hardworking Americans and drive-up costs even further.Rather than resolving these issues, the Biden-Harris Administration spent more time using the federal government as a weapon against its political opponents. From using federal agencies to register voters at official events to attacking former President Trump in our federal courts, President Biden and Vice President Harris have been more committed to abusing their power than serving the American people.Meanwhile, Kansans are just asking for some sort of commonsense policy solutions that bring them a degree of relief from the hardships of the past four years.Ad Astra per Aspera, “to the stars through difficulty”. This isn’t just our state motto – it’s our way of life. Since our state’s founding, Kansans have endured and embraced hardships as we reached for the stars. We work hard to solve difficult problems, we keep our word, and we take pride in being a loyal and dedicated people. Our government would be a lot more productive and efficient if our nation’s capital embraced these values.When I laid out my Commitment to the Big First District at the beginning of the 118th&nbsp;Congress, I promised Kansans to fight for an economy that’s strong, a future that’s built on freedom, a nation that’s safe, and a government that is accountable. Throughout my town halls it was clear – Kansans want me to continue that fight and to get our nation back on track.I do not serve in Congress to be a caretaker in the slow demise of America- I serve to fight and work to make it stronger. I will not give up on bringing our conservative Kansas values to our nation’s capital or believing our brightest days are yet to come.The views and opinions expressed in this op-editorial article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Salina Post or Eagle Communications. The editorial is intended to stimulate critical thinking and debate on issues of public interest and should be read with an open mind. Readers are encouraged to consider multiple sources of information and to form their own informed opinions.

U.S. Rep. Tracey Mann — More Kansas values in our nation’s capital

By GREG DOERING Kansas Farm Bureau

There’s no shortage of jokes about farmers and ranchers asking for a discount or inquiring if a free hat can be included with a purchase. My grandfather once told me, “It never hurts to ask — the worst they can tell you is ‘No’.”

Whether frugal out of necessity or mere habit, the thrift of farmers and ranchers provides plenty of innovation for inexpensive materials. The main corral at the ranch was built with used pipe and cable from a nearby oilfield. Drilling pipe and pump rods were the raw materials that made up most of the gates as well.

One of my first real jobs on the ranch was painting what seemed to be miles of rusty metal. We’d go to the hardware store for a couple gallons of the cheapest oil-based aluminum paint available then thin it down with turpentine. My grandmother crafted crude mittens out of a fleece material we used to guide the paint over the curved surface of the pipe to turn it a shining silver and prevent further corrosion. READ MORE:<a href="https://salinapost.com/posts/3b9d4f18-4693-4d3c-9905-0af3c663478b">&nbsp;Insight: The joy in meeting season</a>

Just about every building was crafted and maintained in the same fashion. The house, garage and barn were built with limestone quarried onsite. A haybarn was later built similarly to today’s pole barns, only the trusses, purlins and girts were pipe. The corrugated metal was attached with nails spotwelded to the pipe. When the galvanized coating weathered away, the roofs and sides also got a coat of aluminum paint.

All of these were built primarily for their utility rather than aesthetics, though they’re all charming in their own way. As time and markets allowed, most received upgrades in addition to the occasional coat of paint over the years. The house had an addition, the garage got new doors, and new tin was placed on the gable ends of the barn, but they remained rustic remnants of the materials readily available when they were constructed.

There’s evidence of similar resourcefulness on farms and ranches everywhere. If your land was close to a railyard, odds are good there’s been a boxcar or two offering storage at some point. In some places, retired boxcars served as makeshift barns or chicken coops and deteriorated to nothing.

On other farms, the boxcars went on foundations and are still storing items or they’ve been enveloped by a series of expansions to comprise a tiny portion of a larger structure. The modern equivalent is the thousands of shipping containers that have become a common storage solution on many operations.

Using native material also has a long history on farms, some examples like stone fences are easily visible from the road. Before barbed wire, dry stone walls were common ways to mark a property line or keep in livestock. I encourage everyone to examine one up close at least once in their life to see how something can look simple from a distance but be incredibly intricate up close. There’s no mortar or adhesive other than the weight of the stones artfully stacked in an interlocking fashion. They’re more than 100 years old in most of Kansas while others around the world have stood for thousands of years.

With some sweat and ingenuity, farmers and ranchers will find a use for just about everything. From turning old tires into livestock waters or making compost in a chemical tote, the number of repurposed items on farms grows out of thrift and necessity.

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

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/6/1687183475033.png" alt="Greg Doering" />
 <figcaption>Greg Doering</figcaption>
 </figure>By GREG DOERING Kansas Farm BureauThere’s no shortage of jokes about farmers and ranchers asking for a discount or inquiring if a free hat can be included with a purchase. My grandfather once told me, “It never hurts to ask — the worst they can tell you is ‘No’.”Whether frugal out of necessity or mere habit, the thrift of farmers and ranchers provides plenty of innovation for inexpensive materials. The main corral at the ranch was built with used pipe and cable from a nearby oilfield. Drilling pipe and pump rods were the raw materials that made up most of the gates as well.One of my first real jobs on the ranch was painting what seemed to be miles of rusty metal. We’d go to the hardware store for a couple gallons of the cheapest oil-based aluminum paint available then thin it down with turpentine. My grandmother crafted crude mittens out of a fleece material we used to guide the paint over the curved surface of the pipe to turn it a shining silver and prevent further corrosion. READ MORE:<a href="https://salinapost.com/posts/3b9d4f18-4693-4d3c-9905-0af3c663478b">&nbsp;Insight: The joy in meeting season</a>Just about every building was crafted and maintained in the same fashion. The house, garage and barn were built with limestone quarried onsite. A haybarn was later built similarly to today’s pole barns, only the trusses, purlins and girts were pipe. The corrugated metal was attached with nails spotwelded to the pipe. When the galvanized coating weathered away, the roofs and sides also got a coat of aluminum paint.All of these were built primarily for their utility rather than aesthetics, though they’re all charming in their own way. As time and markets allowed, most received upgrades in addition to the occasional coat of paint over the years. The house had an addition, the garage got new doors, and new tin was placed on the gable ends of the barn, but they remained rustic remnants of the materials readily available when they were constructed.There’s evidence of similar resourcefulness on farms and ranches everywhere. If your land was close to a railyard, odds are good there’s been a boxcar or two offering storage at some point. In some places, retired boxcars served as makeshift barns or chicken coops and deteriorated to nothing.On other farms, the boxcars went on foundations and are still storing items or they’ve been enveloped by a series of expansions to comprise a tiny portion of a larger structure. The modern equivalent is the thousands of shipping containers that have become a common storage solution on many operations.Using native material also has a long history on farms, some examples like stone fences are easily visible from the road. Before barbed wire, dry stone walls were common ways to mark a property line or keep in livestock. I encourage everyone to examine one up close at least once in their life to see how something can look simple from a distance but be incredibly intricate up close. There’s no mortar or adhesive other than the weight of the stones artfully stacked in an interlocking fashion. They’re more than 100 years old in most of Kansas while others around the world have stood for thousands of years.With some sweat and ingenuity, farmers and ranchers will find a use for just about everything. From turning old tires into livestock waters or making compost in a chemical tote, the number of repurposed items on farms grows out of thrift and necessity."Insight" is a weekly column published by Kansas Farm Bureau, the state's largest farm organization whose mission is to strengthen agriculture and the lives of Kansans through advocacy, education and service.

