Appointing judges would give voters more say

To the editor:

In his July 23 letter, Knight Allen wrote that SJR 2 will take away the public's right to participate in who will become a judge in Nevada. This simply is not true.

Under the present system, many judges run for election unopposed, meaning that the public has no say whatsoever in whether they will stay on the bench. Under SJR 2's merit selection process, incumbents will be evaluated by lawyers, witnesses, parties and others who appear before them. Those evaluations will be made public, and every incumbent must then receive 55 percent of the vote to remain on the bench.

Thus, under SJR 2, the public will have more say about who stays on the bench.

Moreover, to get on the bench in the first place, lawyers will be selected on the basis of merit. As we all know, there is no such requirement now. Any attorney with 10 years of experience can run for judge, and the voting public, by and large, has very little knowledge about a candidate's qualifications. The merit selection process under SJR 2 will ensure that only the most qualified attorneys become judges.

Most importantly, SJR 2 will eliminate the need for judicial candidates to solicit large sums of money from attorneys who will eventually be appearing before them. The current process of open judicial campaigns, financed largely by the efforts and resources of lawyers, creates a fundamental institutional appearance of impropriety that undermines public confidence in what we as lawyers and judges try to do every day: provide access to justice to the people of this state.

This is not a situation of our own making. Judicial campaigns have become astronomically expensive, and even successful lawyers running for judicial office find self-funding a daunting undertaking. Donations, therefore, are a necessary evil of the current process, and the primary source of funding is, of necessity, attorneys. The irony here is that, while lawyers simply want a neutral medium in which to litigate cases, they feel they must provide financial support to protect against the possibility of future judicial bias.

I believe so strongly that a change is essential that I have volunteered to serve on the committee of Nevadans for Qualified Judges, which seeks to educate the public about the benefits of SJR 2.

I'm happy to appear before any organization to further explain why it is in everyone's best interest to vote for SJR 2 in November.

Albert G. Marquis

Las Vegas

The writer is a local attorney.

Bell rung

To the editor:

The city of Bell, Calif., has a scandal over paying its three top officials salaries totaling $1.6 million a year. The citizens of this small community are outraged, and heads are rolling.

Here in Clark County, we have a fire department that refuses to agree to pay cuts to prevent the elimination of many jobs. You might be interested in some figures, as compiled by the Nevada Policy Research Institute for 2009. There are 256 firemen who made in excess of $200,000 last year. The top earner was the Fire Department volunteer coordinator, who was paid $474,559 that year. To gain proper perspective, the director of the county's airports makes a comparatively paltry $367,644 per year.

There are many jobs that pay much less but are considerably more dangerous than fire fighting -- construction work and the military come to mind. It is also interesting that military members do not receive overtime no matter how many consecutive days or hours they work.

It's time to put the "service" back into public service. The Fire Department is extremely important for the protection of our community, and I respect the profession, but it must cease being an overfed cash cow that the taxpayers must indulge.

John J. Erlanger

Las Vegas

Senatorial duties

To the editor:

Some of the confused folks in Nevada may want to read the following -- it's a list of the duties of a U.S. senator:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God."

There's nothing in there about getting you a job, bringing you business, providing you with health care, or bribing other senators with our money.

Just thought, perhaps foolishly, that you might like to know.

Dave Kerns

Las Vegas

Screwed up

To the editor:

In your July 18 Travel section, a story notes that, "The U.S. Border Patrol is warning hikers on the Pacific Crest Trail they could face arrest, jail and a $5,000 fine if they cross the U.S.-Canadian border improperly."

Wow. Just think if we'd enforce that on our southern border. Twelve million illegals at $5,000 apiece -- if my high school math hasn't failed me, that's $60 billion. Surely that's enough to complete the Mexican border fence, and a small section across the Pacific Crest Trail.

Boy, are our government's priorities screwed up, or what?

D.M. SEIERSEN

LAS VEGAS