Chilly reception for water legislation

By MIKE CORN

 

Kansas legislators received a lukewarm reception from the state's five groundwater management districts during a hearing on a proposal aimed at accountability as well as confronting long-term declines in the Ogallala Aquifer.
Only two GMDs, those based in Colby and in Scott City, offered their support for the legislation. Two other lent neutral testimony, while the largest in terms of both size and water use voiced opposition.
Groundwater Management District Manager Mark Rude appeared at Thursday's meeting of the Kansas House Water Committee to voice his district's opposition.
He struggled to clearly lay out the district's opposition, other than to cite the possibility of the loss of local control as well as interference between the district and the state's water czar — the chief engineer of the Division of Water Resources, a part of the Kansas Department of Agriculture. Earl Lewis currently serves as chief engineer.
Managers for both GMD No. 4, based in Colby, and GMD No. 1, based in Scott City, offered support for the measure, although they did ask for slight changes in how financial information is reported.
Both districts, coincidentally, are the only districts that have taken formal, substantive action to reduce water use through the use of Local Enhanced Management Areas. GMD 4 has long been home to the oft-referenced Sheridan 6 LEMA, an area in Sheridan County that precipitated legislation permitting the creation of a LEMA. Sheridan 6 has twice been authorized for five-year terms following its first approval.
In its wake, the Colby District initiated the creation of a district-wide LEMA for the remainder of the GMD.
At GMD 1, a LEMA is in place for irrigators in Wichita County, and a formal public hearing was conducted by Lewis a week ago in Scott City for the creation of a four-county LEMA encompassing the remainder of the GMD, including land in Wallace, Greeley, Scott and Lane counties.
The four-county LEMA would reduce water use by about 10 percent over the course of five years. The Wichita County LEMA is designed to reduce water use by about 25 percent during its five-year life.
The water measure discussed Thursday by the Kansas Water Committee would require GMDs by mid-2024 to submit annual reports to the Legislature and report "conservation and stabilization plans to the chief engineer."
In the past, there's been little variation in how water users react to perceived inroads into how water use is monitored or supervised.
Cracks were quick to appear Thursday, especially when Aaron Popelka, vice president of legal and governmental affairs for the Kansas Livestock Association, offered his group's support for the legislation.
While he acknowledged that much of the Ogallala is overappropriated, he said the KLA believes local control is best.
"While some groundwater management districts have met their obligations under the GMD Act by identifying areas of concern and developing conservation strategies, others have not fully met these obligations," Popelka said. "In fact, in some instances, certain GMDs have worked against local conservation efforts. Such actions increase the likelihood of intervention by the chief engineer and make locally led conservation decisions less attainable."
He went on to suggest changes, most significantly the idea that the state's chief engineer would not have the authority to identify areas of concern or designation an action plan unless a GMD fails to do so.
"If we want locally led conservation efforts, the GMDs must have some ability to determine those plans," Popelka said. "Instead, we suggest the chief engineer’s review be limited to ensuring the plan is reasonable and compatible with the Kansas Water Appropriation Act."
The committee is expected to take up the bill again when it meets next week. 

Setting the record straight

 I said I'd try to do better at posting on this blog, but I never in my wildest dreams — and I've had some real doozies — thought I'd be back this quickly.

Suffice it to say, as I was thinking in the shower about my last posting, from last night, I came to the conclusion that it might have been a touch misleading, unintentionally of course.

So, I decided it would be easy enough to hop under a blanket, fire up the old laptop and chatter away on the keyboard for a few minutes to set the record straight.

I did not mean to lead people to believe that this week's freak snowstorm of 27 inches was unequivocally tied to climate change. It hasn't been. 

It was my leap of faith to conclude that such a massive amount of snow, unforeseen by trained weather forecasters, had to have some "outside influence" to whip something up that powerful, even if it was limited to such a small section.

And in my view, it fit what climate change has come to mean, in that everything we have seen will be intensified. Heavy rains will get heavier, massive snows will pile ever higher, strong hurricanes will get stronger and intense tornadoes will become even more intense. All that goes without saying that warm temperatures will get warmer, winter will get shorter, and so on.

Yes, you can presume, without a shadow of a doubt, that I am among the millions who are convinced that climate change is real. Very real. And yes, I think we see it nearly every day in some form, if we're willing to stop, consider what we've seen in the past and what we're seeing now.

I might be cheating just a bit by virtue of my experience as a former long-time reporter at The Hays Daily News. While there, I was the go-to weather reporter, the keeper of weather records, at least as far as the newspaper was concerned. I shudder to think how many weather stories I've written.