Insight: Thrift and necessity

By GEMA DE LAS HERAS Consumer Education Specialist, FTC

Getting an urgent call from what sounds like your utility company might make you think: Did I forget to pay my bill? The caller says there’s a way to avoid shutoff and fees: they’ll send you a barcode by text or email so you can pay at a local retailer like Walgreens, CVS, or Walmart. Don’t. It’s all a lie. Wondering how to know it’s not a real utility company calling?

Scammers call unexpectedly and create a sense of urgency. But real utility companies don’t do that. Even if you owe money, they’ll work with you on a payment plan and won’t try to scare you into paying immediately — and they won’t send you a barcode and insist you take it to a store to pay.

Here’s how to deal with calls or messages that appear to come from your utility company:

Report utility company impersonators it to your utility company and to the FTC at&nbsp;<a href="http://www.reportfraud.ftc.gov/">ReportFraud.ftc.gov</a>.

By GEMA DE LAS HERAS Consumer Education Specialist, FTCGetting an urgent call from what sounds like your utility company might make you think: Did I forget to pay my bill? The caller says there’s a way to avoid shutoff and fees: they’ll send you a barcode by text or email so you can pay at a local retailer like Walgreens, CVS, or Walmart. Don’t. It’s all a lie. Wondering how to know it’s not a real utility company calling?Scammers call unexpectedly and create a sense of urgency. But real utility companies don’t do that. Even if you owe money, they’ll work with you on a payment plan and won’t try to scare you into paying immediately — and they won’t send you a barcode and insist you take it to a store to pay.Here’s how to deal with calls or messages that appear to come from your utility company:<ul>
 <li>Contact the utility company yourself.&nbsp;If you’re worried you might be behind on your bills, call the company using the number on your bill or the utility company’s website ― never the number the caller gave you, which will lead you back to the scammer.</li><li>Know only scammers demand you pay a certain way.&nbsp;Scammers ask you to pay in a way that makes it hard for you to get your money back —&nbsp;<a href="https://consumer.ftc.gov/articles/you-wire-money">wiring money</a>, putting money on a&nbsp;<a href="https://consumer.ftc.gov/articles/gift-card-scams">gift card</a>, using&nbsp;<a href="https://consumer.ftc.gov/articles/mobile-payment-apps-how-avoid-scam-when-you-use-one">payment apps</a>,&nbsp;paying with a scannable barcode or&nbsp;<a href="https://consumer.ftc.gov/consumer-alerts/2023/12/scammers-hide-harmful-links-qr-codes-steal-your-information">QR code</a>, or&nbsp;<a href="https://consumer.ftc.gov/articles/what-know-about-cryptocurrency-and-scams">cryptocurrency</a>. Your utility company won’t demand you pay that way.</li><li>Act quickly if you suspect you paid a scammer.&nbsp;Contact the company you used to send the money and tell them it was fraud. Ask for their help to reverse the payment. You might be able to&nbsp;<a href="https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/what-do-if-you-were-scammed#Paid">recover some of your money</a>.</li>
 </ul>Report utility company impersonators it to your utility company and to the FTC at&nbsp;<a href="http://www.reportfraud.ftc.gov/">ReportFraud.ftc.gov</a>.

Got a barcode from your utility company to make a payment? That’s a scam

By ALEXANDRA MIDDLEWOOD Insight Kansas

In 2021, in the aftermath of unfounded accusations of election fraud, the Kansas legislature passed a series of laws making it harder for citizens to vote. One bill, HB 2183, included a false representation provision, which made it a felony for an individual to “represent oneself as an election official” or “engage in conduct that gives the appearance of being an election official”.

This bill effectively limited voter registration drives in the state.

From the beginning, this bill sparked great concern among nonpartisan voter advocacy organizations — like the League of Women Voters who challenged the bill in court — as it relies on individual understanding (or misunderstanding).

For example, if a group was running a voter registration drive at a local farmer’s market, even if they did nothing to indicate they were an election official, one person’s misunderstanding that the group was representing such an official could result in felony charges.

Clearly, this law is overly broad and incredibly vague.

The Kansas Supreme Court agreed, concluding that the law criminalizes “honest speech” that may be protected as political speech under the Kansas Bill of Rights. The Court ruled that the law would be blocked until further court hearings could take place and their language seemed to indicate that the law very likely violates the state constitution.

This is a huge win for voter advocacy groups across the state.

Laws that suppress voter registration make it harder for eligible Kansans to participate in elections. which undermines free and fair access to the ballot box.

These strict voting rules also make voting disproportionately difficult for communities of color and other marginalized groups — the poor, the less educated, those who have criminal records — and those who are new to the voting process like young people and new immigrants.&nbsp;One pillar of democracy is the holding of free and fair elections that allow voters to choose their representatives. But voter suppression laws shift that power and allow for representatives to choose their voters by creating more barriers to the ballot box, especially among underrepresented groups.

Voter registration drives are democracy in action, and I can’t wait to see them return in full force this fall.

