How do you celebrate Constitution Day? I suspect that not only do you not celebrate, but you likely are unaware that there is a day dedicated to recognizing the adoption of the U.S. Constitution on September 17th. 

For ten years, I was the Archivist of the United States, and certainly one key responsibility I had was making sure the original Charters of Freedom—​the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights—​were protected, preserved, and as accessible as possible to the public. Early in my tenure, my staff and I concluded that we were not doing enough to adequately educate the public who came through the rotunda on the values of the Charters of Freedom. We made major changes to not only enhance the visit to the Rotunda but added educational space to further promote understanding of the Charters of Freedom, the importance of public records, and their many values to our democracy.

On September 11, 2001, the initial terrorist attacks on the Trade Center quickly led to concerns about attacks on Washington D.C. and the possibility of one target being the National Archives. That potential action could destroy the original documents that undergird our whole system of democracy. Fortunately, that did not happen, but the scenario certainly brought to me a reminder of the special value of the work of the Founders. They put together a system with three equal and powerful branches of government: the executive, legislative, and judicial. For over 200 years, this system has been the bedrock of modern democracy and has become a model for nations around the world.

In late July, as part of this year's Mandela Washington Fellowship six-week Civic Leadership Institute at K-State, I had a very good visit with a young woman from Zimbabwe who ran for public office there and plans to stay involved in public life. She made it clear that folks in her country who want a democracy like ours are now looking at us with real concern and potential doubt. For her and many others, America was the model that many developing nations used to move closer to a real democracy. Her message reminded me that our current crisis may have significant impacts far beyond our borders.

Today our system of governance is being tested daily by an administration that more and more acts if they, the executive branch and particularly the President, can dictate what will be done. Between Executive Orders and other actions that ignore the will of Congress, total disregard for the value of a quality civil service system, using the Presidency for his personal financial gain, stoking the flames of hatred and racism toward immigrants and other minority groups, and appointing Judges whose ideology is extremely far to the right, the Trump Administration is the beginning of potentially demolishing our democracy. Ignoring legislative budget decisions as if President Trump were more like a King and looking to dictators to form close friendships causes not just me but lots of folks great concern. 

It is my hope that this September 17th, Constitution Day, many of you will raise these issues of concern. I hope that this year, it will not be just another day but a wake-up call for all Americans to understand just how much impact the 2020 elections will have on our future as a democracy. It can no longer be assumed that our system of government will survive if the current disregard for democratic norms and systems of checks and balances continues.

The border tragedy is a product of government at its worst. This is an example of where privatizing this function for private sector profits has led to unintended and tragic consequences. There are some government functions that can work when they are privatized, like security for government buildings (this is the protocol at the National Archives, for instance). But privatization does not work with any function like prisons or detention facilities. There is too much temptation for profits to override quality services that are needed to ensure people are cared for in a humane manner. 

For the purpose of being balanced and fair, immigration issues at the border did not start with President Trump. There were problems in the previous administration, just not at the inhumane level we have now. And not fueled by the same hateful rhetoric and beliefs that are used to appeal to an angry, racist mob—​stoking the flames of fear and division and calling into question the fundamental values of our country. What we need is a Congress that will not just investigate and have hearings, but one that will somehow pass comprehensive, bipartisan immigration reform and then properly fund the program. And, more broadly, we need decent people of all backgrounds to recognize hatred, call it out, and work to defeat it with humanity and love.

Enough from me. When someone else delivers the message so right and in a special way, why try to compete? The following is a message from my friend Pastor Max Hale:

Life less on the Border
​
While the coffee is still hot
     evidence incontrovertible
          unrelenting anguish
Little lives rubbished
     caring capability paralyzed
Blanket hot wet
     covers my head
          breathing restricting
               nausea
I cry because I may get over it
Time to dismiss blue devils
Quicksand wisdom
     move sideways
          toward reliable compassion
Refabricate my life
     to fit God's dream

I must center myself before I open myself to the morning news. Otherwise, I'm sick the whole day. Families ripped apart, children in cages, decent people turning savage: we're losing our grip on humanity. I know it doesn't have to be this way. I also know it is possible to lose my compassion. That frightens me. I have been told that if one is ever in quicksand, the secret is not to panic and to move deliberately slowly sideways to solid ground. I can, I will control my rage, dismiss the blue devils of depression, wipe the tears and look for an opening for compassionate action.
                                                                                               -Max

You can read more from Pastor Hale on his blog or his contributions to the Leader Corner.

Hillary Clinton may have lost in her 2016 effort to be President (Electoral College only, she won the popular vote big-time) but for sure her success played a key role, I believe, in inspiring so many talented women to run for Congress in 2018 and win. There are 34 new women in the House of Representatives, 33 of whom are Democrats. What stands out to me when I catch an interview with one of them is their passionate commitment to do what they told voters during the campaign they would do. Clearly, these women listened and learned from voters and they are committed to not making the aisle a barrier to getting anything done.

Now, for the first time, we have many talented Democratic women running for President of the United States. Regardless of whether a woman wins or not in 2020, their presence adds a positive dimension to the dialogue. When women lead the way on many issues of obvious interest to women, more men understand and are supportive. More women running at all levels of government also gives a different perspective as we try to address the many challenges we face as a country.

Looking ahead, this country’s best hope is with women winning more and more elections at every level. I say that because women are much more likely to scrap this viciously partisan gamesmanship that exists at almost all levels of elections, and they will work to get positive things done for the good of the people. Congresswoman Sharice Davids in our Kansas 3rd Congressional District is an excellent example. She is very bright, very passionate about changes that need to be made like in health care and not hesitant to work across the aisle to get things done.

I see similar progress in the Kansas Legislature, particularly compared to when I was in office. In recent years, bipartisan groups of women have been key to getting our state back on the road to recovery after the devastating Brownback years, and Governor Laura Kelly will now take the lead in keeping us on the right path. Now, compare that to when I was first elected to the Legislature in 1970. In my first term the Equal Rights Amendment to the United States Constitution was passed and sent to the states for potential ratification. To show you how times have changed, support for the Amendment was strong generally across the board and it was passed overwhelmingly by a male and Republican-dominated legislature. There were only two women in the House and, interestingly enough, both voted against it based primarily on their concern that we would all be using the same bathroom.