To put it bluntly, I was intimately familiar with weather patterns and weather history in Hays and northwest Kansas.  And it was fun.

But i find it drives me a bit crazy to hear television meteorologists today talk about windy weather ahead, and then note we might have gusts of 20 mph. Sorry, folks, that's a light breeze in the western part of the state. It's not especially strong even in the eastern reaches of Kansas.

Or, perish the thought, when TV folks lament the prospect of wind-chill readings of 10 below zero. That really isn't a big deal to be honest. Heck, I can remember when ... I'll leave it at that.

But it underscores where we are today. 

Temperatures have warmed so much, even though only a degree or two on the long-term average, but noticeably so incidentally that a 10-below-zero wind chill borders on abhorrent. I'll stand my ground on disputing the windy threshold.

But 27 inches of snow is nothing to sneeze at, especially when you consider 30 inches is the all-time record, and that was just set in 2009.

So yeah, I tend to see climate change as an almost larger than life influence on how we perceive weather today.

Let's face it, climate change has become something of the elephant in the room. But, when you're talking about the great outdoors, that must mean it's a mighty big elephant.

Yes, it's January, but signs of spring abound

Note: After  a long hiatus, my youngest daughter shamed me into taking up my keyboard once again and spreading, at least in my mind, some words of wisdom.  To explain my absence, I was discouraged, disheartened by the apparent lack of readership, at least noted by the internal mechanics of the great and powerful google, which knows all and tells even less, unless, of course, you're willing to pay for it. Please give it a read, and I'll try to do better at writing regularly. Feel free to drop me a line, whether you agree or disagree with my musings.

Yes, it's January. Is spring near?

Hope springs eternal, so they say.

Who exactly says that is not a question I can answer, but it seems to be reality. Or perhaps the better fitting term would be a rite of passage.

No matter what applies here, it struck me this week, as I watched a squirrel scamper up and down a stately oak tree, a thread I happened to read on the Kansas Bird electronic mailing list about how spring surely must be right around the comet.

It had all the trappings of good pornography, other than it focused on wildlife. not wild life. Creatures of the outdoors, the birds and the bees, one could say. More specifically, it was about birds, hence the reason why it was passed along on an electronic mailing list owned, operated and originating from a statewide bird group.

So, the idea of spring approaching, never mind the 27 inches of snow that Ed and Cindy Harold of Weskan had received a day prior to watching as the squirrel made seemingly tireless runs up and down the mighty oak tree some 250 miles away, give or take.

Ed Harold, for the uninitiated, sometimes refers to himself — tongue-in-cheek of course — as the man of the mountain. Because he is the de facto caretaker of Mount Sunflower, at 4,039 getting above sea level, it is the highest point in Kansas.

Ed, or most likely, Cindy posted a photo of Kansas’ only remaining mountain man standing outside their mountain-side home, adjacent to what was likely a patio table, the bounty from the day’s snow storm piled 27 inches deep.

The yardstick embedded into the snow, naturally, was turned toward the camera so viewers could easily enlarge the photo and see the measurement for themselves.

Even if a 27-inch snowfall isn’t shocking enough in its own right, the snow had gently, if you can call several inches of snow an hour gently, piled up uniformly, like it was stacked that way intentionally.

This you must remember, occurred on the wind swept plains of far western Kansas. And I do mean far western. As in only a few miles from the Colorado border.

Snow in this part of the state doesn’t typically come straight down. No, out here, snow most often falls horizontally, driven by the howling wind, often piling up into nearly mountainous  drifts of sometimes dirt-laden piles of snow, the dirt scoured out by the very wind blowing the snow.

None of this, of course, has much of anything to do with the squirrel that spent an above-freezing calm afternoon scampering up and down the stately oak.

It does, however, show a stark contrast, in one spot 27 inches of snow and a few driving hours east, intermittent sunshine to warm an otherwise dry and snow-free area.

It’s not the thing that made of tales of old, but rather the ability to see in virtual real time what’s happening in various locations around the state, as well as nation and world.

Some might call it a modern miracle, but it’s certainly not that. It instead is an encroaching reality, driven by the marvels of technology.

But it’s also, a subtle reminder to those willing to accept science that climate change touches nearly everything in a myriad of ways.

To be sure, the naysayers will rise to challenge, claiming that Kansas has always been a state of contrasts. We’ve long had summer one day and winter the next, or snow in one part of the state and dry conditions elsewhere.

