Reid looking out for Nevada on Yucca

To the editor:

Contrary to Sharon Sevigny's Saturday letter, I would like to thank Sen. Harry Reid for keeping a nuclear waste repository out of Nevada.

Thank you, Sen. Reid, for not allowing the most poisonous substance known to man to travel on U.S. Highway 95 one mile from my house. Thanks for preventing the inevitable accident that would spew radioactive material with a half-life of tens of thousands of years in my neighborhood. Thanks for not letting the federal government impose its will on our lightly populated state, as has been done in the past.

Even though I am a Republican, I can recognize when you are working for the best interests of the state of Nevada and its people.

Roger Hillman

LAS VEGAS

Hysterical approach

To the editor:

Sharon Sevigny's economic analysis ("Thanks, Harry," Saturday letter to the editor) was on the money, showing how much it will cost Nevada if Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and his environmental lobbyists succeed in killing the Yucca Mountain Project. Yucca should be canned only if scientific proof is presented showing that it is unsafe.

The same hysterical approach that has created our oil shortage is now focused on eliminating both nuclear power and the fossil fuels that provide the cheap energy that keeps our economy going. The only proven justification is to create very expensive alternative energy industries. There is still no hard science backing the theory that minor concentrations of carbon dioxide cause global warming.

I wonder how much Sen. Reid receives from environmental and alternative energy lobbyists.

Tom Keller

HENDERSON

Gasoline prices

To the editor:

While the price of gasoline has increased some 31 cents a gallon in the past 30 days, the media -- both print and electronic -- have been unusually silent. Perhaps I missed it, but no reason for this current increase has been offered by the newspapers or the television watchdogs.

Surely with the price of oil at low levels and conservation by the driving public, not withstanding OPEC's cutback in production, a valid reason must exist. I trust that we may soon be enlightened.

Herb Nixon

HENDERSON

The future

To the editor:

I am writing with sincere hopes that readers may stir up and fight against the proposed budget cuts for Nevada's higher education system.

I am 19 years old. I am a student. I am the future. I currently go to UNLV, where I am studying to become a teacher, hoping one day to attain my dream of becoming a history professor somewhere in my home state of Nevada.

Right now I feel as though my state does not want me here, either as a student or as a future educator.

What other conclusion can I come to when the governor proposes to cut education funds in a state that already underfunds education?

The time to speak out is now, people. Do not let your silence or indifference condemn Nevada to oblivion. Contact your legislators, your public servants, and force them to adhere to the will and benefit of the people.

Amanda McAtee

HENDERSON

Real needs

To the editor:

At last a voice of reason. The Review-Journal's Geoff Schumacher, in his Jan. 23 column, quotes Evan Blythin, a retired communications professor, regarding Nevada's university system. Mr. Blythin opines that having UNLV and UNR compete does not provide what is best for Nevada and the two should consider a consolidation. But as Mr. Schumacher notes, "most faculty" would reject these ideas "because it would thwart their empire building." (Does the name Jim Rogers come to mind?)

More than 50 percent of Nevada's budget goes to education. I am no statistician, but if I were, I could provide the numbers to show how it is terribly overfunded or terribly underfunded, as your priority requires. But as an average person, that seems to be a considerable amount spent compared to what is spent on all the other needs we have.

While I sympathize with the students at UNLV and UNR who agitate against tuition and fee increases, maybe this is their first lesson in the real world. That being, if you have capital, you are able to have "things." If you do not, you do without.

It would be wonderful if everyone could have a college education provided by the government, but that is not likely. They also need to understand that the state is responsible for providing the "needs" of the people first.

Jerry Andreoli Jr.

LAS VEGAS