Then, following my re-election in 1976 and becoming Speaker for the '77-78 term, I was in the position of appointing all the committee chairs. By then, we had added several women to the Democratic Caucus and it was my pleasure to appoint the first ever women chairs of committees in the Kansas Legislature. They were Ruth Wilkin from Topeka and Ruth Lazzati from Wichita.

For the record, there are very good men in public office as well. It is just that there are too many men who are there to hold the seat, enjoy whatever perks exist, and follow whatever the special interests who got them elected want them to do. Good women are making a real difference at both the state and national level. It just might be realistic now to hope that with this progress continuing, we will soon reach a tipping point and sanity in politics will once again become common at both the national and state levels.

As most of you know, I’ve been around for a while. I’ve had a chance to not just observe but occasionally have played a role in helping communities. From that experience, I can assure you there is a direct relationship between who is elected locally and where that community is headed. Lynn and I have lived in Manhattan now for 14 years, and there is no question that the quality of life and the high standards of public services, including schools, started with quality locally elected officials.

Counties all across Kansas will hold elections for local offices on November 5th, 2019. The filing deadline to be on the ballot in this November's election for local school board and city commission seats is June 3rd (at noon). By that date, potential candidates will have had to make a decision. And, because this will be only the second time we have voted for local elections in the fall of odd-numbered years, I suspect that deadline approaching in six weeks is not getting the attention it deserves.

Who local communities elect makes a huge difference for their future. Because of this importance, I urge civic-minded citizens to be looking for, encouraging, and ultimately finding quality candidates to run. This includes considering running for office themselves. In many ways, the future all starts locally and is dependent on quality candidates who are creative, can make good decisions, and have the skills to manage resources efficiently and serve not just the short-run but the future as well.

Why, more specifically, does who we elect locally mean so much? One important example would be the dollars from the state and federal government that flow to local communities, which are implemented at the local level and certainly impacted by locally elected officials. For instance, state school financial support is invested locally, but turning that investment into positive results is almost exclusively tied to local leadership. That leadership starts with the publicly-elected school board.

The future of Kansas will depend heavily on what we do to grow our population, build our businesses, and attract folks to work and invest here, raise a family, and be a part of a growing prospering state. For that to happen, we need to elect city commissioners and school board members that understand the importance of their role. I know the state will be doing their part to help grow, but they are going to need communities that have their act together and leaders who can carry that vision forward. And do not forget, quality schools are a huge factor in keeping what you have and growing and prospering.

That is why I am calling on those of you who read this blog to do your part in recruiting candidates and raising awareness for the fall local elections. And a great way to help a potential candidate who may be “on the fence” about running would be to offer them your help and support right out of the gate. Each candidate will need a team of committed folks doing what they can to help get their name and message out around the community. The larger the network around the candidate, the wider the reach, and the higher the chances of success in November.

But, obviously, success starts with quality candidates having filed. It is certainly in your selfish as well as community interests to make sure this happens, and you only have six weeks to work.

Kansas legislators are now home and will be for the next three weeks, coming back to the Capitol on Wednesday, May 1st to wrap up the 2019 regular legislative session. This annual legislative break is a good time to communicate your frustrations, appreciation, interests, concerns, and whatever else is on your mind as the session draws to a close. Communicating well, particularly when you are not alone and have others with you in support, can have an impact. There is too much at stake on issues like Medicaid, to sit ideally by and hope that things turn out well for the state and our future.

One thing you need to remember is that most elected officials want to be re-elected. When they do not hear concerns from constituents, they understandably assume they are on the right track to re-election. But when you communicate another picture, it is possible that your influence can produce a different result, one you believe in and one that would help Kansas.

Here are some basics that, if followed, can also increase your chances for success. As important as anything is having your research done and making sure that you understand what it is you want to see happen and know the context of where the issue is at this point of the session. Medicaid expansion is an excellent example. It will take more than 21 votes in the Senate to get it out of committee and have it brought up on the floor. Do you know where your Senator stands on this issue?

One resource I would point to for learning more about the "nuts and bolts" of specific legislation in Kansas would be the State Library. They can be contacted by phone (through their toll-free legislative hot line, 1-800-432-3924, or via text message at 785-256-0733), email, or even a live chat with a librarian through their website. Reference and research librarians are available to answer questions on legislation, legislative procedure, state government, or policy issues, and your calls are confidential. It's a great way to learn more about the state of the issues that matter most to you.

Just as important as research is showing the elected official respect, even when you have very strong differences. After all, they were elected by your fellow citizens and are much more likely to listen if you respect them for performing public service. That doesn’t mean you share compliments that you really don’t believe. Almost all elected officials understand that many of their constituents differ with them and often strongly. But giving them their due, just might make a difference.

How you carry out this task can be done in a variety of ways. Direct conversation, scheduled or at a public meeting, is probably most effective. You know then that at least your message was heard. Most legislators have opportunities coming up, it will likely take a bit of research on your part to see when public meetings may be scheduled in your area or look up contact information to reach out to them directly and set one up.

But in person meetings may not always be possible, so a well-written letter, email, or leaving a voice message can be worth the effort. And it's very hard to ignore a strong personal story, supported by facts, with a direct call to action. What is usually least effective is signatures on a petition, unless the appeal has accepted credibility and numbers that simply blow one away. But often it takes a more sustained engagement over time to truly demonstrate strong support, the kind that could impact future elections.

Keep in mind that any elected official that is seldom-if-ever challenged with a differing opinion is one who not only will maintain his or her position but will likely run again and most often be re-elected. Potentially, a very valuable result of openly sharing your concerns could be to motivate yourself or a fellow citizen to seek public office. We need more citizens to run for office—​more competition and a wider diversity of experience around the table can bring better ideas and results.

As Inauguration approaches and the transition period for newly-elected Kansas Governor Laura Kelly comes to an end, the initial approach to the many problems the state faces will become public and ready for the Legislature to engage. I have high confidence that the Kelly administration will do the very best they can for Kansas, and I have no intention of second guessing their directions. What I do want to do is help educate the public on just how massive the problems are and how desperately important it will be for enough legislators from both parties to set politics aside and, in a-non partisan way, work with the Governor to address our endless challenges.

I say all this because we are at a point of no return. We either step up and correct what is not working or the state, at some point soon, will be in a hole so big that getting out just may not be possible. Making these corrections will, from my experience, require at least two actions to take place. First, will be the incredible importance of quality and sustained communication from the Kelly administration to the Legislature and the people of Kansas. Kansans must understand the massive problems we face. Second, citizens need to participate, speak up, and let the Legislature know they expect (and will support) action in addressing these challenges.  