While true, they are also are essentially meaningless in this situation.

In this case, this approaching storm behaved as expected, inasmuch as it stayed in the western reaches of the state.

It was, however, predicted to be a low intensity snowstorm, in forecast after forecast. Snowstorms can be difficult to call, and they can prove extremely variable. But, here we’re talking about a early forecast of an inch or two and up to six or slightly more as the day dawned.

Nowhere was there a forecast of 27 inches.

Ed Harold said it wasn’t the biggest snowfall ever, one similar falling in the 1970s. That one was normal, to use the term loosely, as it fell horizontally.

But the mountain man’s snow of 2022, came in just shy of the 30-inch snowfall that fell in a 24-hour period in 2009 in Pratt.

So, while my squirrel friend — not the Harolds of course — scampered up and down the oak, carrying leaves and twigs to make a nest in some recess of the tree, we must remember that climate change is real. It’s all around us even here in Kansas. The nights are generally warmer and average temperatures continue to climb.

We must recognize reality, and do what we can to help reduce its effect. There’s plenty that can be done, even without inconvenience.

What will it hurt if we turn our thermostats down a couple degrees? We can grab a sweater or a blanket. It will save money.

If it helps the environment or the climate, so much the better.

It’s all pretty simple. We must do it ourselves, we must demand it from those who govern.

It all will help. We all must help. 

Sorry state of the newspaper industry in Kansas

It simply amazes me every time I take anything more than a cursory glance at how things are going in the newspaper industry in the Sunflower State.  Amazed because I just didn't think it could get much worse.

Unfortunately, for those of us still in Kansas, Gatehouse Media seems to know just how to continue to lower the bar.

Sure, I've been seeing complaints on Facebook — a scourge in its own right — about The Salina Journal lately from residents of the Lindsborg community. It seems they've been having a nightmare of a time getting their paper, not just on time, but on the same day.

Posting after posting in this community turns to subscribers not getting their paper for the day, or in some cases, for several days.

Now, to be sure, some of these problems might fall to carriers, who are certainly paid a pittance. But that's as it's always been. Some carriers were good, some not.

However, and obviously I'm only watching as folks post comments about their particular situation, the Journal isn't helping them out much.

When subscribers call in, the response varies. No one answers on up to promises of a delivery that never comes.

Heck, I've seen postings from carriers that papers will be late, thanks to mechanical issues or some such problem. To be sure, having spent my years in the industry, I know things break. Way too often, in fact. But it's also a handy excuse.

But Salina has long had two printing presses and a multitude of problems just getting the paper out the door, never mind onto the subscribers' doorsteps. 

Now, however, Salina has gone the way of The Hays Daily News, in that its printing presses have been silenced, the printers shown the door and the task of printing the daily paper sent elsewhere. 

When the Hays presses were turned off, the paper was printed in Salina, often on the presses that came from Hays.

Now, of course, Salina and Hays are printed in Hutchinson.

Its a trend.

The Wichita Eagle is being printed in Kansas City, for example. There have been so many changes, I can't keep track of them all.

But the latest low to be struck by Gatehouse-Kansas, if I can use that moniker, is the absolute devastation of the staffing at all the Gatehouse papers, most notably the former Harris Enterprises newspaper, which included Hays, Salina, Garden City, Hutchinson and Ottawa in Kansas and Burlington in Iowa.

Gatehouse picked the group up for a song, reportedly $20 million. It had a long and deeply respected history.

The names are the same, but you can't recognize what it once was.

You see, it's the papers' skeletons that are still visible. Most still occupy the now vastly oversized buildings, considering how small staffs are.

Perusing staff listings online show a paltry reminder. The number of reporters who are working in four of the communities — Hays, Salina, Garden City and Hutchinson —now match the number of reporters we had at our peak at the Hays Daily News.

There are only six reporters shown as working at these four papers, two each at Hutchinson and Hays, and one each at Garden City and Salina. 

Salina is looking to hire a reporter, but I'm not about to suggest anyone apply. You would almost need to be magical to fit the job description. Consider:

The successful candidate, according to an advertisement, will have to cover the community news, as well as local government, as well as features. But you'll also need to cover "intense breaking news situations." No sweat, I did that for more than 30 years.

But now, you have to also post on social media, while writing "quickly under deadline pressure."

Reporting accurately is still a requirement, thankfully, but you also have to be an accomplished photographer and videographer. Well, you have to shoot "strong" photos and videos as well. 

