LETTERS: Nevada can’t afford to provide photo identification to voters
To the editor:
Earlier this month, Nevada Secretary of State Barbara Cegavske reiterated her support for voter ID, and an editorial called for the Legislature to pass such an expensive bill (“Picture this,” Jan. 16 Review-Journal). Let’s not forget that while Nevada is still in recovery from the recession, there are significant costs to create a voter ID system. The state would have to pay for free state identification to individuals who don’t already have an ID. Counties have to educate voters and the general public, revise and update election materials and thoroughly train poll workers.
The editorial urges the Legislature to simply copy Indiana’s statute. It’s surprising that one would call for the same election law from a state with far different demographics, economic circumstances, geography, Department of Motor Vehicle rules, procedures and locations. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, Indiana spent $2.2 million between 2005 and 2011 on voter education outreach alone. Indiana also estimated spending more than $10 million between 2007 and 2010 to issue IDs to the public.
At a time when schools are overcrowded and senior citizens are struggling to make ends meet, Nevada taxpayers simply cannot afford voter ID. Our schools are underfunded, and too many families are still looking for work. Elected officials have a responsibility to spend taxpayer money wisely and to govern toward solutions. This is a disenfranchising political gimmick that our community simply cannot afford.
EBETH PALAFOX
LAS VEGAS
The writer is state director of Mi Familia Vota in Nevada.
R-J comment boards
To the editor:
I am pleased to see that the Review-Journal has disabled the comment boards, on which certain people have made it their life’s work to demean and attempt to destroy the opinions of those who had their letters published. I have read many of the comments and decided not to participate in the slander and name-calling that goes on.
It’s too bad that the comment boards didn’t serve a useful purpose as a place where adults could voice their opinions and have reasonable arguments, without having to endure the hateful input from a few malcontents.
BILL DIRKSE
LAS VEGAS
Sales tax deductions
To the editor:
Steve Tetreault recently wrote about a bill introduced in Congress that would make the sales tax deduction in the eight states without a state income tax permanent (“Bill would make sales tax deduction permanent,” Jan. 19 Review-Journal). Needless to say, one of the inequities in our tax code is that the deduction is permanent for the 43 states that allow it for either state income tax or sales tax, while the seven states with only a sales tax do not have that same permanent deduction status.
Mr. Tetreault writes, “A permanent extension of the sales tax deduction would cost the U.S. Treasury $34 billion over 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office.” I have trouble understanding the purpose of that statement. Does Mr. Tetreault think the cost of making the tax code more equitable is too high? Personally, I feel that statement should not have been included, or that he should have included a statement that gave a comparable cost for the 43 states with the state income tax deduction.
RON PYZIK
HENDERSON
Panhandler problems
To the editor:
You may be fortunate if over the past several years, teams of aggressive panhandlers have not descended upon your neighborhood. However, in mine, it is commonplace to find them working shifts, begging among the cars at every intersection, haunting the drive-thru at my favorite fast-food place and approaching me when I gas up my car.
This troubles me, as it should you if you are concerned about pedestrian fatalities, fear for the safety of your loved ones or are dismayed by the loss of quality of life in your neighborhood. I have called the Metro police department’s non-emergency number several times to complain about specific aggressive panhandlers, and they are quick and courteous to respond, but more of us must help the police by reporting these panhandlers. It’s the job of the citizen to report a problem.
The police should also proactively control this quality of life issue in the neighborhoods they are sworn to protect.
ANDREW FROGEL
LAS VEGAS
Subsidized school lunch
To the editor:
According to a report in the Jan. 18 Review-Journal, the majority of public school students in the United States qualify for subsidized lunches (“Poverty rampant among students”). It seems to me that either the requirements to qualify for these programs are too low, or too many people are having children that they cannot afford.
JACK OLIVER
LAS VEGAS