The reality is that quality state government has been totally decimated as a result of the disastrous Brownback years. Public education, as it should, gets lots of attention and, to a lesser extent, the need to take care of our infrastructure is known. Both these areas must be responsibly addressed. But my point is that recent policies have negatively impacted state government across the board. Twelve and sixteen hour shifts for workers in our prisons and state hospitals are not the norm because it is the new way to better serve these agencies’ missions. These institutions simply do not have the budget to adequately undertake their responsibilities and maintain accreditation standards, which can lead to loss of federal funds, further compounding the problem.

Often forgotten is the devastating damage the Brownback administration did to the civil service system. That administration was able, with legislative support, to ignore the long standing system where merit prevailed, which lead to quality folks being attracted to public service. I am sure the Kelly administration will work to get the civil service law changed back. But in this case, the law will allow the administration to switch back to merit now and start the process of recruiting quality public servants we need to successfully carry out state programs and functions. This will all take time and probably much of the four-year term for any significant progress to be made. But steps in the right direction will need to start right away.

For quality government to be restored, it is essential that the public know the long range plan and that the initial steps taken by the Kelly administration are consistent with that plan. From a practical point of view, this will take leadership from both sides of the aisle understanding that it cannot be politics as usual. I know the Governor will be reaching out and doing her part. Key to success is whether the legislative leaders within both parties can set aside 2020 election goals and “gotcha” politics that only lead to stalemate and getting done only what has to be done. We must now put the state and its future first, or that future will not be what we want and need.

Despite the overwhelming evidence and grave warnings issued in a new US Government report on climate change, President Trump and supporters of the status quo continue to double-down on climate denial. In response to the report—​commissioned by Congress and conducted by departments within his own administration—​President Trump first worked to bury its release among the hoopla of “black Friday” and then flatly dismissed its findings, saying, “I don’t believe it.” As a concerned citizen and grandparent, the simple question I would ask to the President and anyone still denying the facts about climate change is: “What if you’re wrong?”

On December 5, 2015, I posted a blog entitled “Climate Change Skeptics, What If You’re Wrong?” I stand by that, and I'd encourage people on all sides of the issue to ask themselves that common sense question. Because, as a believer in science and a supporter of action on climate change, I would much rather be wrong and have paid some short term costs rather than face the grave consequences of inaction. And the evidence from the past three years has only strengthened my feeling about the issue, from scientific findings to the events unfolding that have already inflicted huge damage, including Hurricane Florence. But the real clincher is for me is what’s going on in California right now with fires causing damage that goes way beyond any historical pattern. I would hope that the significant loss of lives, the fact that a whole town is totally wiped out, and the unfortunate reality of more tragedy looming on the horizon would at some point get our attention.

Recently, Lynn and I were with grandchildren in Estes Park, Colorado. This area has been impacted by warmer weather in pretty dramatic ways. For starters, there are mountain pine beetles that have destroyed many pine trees due to warmer winters increasing the likelihood of damaging wildfires. There are areas where folks have built cabins and second homes in places of beauty without a second thought that they could go up in smoke at any time. The hotter, drier climate has changed all that and, as we watch California burn, you can’t help but think, “will Colorado be next?”

Since posting that first blog in 2015, I think it is fair to say we have made little or no progress on dealing with climate change. To be truthful, we really never recovered from the initial moniker “Global Warming.” It was used and abused by those who defended the status quo for various selfish reasons, including ignorance. There has been very little acceleration in US-based research and now, as a country, we have totally abandoned our international friends in dealing with the issue of climate change. Another report that really grabbed my attention from the United Nations moved up projections for crisis and irreparable damage. If significant progress is not made within the next ten years, it will be too late to save many of Earth's natural wonders such as coral reefs. And if the environmental impact hasn’t motivated you yet, the economic realities soon will. Indeed, the market is already shifting in response to climate change. So when will our government catch up? And, rather than simply reacting to the symptoms—​in terms of our environment, our economy, and our national security—​will we ever begin to be proactive about solutions or strategies to address root causes?

In order for progress to be made, we’ll have to change this pattern of indifference and ignorance about the problem. So how do we begin the process of putting pressure on our elected officials about the seriousness of climate change? One obvious barrier we have is the current state of politics, where an issue such as climate change gets little or no coverage in the press, and therefore, little or no educating of the American people. And compounding the problem is that as you listen to many newly elected or re-elected members of Congress as they list their priorities, climate change doesn’t tend to get mentioned. Although, as the economic impacts begin to hit home for more Americans, there is some hope this could change when the new Congress is gaveled in next year.

So what can we do? There are organized groups who are leading the cause for not just understanding of climate change but also action. What we need is for large numbers of citizens to join, to support, to lend a hand, and to help make climate change a voting issue. As I’ve always told my students, most elected officials will change their positions if their re-election is at risk. That can happen when rank-and-file citizens engage, which is what we need or it will not be just the trees that are burning.

On this coming Labor Day, September the third, I salute the wisdom of the voters of the State of Missouri. On August the 7th, they voted to repeal their existing Right to Work law and helped restore some hope for me that the people, the voters, do have something to say and do have a role in how their government should operate. The vote was overwhelming, and I know that didn’t just happen on its own. Much work, including help from Kansas, went into educating the voter on what Right to Work really means and the benefits of workers having some of their strength restored at the bargaining table.  

It was just a year ago this weekend that I posted a blog on “The Labor Movement and the Middle Class.” I stand by what I wrote then in terms of the critical link between the labor movement and the success of the middle class. But, on reflection, if you had asked me at that time of the chances that Missouri would repeal their Right to Work law, I would have probably said slim to none. I would have said so because, as I wrote, the labor movement had been on a long decline. How could they possibly have the political muscle to achieve this goal? Oh for sure the labor folks worked hard and invested much in this effort. But I really believe what brought this success this time is they got the people to understand that what they wanted would be for the greater good of the State of Missouri, not just for union members and Unions in general.

