Sports complex won’t save Las Vegas
To the editor:
I'm still not sold after reading another section-front article about how great an almost $2 billion sports arena complex would be for Las Vegas (Sunday Viewpoints). It's like being an investor who was the last to know about a great new trend in the market.
We can't possibly hope to make millions in tax revenues on sports. People don't come to Las Vegas to watch sports, they come here to gamble on them. And if these investors are so sure people will come, then why do they mention a tax when it comes to financing the plan? Why isn't the cost of building the arena just added to the ticket prices?
If I opened a clothing store at The Fashion Show mall, I wouldn't be asking for a new tax that only my paying customers would pay. I would just add $10 to the price of the jeans.
Mitchell Tannis
Las Vegas
What standards?
To the editor:
For the writer of the May 17 editorial, "Devaluing diplomas," or letter writers such as Julia Sills (May 17) who are critical of a plan to let some students who fail the math portion of the state High School Proficiency Exam still receive their diplomas:
What were the high school graduation requirements for you? Chances are there were no proficiency exams in your time or in your state. Chances are that you needed fewer credits than today's students in the Clark County School District. Chances are that you were not required to take as many math and science classes. Chances are that there were few discipline or attendance provisions.
In my view, the current standard was a giant, ill-conceived leap in "reform," just like the No Child Left Behind Act. Both of these attempts were flawed and need to be reformed -- and that is all this bill seems to be doing.
We should all be proud of the students who achieve all that it describes. If school district officials like it for the improved graduation rate (though no one believes that this will actually mean many more graduates), how can you blame them? The rate was deflated by these new exams the past few years, and critics used that to hammer them despite the hard work they do on behalf of our children every day.
John Ringler
Henderson
Deep breath
To the editor:
Regarding the Saturday article, "Bill aims for ban to go up in smoke":
There is no denying that some in the Legislature are controlled and guided by money and special interests.
Removing the need and right to breathe clean air in bars and restaurants -- a standard imposed by Nevada voters -- is an assault on human health. Breathing clean air is a necessity, a right. Smoking, however, is not a right, as suggested by those who suffer from tobacco addiction. They have no right to afflict their disease and toxic smoke on others.
Take note of any elected official who's not intelligent enough to put public health and well-being above those who seek to expose people to breathing toxic air. Under no condition should legislators endorse any workplace or business being contaminated by a health hazard, from e-coli in the food we eat to smoke in the air we breathe.
It is our responsibility to ensure that legislators whose arrogance comes before the will of the people are never to serve again. We encourage the voters to stand tall with lungs wide open and throw out of office those legislators who seek to diminish and destroy our right to breathe clean air. The law was passed by the majority. It is the ultimate duty of our elected officials to respect the law we enacted.
Stephanie Steinberg
Las Vegas
The writer is chairwoman of Smoke-Free Gaming of America.