You may even catch me at my local farmer’s market or walking around WSU’s campus wearing the “ask me how to register to vote” t-shirt I bought to celebrate the Court’s ruling.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/9/1694699489540.png" alt="" />
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure>By ALEXANDRA MIDDLEWOOD Insight KansasIn 2021, in the aftermath of unfounded accusations of election fraud, the Kansas legislature passed a series of laws making it harder for citizens to vote. One bill, HB 2183, included a false representation provision, which made it a felony for an individual to “represent oneself as an election official” or “engage in conduct that gives the appearance of being an election official”.This bill effectively limited voter registration drives in the state.From the beginning, this bill sparked great concern among nonpartisan voter advocacy organizations — like the League of Women Voters who challenged the bill in court — as it relies on individual understanding (or misunderstanding).For example, if a group was running a voter registration drive at a local farmer’s market, even if they did nothing to indicate they were an election official, one person’s misunderstanding that the group was representing such an official could result in felony charges.Clearly, this law is overly broad and incredibly vague.The Kansas Supreme Court agreed, concluding that the law criminalizes “honest speech” that may be protected as political speech under the Kansas Bill of Rights. The Court ruled that the law would be blocked until further court hearings could take place and their language seemed to indicate that the law very likely violates the state constitution.This is a huge win for voter advocacy groups across the state.It’s also a huge win for democracy.Laws that suppress voter registration make it harder for eligible Kansans to participate in elections. which undermines free and fair access to the ballot box.These strict voting rules also make voting disproportionately difficult for communities of color and other marginalized groups — the poor, the less educated, those who have criminal records — and those who are new to the voting process like young people and new immigrants.&nbsp;One pillar of democracy is the holding of free and fair elections that allow voters to choose their representatives. But voter suppression laws shift that power and allow for representatives to choose their voters by creating more barriers to the ballot box, especially among underrepresented groups.Voter registration drives are democracy in action, and I can’t wait to see them return in full force this fall.You may even catch me at my local farmer’s market or walking around WSU’s campus wearing the “ask me how to register to vote” t-shirt I bought to celebrate the Court’s ruling.

INSIGHT KANSAS: Overturned voting law a victory for voter registration drives, democracy

By GLENN BRUNKOW Pottawatomie County farmer and rancher

I admit it, I am a political junkie, and I have not been able to stop listening to the radio, watching the TV or reading about recent events, all of which can be best described as unprecedented. They are coming fast and furious. I told someone the other day it was like coming up to a wreck on interstate and not wanting to look but not being able to stop myself from looking. All I can say is the election isn’t here yet, so you better buckle up and expect the unexpected.

Speaking of the elections the candidate endorsements by Kansas Farm Bureau’s (KFB) own Voters Organized to Elect Farm Bureau Friends, or VOTE are out. The endorsements are based off candidates’ understanding of agriculture and KFB policy, along with recommendations from members across the state who know the candidates best. The VOTE FBF board met and discussed every candidate running for state or federal legislature before endorsing candidates.

These endorsements are earned, not given. In most cases, candidates have been active in either attending county Farm Bureau events or at least reaching out and communicating with the Farm Bureaus in their district.

If you look at the list, you will also notice both Republicans and Democrats are endorsed. Kansas Farm Bureau is a bipartisan organization, and we work with legislators from both sides of the aisle, therefore party affiliation isn’t one of the metrics VOTE FBF considers when evaluating candidates.

I encourage everyone to look at the list of endorsed candidates and consider voting for them. It is important that we elect officials who understand the risks and rewards of growing food and how government actions can help or hinder our work. I am sure you have heard many, many times that we are less than 2 percent of the population, and it is important that we work to elect legislators who understand agriculture. Endorsements can be found at www.kfb.org/VOTEFBF.

Beyond that, I encourage all of you to exercise your right and vote in the upcoming primary and general elections. Our great nation depends on participation from all citizens in the process of selecting our government. I also encourage each of you to do your homework and really understand just who it is you are voting for. Also remember districts have changed, so find a map and know what district you are in.

I would hope you also take interest in the local races for county commission or bond issues for schools. Often those decisions have just as much or in some cases more sway over your everyday lives.

The bottom line is casting a ballot is not something we should take for granted. There are many places in the world that do not have that ability. So please, wade through all the rhetoric, hype and sensationalism and get out and vote for the candidates who best represent your beliefs.

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

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/7/1690818396954.jpeg" alt="Glenn Brunkow" />
 <figcaption>Glenn Brunkow</figcaption>
 </figure>By GLENN BRUNKOW Pottawatomie County farmer and rancherI admit it, I am a political junkie, and I have not been able to stop listening to the radio, watching the TV or reading about recent events, all of which can be best described as unprecedented. They are coming fast and furious. I told someone the other day it was like coming up to a wreck on interstate and not wanting to look but not being able to stop myself from looking. All I can say is the election isn’t here yet, so you better buckle up and expect the unexpected.Speaking of the elections the candidate endorsements by Kansas Farm Bureau’s (KFB) own Voters Organized to Elect Farm Bureau Friends, or VOTE are out. The endorsements are based off candidates’ understanding of agriculture and KFB policy, along with recommendations from members across the state who know the candidates best. The VOTE FBF board met and discussed every candidate running for state or federal legislature before endorsing candidates.These endorsements are earned, not given. In most cases, candidates have been active in either attending county Farm Bureau events or at least reaching out and communicating with the Farm Bureaus in their district.If you look at the list, you will also notice both Republicans and Democrats are endorsed. Kansas Farm Bureau is a bipartisan organization, and we work with legislators from both sides of the aisle, therefore party affiliation isn’t one of the metrics VOTE FBF considers when evaluating candidates.ADVERTISINGI encourage everyone to look at the list of endorsed candidates and consider voting for them. It is important that we elect officials who understand the risks and rewards of growing food and how government actions can help or hinder our work. I am sure you have heard many, many times that we are less than 2 percent of the population, and it is important that we work to elect legislators who understand agriculture. Endorsements can be found at www.kfb.org/VOTEFBF.Beyond that, I encourage all of you to exercise your right and vote in the upcoming primary and general elections. Our great nation depends on participation from all citizens in the process of selecting our government. I also encourage each of you to do your homework and really understand just who it is you are voting for. Also remember districts have changed, so find a map and know what district you are in.I would hope you also take interest in the local races for county commission or bond issues for schools. Often those decisions have just as much or in some cases more sway over your everyday lives.The bottom line is casting a ballot is not something we should take for granted. There are many places in the world that do not have that ability. So please, wade through all the rhetoric, hype and sensationalism and get out and vote for the candidates who best represent your beliefs."Insight" is a weekly column published by Kansas Farm Bureau, the state's largest farm organization whose mission is to strengthen agriculture and the lives of Kansans through advocacy, education and service.Copyright © 2024 Kansas Farm Bureau, All rights reserved.