As I put this salute together, I was reminded of a parallel experience growing up on and operating a dairy and Registered Holstein herd for many years. Most agricultural commodities had a checkoff so that, as commodities were sold, there would be money pooled to promote the product and fund further research and development into that commodity. For dairy, it was milk checks to go primarily towards marketing their product. It was put in place by a vote of those who produced and sold their milk to Co-Ops primarily. But when the majority vote took place and it came time to implement, the checkoff applied to even those who opposed the checkoff. There was no “right to sell” without the checkoff but with the benefits. Everyone participated. I also remember listening to dairymen defend their system and, at the same time, oppose labor’s view on Right to Work. Apparently, consistency doesn’t always govern.

Federal laws permit and enforce many mandatory commodity checkoffs. Meaning we currently require farmers to chip in “for the good of the group,” but when workers wish to pool together their resources for their collective benefit, we pass laws that essentially exempt people from having to pay into it. Afterall, the so-called “Right to Work” is really just the right to avoid paying union dues, while any benefits that result from the negotiations—​to the employees themselves or the labor market as a whole—​still come your way.

So I salute the repeal of Right to Work in Missouri, and I issue a warning to their Legislature. The initial reaction from the Republican Legislative leadership on the repeal is to consider the possibility of just passing a new “Right to Work” law. In their view, they are the all-powerful legislature and are in a much better position to know what is best for the state. If that is the case, the next people's movement just might be taking them out of office.

“Every day may not be good, but there is something good in every day.”  This message is posted right over the check-in desk at the lab where I have my blood tests on a regular basis. We do have bad days for sure. But I think, all too often, we fail to see or appreciate some part of the day that was good. When not appreciated, it is often our loss as well as missed opportunities to positively impact other folks or happenings.
​
My most recent personal example was election day, August 7, 2018. The winners in the Primaries have now advanced to gear up for the general election in this critical election year, but in their wake, there are many other qualified and committed Kansans who offered up their names and life experiences to their fellow citizens and asked to represent them and work on their behalf. So how could something so depressing as losing an election that you and many others had put so much time and energy into have something good to acknowledge and benefit from? From personal experience, having lost three elections, I can say that it is not easy, and it often has to come days later. For Democrats, in the crowded field for Governor and 3rd District Congress, I am sure some of that reflection is still coming.

But as I look back now, I can see several positives. For starters, many candidates who lost will live to fight and win on another day, and within that group, there is a lot of talent that will be recognized and supported. Through their leadership, they will each continue to impact their communities and our state. And there will also be many valuable lessons learned from their campaigns that, in time, will have positive impacts. That is why the good and bad needs to be found, documented, and stand ready for the right opportunity to be used.

On a personal level, looking back on the Democratic Governors race, there was much good to appreciate. I got to know Josh Svaty and Katrina Lewison (as well as their spouses) much better and appreciate their huge potential for the future. I also got to listen to these two exceptional speakers election night, not just appropriately conceding to Senator Kelly, but also communicating their support going forward. They made it clear that the fight for a better Kansas goes on and that all Democrats must do their part. I also know there are hundreds and hundreds of Kansans across the state that feel the same and will be there to help now as well as with opportunities in the future.

The realities of our current system have made it even harder for qualified citizens to step up and offer their service. But, without good people with diverse experiences running for public office (and strong supporters working hard for something they believe in), we will never achieve the outcomes the people want and need. So to all those who have sought public office or given it serious consideration: We need you, and we need your leadership at all levels of government. The path to positive change will not always be an easy one; there will be bad days. But we must find the good in every day, and use it to drive the pursuit of progress.

What is it they say on solving crime and frequently mentioned on the various TV shows? Follow the money. Where does all that campaign money for members of Congress come from? How does it impact election results and most importantly how does it impact what Congress does or doesn’t do? In practice, we know it primarily comes from lobbyists and very wealthy citizens wanting to influence and control elected members of Congress. Because of the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, there are no limits. And complementing that further is that much of that money is hidden from public view. So how do we hold our elected officials accountable? How do we know whether they represent us or greedy self interests?

Giving me some hope that the above doesn’t have to be the norm forever, a number of years ago a group was formed to help address some of the reforms so desperately needed in government. It is called the Reformers Caucus. It is made up of 200 plus former members of Congress and Governors from both parties who know from experience the necessities for change and that, without outside pressure, the changes will not be made. I joined a number of years ago. Titled Issue One, their first priority was to deal with the excessive impact of outside non transparent money influencing our politics.

“We the People of the United States,” our Constitution begins with these sacred words. The Preamble statement should remind us that the power and legitimacy of our democracy resides directly with us, its citizens. It is in that spirit that the Reformers Caucus is focused.

The priority for now is promoting transparency and disclosure. Given the Supreme Court and Citizens United using free speech as the anchor of their decision of no limits, we think the only logical change available to us at this time is making sure everything is disclosed and in a timely manner. That will allow citizens to factor in where the money is coming from in determining who they support. This would include super PACs and 501(c)(4) nonprofits.

Secondly, we want to encourage increased participation in the political process by providing incentives for small contributions. This would include allowing political parties to add together  their small contributions and have no limit on how it is divided up. This would change the dynamic between large and small contributors and could help grow the political parties. Our package would also reduce Pay-to-Play by banning registered lobbyists from making contributions or becoming fundraisers for congressional campaigns. Then of course strengthening enforcement would be a necessity.

It is just a start, but the Reformers Caucus is making progress in getting Congressional support. What we need now is public pressure to really succeed. That is where you come in. Please learn more about how excess money is corrupting our democracy. You can make a difference.

One of many lessons I teach students whenever the opportunity arises is the value of showing respect to anyone you seek to influence. This is particularly true in instances where you are trying to have an impact with someone who, you know in advance, vehemently disagrees with you. The reason of course is very simple. By being respectful, the conversation has potential to help get beyond your differences into learning more about your potential agreements and, ultimately, a compromise resolution to the conflict.

That is why the activism by the students of Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida (and the millions nationwide who joined them) is so impressive. I hope you had a chance to listen to some of the speakers at the D.C. rally and take note at how respectful they were of those who obviously disagree. They aren’t turning cars over or breaking laws to make their point. They are focused on the right way to truly have an impact and, so far, have put many of their adult counterparts to shame when it comes to engaging civilly without personal attacks or distractions. They are taking their case to the American people and pushing any and all who agree to make their message heard in policy-making and on election day. I hope to see their approach and their tone continue as they work to engage elected officials through town hall events and other advocacy efforts. This will have lasting implications, not only for the gun policy discussion but also for the future engagement of a generation that’s beginning to find its voice and take a more active role in shaping the world around it.