And you must be available nights and weekends. I get that; the news doesn't schedule when it's going to happen.

But my former colleagues tell of working most days and evening, and most weekends. Sort of slave labor in some respects.

You only need some experience, at a college paper or someplace else, and be working toward a bachelor's degree.

They claim to have a competitive wage, benefits and offer time off. They don't elaborate.

But the kicker here is, if you want to apply, you send your resume to Topeka. Not Salina. They don't have a managing editor or an executive editor, and from the staff listing, no publisher, well, other than one in Topeka, who serves as publisher there and for other Gatehouse papers across the state. They do now have a general manager, one shared by Hutchinson and Hays. More cheapskateism, if you'll excuse the word.

It's also notable that Salina's staff roster lists five people in the newsroom, one of whom has already left the paper. All told there are 17 people on the Journal roster, down from perhaps more than 100 who worked there at its peak.

Garden City shows six people on their roster. Hutchinson has 20.

Hays has 11. At its peak, Hays had nearly double that in the newsroom alone. The paper overall had more than 65 employees.

I was fortunate enough to leave The HDN when it was still fairly vibrant, even though Harris shareholders had already turned their backs on the business.

In hindsight, I now look like the smartest guy around, taking my retirement months before the axe would have fallen.

I don't regret it at all.

Moving at the speed of water

There's plenty happening these days on the water front in Kansas.

That's no different than it typically is, however. It just seems there's a different perspective abounding. It's not a new one, that's for sure, but different from what I'd call normal.

You see, water policy in Kansas moves at a speed snails would be proud of. In short, it doesn't move much.

I can remember sitting in a Kansas Water Office river advisory committee meeting during what was considered a heyday in monumental water change while I was at The Hays Daily News. Well,  I should say it was a multi-year continuation of a heyday in monumental water change.

You see, I was sitting in this meeting, years after the Kansas Water Office created the river basin advisory committees, listening as someone talked about action needed to be taken to set the state on a course of water sufficiency.

I sat there, knowing that I had heard this exact message before, in an earlier meeting of the same committee. There's an old adage in the newspaper industry that there's only so many ways to write the same story over and over.

So I decided I couldn't write the same thing again, opting instead to stop attending the redundant basin advisory meetings, where advice wasn't often offered and even more rarely accepted by state powers-to-be.

It was a wise move on my part, as when I went back to those meetings — again years later — only to find they were still discussing the same things, the same solutions. Heck, even the same people were on the committees.

Why, you ask, am I dredging all of this up, when it was years ago, and likely years in the future.

Well, I chuckled a bit (or a lot) when I saw Hays city officials were agog that it had taken so long for the state's Division of Water Resources to get off the dime on Hays' plan to tap water along the Arkansas River outside Kinsley on land Hays bought long ago for the sole purpose of farming its water.

It's been a whopping four years, commissioners bemoaned of the state's inaction. And they weren't going to stand for it, heading to Topeka to lobby the governor, her lieutenant and state Sen. Rick Billinger, R-Goodland, on convincing DWR to get moving. It seems Billinger was most anxious to pressure DWR and its Chief Engineer David Barfield, but keep in mind Hays is the largest contingent of voters in Billinger's district.

But two things are at work here, and one taints the system.

First, as I've already laid out, water policy or action in Kansas moves slow.

Second, it was wrong for Hays to head to the governor or Billinger, and especially bad they suggested they might intervene.

You see, Barfield is supposed to be a protected employee, one protected — insulated — from political pressure.

And it seems like these folks just don't get that. But that's been another in a long, slow-moving effort by — you guessed it — politicians, who want to inject politics into an issue that is already difficult enough. They want to strip Barfield of that protection.

To be sure, it's fair enough for Hays to lobby DWR to get its act in gear, although they knew it was going to be a long, long time before water started flowing from Kinsley to Hays. They chose to ignore it and they should recognize that. Hays sat on the ranch water for years before even starting the task of asking for permission to build a pipeline.

I long said it would take 10 years before a drop of water headed north, even if there's not a lawsuit filed to stop it. They pooh-poohed me. But that's always been Hays' style: When they want something, they want it now. Perhaps not a bad approach for some things, but this is not one-size-fits-all situation.

