Do parents care about education anymore?
To the editor:
Erin Neff's Tuesday column addressed the poor performance of Clark County School District students on math tests. The poor performance should not come as a surprise, and it could be addressed to a degree by better-trained teachers and smaller class sizes -- both of which mean higher taxes.
But what is seldom mentioned in such commentaries is how many school systems all across America have this issue. The largest problem isn't a lack of funding, and it never has been. This is a societal problem that cannot be fixed by tax increases alone.
When I was a kid, my mom did not work and both my parents were heavily involved in my schooling. I wasn't allowed to do poorly in school, and my parents worked with me to make sure I did my homework and did well in school. My TV watching was restricted, and there were no computers or video games. I was a kid and was treated as a kid, not as an adult, and my parents were my parents, not my friends.
I would love to take all these kids who failed this math test and see how many of them have parents like I had, a commitment to school like my parents insisted I have, etc. This society has changed drastically, and so have its parents and its children.
To believe that more tax money is all that is needed is really a terrible oversimplification and ignores some really important issues.
Michael K. Casler
LAS VEGAS
Reward hybrid owners
To the editor:
In response to your Wednesday editorial, "HOV lanes": Because the federal government likes to experiment in behavior modification, we should be opening up the high-occupancy vehicle lanes on U.S. Highway 95 for hybrid and other high-mileage vehicles. It would be nice to see these lanes better utilized after all the costs expended for their construction.
Henry Schmid
LAS VEGAS
Unfunded liabilities
To the editor:
In the latest round of state budget cuts, it was decided to take $17.5 million out of a fund that had been set aside to cover an expected $3 billion-plus unfunded liability Nevada taxpayers face in the state's benefits account for government employees. That's sort of like what the federal government does when it takes money from the Social Security trust to pay for ongoing operations.
When asked why the government was taking money set aside for the future to cover a budget shortfall today, rather than cutting present-day spending, state Sen. Bob Beers put it bluntly: "Our grandchildren don't vote." That's true. But it's wrong to be kicking the can down the road and pawning off politically difficult decisions to the next generation.
The problem is we've promised government employees retirement benefits we simply cannot afford. And the longer we wait to address the problem, the harder -- and more painful -- it will be solve. Just like Social Security. So the first step is to acknowledge that it's time to completely rethink exactly what kinds of retirement benefits, including health care, we can provide government workers, and how to best do so.
Currently, Nevada state employees are provided what is known as a "defined benefit" plan for retirement. This means the government puts money into a common pool and invests it. If the expected income generated from the investments won't cover the amount of money needed to provide the benefits promised, that's known as an unfunded liability. And that means taxpayers must put more money into the "pool" to cover the expected future shortfall.
But unless the way we provide retirement benefits to government employees changes, taxpayers will constantly be hit up for more.
Sue Lowden
LAS VEGAS
THE WRITER IS CHAIRWOMAN OF THE NEVADA REPUBLICAN PARTY.
Justice overkill
To the editor:
On April 22, Dr. Harriston Bass received a 25 years-to-life sentence for illegally selling pain medications to a woman who later overdosed and died. While Dr. Bass' unethical and illegal behavior and lack of remorse were despicable, justice watchers should question the sentence Dr. Bass received.
How does an accidental death by overdose constitute a second-degree murder conviction, rather than involuntary manslaughter? In this case, does a 25 years-to-life sentence have any more deterrent value than a 10-year term?
In his Wednesday article on the sentencing, Review-Journal reporter David Kihara noted that there was no legal precedent in Nevada for a sentencing this harsh, and that the doctor had no prior criminal history. I'm sure the fact Dr. Bass is a vocal black man did not help his case.
Let's see if the doctors involved in the recent hepatitis outbreak get the same justice.
Dahn Shaulis
LAS VEGAS
Scary debt
To the editor:
Has anyone considered that the United States may already be bankrupt? When you owe more than $9 trillion -- that's $9,000,000,000,000 -- how can a country claim to be solvent? Especially when there is no end in sight to this increasing deficit every year, and absolutely no chance of ever paying it off.
Glen Kaner
LAS VEGAS