That is also why I took notice of a piece written by David Brooks of the New York Times, entitled “Trust and respect first, then compromise on gun control,” published in a recent edition of the Manhattan Mercury. I have long liked Mr. Brooks, a sound, but sane conservative from the old school, someone who is always respectful of others. In this article, he shared about a process for bringing together a mixture of far right conservatives and clear liberals, with the goal of building respect among each other. Only after that is achieved can you have any chance of working out your differences and coming to some compromise that serves the greater good.

Clearly Washington D.C. could use some help, and this seems to flow down into other levels of government and into our international relations as well. You might have noticed in representing the United States at the winter Olympics, Vice President Pence chose to totally snub the sister of the President of North Korea. Now that might at first blush seem very logical. But when you think about their growing capacity to do us serious harm, maybe a step or two of respect might have been a good investment for future successful diplomacy. But enough from me. I really want you to take time to read the Brooks article. It is most timely on a variety of fronts and if applied could make a difference in resolving, or at least taking mini steps, on some of our major challenges where there are polar differences and little or no respect for each other.

Fortunately, the task of reviving civility has received more attention in recent years (with different organizations and resources coming together), and perhaps it can gain more traction as we continue the task of strengthening our democracy for the 21st century. Each of our daily exchanges will help write the story. But the true test will be our ability to come together and solve problems—​both big and small—​today and into the future.

As we enter 2018, it is hard not to feel like we’re heading into some of the more consequential months of our history, at the national level as well as right here in Kansas. 2017 was a roller coaster year, and it seems this will continue into the current year, with an extremely influential election approaching us before 2018 ends. I will have more to say on national politics in later blog posts, but I’d like to start out this year with what we’re facing at the state level here in Kansas.

We begin the year with essentially two Governors and no one knowing for sure when and how that will change. Next Tuesday, Governor Brownback will deliver the State of the State Address to the Kansas Legislature and the citizens of Kansas. It had been assumed for months that it would be Governor Colyer giving the Address, but the workings of the U.S. Senate got in the way. It is assumed that this will get corrected when/if Brownback’s nomination is resubmitted. Why is this an issue? Politically, it complicates things for Lt. Governor Colyer. He had hoped to be leading the way, setting his own agenda, and in the process establish himself as an incumbent running for re-election.

In my judgement, the race for Kansas Governor in 2018 is more important for the future of this state than any preceding. Why do I say this? Because this election (in addition to the races for the Kansas House of Representatives) will decide whether, as a state, we once-and-for-all bury the Brownback agenda. We took a serious step in 2016 that led to the 2017 Legislature bringing a real breath of fresh air and progress to the state. The 2018 election will be a referendum on whether the people of Kansas like that direction or prefer to go back to the Americans for Prosperity approach of starving education, ignoring vital health care needs, underfunding basic state services, and neglecting our state's infrastructure.

We also start 2018 with what has to be the largest field of candidates ever for Governor within both parties and, to add to complication, a possible serious independent candidate. We are not used to this much interest and competition, especially Democrats, and from experience I know a little about how this changes things. In 1978, I had two serious, qualified opponents. It made fundraising a particular challenge because too many Democrats didn’t want to commit early or even before the Primary. On the flipside, it is fortunate for Democrats that with a very crowded Republican race that there is serious competition for the Democratic nomination. Without that, there would be no real press coverage or forums to reach the public until after the primary.  

This leads me to a very practical concern, especially for the very large field of Republican candidates. Without a run-off system (where there is a second election if the initial winner has less than 50%), the party’s winner might not really be the strongest candidate. For example, it could very easily be in the Republican race that the second finishing candidate might have much more support from those finishing down the line and would win a runoff vote. This is why most observers of our current Republican field believe clearly the early leader is Secretary of State, Kris Kobach. This is despite his being very unpopular in many Republican circles—​not to mention the scores of Kansans and Americans who are fed up with, among other things, his assault on the right to vote (part of which will face its day in court in March). With Kobach’s solid base of support, a crowded primary is much to his liking.     

This election has so much at stake, as starkly different political agendas will go head-to-head. With so much contrast in possible outcomes, hopefully participation from voters will be driven up, even in an August Primary. Ideally, there will be many public forums where you are able to evaluate the candidates side by side, free of the all-too-often false, misleading mailers and ads that we’ve become accustomed to, especially in this big-money era of politics. And, in the end, a new Governor—​who leads us into the future by bringing us together and not taking us back to the horrors of the last seven years—​must prevail.

For the country, last night’s results in Alabama could at some point down the road be looked at as the starting point of this country getting its act together. Yes, it was a victory for Jones over Moore. But most importantly, it was how this happened, how in the reddest of red states a Democrat could win against all odds. Moore had the President, the money, and the pressure from Republicans in general who understandably want to hold on to the majority in the Senate. Yet, the people of Alabama stood up for decency and rejected all that Moore represents in these challenging times. So how did it happen?

First of all, Jones was as good a candidate Democrats could have come up with for this race. He raised enough money to get his message out. He had apparently a great campaign staff. But the key was how he ran the campaign and the message he took to the whole state of Alabama. He worked the entire state, going into every county and organizing in those areas that most Democrats had been leaving alone. And his message was consistently moderate and more centrist. But most importantly, he made it clear he ran and will serve committed to getting things done, reaching across the aisle, avoiding as much as possible special interest politics, and staying on the issues the folks of Alabama raised as he campaigned.

The question now is will both parties learn from this and follow his general lead for the best interests of the country. The message I believe was clear for Democrats in 2018. Go to wherever the people are with your message but also listen. Keep the message focused less on ideological battles or wedge issues and more focused on the real changes the people want and need, remain committed to getting things accomplished (including working across the aisle to do so), and always look out for what would be best for the people you want to represent. For Republicans, their loss might just free them up to some extent from extremist politics. Just maybe the message might get through to the President that—as we've learned in Kansas—​even lifelong Republicans can be pushed too far to the policy and rhetorical fringes and begin to demand better. But what would be really great, for example, would be Mitt Romney taking on Hatch (in his 80’s and lost in extremism) in Utah and the country getting a sane, smart conservative that would only do it to get things done. It seems to me that a return to balanced, reasonable debate would not only benefit the country’s general discourse but also result in better policy on behalf of the people.

How this really works out, no one knows for sure. But at least for now there is a little hope that the country can say, “enough is enough” to the politics of disrespect and division.