Insight Kansas — Choosing Candidates

By RUSSELL FOX Insight Kansas

Before my family and I moved to Kansas, 18 years ago next month, I didn’t consider summer my favorite season. As a perpetual student and then a college professor, summer vacations were obviously a nice break, and of course summer activities were fun. But compared with flowers in the spring, foliage in the fall, and snow in the winter, summer just didn’t impress me.

The Sunflower state changed that. People complain about the heat, humidity, and wind but I found it all quite wonderful. Getting on my bike and hitting the long, straight county roads, looking across golden wheat fields and rolling green pastures towards a broad and blue horizon, with sunflowers along the way—it was beautiful, and made me a firm fan of Kansas summers.

That did involve some adjustments, though. For example: when are the lazy “dog days” of summer? As a scholar of politics as well as a fan of the season, this actually mattered to me.

Growing up in Washington state, August was the tired, tail-end of summer, the time when everyone mentally checked out, and I carried that assumption into my professional life. Living and studying in Washington DC, August was so disregarded by many who worked there that there were humorous&nbsp;<a href="https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2010/08/august-let-s-get-rid-of-it.html">calls to abolish it</a>. August was when the parties and agencies mopped up unfinished business, if they worked at all, just waiting for politics to re-ignite in the fall.

But in Kansas, whose approach to the calendar had historically followed agricultural patterns distinct from what I knew as a child and student, things were different. With the wheat harvest complete before the end of July, schools and governments looked to August as the time to get back into a normal routine. And so, as the years have gone by, I’ve had to accustom myself to treating late July, rather than August, as the time to truly tune out and reset one’s internal clock.

I was thinking about this while speaking to a local political group just last week. I was surrounded by older folks, who’d dedicated years—decades really--of their lives to understanding and promoting the causes and candidates they believed in. One might imagine these folks would be, like me on these hot, late July days, taking it easy. But no—they were fired up, anxious and ready and engaged, filled with questions and challenges and concerns.

Their attitude surprised me, though it shouldn’t have. In a single week they, like all of us, had seen the attempted assassination of one presidential candidate and the withdrawal of another. Far from the summer political calendar closing its eyes and taking a nap, suddenly everything was turbo-charged and dramatic, the news terrible and shocking and inspiring and unexpected. As I commented to some other news junkies, upon my second late-night visit to a local television station in a little over a week, it’s not supposed to be like this until after Labor Day!

Well, so much for those expectations. July is rushing into August and beyond at breakneck speed, with primary elections and brokered conventions looming across the nation, some of whose consequences might well affect even the most local legislative races across our state.

In a political culture supposedly built upon democratic debate, with people taking the time to test different political options carefully, that kind of speed isn’t good. But unless we can all learn to turn off our phones and trust that not everything always needs to be treated as a desperate emergency, we’ll have to make the best of our hurried reality, applying whatever limited breaks we can find occasionally. Summer’s still here, but maybe not the dog days of old, unfortunately.

Dr. Russell Arben Fox teaches politics at Friends University in Wichita, KS

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/7/1690389122282.jpeg" alt="" />
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure>By RUSSELL FOX Insight KansasBefore my family and I moved to Kansas, 18 years ago next month, I didn’t consider summer my favorite season. As a perpetual student and then a college professor, summer vacations were obviously a nice break, and of course summer activities were fun. But compared with flowers in the spring, foliage in the fall, and snow in the winter, summer just didn’t impress me.The Sunflower state changed that. People complain about the heat, humidity, and wind but I found it all quite wonderful. Getting on my bike and hitting the long, straight county roads, looking across golden wheat fields and rolling green pastures towards a broad and blue horizon, with sunflowers along the way—it was beautiful, and made me a firm fan of Kansas summers.That did involve some adjustments, though. For example: when are the lazy “dog days” of summer? As a scholar of politics as well as a fan of the season, this actually mattered to me.Growing up in Washington state, August was the tired, tail-end of summer, the time when everyone mentally checked out, and I carried that assumption into my professional life. Living and studying in Washington DC, August was so disregarded by many who worked there that there were humorous&nbsp;<a href="https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2010/08/august-let-s-get-rid-of-it.html">calls to abolish it</a>. August was when the parties and agencies mopped up unfinished business, if they worked at all, just waiting for politics to re-ignite in the fall.But in Kansas, whose approach to the calendar had historically followed agricultural patterns distinct from what I knew as a child and student, things were different. With the wheat harvest complete before the end of July, schools and governments looked to August as the time to get back into a normal routine. And so, as the years have gone by, I’ve had to accustom myself to treating late July, rather than August, as the time to truly tune out and reset one’s internal clock.I was thinking about this while speaking to a local political group just last week. I was surrounded by older folks, who’d dedicated years—decades really--of their lives to understanding and promoting the causes and candidates they believed in. One might imagine these folks would be, like me on these hot, late July days, taking it easy. But no—they were fired up, anxious and ready and engaged, filled with questions and challenges and concerns.Their attitude surprised me, though it shouldn’t have. In a single week they, like all of us, had seen the attempted assassination of one presidential candidate and the withdrawal of another. Far from the summer political calendar closing its eyes and taking a nap, suddenly everything was turbo-charged and dramatic, the news terrible and shocking and inspiring and unexpected. As I commented to some other news junkies, upon my second late-night visit to a local television station in a little over a week, it’s not supposed to be like this until after Labor Day!Well, so much for those expectations. July is rushing into August and beyond at breakneck speed, with primary elections and brokered conventions looming across the nation, some of whose consequences might well affect even the most local legislative races across our state.In a political culture supposedly built upon democratic debate, with people taking the time to test different political options carefully, that kind of speed isn’t good. But unless we can all learn to turn off our phones and trust that not everything always needs to be treated as a desperate emergency, we’ll have to make the best of our hurried reality, applying whatever limited breaks we can find occasionally. Summer’s still here, but maybe not the dog days of old, unfortunately.Dr. Russell Arben Fox teaches politics at Friends University in Wichita, KS

INSIGHT KANSAS: On being (politically) surprised by summer

Last
month during the state legislature’s special budget session, one contentious
issue in the budget bill was doubling the state’s childcare tax credit.

