weather icon Clear

LETTERS: Contamination of Lake Erie a warning to all who depend on Lake Mead

To the editor:

Reading about the Lake Erie’s water contamination problem and its impact on the citizens of Toledo, Ohio, one can only wonder how long we can continue to neglect Lake Mead (“Ohio loans $150 million in water toxin fight,” Aug. 14 Review-Journal).

The Toledo water treatment plant provides potable water for approximately 400,000 people. For years, the infrastructure of the water treatment plant has been neglected to the benefit of more politically attractive development projects. Now a true crisis exists. The crisis has been caused by more than an apathetic approach to rebuilding infrastructure. The lack of regulation of farm fertilizing products has allowed runoff to significantly impact the water quality of Lake Erie and has been a major factor in the development of toxic algae blooms in the western Lake Erie basin.

Lake Mead faces a similar crisis. With the lake’s level at an all-time low, how much longer can Nevada’s politicians stand by and do nothing while gas-powered boats and recreational watercraft foul the lake’s remaining waters? If harming the water supply of 400,000 people is considered a crisis, impacting 2 million people will be a disaster of proportions that Las Vegas will never recover from.

What does it take to get a Nevada politician to do something proactive before Las Vegas becomes a desert wasteland?



Desalination plants

To the editor:

Many articles have been written about the valley’s water shortage. However, I never see anyone address the idea of collaboration with California, Arizona and Nevada in building a desalination plant.

I would think the governor, legislators and the Southern Nevada Water Authority would explore this possibility and then provide the answer to the community. We can’t continue to take from a source that is not being refilled. The additional intake pipe will be great, but what happens if the drought continues and the lake’s level continues to fall? Then what?

We should be planning far more into the future than we seem to be doing now. A new intake and higher prices do nothing to increase the amount of water that we will need.



Attack everyone?

To the editor:

I’m confused. I thought the American people were tired of us getting into wars in the Middle East. Yet Kay Hopkins (“White House weakness,” Aug. 15 letter) wishes our president was more like Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu.

Does she mean we should attack a tiny country such as Honduras for letting some of its children escape to America and leave us broke trying to feed and help them? Does she feel we should attack Russia for meddling in Ukraine’s affairs?

Is there a country we should form a blockade around to stop them from doing something we don’t like; maybe all of South America?



Money grab

To the editor:

What do you know? The House actually did something. Now it’s the Senate’s turn to agree and act.

Regarding the commentary in the Aug. 15 Review-Journal, “Senate must follow House’s lead on Internet access tax,” I am in total agreement that the Senate must act to extend the Internet service tax moratorium, which expires Nov. 1. Sooner, rather than later, a law must be enacted, or the Telecommunications Act of 1996 must be updated, to forbid such a tax.

It’s bad enough that I personally have not yet weaned myself from the clutches of the cable company, but when I see all of the various taxes, fees and surcharges (eight in total) added to my monthly billing statement, I find it a ridiculous additional money grab.

If Internet service providers have to apply further taxes, then those providers will need to add an additional fee to cover the cost of collecting the tax and remitting it to the government. Really? Pay attention, people.



Special interests

To the editor:

I agree with Darlyne Underhill’s letter to the editor (“Corporate taxes,” Aug. 15), and I have a theory about why Congress does not take action on something that could be so good for America.

First, if Congress were to reduce the corporate tax rate, it would be pressured to find new revenue to replace lost tax dollars. The most logical move would be to eliminate tax loopholes benefiting special interest groups. Second, most of the House majority has signed Grover Norquist’s pledge not to raise taxes, which includes eliminating tax loopholes. The thought of offending the special interest groups and Grover Norquist, and thus possibility reducing campaign donations, will not be tolerated, therefore no corporate tax cut.

After all, the number one priority is getting re-elected, not doing what is best for America.



Bigger president

To the editor:

Sherman Frederick’s column about the United States needing a “bigger president” was about 11 years too late (“We need a bigger president,” Aug. 17 Review-Journal).

The United States needed a bigger president who wouldn’t falsify intelligence information for personal war goals; a bigger president to understand that Saddam Hussein was not a threat to the national security of the United States; a bigger president to understand that removing Saddam’s government would totally destabilize the region and leave militant Islamists unchecked.

Where was Mr. Frederick’s commentary before we lost thousands of American soldiers?



Don't miss the big stories. Like us on Facebook.
EDITORIAL: The predictable consequences of rent control

Despite being dismissed as a destructive gimmick by most serious economists, rent control is making a comeback in progressive circles. Lawmakers in New York, California and Oregon this year either expanded or created programs that impose limits on how much landlords may charge for the use of their property.