The Register supports electing Dennis McKinney Treasurer of Kansas. McKinney has done a good job in the office since he was appointed to it when Lynn Jenkins resigned to serve in Congress in January, 2009.
McKinney is a 50-year-old farmer from Greensburg — the town that survived one of the most devastating tornadoes ever to hit Kansas. He was given the job because he demonstrated his intelligence, his sound judgment and his dedication to good government over 16 years in the Kansas House, where he became minority leader.
The office of treasurer is not a partisan post. It’s an office manager’s job that rarely calls for policy decisions.
Kansas treasurers do, however, travel around the state, going from community to community with their lists of unclaimed property that the office holds, urging citizens to check up and see if they might have forgotten a bank account or valuables left in a safety deposit box that remain unclaimed.
So McKinney shows up in Iola from time to time. Checks in at the courthouse. Makes his presence known to the city’s banks and drops off an ad at the newspaper inviting Kansans to visit the unclaimed properties website his office maintains.
The State Treasurer is also bookkeeper for the state. As such, McKinney became aware that the long term soundness of the KPERS retirement fund is shaky. Too many Legislatures in the past have fudged on their appropriations to the fund. It will run out of money down the road if it isn’t bolstered.
The treasurer can, and should, warn the Legislature, the governor and the people of Kansas about that need — but that’s all that he or she can do. The warning would carry no more weight coming from a Democrat than from a Republican. It’s a matter of math, not ideology.
Finally, it would be nice to elect McKinney in this red year, in this deep red state, just to show the world that Kansas believes in  equal opportunity.

— Emerson Lynn, jr.

Voters will decide Nov. 2 whether to increase a countywide sales tax by 1⁄4 of a cent to go toward a new Allen County Hospital.
Members of the Allen County Healthcare Committee address questions about the issue.
Q: Why did Allen County Commissioners ask the City of Iola commissioners to help with the funding of the hospital project?
A: There are several answers to this question. 
First, the City of Iola and its citizens have the most to gain by the continued presence of the hospital. With an annual budget of $15-$20 million and an annual payroll of about $9 million, the  hospital and its 150 employees have a substantial  impact on the Iola economy. The hospital is also a major consumer of utilities from the city.
Second, Iola has only recently renewed its very successful 10-year sales tax for street, alley and capital improvements. By committing up to $350,000 a year of that revenue to the hospital project, it lowers the money needed from the county.
In the Nov. 2 election, citizens of the county will be asked to approve a 1⁄4 cent sales tax increase to fund a new hospital. Without city funds, the county referendum would have been for a 1⁄2 cent sales tax. Placing the hospital in Iola city limits — or close enough that it could be annexed — ensures that it will receive these city funds.
Third, using sales tax dollars for capital improvements has many benefits. Taxpayers can see the results through the many recently completed street projects including upgrades to Lincoln, North Cottonwood and Kentucky streets. The courthouse square also has new lighting, sidewalks, curbs and gutters completed in the last 10 years.
Deferring for a while some future improvements to other streets will be a decision for future city
leaders, but the citizens know that the use of sales tax dollars for capital improvements has been an excellent way to bring infrastructure in the city up-to-date.
Fourth, the leaders of Iola understand all too well how challenging it is to retain and attract new jobs to the area. Investing in a modern healthcare facility is essential to Iola’s future. None of the major employers that were in Iola when the hospital first opened in the early 1950s are here now. Today’s major employers have all come to the area since then. Major employers looking to expand or relocate in the United States insist on the presence of a modern hospital. To attract an industry to replace Haldex and any others that might close in the future will require having a modern hospital. It is essential to attract new jobs here.

The idea of a longer school year makes sense, President Barack Obama said in a television interview Monday, adding that American youngsters attend classes, on average, about a month less than children in other advanced countries.
He also defended federal aid to public schools, but added that money alone wouldn’t lift America’s public schools to the level they need to be to compete on the world educational scene.
He said America’s worst performing teachers “have got to go” and that educational standards must be raised to give American students a better chance in the global labor market.

OLD STUFF, really. And the fact that these two prescriptions for raising the level of our public education have been made over and over again by educators and employers for decades with zero impact is a
crying shame.
In a little over a month, Kansans will go to the polls and elect or re-elect our representatives to Congress, four to the House, one to the Senate, a governor and dozens of state legislators.
So, are the candidates for those very important jobs talking to us about the need to make Kansas a leader in public school improvement? Are they saying, yes, Kansas should lengthen its school day and its school year so that Kansas students would learn, say, 15 percent more in their 12 years in the public schools? Are the candidates hammering home the message that high quality teachers are the key to high level learning, and asking for public support for the higher taxes that will be needed?
Not a bit of it.
Iola and the rest of the state will stick with the present school year, thank you. It was good enough for granddad — and many great-granddads, too — so it should be good enough for junior. Hey, the world hasn’t changed in the last 100 years, has it? Two plus two was four in every-year A.D., right? Who really needs to be able to gather facts, evaluate them and put them together to make a cogent presentation? They can get that stuff in college, can’t they? Laboratory science is a luxury, like two years of a foreign language or discussion classes in economics, history and social science.
Be warned. Lifting the level of our public schools will make coddled elitists of our kids. Can’t go there, can we? Better play it safe and
not teach them so much that they’ll want to learn more, achieve more, shake things up. Scary thoughts, aren’t they?

A MORE LIKELY explanation for our unwillingness to make our public schools better is just plan stinginess. Intellectually, we do understand that more time in the classroom with better teachers to meet higher educational standards would make America a better nation. But then we grab tight to our wallets: we just aren’t willing to pay the price that a higher level of public education costs.
We’re selfish, folks. We tell ourselves we want the best for our kids and then make sure that our governor, our legislature, our local shakers and movers, are all pledged to keep taxes low, to trim public spending everywhere, schools included. In other words, we make certain that our kids get an economy class education.
After the election, when the study club meets and the speaker tells the members that Kansas really must lift its public education level higher for the sake of the kids, heads will nod in vigorous agreement. But no one will rise to take their share of the blame.

Emerson Lynn, jr.