This Saturday evening, the Mandela Washington Fellowship for Young African Leaders here at K-State’s Staley School of Leadership Studies will be wrapping up a six-week Civic Leadership Institute. The Young African Leaders Initiative is facilitated through the U.S. State Department with the goal of helping develop the next generation of leaders in Africa. In all, there are 1,000 leaders studying at colleges and universities around the U.S. this summer who will bring their learning and newly-established networks back to their countries and continue to make change in their communities upon their return home. For the second straight year, the Staley School has had the pleasure of hosting this Fellowship. Twenty-five young but experienced Sub-Saharan African leaders, representing twenty three countries, make up the group. The time has been filled with class work and training sessions, interactions with local public, private, and nonprofit sector leaders, participation in some local civic engagement efforts, and making the most of a variety of experiences from Kansas City to Wichita. Building off our experience from last year, this year's program has not only been well-received but has proven once again to be of significant value.

As alluded to in my welcoming remarks six weeks ago, I made it clear then that the learning would go both ways, that we—​here at K-State and in Kansas—​would benefit significantly as well. That has certainly played out in real time. I was particularly struck by the candid comments from our visitors at a forum for local elected officials to share and answer questions. Just one example made clear by a young woman, Folasade Bamisaye from Nigeria, who shared during the forum that she was amazed that this country taxed feminine hygiene products. Here in this country there is little or not even discussion about this issue, much less action. So there is much that can be gained from a dialogue and exchange of ideas on the future.

Each of the Mandela Fellows is engaged across a wide array of issues, including: youth development, public health, gender equity, grassroots organizing, agricultural sustainability, and disability rights. The benefit of having six weeks is having the time to work on specific challenges they had in their leadership experiences in Africa. Naturally they all, as we do, want better ideas in general on how to lead effectively and mobilize people to address challenges. But they also focused on a couple specifics. They wanted to learn more about developing partnerships to work towards systemic change. And one piece in particular, that we all need to focus on, is the importance of utilizing volunteers more successfully.  

One of the unique aspects of this program is the one-on-one mentoring that takes place. Last year, my partner was Abdoul Salam Diallo from Guinea (pictured to the left). Our natural link was his family’s tie to milk cows, so as would be expected that put us together, but from there, our relationship grew to include more areas of discussion around his work. My partner this year is Ahmed M. Afi from Somali. Our connection is his direct interest in public service, and he has made some progress in that regard. His ambitions include being a national leader for Somalia, and given his knowledge, passion, and political savvy, I’m not going to be surprised at all if he achieves his goals. I certainly look forward to staying in communication, continuing to share lessons from my experiences, and knowing just how his plans are going.

Now, here is the not so good news. This program, along with many others, falls under the banner of “Foreign Aid” or investments in diplomacy. As you may know, these types of investments are currently under attack by the President, and it will be up to the Congress to—​as our country has historically done—​appreciate the value of investing in programs like this and other aid efforts. Stronger, well-prepared leaders for the future of Africa will help empower and mobilize citizens to address a range of issues that exist throughout the continent. Meanwhile, the ability to address community needs such as food insecurity not only helps these countries build for the future, but it’s also absolutely in our national security interest. Hungry people can easily be the target of self-serving leaders who prey on the needy to the benefit of themselves and, in the process, create an environment that is ripe for terrorist activity.
​​
It has been an absolute joy to spend time with the Mandela Fellows during these past six weeks, and most importantly, I look forward to the impacts that their leadership will make in the effort to build a healthier, happier, and more peaceful world for all.

Learn about each of the Mandela Fellows on the Staley School's blog or see more pictures on Facebook.

Recently, Senator Moran held a townhall meeting in Palco, Kansas. I include the “Kansas” part because I suspect many are not aware there is a Palco. Located in the western part of our state, they certainly represent an area that supported the President as well as the Senator in recent elections. The focus of the townhall was on healthcare, the Affordable Care Act (ACA) or Obamacare, and the Republican Senators and their plan to repeal and replace.

I’m impressed with how Senator Moran basically handled the meeting. One, I compliment him for going there and having the public meeting. Secondly, he obviously handled it well. He listened, said he understood their concerns, and left the impression he would work hard to address their issues. I’m also very impressed with Palco and the large number of citizens from around the area who turned out to question and listen to the Senator. They had their questions ready, were civil, and were respectful of Senator Moran. This is in contrast to many of his colleagues who have faced hostile crowds and for some, consequently, they just don’t have public meetings. But this meeting reflected the Kansas that we know and love: where people’s passion is matched by a level of respect and a willingness to listen and seek understanding.

However, there is still a lot of political pressure on the Senate from not just the President but right wing political interests in general. The assumption is that whatever the Senate can pass, the House would be under unbelievable pressure to just accept it and send it on to the White House for signature, thus carrying out a Republican campaign pledge of repealing Obamacare. The question of whether that is good public policy or not was behind much of the energy in Palco.

Senate Majority Leader McConnell is focused on trying everything to get the 50 votes for passage, knowing the Vice President would break the tie in their favor. From the outside, it looks difficult given that making the key moderate Senators comfortable loses a couple on the far right. This week, he has announced a delay in the vote because of the absence of Senator John McCain, who holds a key vote that McConnell will need in order to pass the bill. You know he is frustrated because he has now threatened to work with the Democrats, which from my point of view is exactly what should be done. And I believe it is very telling of their approach that bipartisanship is viewed as a last-ditch, worst case scenario to be used as a threat, rather than a critical step to passing legislation on behalf of all Americans. Like the ACA or not, it is in place, and as shared in Palco, there is support for many of the specific pieces of the law and it has undoubtedly made a difference in many people’s lives, which creates a lot of opposition to repealing it. Clearly the ACA has flaws, and this is where working together in a bipartisan way for changes could bring about a much better program, serving more Americans, and done more cost effectively.

So, Senator Moran, now is the opportunity for you to really shine. This is the time for you to stand up, speak out, and make a huge difference for the good of the country and as well for the future of the Republican Party. It’s an opportunity to be a beacon for what politics has been in the past and could be again in this state and country. You know what is on the table hurts too many Kansans and communities. Does improving the ACA have political risk? Yes. However, with four years before your next election, the positive changes would have time to have impact and will less likely be the albatross that some will say today. Of course this does not guarantee an electoral victory, but it may guarantee a better life for Kansans and citizens nationwide. And, having lost elections myself, I can tell you that there are far worse things that could happen. In fact, opportunities could open up that you’ve never dreamt of. I guarantee you would be busy sorting through all sorts of possibilities that would add diversity to your life experiences as well as some new leadership opportunities. Who knows, you could even live full time in Manhattan, Kansas.

