Kansas continues to fascinate

In the Kansas Republican primary Tuesday, two members of the House faced challenges from the center while Sen. Pat Roberts faced a challenge from the right. All survived. Now, it's the governor's turn to worry.

|
John Hanna/AP
Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback speaks to Republican Party activists during a rally, Wednesday at the state GOP headquarters in Topeka, Kan. Sen. Pat Roberts is beside him.

In 2004, Thomas Frank wrote “What’s the Matter With Kansas?” a fascinating if tilted view of the political dynamics of a state that takes its politics very, very seriously.

Kansas is an overwhelmingly agricultural state. It also has a vibrant (or once vibrant) aviation industry and a wind energy sector.

It is also a pretty rural state, sitting smack in the middle of the country.

Kansas has always had a pretty volatile political history, stretching back to when it first entered the union. This is what the History Channel’s website said about that entry:

Trouble in territorial Kansas began with the signing of the 1854 Kansas-Nebraska Act by President Franklin Pierce. The act stipulated that settlers in the newly created territories of Nebraska and Kansas would decide by popular vote whether their territory would be free or slave. In early 1855, Kansas’ first election proved a violent affair, as more than 5,000 so-called Border Ruffians invaded the territory from western Missouri and forced the election of a pro-slavery legislature. To prevent further bloodshed, Andrew H. Reeder, appointed territorial governor by President Pierce, reluctantly approved the election. A few months later, the Kansas Free State forces were formed, armed by supporters in the North and featuring the leadership of militant abolitionist John Brown.

And from that point forward, the politics of Kansas became pretty contentious.

Mr. Frank’s thesis was that overwhelming social conservatism of everyday Kansans today has distracted them from the economic populist issues that should drive them to the Democrats.

It’s an interesting thesis, but I think it needs to be updated, because what is happening to the Republican Party in Kansas is fascinating.

Pat Roberts, the venerable and conservative senior senator, faced down a challenge from an obviously unqualified Milton Wolf. Dr. Wolf’s chief claim to fame was being Barack Obama’s distant cousin.

But Roberts wasn’t the only one to face a challenge. Rep. Tim Huelskamp, the conservative who voted against John Boehner for speaker, barely squeaked by his primary challenge, mostly because he voted consistently against the state’s farm interests.

Rep. Mike Pompeo faced a heated primary challenge from his predecessor, Todd Tiahrt.

Both Reps. Pompeo and Huelskamp ran on an economic populist platform that eschews all federal help, even help from programs that help Kansas businesses.

As a former chairman of the Agriculture Committee, Roberts was put in the uncomfortable position of having to defend his record of helping his state’s farm interests against attacks from the populist Wolf.

He succeeded, but it was closer than many thought it would be.

The problem for the conservative movement in Kansas comes at the top of the ticket. Gov. Sam Brownback has been perhaps the most conservative governor in the history of the state of Kansas. But he is facing a challenging battle for reelection because his policies haven’t worked like he or his constituents thought they would.

The irony is that neither Roberts, Huelskamp nor Pompeo face any general election issues, while Governor Brownback, who had no primary opponent, might lose.

Kansas continues to fascinate.

John Feehery publishes his Feehery Theory blog at http://www.thefeeherytheory.com/.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Kansas continues to fascinate
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/Politics-Voices/2014/0807/Kansas-continues-to-fascinate
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe