To the editor:
So, Brian Sandoval and Rory Reid are going to grace us with a sophomoric attempt to persuade us to vote for them. This evening’s gubernatorial debate about education reform should be a good one.
Back in the day, each community took care of its own school system. Our legislators from the land of Bilk and Money decided they had to “level the playing field” and dump billions of taxpayer dollars into the education system to “save” our children. Result: higher dropout rates, busing, etc., all in the name of being fair.
If it wasn’t bad enough that the politicians had to ruin things, then the unions had to get involved. Anytime you put federal dollars into the equation, you are doomed from the beginning, because now, you have to play by their rules. Add the NEA lobby and you have such a cesspool that there is hardly a chance that any of our children can get a decent education.
I only hope that today’s debate will be used to entertain us, and not trying to buy our votes.
RICHARD W. ANDERSON
Close the doors
To the editor:
Sen. Harry Reid says Sharron Angle is just too extreme because she wants to close the federal Department of Education.
This enormous bureaucracy was created to improve the quality of U.S. schools, but in review of its accomplishments and after billions of dollars spent, our schools are in free-fall with no end in sight.
The original goals were commendable, but as with most government entities, the laws of unintended consequences have produced nothing more than a union controlled political action committee pouring tons of money into the liberal agenda.
Time to close it down. What is it accomplishing?
Keep us safe
To the editor:
Sheriff Doug Gillespie has temporarily stopped Las Vegas police from doing forced entries. SWAT teams will do those until the department has reviewed and revised their procedures.
They sure need changes.
Most of us like police and consider them valuable to the community in providing safety and enforcing laws.
But lately it is has become obvious our police are dangerous. Metro is now in the harsh spotlight of public opinion. But Henderson cops have been guilty, as well, of unnecessary shootings. To wit: An ice cream truck lady shot dead, in front of two of her kids, because she was brandishing a small knife.
It seems any cop could have knocked her knife arm useless with a baton. But she is dead, her children are motherless and our city makes a court settlement.
A recent shooting makes our cops look awful. Trevon Cole, an unarmed, small-time marijuana dealer, was shot in his apartment. Metro looked like not-funny Keystone Kops because Mr. Cole was mistaken for another felon from Houston, but the lead detective told his team Mr. Cole had no priors; the shooter’s flashlight malfunctioned so he could not see well; a rifle was used in an apartment when a shotgun would have been a safer choice.
Meanwhile, Erik Scott was essentially murdered while surrounded by police in broad daylight in a Costco parking lot. He was hardly a desperado.
That shooting and Trevon Cole’s will cost the county in civil lawsuits and reputation. Compare these episodes with the great performance of Arizona police last week. They captured the “Bonnie & Clyde” couple without firing a shot.
Add to this the high-speed car wrecks caused by our police, killing and injuring some unlucky civilians, and it is easy to see why public confidence in police is way down.
Yes, Sheriff Gillespie has a lot of changes to make in keeping us safe — from cops.
Richard N. Fulton
To the editor:
In response to your Aug. 21 editorial, which referenced a major energy infrastructure project that NV Energy announced the day before:
The One Nevada Transmission Line, or ON Line, will for the first time electrically connect the northern and southern parts of the state. This new interconnection will result in significant cost savings and reliability benefits for our customers, as well as help us meet Nevada’s renewable energy mandate.
We estimate that this 235-mile interconnection will save our customers at least $500 million over the next 30 years. These savings will result from more cost-efficient use of our southern and northern generating plants to meet customer needs.
Nevada is blessed with abundant renewable energy resources. Development of these resources is important for Nevada’s energy future and for economic development in our state. ON Line will help spur this development by providing transmission access to those remote areas in Nevada where these resources usually are found In particular, ON Line will assist in the development of lower-priced, highly reliable geothermal projects, thereby reducing the cost of meeting Nevada’s renewable energy mandate. And for those renewable sources that are not available at all times (e.g., solar when it is night or cloudy), ON Line will assure reliability by enabling NV Energy to respond with traditional forms of electrical generation.
Finally, Nevada’s renewable developments are likely to exceed our state’s internal electrical needs. As a result, revenues produced from such resources and the transmission to move them outside the state could provide additional opportunities to lower costs for our customers.
We plan to have this important transmission line in service by the end of 2012. And, I’m confident that our customers will enjoy significant long-term operational and renewable energy benefits through the One Nevada Transmission Line.
The writer is president and chief executive officer of NV Energy.
To the editor:
I cannot be the only one who is already so sick of these political ads on television. No one says what they will do if they get elected. All they do is run each other down with such nonsense that it shows a lack of intelligence on their part. Or their lack of respect for the intelligence on the part of voters.
I, for one, will probably and sadly stay away from the polling booth this year. I cannot in all honesty vote for candidates who show no respect for the voters.
To the editor:
Reading Rick Tope’s letter to the editor on Thursday (“Depend on government”) almost made me choke on breakfast.
I thought he was kidding and I was waiting for the punch line.
First he is opposed to the government “giving” more money to the rich since they’ll probably buy Treasury bonds with it. News flash, Mr. Tope: The government doesn’t give money to the rich. It just takes less. The money doesn’t belong to the government in the first place.
I know that’s a hard fact to grasp, but it’s true.
As an aside, most of the “rich,” define it as you wish, don’t hoard their money, they invest it in businesses which actually create jobs. And, yes they get a return on their investment. It’s called capitalism.
Secondly, he falsely and blatantly states that the government creates jobs and is the biggest employer in the world. The biggest in the world part may be correct, but as far as creating one job? It’s never done so.
Mr. Tope seems to believe it actually produces jobs. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
So taking my money and paying an employee of the government is not creating anything but simply transferring my wealth to somebody else under the guise of “work.”
Mr. Tope states that the government produces — yes, that word again — more jobs than any company on Earth. By his logic we should just make government bigger, and all unemployment would cease. In spite of the politicians’ blather, they are unable to create any jobs. Private-sector industries create jobs and produce things.
I would love to hear an explanation of how the government creates, not transfers, one — yes, one — job.