Let’s fix how colleges are funded

To the editor:

Thank you for publishing the Wednesday editorial, "Funding formula," discussing the need to alter the funding formula for our state's institutions of higher education so that it is more equitable to the institutions that serve the majority of the population in our state (particularly here in Nevada's largest city).

Las Vegas deserves to have a first-class, research-oriented institution such as UNLV to foster economic development in this great city. Students will pay more for better-quality schools, especially if they know that the funds are specifically used to benefit their education. Universities can maintain high standards of education only by properly funding their programs, hiring the best professors, maintaining an appropriate level of support staff and constructing appropriate infrastructure to perform research which tuition funds can help achieve.

Science and engineering programs, for example, require significant investment in research and teaching laboratories. These fields also suffer from smaller enrollments yet, more than anything, they are absolutely vital to America's economic, health and military successes via the novel technologies that they routinely spawn.

We need to develop a formula that rewards and promotes teaching and research excellence in our higher educational institutions, and promotes a high student retention rate. We also need a formula that recognizes the tremendous service that institutions such as UNLV perform for their local communities.

Michael Pravica

Las Vegas

The writer is an associate professor of physics at UNLV.

Liberal whining

To the editor:

In response to Dan Olivier's Thursday letter:

I have been reading the Review-Journal editorial page since 1988. Since then, I have witnessed an absolutely intolerable amount of whining from Mr. Olivier of Bullhead City, complaining about rich, greedy, homophobic, racist, sexist Republicans.

Maybe if he'd spent the past 20-plus years working hard instead of complaining, he might be rich, too.

Mike Bryant

Las Vegas

Oh, Canada!

To the editor:

The Wednesday Final Word was a quote from Canadian academic Jack Mintz, saying his countrymen are upset about President Obama's refusal to approve the Keystone XL Pipeline. He needs to review Canadian history.

There was a school of thought in the '60s and '70s that "continentalism is treason." Canada has always had a love/hate relationship with the United States.

Before the Canadian railroad was built, there was great debate about whether there should be many north-south lines to tie in with the United States or whether to build a more expensive but more unifying east-west line. They went for the east-west route.

I don't know who the majority of Canadians want to sell their oil to -- the United States or China -- but in the end they will do what is best for Canada.

Bruce Hotchkiss

North Las Vegas

The goose

To the editor:

More Republican hypocrisy:

Here's Senate GOP leader Mitch McConnell in 2010: "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president."

Here's Sen. McConnell in 2012: President Obama's "goal isn't to conquer the nation's problems. It's to conquer Republicans."

So apparently it's OK if the Republicans' most important goal is to conquer Mr. Obama rather than the nation's problems. But, according to Sen. McConnell, if the shoe's on the other foot, the Republican attitude is, of course, that such an approach is completely antithetical to the Golden Rule.

To put it more simply, what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

Jim Graham

Las Vegas

Fair share

To the editor:

Shame, shame on all the politicians, all those in the news business and all those in our educational system who either are ignorant or keep the general public ignorant as to "capital gains" income and regular income with all this "tax all those rich guys" and "they need to pay their fair share" rhetoric.

First, let me say I make less than $50,000 a year. But I do know and understand what capital gains taxes are and why they are taxed at a different rate then regular income.

My question: Why can't we get our politicians to scrap the present tax system and go to a simple flat tax of 12 percent to 14 percent with no or few deductions for everyone? Then everyone would be "paying their fair share."

David Jaronik

Pahrump

It's not fair

To the editor:

I have to chuckle when I watch a Republican politician stand up and say his is working for the American people. He is not working for me.

How much do those on the right feel the poor should pay in taxes? How about my sister- in-law, who paid no taxes, but lived on $11,000 a year? Or a single mother who makes minimum wage, works 30 hours a week and has no health care? How much should she pay?

I listened to a Republican congressman today who repeated over and over that "46 percent of the American people pay no taxes." But those are the people barely getting by. By all means, let's get as much as we can from these folks.

Companies such as General Electric, which not only paid no taxes but actually got a refund, get a free pass.

The richest of the rich have gotten the tax breaks for 11 years. They have amassed even more wealth, while the rest of us went downhill. This is not envy or class warfare. It is about fairness. And right now there is none.

So I thank those Republican politicians for giving me that chuckle even as I weep about more of the middle class losing their jobs, their homes and their hope. I have to wonder how any middle-class or poor person would ever support anyone who continues to tell us that tax increases on the rich would kill more jobs. Where are the jobs? Corporations are getting tax breaks to take jobs out of our country. How does that make sense?

Sandra E. Thomas

Las Vegas