July 18th Update: 
Just a few hours after I posted this blog, I was pleased to read that Senator Moran released a statement opposing the current version of the Republican health care bill. As several of McConnell's key votes have moved into the "no" column, it seems that—for now—the current version of the bill has no path forward. However, with that being said, the issue has still not been addressed, and the story is far from over. Credit goes to the many citizen activists who have stuck with the issue and persistently raised their voices to influence our elected officials to find a better way forward. And this engagement cannot stop now, especially with the news that Senator Moran now favors a repeal of the Affordable Care Act without a replacement plan in place. I'm glad he had the wisdom to listen to his constituents on the GOP's replacement bill, and I would encourage him to continue listening on this issue and many others.

In the June 12th New York Times, there was an excellent op-ed piece that Kansans should take pride in. The title was “Finally, Something Isn’t the Matter with Kansas,” written by Michael Tomasky. His title, of course, plays off of William Allen White’s famous essay, “What’s the matter with Kansas?” The focus of the article is the Kansas Legislature’s override of the Governor’s veto of the tax package. The piece is well-written and hopefully will be accurate in suggesting this action might just lead to a new and more positive direction in this country, which brings to mind another famous William Allen White quote from one of his later writings—​and one that I have referenced in past blog posts—​”When anything is going to happen in this country, it happens first in Kansas.”

But it’s the rest of the story, left out in this op-ed, that I want to focus on and what I believe will be needed if this kind of action is to spread. Contrary to the usual reporting, and reinforced in this op-ed, the new approach was not so much a change in the Republican direction on taxes as it was the bipartisan approach that made it possible. In the end, every single Democrat and enough rational Republicans cast their votes for a wiser way forward. The effort to override was backed by every former Kansas Governor of both parties. But maybe the most significant aspect is that much of the initial leadership came from a group of female legislators from both parties, working over a period of time, to lay out key elements of a tax package that ultimately passed.
 
Historically, both at the state and national level, it is this bipartisan approach that brings quite often the best of times. I think of Speaker Sam Rayburn and Senate Majority Leader Lyndon Johnson, both Democrats, working with Republican President Dwight Eisenhower that led to numerous successes, including the creation of the Interstate Highway System. It was Democratic Speaker Tip O'Neil working with Republican President Reagan that brought successful reform to the Social Security System. The successes I had as Governor came from working with the majority Republican leaders in the Legislature. Contrast these examples with Republican Senate Leader Mitch McConnell publicly stating that his number one priority was to oppose every measure President Obama wanted, including legislation that Republicans had once proposed and supported. And, also counter to positive results on our highway system and social security, is the Affordable Care Act, which did not have bipartisan support. Now, with Republicans in total control of Congress, there is the possibility of a new health care plan, replacing President Obama’s plan but, if passed, it will be done without Democratic votes. Isn't it likely as soon as the Democrats have the power there will be another change? Working together, for instance on the needed adjustments to the Affordable Care Act (which could garner both Democratic and Republican support), would result in a much better plan and the stability to positively impact health care over time.

On a larger scale, what it takes is members of both parties agreeing on the outcomes we want to achieve for the people of our state and country, keeping the future well-being of the people at the center of the process, and checking big money interests and bitter partisan wedge issues at the door while they work to achieve the results that the people want and need. Another key to this will be reestablishing the value of truth (even when it means accepting the hard truths) and agreeing on the facts at hand. For example, the more that Kansans understood our budget challenges, the easier it became to send representatives to Topeka who had looked at the facts and agreed on the problem—​which allowed citizens to more effectively voice their concerns and create a critical mass of support for the Legislature to work towards real solutions to the challenge at hand.
 
So, only time will tell whether what has happened in Kansas will spread across the country. Meanwhile, in Kansas—​in order for this direction to continue—​support for legislators from both parties who made progress possible must continue. And we should be judging future candidates by whether they support a solid, stable financial future for the state or a return to the reckless and failed fiscal and economic direction that landed us in this mess in the first place. The elections in 2018 and 2020 will determine whether this is truly a new direction for the state of Kansas or just a blip in the passage of time.​

Last night, the Kansas Legislature overrode the Governor’s veto of Senate Bill 30 on taxes and, in so doing, restored credibility to the funding of state government. This tax bill will have a huge positive impact on the future of the state. The flawed Brownback experiment is over. It is very hard to overstate this fact. This bill includes a significant step in funding public education (more on this later). It should eliminate any need to continue to rob from the Department of Transportation, which will help restore funding of maintenance for our highway system. It will restore credibility to our state finances and should help the state’s credit rating. It will put a stop to the steady decline of support for funding state government and, to the credit of the Democrats who held out for a tax credit for Child Care, many young families will be helped.
 
At long last, the road to recovery begins, but it’s important to remember that this didn’t just happen by chance. It was possible because in 2016 the citizens of Kansas elected a much better legislature, and then they stayed engaged throughout a long and challenging session. It also happened because key leaders in both parties listened to their constituents, stepped up, and made the future of Kansas a top priority. That is why the votes were there to override the Governor’s veto. Raising revenue is never easy, and for some Republicans, going against their own Speaker and their own Governor was difficult. However, for the benefit of the entire country, the case of the failed Kansas fiscal experiment has proven (once again) that trickle-down economics does not work, and when voters are aware of the facts and realities, common sense and reason can prevail over rigid ideology and political entrenchment. In other words, facts matter. And, in the future, Kansas can continue to be a model for how to engage and overcome regressive policies and the “alternative facts” used to sell them.
 
The key leaders in the Senate were Senator Jeff Longbine, the elected Vice President of the Senate, and Minority Leader Senator Anthony Hensley. Very early in the process, they set aside partisan differences and openly worked together getting the necessary support in the Senate. In the House, I start with calling attention to the leadership of the tax committee, where much of the specifics were worked. Chair Steven Johnson and Ranking Minority member Tom Sawyer respected each other and closely worked together from the start, not always agreeing but always committed to a good final result. I also salute Majority Leader Don Hineman and Minority Leader Jim Ward. Don had the challenge of leading the Republicans with the Speaker who, except for the final vote, was against him. For Jim, keeping (for the most part) the 40 Democrats together (they all voted to override) was a challenge but key in getting 63 votes initially and 84 in the end. And the final critical component was the bipartisan Women's Caucus, who came together to work on a compromise that significantly influenced the bill that is now law. All Kansans can be grateful for and proud of their leadership.
 
