Youth and the moral side of online gambling
To the editor:
In your Sunday editorial, "Upping the ante," the Review-Journal supports Internet poker. Respectfully, I disagree. There are not adequate safeguards to prevent teenagers from illegally gambling. There are in life "moral imperatives." A society that violates them suffers grave, negative consequences.
Only one major casino owner opposes Internet poker - Sands CEO Sheldon Adelson. He states, "It's a moral issue." His concern for our youth and society is exemplary and praiseworthy. That a billionaire - one of the richest persons in the world and a casino owner himself - opposes Internet poker should give profiteers and the public a reason to re-think supporting and passing this inherently corrupting, detrimental legislation.
There is also the "butterfly effect" factor - a seemingly flawless, money-making venture is simultaneously undermining the moral imperative, thereby bringing horrendous consequences, suffering and sorrow.
Though it appears this unwise legislation will pass nevertheless, I say you never know.
Further, better to go down with the ship than save one's life by kicking innocent, non-swimming children out of the life boat into a tumultuous, rapacious ocean.
Though we who oppose Internet poker gambling are few, I choose to be on the side of the moral imperative and make a stand to safeguard the youth of America.
Clyde Dinkins
Las Vegas
Traffic jams
To the editor:
I've been reading many articles about proposed local stadiums and have seen many of the pluses of such plans reported. But none of the articles seems to address one of the key issues: How do you get 20,000 to 50,000 people to a stadium and then get them out given that we already have clogged roads and no viable mass transit?
One recent article looked at Dodger Stadium comparisons and made it sound like a stadium downtown should be something people can walk to. Who are "they" and where are they going to walk from? You need parking or mass transportation.
Other articles talk about all the opportunities for sport teams and events, which certainly will bring in money. However, trying to shoehorn something into space that has poor access for political, monetary or ego gain is extremely shortsighted and an example of poor planning.
Las Vegas seems to have a history of just "build it and we'll worry about the details or fix it later." Try bringing 20,000 people to the same place at the same time using the systems and infrastructure we have and you can guarantee a disaster.
Before we go too far with any of these stadium plans, it's time we see from the developers their plans for infrastructure to move people to and away from any of the proposed stadiums. The public should demand it.
Richard DePaso
Henderson
Medicaid expansion
To the editor:
I like Review-Journal columnist Steve Sebelius. He's smart and witty.
Nonetheless, I disagree with most of Mr. Sebelius's positions, particularly the recent foolishness about Republicans not caring about the middle class (Friday Review-Journal). That one I just laughed off. But Mr. Sebelius's Sunday column, "No free money," was an excellent analysis of the true costs of expanding Medicaid in Nevada, now that such expansion is no longer required by the (un)Affordable Care Act. Enlarging Medicaid would not be a free ride for our state, by any measure.
It's possible that liberals (who generally don't like to discuss costs) may not realize that Mr. Sebelius is actually in favor of the Medicaid expansion, as evidenced by his mention that deaths have declined in states with enlarged Medicaid rolls. Fine and dandy, but there are plenty of other ways to reduce deaths without massive spending outlays on the federal and state levels.
The one cost not really addressed in the column is the federal government's contribution, which is not manna from heaven, as we might like to believe. Rather, federal reimbursements come from taxpayers' pockets, and from a half-trillion-dollar reduction in Medicare spending, which in turn will come out of the hides of the elderly. We may someday see studies showing an unnecessary rise in senior deaths due to the Medicare cuts in the law.
That said, kudos - this time - to Steve Sebelius for providing the transparency we all yearn for.
Ellen Shaw
Henderson
Chicken mayor
To the editor:
Boy, this is complicated. Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, former Obama chief of staff, wants to block any further expansion of the Chick-fil-A chain in his town. Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy actively supports traditional marriage and Mayor Emanuel has decided to side with gay marriage advocates. He says Mr. Cathy's views are not consistent with Chicago's values. In other words: Mr. Cathy, take those jobs someplace else.
But just a few days ago the Chicago Sun-Times reported that Mayor Emanuel welcomed the help of Nation of Islam's Louis Farrakahn in patrolling Chicago's crime-ridden streets. It appears that Mayor Emanuel is willing to overlook Mr. Farrakahn's avowed anti-gay positions and even his toxic anti-Semitism (Mayor Emanuel is Jewish).
I'm confused. I don't know how Rahm Emanuel sorts all this out in his own mind. But I suggest he pay attention to one of former Texas Rep. Dick Armey's axioms, "When you make a deal with the devil, you're the junior partner."
Robert R. Kessler
Las Vegas
