Letters on campus carry, county records, divesting, attacks on press, Russia

Reverse course on guns on campus

In his State of the State address, Gov. Sam Brownback neither mentioned the rising concerns about concealed guns on college campuses nor put forth any plans to address them. This is disappointing.

In 2013, Kansas enacted a reckless bill that – if allowed to take effect in July – will force Kansas public colleges and universities to allow concealed handguns on campus unless they install expensive security measures.

A poll of more than 20,000 employees of Kansas Board of Regents schools found that 82 percent would feel unsafe if students brought concealed handguns to class. Seventy percent said the new policy would negatively impact courses, and two-thirds said it would inhibit educators’ ability to teach and engage with students.

Under the campus-carry measure, if universities want to keep guns out of a building, every door must have security measures, such as metal detectors and security guards. Given Kansas’ current budget crisis and the prohibitive cost of security, this is not a realistic alternative.

As part of Kansas Moms Demand Action, I believe we can respect people’s right to bear arms without inviting unnecessary dangers like campus carry. I urge our leaders in the Statehouse to buck the gun lobby and act to prevent this dangerous policy from taking effect.

Keep records open

I read how Sedgwick County may lobby to close some financial records to the public, and I do not agree with Assistant County Counselor Jon Von Achen (Jan. 10 Eagle). Though having more than half a million dollars lost to fraud is a big problem, closing records to the public is not the answer.

Achen said that “we need to make sure that we are secure and that we are protecting the taxpayers’ dollars.” But as taxpayers, we have a right to know the financial state of our county and how our tax dollars are being spent.

Why is it that when someone says, “It is a matter of security,” we as citizens practically throw our rights away? Benjamin Franklin said that those who give up liberty for security deserve neither, but who is to say we can not have both freedom and security? All we have to do is remind our government that it works for us, not the other way around.

If they think the only way to keep someone from stealing half a million dollars is to take our rights, then they need to find employment somewhere else.

Government finances

If we private citizens took care of our financial affairs – setting priorities, making a budget, paying our bills, etc. – like our many levels of government do, we would all be bankrupt, in jail or sleeping under a bridge. When they create a problem, they “rob Peter to pay Paul.”

Everyone wants to sit at a desk and punch buttons, because they are too lazy to write a $566,000 check and hand-carry it to the right place. They will form a “working group,” appoint a committee, then a sub-committee, have a meeting, table the problem for now, tell a few jokes, laugh, leave the meeting room – and they will have done their high-paying jobs for the day.

Doesn’t anyone have the authority to say what and how to do something right?

Divesting dilemma

President Trump’s wealth is an impediment to his ability to govern the country in an impartial manner, so he needs to divest – and not in some half-way manner where he puts his holdings in the hands of family members. The fear of self-serving actions is acerbated by his stunning refusal to release his tax returns and a complete accounting of his financial holdings. Clearly, his actions to date lead us to infer that where there’s smoke, there’s fire.

However, is it fair to ask a man with a far-flung financial empire under his control to divest of all his holdings in that empire? Might he, as well as his investors, suffer significant financial losses in the process of a rapid divestiture?

Does a shift in responsibility and control to a third-party outsider have any hope for reasonable continuity? Does he have a reasonable right to expect some degree of control over his hard-earned achievements, particularly while they are still ongoing and require leadership and direction?

If a prerequisite to an important political office is to force a wealthy man to lose wealth and power in order to take office, are we, in effect, barring the wealthy from serving in major office?

Many politicians enter politics relatively poor and retire relatively wealthy. Does Trump have to enter politics wealthy and leave poorer?

Stop the attacks

Donald Trump attacks anyone who disparages him. Members of Congress, the free press, our intelligence agencies, NATO, our European allies, “Saturday Night Live,” actors, members of his own party, Gold Star families, union leaders, and the list goes on and on.

His attacks are personal and include misinformation. Classic signs of a bully. Sad!

Maybe it would be easier to list whom Trump has not disparaged: Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Does Trump believe that by viciously attacking anyone it will stifle dissent? Make the press fearful of saying anything negative? I hope not. I hope it will encourage the free press to continue its objective reporting.

This is America not Russia, where the government owns the media and dissidents are arrested and disappear.

Think about it. Is this how you want America to be?

It is up to Trump to stop these attacks, accept criticism as part of the job and be a leader. Only then will I be able to call him President Trump.

Align with Russia?

President Trump believes an alliance between Russia and the United States will allow them together to solve “some of the many great and pressing problems and issues of the world.” This is extremely disturbing. By what means?

This story was originally published January 22, 2017 at 5:03 AM with the headline "Letters on campus carry, county records, divesting, attacks on press, Russia."