I share this knowing many important decisions remain. But last night has made it possible for those decisions to be good for Kansas. I will close with this point. As I have shared many times, elections do have consequences. This great achievement would not have happened without the voters electing who they did in 2016. Keep that in mind as we move forward with the elections coming up in 2018 for both Governor and the House of Representatives.

Well the Legislature is back in Topeka, and surprise, surprise there is much talk about taxes and the budget and how to resolve these two key issues that will impact the state going forward. I made it clear in a previous blog, which assessed this Legislative Session up to the first adjournment, that it was not surprising that the major issues would still be around for the month of May. And here we are now, and the pressure is on.

Yesterday, a message went out from four former Kansas Governors. The message sums up very well the challenge and importance of getting the tax and budget resolutions done in a way that best addresses the real problems we face. As stated, ”half measures and quick fixes won’t get the job done.” There will always be political hurdles to raising taxes, even when done part-way. So why not have something very positive to show for the effort and the risk taken? Not going far enough will, for example, lead to continued robbing of the highway fund to get by and will guarantee even more negative results for the state. Truly solving the budget crisis will require bipartisan cooperation and courage to do what is in the best long-term interest of the state, and I hope that this experienced perspective from our former Governors of both parties can help encourage legislators to govern the state not just for the next election but for the future of all Kansans.

What I want to add is this: A big problem in underfunding key services is that the taxpayer in many ways will, over time, find themselves in an even worse financial situation. You can read more about this in my blog post, “Lower Taxes Aren’t Always Lower.” But the bottom line point is that properly funding schools and taking care of our infrastructure are wise investments for communities and the State of Kansas. When not adequately done, the quality of public school declines and highway maintenance gets far behind—​which only leads to even higher costs to repair and replace that neglected infrastructure down the road. All the while, the tax burden remains (or even increases) while communities and the state decline. You find businesses not wanting to stay or expand in Kansas, and your best talent looks elsewhere to raise a family and serve their economic needs.

What surprises me most is who some of the opponents of properly funding education and infrastructure are. They present themselves as sound conservatives who look at these issues through a business investment perspective. But, for some reason, they don’t make the transfer of sound investment in business to funding our infrastructure and public education. Until recently, the modern state has always played a very important role in funding these two key needs. To fail now will severely harm our future, and the negative impacts will only multiply over time.

Please join us former Governors and many other responsible leaders in both political parties in expressing support for both the repeal of the LLC exemption and amending the tax structure to raise the money that will fund the budget deficit. Write, call, email, visit, post, whatever you can do to engage legislators who may be on the fence and thank those who are working cooperatively and courageously to solve problems in the best long-term interest of the state. Let the legislators know there is strong support for wisely investing in education and infrastructure; your persistence could make the difference.

According to a story today in the New York Times, the President’s tax proposal being informally presented today brings back the Laffer Curve—​first shared by Arthur Laffer to key Republicans in 1974, including Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld. But most important to Kansans is the Laffer-Brownback partnership on tax reform that has brought us the financial disaster of the last five years.

That brilliant move has wrecked school finance funding, cut highway maintenance to a bare minimum, and in general put many very needed state programs in financial stress. As William Allen White once said: “When anything is going to happen in this country, it happens first in Kansas.” In this case, it is the blowback from our trickle down experiment that ought to send a message to Washington policymakers that this dog just won’t hunt. For more on this idea, you can read my blog post about the next story to “happen first in Kansas.”

It will be interesting how the Kansas Congressional delegation reacts. They not only have the benefit of knowing how the curve didn’t work in Kansas but also the election results of 2016, which made it clear that voters are also aware of its failures, and they acted accordingly. Tax reform should be on the Washington agenda. What we need is the President bringing together key members of Congress of both parties with different approaches and challenging them to work for real and sane reform. I know how unrealistic that might be, but we as citizens need to be pleading for that direction.

In the coming years, I believe the Kansas Legislature—​and our state in general—​could become a model for needed change in this country, by showing how to engage and overcome these failed policy ideas and deal with their disastrous results. And so, with a little encouragement from the people of Kansas, we have the opportunity to make William Allen White right again. ​

The truth shall set you free. Yes. But it probably won’t get you elected (or so it appears), and apparently, it is no longer an expectation for high public office. Everywhere you look, we now have alternative facts, fake news, and Pinocchios. I’ve been around this issue since the 1976 election and know for sure that the truth, from time to time, is stretched even going back to our country's earliest days.

The problem is that, in last year’s election, lying was such a successful political tool that it is now clearly carrying over into post-election time. We already had problems with outside money influence, but now with truth being in short supply, the challenges only grow. We already have far too many citizens totally turned off, and if this continues, it only guarantees that the special interests with money will win more and more often. That is not good for our democracy or for the people.

I reference my ‘76 experience because it was my first time when blatant falsehoods were used against me. I barely survived, but I became Speaker and then Governor so some might say, “no harm no foul.” Certainly, I was very lucky to have run in the years that I did, when truth was a far more regular participant. After that ‘76 squeaker, I remember sharing what I had experienced with a party leader across the aisle. His response was, “Come on John, that is just politics.”

Well, it has never been easy for me to accept that fact. I went so far in later campaigns to have my ads, in advance of using them, taken to the press to show the documentation backing up my message. On reflection, it was a total waste of time, as my opponents didn’t document anything and the press was generally uninterested. Being unable to backup a claim was something I wanted no part of. What I must add is that after the election, truth was expected and usually delivered with support from both sides of the aisle. I fear that is quickly changing and is driven by action at the top, both here in Kansas and now in Washington, D.C.

But when lying gets to the Presidential level and doesn’t stop when the election is over, we now have a problem that should concern us all. Deciding what direction to go, what specifics to implement, is difficult enough when the basic numbers are accepted. Today, elected officials look at the same problem but see totally different things. Our only hope is back to the citizens knowing the difference and making it clear that they will not accept lying as the way this great country operates.

To further amplify the message, I share this article from actor and patriot Sam Waterston, "The Danger of Trump's Constant Lying." If any of this resonates with you, pass it along. Time is of the essence.