We need a plan to save state’s system of higher education

To the editor:

To listen to the governor, legislators, university regents and the chancellor of Nevada's system of higher education, all is lost and the sky is falling (Feb. 3 Review Journal). While they have the lament down pat, they don't seem to have a plan.

In the meantime, our system of higher education is getting massacred by random, hasty and ill-conceived cuts. We need a plan, something that leaves us with some semblance of higher education in Nevada.

I have a plan.

My plan begins with a significant change in attitude. The general attitude in Nevada is that it is two states, north and south Nevada. So it is that we have two competing universities in Nevada. At the undergraduate level, it is reasonable to have duplicate programs in the north and south. But with Nevada's small population and revenue stream, it is ridiculous to duplicate specialty programs. We need to see ourselves as one state.

If we saw ourselves as having one university system, we would eliminate duplicate specialty and graduate programs. For example, we might let the north have football, and the south would have basketball. Through attrition and buyouts, we could delete one-third of each duplicated program and then combine the remaining two-thirds into one superior program. Reno could have an enhanced football program, and Las Vegas could have an enhanced basketball program.

Such a plan would require some moving around. Football faculty in the south might not like moving to the north. They would not have to maintain employment in Nevada but, if they did, the state could facilitate moving expenses and the search for a new homestead. When the dust settled, Reno would have an augmented football program and Las Vegas would have an augmented basketball program.

The same plan could cover all specialty and graduate programs.

No one in the north or south will like this plan -- it seriously interferes with regional empires. But if the governor, legislators, regents and chancellor have a better plan, I'd love to hear it.

The sky is not falling, but we are facing a serious economic crisis and we need a plan for a future that includes quality higher education in Nevada.

EVAN BLYTHIN

Blue Diamond

The writer is an emeritus professor, University of Nevada, Las Vegas.

Ensign who?

To the editor:

Is Harry Reid Nevada's only senator? While it is true Sen. Reid is the Senate majority leader, he is not solely responsible for our governor's ineptness nor for the state's inability to meet federal grant guidelines or the under-usage of received funds. Yet, Sen. Reid has been vilified for every denial of every request for funding.

On the "flip" side, your reporting and editorials have failed to show what role Nevada's junior senator -- John Ensign -- has actually played in advancing Nevada's interests in Washington. Indeed, he appears, according to your own reporting, to perform a "non-role." Even Sen. Reid's GOP competitors never mention Sen. Ensign. By comparison, Sen. Reid's handiwork in saving teaching and law enforcement jobs, helping CityCenter get funding it desperately needed, and maintaining the state's unemployment benefits is evident.

Since Sen. Ensign's ability to bring tangible benefits to the state is rarely noted, it seems that your paper -- as well as Sen. Reid's political opponents -- have unfairly and unfoundedly chastised the senior senator for not doing enough.

At no time has anyone compared his efforts and achievements for the state with those of his colleague, Sen. Ensign.

Fairness and objectivity require at least that.

KENNETH PRAGER

NORTH LAS VEGAS

Real warming

To the editor:

In two recent columns about global warming, Walter Williams has claimed "it is the height of arrogance" to believe that mankind can make significant changes to the Earth's balance, and that "it is a fact that there are more polar bears now than in 1950." The first claim is just plain erroneous, and the second is misleading, at best.

It is the height of cognitive dissonance to deny that humans are capable of upsetting the Earth's balance. We have witnessed the great whales hunted to near extinction, the destruction of rainforests around the world, unabated over-fishing, and the increase of plastic garbage in the ocean. The production of persistent organic pollutants, which accumulate in top predators, has resulted in their presence in human blood and breast milk. Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) once threatened the stratospheric ozone layer. In 1987, the United States led other nations in signing the Montreal Protocol, which phased out the production and use of CFCs. Mr. Williams probably believes it was divine providence that eventually stabilized ozone loss, but it was actually the decisions made in Montreal.

I also take offense to Mr. Williams' view that I am brainwashing my students about the plight of polar bears. Although bear populations likely increased after bans on trophy hunting, an accurate total population is almost impossible to obtain. One should keep in mind that the 1950 estimate of 5,000 bears has long been recognized as unreliable. The only population of polar bears that has been subjected to an uninterrupted long-term study has clearly shown us the future for polar bears. In this population (southern Hudson Bay), the capture rate of seal pups has been reduced as a result of earlier ice break-ups, leading to decreased fecundity for the population.

Global warming theory has not been dreamed up by a bunch of anti-American, nature-worshiping environmental extremists. The scientists involved are a mixed bunch, and include scientists from America's two vanguard institutions of ocean science: Woods Hole and Scripps Institute of Oceanography.

Regarding the hacked e-mails, the public should defer judgment. Claiming that the e-mails prove the entire theory a massive fraud is akin to concluding that there is no crime problem just because a police officer was found to have planted evidence on a suspect.

WILLIAM FOUTS

LAS VEGAS