Rep.
Mark Steffen (R-Hutchinson) made comments saying the tax credit served as an
“incentive” for mothers to enter the workforce and weaken “traditional
families”.

Justifiably,
he was blasted by colleagues on both sides of the aisle.

Taking
such an opposition to the childcare tax credit is not only “offensive”(as
stated by Senate President Ty Masterson (R-Andover)), it ignores the hard
reality that&nbsp; Kansas families face.

According
to the <a href="https://www.epi.org/child-care-costs-in-the-united-states/?gad_source=1&amp;gclid=Cj0KCQjwkdO0BhDxARIsANkNcrd6TdwaTG7RtofHvPSZ26rRaH2PYt-1AMc3NMuuLbpF0MP1RmGspV0aAp5nEALw_wcB#/KS">Economic Policy
Institute</a>, the cost of daycare is unaffordable for 92% of families in the state.

A
shortage of childcare has continued to drive up costs. 104 of the state’s 105
counties have a higher demand than availability. The supply and demand issue
raises childcare costs and prices families — especially mothers as women often
make lower wages than men — out of the workforce.

Infant care costs are 28.4% higher than full-time college tuition at an
in-state public university, and childcare costs for kids under the age of four
are about equal to full-time public university tuition costs. 

Infant care is approximately 12.3% higher than Kansas’ average rent
costs. 

Kansas’ childcare costs as a percentage of workers’ salary is one of
the highest in the country.

According to MIT’s <a href="https://livingwage.mit.edu/states/20">Living Wage Calculator</a>, an average single adult Kansan with one child would
need to make $34.03 per hour to earn a living wage.

A living wage is defined as the amount a worker needs to make to meet
their basic needs — food, childcare, healthcare, housing, transportation,
taxes, and other essential items like clothing, personal care items, and
broadband.

A household with two working adults and one child would need both
adults to make at least $19.29/hour to meet their basic needs.

Steffen’s ideal two adult, one child household where only one adult
earns an income would need to earn $33.72/hour, even while spending $0 on
childcare. 

According to the Kansas Department of Labor’s <a href="https://www.klic.dol.ks.gov/vosnet/analyzer/resultsNew.aspx?enc=dTkmvkgGEL2blQpjB3ZCAerz8ejCpEVgtZZJ82GDP5c=">Occupational Employment and Wage
Statistics</a> (OEWS)
report from 2023, the median wage of Kansas workers (both hourly and salaried)
across all industries was $21.76 per hour.

75% of all workers made less than $31.09/hour, per OEWS. 

In other words, more than three-quarters of Kansas workers don’t make
enough income to afford their basic needs in a two-adult single-income
household with one child.

The data is clear: a vast majority of Kansas families do not make
enough money to meet their basic needs, with or without having to pay for
childcare.

Childcare is not a luxury for Kansas families. It’s a necessity.

Steffen’s remarks highlight a troubling disconnect from the economic
realities facing Kansans. 

By dismissing childcare tax credits as an incentive that could
supposedly undermine “traditional families”, he not only ignored the
overwhelming financial strain that childcare costs impose on households across
the state but also neglected the critical role that affordable childcare plays
in enabling parents — especially mothers — to participate fully in the
workforce and public life.

Thankfully for Kansas families, the proposal to double the childcare
tax credit ultimately passed with bipartisan support as part of the larger tax
bill.

The state childcare credit is now 50% of the comparable federal credit,
adding some relief for many families across the state.

______________________________________________________________________

Alexandra
Middlewood, PhD is the Department Chair of Political Science at Wichita State
University.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/9/1694699489540.png" alt="" />
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure>By ALEXANDRA MIDDLEWOOD Insight KansasLast
month during the state legislature’s special budget session, one contentious
issue in the budget bill was doubling the state’s childcare tax credit.Rep.
Mark Steffen (R-Hutchinson) made comments saying the tax credit served as an
“incentive” for mothers to enter the workforce and weaken “traditional
families”.Justifiably,
he was blasted by colleagues on both sides of the aisle.Taking
such an opposition to the childcare tax credit is not only “offensive”(as
stated by Senate President Ty Masterson (R-Andover)), it ignores the hard
reality that&nbsp; Kansas families face.According
to the <a href="https://www.epi.org/child-care-costs-in-the-united-states/?gad_source=1&amp;gclid=Cj0KCQjwkdO0BhDxARIsANkNcrd6TdwaTG7RtofHvPSZ26rRaH2PYt-1AMc3NMuuLbpF0MP1RmGspV0aAp5nEALw_wcB#/KS">Economic Policy
Institute</a>, the cost of daycare is unaffordable for 92% of families in the state. A
shortage of childcare has continued to drive up costs. 104 of the state’s 105
counties have a higher demand than availability. The supply and demand issue
raises childcare costs and prices families — especially mothers as women often
make lower wages than men — out of the workforce.Infant care costs are 28.4% higher than full-time college tuition at an
in-state public university, and childcare costs for kids under the age of four
are about equal to full-time public university tuition costs. Infant care is approximately 12.3% higher than Kansas’ average rent
costs. Kansas’ childcare costs as a percentage of workers’ salary is one of
the highest in the country.According to MIT’s <a href="https://livingwage.mit.edu/states/20">Living Wage Calculator</a>, an average single adult Kansan with one child would
need to make $34.03 per hour to earn a living wage. A living wage is defined as the amount a worker needs to make to meet
their basic needs — food, childcare, healthcare, housing, transportation,
taxes, and other essential items like clothing, personal care items, and
broadband.A household with two working adults and one child would need both
adults to make at least $19.29/hour to meet their basic needs.Steffen’s ideal two adult, one child household where only one adult
earns an income would need to earn $33.72/hour, even while spending $0 on
childcare. According to the Kansas Department of Labor’s <a href="https://www.klic.dol.ks.gov/vosnet/analyzer/resultsNew.aspx?enc=dTkmvkgGEL2blQpjB3ZCAerz8ejCpEVgtZZJ82GDP5c=">Occupational Employment and Wage
Statistics</a> (OEWS)
report from 2023, the median wage of Kansas workers (both hourly and salaried)
across all industries was $21.76 per hour. 75% of all workers made less than $31.09/hour, per OEWS. In other words, more than three-quarters of Kansas workers don’t make
enough income to afford their basic needs in a two-adult single-income
household with one child.The data is clear: a vast majority of Kansas families do not make
enough money to meet their basic needs, with or without having to pay for
childcare.Childcare is not a luxury for Kansas families. It’s a necessity.Steffen’s remarks highlight a troubling disconnect from the economic
realities facing Kansans. By dismissing childcare tax credits as an incentive that could
supposedly undermine “traditional families”, he not only ignored the
overwhelming financial strain that childcare costs impose on households across
the state but also neglected the critical role that affordable childcare plays
in enabling parents — especially mothers — to participate fully in the
workforce and public life.Thankfully for Kansas families, the proposal to double the childcare
tax credit ultimately passed with bipartisan support as part of the larger tax
bill.The state childcare credit is now 50% of the comparable federal credit,
adding some relief for many families across the state.______________________________________________________________________Alexandra
Middlewood, PhD is the Department Chair of Political Science at Wichita State
University.

