LETTERS: GOP provision leads to exemptions

To the editor:

The Review-Journal was quick to point out the story that Sen. Harry Reid had exempted some of his staff from participating in the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). However, there is a “rest of the story.” Prominent Republican lawmakers Darrell Issa, Tom Coburn, Steve Stockman and even Charles Grassley, architect of the infamous Grassley amendment, are exempting some of their staffs, as well. As it turns out, a provision in Obamacare written by Sen. Tom Coburn actually allows exemptions for some staff members.

So, it would appear that Republicans, not Democrats, are wholly responsible for Sen. Reid being able to exempt some of his top aides from having to buy health insurance via the ACA. What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

JIM GRAHAM

LAS VEGAS

National anthem at NFR

To the editor:

What a difference one night can make at the National Finals Rodeo. On the first night, Clay Walker sang “The Star-Spangled Banner,” and on the second, Susie Dobbs sang her rendition. The difference was night and day.

Mr. Walker sang in a range the audience could sing along with, while Ms. Dobbs sang in a range that very few could. Happily, rodeo fans could be heard singing with Mr. Walker, but sadly, they could not be heard singing with Ms. Dobbs. NFR officials do this event a huge disservice by allowing entertainers to sing our national anthem in a way that excludes crowd participation.

GARY TRICHTER

BANDERA, TEXAS

Online gambling

To the editor:

Bradley Kuhns’ letter to the editor Saturday, regarding Sheldon Adelson’s stance against online gaming, was misleading in every sense of the word (“Adelson’s motives about money”). Of course, children will not be allowed to gamble online. The effect that online gaming will have on children will come because of the parent, guardian or whomever provides for the health and welfare of the children.

It is bad enough seeing parents gambling away their earnings in a casino, but registering a credit card online to gamble is a sure-fire way to spend the bread money without seeing the money disappear from one’s wallet. In many cases, the results will be catastrophic for the welfare of children.

I have worked at food banks and seen people coming for handouts whom I recognized as gamblers in casinos. We always knew that the food we gave them might be the only food their children got. My vote would be for no online gambling in any form. Casinos have always been geared to take your money; the only difference is that online, you can gamble away the gas money it took to get to the casino.

JAMES RIDEOUT SR.

PAHRUMP

Adelson’s motives

To the editor:

I take strong exception to Bradley Kuhns’ letter in Saturday’s Review-Journal (“Adelson’s motives about money”). Mr. Kuhns calls Las Vegas Sands Corp. Chairman Sheldon Adelson “a hypocrite and greedy person” because Mr. Adelson is a gaming mogul who seeks to ban Internet gambling.

Mr. Kuhns’ reasoning is flawed. Mr. Adelson opposes Internet gambling on moral grounds. At present, there is not adequate technology to prevent children and teenagers from illegally gambling on the Internet, and experts admit it. The resulting crime and havoc in families across the country will be horrendous.

As Mr. Adelson says, “It’s fool’s gold,” meaning the initial short-term profits will put thousands of hotel and casino workers out of a job when tourism drops.

Internet gambling advocates, including the American Gaming Association, have a myopic, skewed view of online gaming. It will exacerbate America’s moral decline. It should be banned. Its liabilities outweigh its assets. For many families, Mr. Adelson’s adage will become the truth: “Click a mouse, lose your house!”

CLYDE DINKINS

LAS VEGAS