The transfer of water from the R9 Ranch in Edwards County to the Schoenchen wellfield in southern Ellis County is groundbreaking, the first time the state's water-transfer act has been triggered. Plus, the request from Hays for taking an irrigation water right and turning it into a municipal water right is significant, given its so much bigger than is typically seen. It's setting precedence as well, and is something that will happen again and again as temperatures warm and pressure comes to bear on water resources here and afar, and cities flush with cash start buying up water rights. Heck, irrigators in southwest Kansas already want to avoid responsibility to save water and import it in from the Missouri River. It's still being quietly considered, never mind the huge cost

So, we have two precedent-setting situations before us.

These tasks need to be done right, and by that I mean ethically and legally.

I'm confident there will be a lawsuit, if not several, and the deep-pocketed folks behind it will press it as far as they can, likely to the Kansas Supreme Court, perhaps beyond. Activity in the halls of justice move only slightly faster than water policy.

That's why it's important for political pressure to look elsewhere. Legislators have plenty else to do, fixing problems facing Kansas. State officials have plenty else to do, given the finance problems Kansas continues to face.

I'm also confident city folks have plenty else to do. If they don't think so, perhaps they need to take a closer look at their city. There's always plenty of work left to do.

And let's face it, DWR has plenty of other work to do, in addition to the routine work it's charged to do with a reduced staff that came about when Republicans decided to destroy the state budget.

Something's gotta give when workload increases and the number of people there to do the job doesn't keep pace. Throw in unneeded interference and the task slows down even more.

Take this LEMA and shove it

After sitting in something of a state of limbo for the past 45 days, directors of the St. John-based Big Bend Groundwater Management District No. 5 voted to embrace a self-developed plan aimed at restoring water to the nearby Quivira National Wildlife Refuge.

The directors took their action despite a warning from the state's water czar that the plan simply doesn't go far enough in reducing the demand on the imperiled Rattlesnake Creek that supplies Quivira — and its hundreds of thousands of birds, many of them endangered.

In short, the GMD board essentially told David Barfield, chief engineer of the Division of Water Resources, to take their LEMA and shove it. Again, never mind that Barfield said the plan doesn't go far enough.

Heck, even lame duck Kansas Agriculture Secretary Jackie McClaskey quietly rushed out a letter in October telling the board to sit back and relax before doing anything hasty. The board didn't wait long, however.

Of course, you could tell the pressure was mounting to do something.

Letters from cities, school districts and ag-related entities were flowing in to the GMD, likely at their urging, telling Barfield and his DWR, along with the U.S. Fish and Widllife Service, which operates Quivira, to move ahead with the plan before them. Heck, letters were even sent to state political leaders and ethics-ravaged and soon-to-be former Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke.

The LEMA proposed by GMD 5 first saw the light of day in August, sticking with its long-held proposal to require the removal of end guns from center pivots. That might save about 14,000 acre feet of water, they said.

They also proposed to reduce water use by about 4,000 acre feet in an area that has greatest effect on streamflow in the Rattlesnake.

Where that savings would come from, however, is anybody's guess. But the board hopes to find it somehow.

The biggest share of the "recovery" of Quivira water will come from augmentation — the drilling and pumping of yet additional wells for delivery of water from a proposed wellfield somewhere south of the refuge and then delivered to Rattlesnake Creek.

Exactly where this wellfield will go is still up in the air, however.

"The end gun program is not expected to fully reverse trends or to provide a complete offset of future streamflow losses; thus, the augmentation wells will serve to deliver flow sufficient to meet the objective for serviceable supply on this reach of Rattlesnake Creek," the LEMA plan states.

Now, the plan won't take effect until 2020, more than a year out. And the plan will only be evaluated twice in the first 10 years. It will exist in five-year terms.

What will all this mean for Barfield?

Last we left it, Barfield had dictated that additional reductions were needed, and his agency said there was a difference of about 10,000 acre feet. GMD 5 didn't like that idea at all, and that's when McClaskey wrote the letter essentially saying don't give up hope yet.

Of course, it's a little hard to tell where DWR is now, given they are slow to post information and don't provide much detail when they do. It's also tough to say if McClaskey pressured Barfield to back off.

Suffice it to say up front that Barfield can't change anything in the LEMA plan. He might be able to buy some time, but if the GMD wants to move ahead, he will have to set hearings. 

The law isn't a very good one, in that his hands are tied. Basically, he has to find some fault with it to reject it. Easy enough, of course, but, he can only reject it or accept it.

If it's rejected, he can make recommendations. If it's accepted, well, it likely will be going to court, especially considering it's already there on the most basic of reasons.

Suffice it to say it's another shining example that irrigators aren't at all willing to cut back. Despite all the talk about saving water, it hasn't happened. It likely won't until legislators force it.