INSIGHT KANSAS: Kansas childcare is unaffordable for most families

Do people vote against their self-interest? For example, there are LGBTQ Americans that vote Republican, despite the party’s track record of unfavorable policies toward the LGBTQ community.

Similarly, affluent Americans back President Biden, even though his tax policies target high-income households.

And despite Donald Trump’s persistent attacks on migrants, and support for harsh immigration policies, many Latinos support him.

Writing after the reelection of George W. Bush in 2004, Kansas native Thomas Frank claimed in his bestseller, What’s the Matter with Kansas, that the white working class were deceived into voting against their economic interests. Republicans convinced them that a liberal, coastal, urban elite threatened traditional American values and it was the responsibility of heartland farmers, factory workers, and waitresses to protect those values.

But according to Frank, traditional values were a ploy. Republicans after all represented big business and the wealthy. What the working class received for their support was lower wages, tax cuts for the rich, business deregulations, and sustained attacks on labor unions.

“Strip today's Kansans of their job security, and they head out to become registered Republicans. Push them off their land, and next thing you know they're protesting in front of abortion clinics. Squander their life savings on manicures for the CEO, and there's a good chance they'll join the John Birch Society.” What’s the Matter with Kansas? (2004, 67-68).

As it turned out, Frank was wrong. Systematic research showed the working class was not tricked. Economic issues, compared to traditional values, were the main drivers of their vote.

Moreover, the working class are not the only group to switch party allegiances – affluent voters have as well. In 1996, the highest income voters went for Republican Bob Dole by 16 points. But that margin completely disappeared by 2020. Joe Biden split the wealthy vote evenly with Trump.

This change impacted Kansas. In 1996, Johnson County went for Dole by 22 points. By 2020, Biden won by 8 points, flipping Kansas’s wealthiest county for the first time in decades.

Does this mean Democrats hoodwinked affluent Johnson County voters into acting against their material interests? Of course not.

Wealthy Americans that support Democrats may do so because they believe in the values championed by the party – protecting the environment, universal health care, and a larger role for government in fighting racial and economic inequalities.

Similarly, LGBTQ and Latino Americans who cast their votes for Republicans may do so because they identify with the values the party upholds - limited government, strong national defense, free markets, and lower taxes.

All of this serves as a reminder that self-interest manifests in countless ways and its interpretation is entirely subjective.

Voters prioritize certain interests over others. It’s ultimately a personal matter.

The strength of democracy lies in the freedom of voters to choose candidates that align with their self-interests. But when doubts are raised about what in fact those interests are, and the political choices that arise from them, democracy suffers.

The views and opinions expressed in this editorial article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Salina Post or Eagle Communications. The editorial is intended to stimulate critical thinking and debate on issues of public interest and should be read with an open mind. Readers are encouraged to consider multiple sources of information and to form their own informed opinions.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/9/1695215697316.png" alt="Mark Joslyn" />
 <figcaption>Mark Joslyn</figcaption>
 </figure>By MARK R. JOSLYN University of Kansas Professor Political ScienceDo people vote against their self-interest? For example, there are LGBTQ Americans that vote Republican, despite the party’s track record of unfavorable policies toward the LGBTQ community.Similarly, affluent Americans back President Biden, even though his tax policies target high-income households.And despite Donald Trump’s persistent attacks on migrants, and support for harsh immigration policies, many Latinos support him.Writing after the reelection of George W. Bush in 2004, Kansas native Thomas Frank claimed in his bestseller, What’s the Matter with Kansas, that the white working class were deceived into voting against their economic interests. Republicans convinced them that a liberal, coastal, urban elite threatened traditional American values and it was the responsibility of heartland farmers, factory workers, and waitresses to protect those values.And so, they voted Republican.But according to Frank, traditional values were a ploy. Republicans after all represented big business and the wealthy. What the working class received for their support was lower wages, tax cuts for the rich, business deregulations, and sustained attacks on labor unions.Frank did not hold back:“Strip today's Kansans of their job security, and they head out to become registered Republicans. Push them off their land, and next thing you know they're protesting in front of abortion clinics. Squander their life savings on manicures for the CEO, and there's a good chance they'll join the John Birch Society.” What’s the Matter with Kansas? (2004, 67-68).As it turned out, Frank was wrong. Systematic research showed the working class was not tricked. Economic issues, compared to traditional values, were the main drivers of their vote.Moreover, the working class are not the only group to switch party allegiances – affluent voters have as well. In 1996, the highest income voters went for Republican Bob Dole by 16 points. But that margin completely disappeared by 2020. Joe Biden split the wealthy vote evenly with Trump.This change impacted Kansas. In 1996, Johnson County went for Dole by 22 points. By 2020, Biden won by 8 points, flipping Kansas’s wealthiest county for the first time in decades.Does this mean Democrats hoodwinked affluent Johnson County voters into acting against their material interests? Of course not.Wealthy Americans that support Democrats may do so because they believe in the values championed by the party – protecting the environment, universal health care, and a larger role for government in fighting racial and economic inequalities.Similarly, LGBTQ and Latino Americans who cast their votes for Republicans may do so because they identify with the values the party upholds - limited government, strong national defense, free markets, and lower taxes.All of this serves as a reminder that self-interest manifests in countless ways and its interpretation is entirely subjective.Voters prioritize certain interests over others. It’s ultimately a personal matter.The strength of democracy lies in the freedom of voters to choose candidates that align with their self-interests. But when doubts are raised about what in fact those interests are, and the political choices that arise from them, democracy suffers.The views and opinions expressed in this editorial article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Salina Post or Eagle Communications. The editorial is intended to stimulate critical thinking and debate on issues of public interest and should be read with an open mind. Readers are encouraged to consider multiple sources of information and to form their own informed opinions.

