Bill on recall petitions a dead end

To the editor:

On Sunday, right next to Editor Thomas Mitchell's protest of the Sedition Act of 1798 for plainly violating the First Amendment, a Review-Journal editorial called for quickly passing Senate Bill 156, which concerns recall elections, auspiciously labeling it a "no-brainer."

The bill's sponsor, Sen. Terry Care, D-Las Vegas, is attempting to change the meaning of Article 2, Section 9 of the Nevada Constitution by substituting Secretary of State Ross Miller's interpretation with his own.

I offer on this occasion no argument on the legal or policy merits of the differing interpretations of Article 2, Section 9. I only point out that as Nevada's chief election official, the constitutional duty and power to interpret and apply our election laws rest first with Mr. Miller, not Sen. Care or the Legislative Counsel Bureau. Mr. Miller's interpretation might be challenged through the courts, or changed by constitutional amendment. But, as the Sedition Act exemplifies, the meaning of a constitution may not be changed or overruled by the enactment of mere statutes, which Sen. Care would have us do and the Review-Journal applauds.

Sen. Care's proper course of action is to introduce a constitutional amendment. But even that is unnecessary because a case calling for judicial interpretation of Article 2, Section 9, has commenced in District Court. The final ruling, after any appeals, will either strike down SB 156 as unconstitutional or render it redundant. Either way, SB 156 is a dead end.

Sen. Care should quickly withdraw SB 156, or the Legislature should quickly reject it to avoid wasting any more of the Legislature's valuable time and resources. That's the real no-brainer.

Travis Chandler

BOULDER CITY

THE WRITER, A BOULDER CITY COUNCILMAN, WAS THE TARGET OF AN UNSUCCESSFUL 2008 RECALL PETITION.

Disgusting feature

To the editor:

I was disgusted by your Sunday cover page, which featured a picture of the convicted criminal Mary Kincaid-Chauncey. Then, on the front page of your B section, she was featured in a long story about her suffering in prison and her Bible thumping ("Life on the inside: Former commissioner believes she went to prison for a reason").

Mary Kincaid-Chauncey is a convicted criminal who stole from the community by denying them honest representation on the Clark County Commission.

She is not a media celebrity. Your story was disgusting and offensive to every resident of Clark County. You should be ashamed of featuring a criminal.

You forgot to mention that the residents she cheated also paid for her legal fees -- she was deemed "indigent" by the courts. I guess she spent all her bribes on personal trivia.

Nancy Boot

LAS VEGAS

Rewarding failure

To the editor:

I had to laugh when I read Sunday's Review-Journal about AIG and how the company's executives had to give bonuses to keep "talented staff."

Any worker with "talent" would realize we're in a recession and do their part to help out, not take a bonus this year. They can prove their "talent" by helping AIG recover from this downturn and earn that bonus. If they don't agree, then let them go to the unemployment office and collect their next round of checks.

One thing that should have been attached to the financial rescue plan as a precondition is a "no bonus" clause. If "we the people" can allow almost 9,000 stimulus earmarks, including a study of how pigs smell, then we can save by not allowing the AIG pigs to smell so badly.

Oink, Oink.

When all is said and done, our government has proved it enables and rewards poor decisions.

President Obama needs to quit blaming President Bush for the state of our country. He passed the stimulus and didn't cut one item. Where is that "change" we were promised?

President Obama is a Democrat, and historically Democrats spend and tax. If AIG were allowed to fail, we could move on and create a better system. It's just another example of the lack of experience and leadership from our new rock star president.

How about starting by taking House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's jet away?

Matt Dorman

NORTH LAS VEGAS

Bonus? For what?

To the editor:

Maybe I am out of touch, but my definition of a "bonus" is a reward for something that has helped, added to and benefited the company I work for.

Pray tell me what AIG executives and employees -- except for maybe the janitors -- have done to improve the financial situation of that company.

Being part of the economy's problem definitely doesn't warrant a bonus.

Jo Anne Smith

MESQUITE