Here, irrigators will lose end guns, but they never should have had them in the first place. They are truly wasting water, a violation of state law.

So, they don't want to do anything to reduce water use. In fact, they've already suggested some changes that will allow flexibility.

Next up will be to see how Barfield and his DWR crew responds.

This is gonna get ugly. It should.

Of politics and Kansas

Blessed are the Kansans who found it in their hearts to vote against the state's racist-in-chief Kris Kobach.

He was an evil man who would have been, well, entirely wrong for Kansas, which, despite all its shortcomings, is essentially a state filled with well-intentioned, albeit often misguided folks.

Why Kansas is a state with so many Republicans, or for that matter Democrats, is a mystery. Instead, I would think Kansas residents would be clamoring to register as independent voters, the parties be damned.

I say that because Kansas has been left behind by them both, and you can throw any minor-league parties into that mix. Bottom line, Kansas is and always has been a state that wants to do its own thing, often screwing it up, but trying just the same.

In some respects, I think the vast majority of Kansans are so anti-political that they really don't care who serves as governor or secretary of state or someone in the Legislature, that they'd rather leave the task of choosing the select few to someone else or another day. Same goes for those pesky politicians in Washington who have disappointed Kansans for so many years.

But there has been a change of late. And yes, I'm referring to the political shenanigans of Trump and his party of ill-repute — the Republicans. For Kansas, that includes the likes of Pat Roberts and Jerry Moran, long level-headed men who kind of meant to do the right things, didn't stir up too much trouble and were willing to step across the aisle and talk to people of the (gasp) other party.

Moran has long groaned about the abuses and wrongs that have been taking place in D.C., but has fully accepted and adopted the shenanigans, putting party above all else — especially Kansas and its residents. Roberts has gone with the flow so long, it was a change barely discernible.

They both disgust me, to say the least.

For some reason, it all seemed to change when the tea party folks, and Tim Huelkamp, stepped to the forefront, and katie-bar-the-door, everyone wanted to be outfront. Typically, that's a dangerous spot to be, due to the fallout that follows. But foolish minds never worry about the consequences.

Back in Kansas, the same trend was falling in place, with the party powerful — whoever that might be at the moment — was pushing trends and people who only had an agenda that failed to include Kansas. Instead, the quest was prosperity for those who bankrolled the situation, their friends and relatives and the power brokers who hid behind closed doors.

Read Sam Brownback into that equation, a political hack all the way back to his college days when he alienated his classmates. Sam seems to be a guerilla partisan, striking and then slipping into the woodwork, either to lick his wounds or let people forget. But he re-emerges, just as he did as state Ag Secretary, where he performed adequately and got his name out. Then he tried Congress before heading back home to destroy Kansas, by running for governor.

We all know how that turned out, with Kansas kicked in the teeth over and over, schools closing, and the list goes on. Jeff Colyer appears to have been the patsy in this event and will likely just go away.

But look at the debris and destruction old Sam left behind: An emboldened Kris Kobach, whose sole goal it seems was white supremacy, armed no less. He sought to strip voting rights, and expand gun rights.

His party of ill-repute went right on along with it, tossing a smattering of money his way to keep him in the game. They should have called him out for all his shenanigans.

Thankfully, Kansas voters saw through his ploy and said no, although entirely too many people approved of him. I'm not sure what that says of them, however.

But voters in the Sunflower state stuck with those who had been serving in the U.S. House of Representatives, except in one case. For that, I'm pleased.

However, and that's a big one, voters who were smart enough to reject Kobach were foolish enough to return Roger Marshall, Ron Estes and some new person that honestly I'm just not familiar with, but who leaves me with a really bad taste in my mouth.

I recognize I'm now branded a liberal, although I had always considered myself more middle-of-the-road on politics than left-wing. Considering the religious right we now have in power, I guess I am liberal, so take that all into account.

But Marshall is solidly Republican, never mind Kansas, and only favors the rich and famous or those knighted by his king, Donald Trump. Estes reminds me of the guy who wants to be everyone's friend, but doesn't have a clue what's really happening in the first place. He just keeps smiling, who gives a damn about the devastation surrounding him.

So what's all this mean?

Kansas is better than this. The state and its inhabitants know right from wrong and actually do care about their fellow man, whether they are black, brown, yellow or white. It's time we all step up and take charge of this state, deciding who can represent us and what they can do. It is, after all, our future.

We must decide where Kansas has been, and where we are going. And we must do it quick.