Insight Kansas — Respecting voter choices: A key rule for democracy

By STEVEN HOWE State Representative (R-71st District)

Last month, the governor vetoed a bipartisan tax reduction bill (SB37), expressing concern about the long-term costs of sustaining a lower tax structure. The governor then called for a special session of the Legislature to reconsider a revised tax plan, Senate Bill #1, which was agreed upon in advance by the governor, House and Senate leadership.

Yesterday, I was in the Capitol for this much-anticipated special session. Both sides of the aisle were told that we needed to pass a “clean” bill without amendments otherwise, it might result in another veto from the governor. 

We were told this was the best we could do in light of the governor’s veto pen.

I joined a super-majority of legislators in the Kansas House passing SB 1 by a margin of 121-2. The Senate passed the same legislation 34-4 and now it goes to the governor for her signature.

This tax reduction bill does the following beginning in tax year 2024:

⦁ Fully exempts Social Security income from Kansas income tax

Restructures individual income tax brackets and rates to provide for a two-bracket system (5.58% and 5.2%.)

⦁ Increases the standard deduction amounts from $3,500 to $3,605 for single filing status, $8,000 to $8,240 for married filing status and $6,000 to $6,180 for head-of-household filing status.

⦁ Increases the personal exemption allowance amount, currently set at $2,250 for all persons on the return, to $18,320 for married couples filing jointly, $9,160 for all other filers, and an additional $2,320 for each dependent listed on the return.

⦁ Abolishes the Local Ad Valorem Tax Reduction Fund and County and City Revenue Sharing Fund.

⦁ Increases the amount of residential property exempt from the statewide uniform school finance levy to $75,000 of appraised value.

⦁ Increases the tax credit for household and dependent care expenses from 25 percent to 50 percent of the federally-allowed amount.

⦁ Reduces the privilege tax rates applied to financial institutions (for banks it goes from 2.25% to 1.94%) (for trust companies and savings and loan associations it goes from 2.25% to 1.93%).

⦁Excludes Section 1031 exchange sales from being considered valid sales for property valuation purposes.

While many of us wish we could have done more, some tax reduction is better than nothing at all. In order to further reduce taxes in future years, the Legislature and governor need to get serious about reducing state spending, which has seen exponential growth in recent years.

Lastly, during the special session, legislation (HB 2001) was introduced and passed in both chambers to lure a professional sports team, NFL and MLB, to Kansas. Both the Royals and Chiefs are considering their options in light of a sales tax proposal being defeated by voters in Jackson County, Missouri in April of this year. While I think highly of the Royals and Chiefs, and I have enjoyed their successes over the recent years, I voted against HB 2001.

Essentially, I do not think it is the role of the state government to be involved in incentivizing the construction of luxurious sports stadiums, especially when many people cannot afford to enjoy a game or concert. The National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) published an informative report on this subject, which I will share a link to <a target="_blank" href="https://www.ncsl.org/fiscal/stadium-game-back-in-play">here</a>.

 In this report it states, “For the past several decades, cities and states have subsidized the construction of new sports facilities. However, consensus among economists and other experts is that sports stadiums do not offer a positive return on investment.” 

I would encourage everyone who is interested in this issue to read this informative report.

Moreover, according to recent news reports, the Chiefs and the Royals, they hired 35 lobbyists to blitz legislators leading up to the special session with phone calls, meetings and even steak dinners, as reported by the Kansas Reflector. 

No wonder people are disillusioned with politicians. Fast-tracking legislation like this confirms people’s suspicion that special interests rule the agenda in Topeka and that the government is overrun by people with deep pockets.

Luckily, and for everyone's sake, the Legislature is now adjourned until January 2025. Ultimately, the vitality of our republican model of government rests on your participation. Each election year, the people of Kansas consent to the kind of government they want. Please do not sit on the sidelines this election year. Ask questions, do your research, meet the candidates, attend a forum, and most importantly - VOTE!

