Mayor’s race shows need for reform
To the editor:
The Wednesday article about how much money the Las Vegas mayoral candidates have raised continues to miff me. As a state, we are being buried alive for lack of money, but the people who have extra money give it to politicians to make commercials, put up signs and tout themselves.
We the people are totally annoyed with all of these things. Personally, if I'm watching TV, I keep my finger on the mute button. I hate to see the landscape fouled by political signs, and I don't talk to people who come to my door. They were not invited.
The people who contribute to these campaigns want favors from them -- and expect to get them. They would be much better off contributing to all the shortfalls the state is facing. They could probably deduct these things on their taxes. The TV stations could offer one hour each to the politicians to say their piece as to why we should vote for them.
This system needs to be changed before we all go insane from their campaigns.
Flora Bosley
Las Vegas
No beef
To the editor:
Victor Chaltiel has spent more than $1 million of his own money, most of it going to incessant, mind-numbing, repetitive television commercials, in order to win a job that pays $130,000 annually. Either the man has an insatiable ego and is trying to buy the Las Vegas mayor's race, or he must have some very original ideas and is committed to returning Las Vegas to its former prosperity.
One would hope that the interminable number of TV ads would enable him to articulate these ideas. Instead, all we get is "Victor for Las Vegas" and the fact that he is a successful businessman, not a politician. In the words of an equally annoying commercial from the past, "Where's the beef," Victor?
howard ginsburg
las vegas
Bad candidates
To the editor:
Thank you for publishing the top five candidates and their campaign fundraising and spending thus far in the Las Vegas mayoral race.
Let me recap, from my perspective, what I culled from this article:
-- We have one candidate who is spending 10 times the annual salary of the position he is seeking.
-- We have a candidate who has already spent four times the annual salary of the position.
-- Another candidate who is spending 3.5 times the annual salary of mayor.
-- Then, on top of this out-of-control spending spree, some of the candidates are campaigning about tackling taxes and school issues and how they, as mayor, want to make changes, when in reality they have zero involvement in those areas as mayor.
-- Then there are the candidates who are talking about "local" jobs, but do so on robocalls that originate from Utah.
To summarize on the "crowded mayoral candidate field," it seems some of the candidates should run for a different office if they want to tackle the schools and tax issues. Some of the candidates should take a remedial course in budgeting and learn about not spending more than you have. And finally, some of those talking about "local jobs" should at least generate their robocalls from the 702 area code.
For me, the clear winner for mayor should be "none of these candidates."
Michael Mitchell
Las Vegas
Trip plans
To the editor:
In response to your March 25 article about the fact that the DesertXpress train service may soon become a reality:
You have to start somewhere. I commend those who are willing to get beyond "analysis paralysis" and provide some type of alternative method of traveling between Los Angeles and Las Vegas.
As part-time residents of Henderson, my wife and I visit your beautiful area approximately once a month. Although the current plan does not help us get through the congested L.A. basin, it gives us something more important -- hope.
Good luck to you all. We might even make more frequent visits to the Las Vegas Valley.
Ed Stephens
Camarillo, Calif.
Animal abuse
To the editor:
I read with horror your March 26 editorial opposing the bill that would require more severe penalties for individuals who torture, maim and kill animals for pleasure. Such a cavalier attitude about the atrocities suffered by helpless animals at the hands of people is frightening, offensive and repulsive.
Consider that animals have no choice who owns them, nor the conditions in which they live. Referencing your comment about this proposed penalty being as severe as spousal abuse, I offer this: People have choices in their lives. If I were a victim of domestic abuse, I could, and would leave the abusive situation. I have that choice. Animals do not.
Also, children and adults who enjoy committing unthinkable acts against animals many times escalate this despicable behavior to include fellow human beings. It would be to society's benefit if these sick individuals, children or adults, were dealt with severely for acts of animal cruelty.
Animal cruelty should be a serious crime, and offenders should be accountable to the law and punished severely for cruelty to helpless animals.
Human society is only as strong as its weakest link, and to allow the degradation of humanity by condoning animal cruelty paints a sorry picture of the state of our society and our humanity.
No doubt I will be painted as just another animal rights "kook" -- and I do not envision passage of Senate Bill 223 because of the attitude you have expressed -- but I applaud state Sens. Shirley Breeden, David Parks and Mark Manendo for their efforts on behalf of animals that have no defense against the darker side of human nature.
Patricia Salaz
Las Vegas