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/2/1709073668247.jpeg" alt="Steven Howe" />
 <figcaption>Steven Howe</figcaption>
 </figure>By STEVEN HOWE State Representative (R-71st District)Last month, the governor vetoed a bipartisan tax reduction bill (SB37), expressing concern about the long-term costs of sustaining a lower tax structure. The governor then called for a special session of the Legislature to reconsider a revised tax plan, Senate Bill #1, which was agreed upon in advance by the governor, House and Senate leadership.Yesterday, I was in the Capitol for this much-anticipated special session. Both sides of the aisle were told that we needed to pass a “clean” bill without amendments otherwise, it might result in another veto from the governor. We were told this was the best we could do in light of the governor’s veto pen.I joined a super-majority of legislators in the Kansas House passing SB 1 by a margin of 121-2. The Senate passed the same legislation 34-4 and now it goes to the governor for her signature.This tax reduction bill does the following beginning in tax year 2024:⦁ Fully exempts Social Security income from Kansas income taxRestructures individual income tax brackets and rates to provide for a two-bracket system (5.58% and 5.2%.)⦁ Increases the standard deduction amounts from $3,500 to $3,605 for single filing status, $8,000 to $8,240 for married filing status and $6,000 to $6,180 for head-of-household filing status.⦁ Increases the personal exemption allowance amount, currently set at $2,250 for all persons on the return, to $18,320 for married couples filing jointly, $9,160 for all other filers, and an additional $2,320 for each dependent listed on the return.⦁ Abolishes the Local Ad Valorem Tax Reduction Fund and County and City Revenue Sharing Fund.⦁ Increases the amount of residential property exempt from the statewide uniform school finance levy to $75,000 of appraised value.⦁ Increases the tax credit for household and dependent care expenses from 25 percent to 50 percent of the federally-allowed amount.⦁ Reduces the privilege tax rates applied to financial institutions (for banks it goes from 2.25% to 1.94%) (for trust companies and savings and loan associations it goes from 2.25% to 1.93%).⦁Excludes Section 1031 exchange sales from being considered valid sales for property valuation purposes.While many of us wish we could have done more, some tax reduction is better than nothing at all. In order to further reduce taxes in future years, the Legislature and governor need to get serious about reducing state spending, which has seen exponential growth in recent years.Lastly, during the special session, legislation (HB 2001) was introduced and passed in both chambers to lure a professional sports team, NFL and MLB, to Kansas. Both the Royals and Chiefs are considering their options in light of a sales tax proposal being defeated by voters in Jackson County, Missouri in April of this year. While I think highly of the Royals and Chiefs, and I have enjoyed their successes over the recent years, I voted against HB 2001.Essentially, I do not think it is the role of the state government to be involved in incentivizing the construction of luxurious sports stadiums, especially when many people cannot afford to enjoy a game or concert. The National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) published an informative report on this subject, which I will share a link to <a target="_blank" href="https://www.ncsl.org/fiscal/stadium-game-back-in-play">here</a>. In this report it states, “For the past several decades, cities and states have subsidized the construction of new sports facilities. However, consensus among economists and other experts is that sports stadiums do not offer a positive return on investment.” I would encourage everyone who is interested in this issue to read this informative report.Moreover, according to recent news reports, the Chiefs and the Royals, they hired 35 lobbyists to blitz legislators leading up to the special session with phone calls, meetings and even steak dinners, as reported by the Kansas Reflector. No wonder people are disillusioned with politicians. Fast-tracking legislation like this confirms people’s suspicion that special interests rule the agenda in Topeka and that the government is overrun by people with deep pockets.Luckily, and for everyone's sake, the Legislature is now adjourned until January 2025. Ultimately, the vitality of our republican model of government rests on your participation. Each election year, the people of Kansas consent to the kind of government they want. Please do not sit on the sidelines this election year. Ask questions, do your research, meet the candidates, attend a forum, and most importantly - VOTE!The views and opinions expressed in this editorial article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Salina Post or Eagle Communications. The editorial is intended to stimulate critical thinking and debate on issues of public interest and should be read with an open mind. Readers are encouraged to consider multiple sources of information and to form their own informed opinions.

A QUICK LOOK — Rep. Howe shares whats inside the bipartistan tax reduction bill

By BILL FIANDER Insight Kansas

Last semester, I asked my sustainable city planning class to close their eyes and visualize the typologies of five cradle-to-grave residences: birth residence, high school residence, current residence, parent’s residence, and oldest family member’s residence.

About 80% visualized at least two of the four basic residential typologies – single-family detached, single-family attached, small multi-family, and large multi-family (20+ units).

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/2/1708024541249.jpeg" alt="" />
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure>By BILL FIANDER Insight KansasLast semester, I asked my sustainable city planning class to close their eyes and visualize the typologies of five cradle-to-grave residences: birth residence, high school residence, current residence, parent’s residence, and oldest family member’s residence.About 80% visualized at least two of the four basic residential typologies – single-family detached, single-family attached, small multi-family, and large multi-family (20+ units).Yet, local zoning laws are almost exclusively tilted towards only one type - single-family detached. It’s common to find 80-90% of residential zoning dedicated to the most expensive and land-consumptive typology.Unsuspectingly, my students demonstrated two profound points: equitable housing choices are a basic need in life, and ignoring zoning reform will be done at the peril of your community’s prosperity.Just ask The Fonz! The iconic leather-jacketed uber-cool greaser of ABC’s Happy Days sitcom from my 70s childhood. Long before today’s demographic and economic shifts necessitated rethinking our love affair with single-family zoning – delayed marriages, lower birth rates, elderly adults soon outnumbering children, rising single-person households – Fonzie was making zoning reform cool.He lived in a small accessory dwelling unit (ADU) above the Cunningham family’s garage subordinate to their primary residence. Lending to his coolness, it was illegal. But it offset Mr. and Mrs. C’s mortgage costs and gave suburbia a housing choice for working-class mechanics it didn’t have otherwise. The property not only posed theatrically as a quintessential 1950s suburb but as a bellwether for today’s zoning reform front lines.The fact that it is still illegal in most of America should come as no surprise. What may surprise you is the juice this idea is gaining in city halls and capitals to address critical shortfalls in housing. California, Oregon, Washington, Connecticut, and Maine have led state-enabling acts for ADUs and prohibit local bans. Others as big as Texas are very close. Some cities like Minneapolis and Alexandria, Virginia have monumentally done away with single-family zoning altogether.While ADU zoning is decidedly a local matter, housing supply is of mutual interest to states and locals. Cooperative state legislation has shown it can provide political cover to local governments prone to the weight of NIMBY (Not In My Backyard) proselytizing. As Cincinnati’s Mayor, Aftab Pureval puts it, “The third rail of local politics is zoning”.In Kansas, legislators and mayors should be aware that easing up on zoning to allow small and multi-family units garnered astonishing support in the statewide Kansas Speaks survey last year – 44% favored vs. 14% against. This is not true everywhere like Prairie Village. However, Topeka is the latest of a few municipalities to go down the zoning reform path with ADUs. As they mull a proposal to open 100% of their residential zoning to ADUs under certain conditions, its significance should not be understated; if only 5% of the newly opened areascontained ADUs, around 2,500 units would be created or 30% of their 20-year multi-family demand. Other benefits – aging in place, multigenerational living, and passive income for homeowners – are no less significant.ADUs are not a silver bullet. Addressing other zoning barriers for live-work units, “missing middle” typologies (duplexes, triplexes, townhomes, small apartments), transit-oriented development, minimum lot sizes, density caps, and parking mandates are complimentary.But wouldn’t it be cool if openness to naturally occurring affordable housing is closer in reach with the stroke of a pen and some new map colors than a tax dollar?Heeey!

Opinion