Comments (21) | Add a comment
LETTERS
Pedestrians have responsibilities on the road
Tools
To the editor:
I would like to express my opinion regarding the recent incidents involving both drivers and the death of pedestrians.
I am a police volunteer for the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department and during our routine patrol in the Strip, we have seen pedestrians ignoring the "Don't walk" signs.
Furthermore, they cross Las Vegas Boulevard without using the walkways or bridges built by the city and paid for by our own taxpayers' money for their own safety.
I do not blame some drivers for honking and yelling expletives toward these violators. I do believe that both drivers and pedestrians should be responsible enough for their own safety.
ART RAZ
Las Vegas
Freedom fighters
To the editor:
In his Nov. 9 column ("Don't put philosophy ahead of people"), Steve Sebelius backs away from claims he made in a previous piece ("Defending liberty?" Nov. 6) that conservative legislators "don't care if schoolchildren go hungry," this time granting that nobody "is happy about kids going hungry or workers dying in industrial accidents."
Having abandoned his textbook false dichotomy -- either you agree with liberal policies or you must not care if "parents labor in unsafe workplaces" -- he nonetheless misses the mark.
Part of Mr. Sebelius' beef is with lawmakers who voted against Assembly Bill 137 and Assembly Bill 254 during the past legislative session. He argues, in his more recent column, that even if these conservatives would prefer that children not go hungry, the "conservative philosophy" that drove those legislators to vote as they did will have the effect of hurting "real people suffering in real life." But that isn't the case.
AB137 would have required every school district in the state to increase enrollment in the school breakfast program by 10 percent per year -- until "the school district achieves 100-percent participation in the school breakfast program."
Leaving aside the fiscal folly of subsidizing meals for students whose parents are millionaires, this isn't about breakfast at all -- it's about control, and the question of who should raise and feed your children. Mr. Sebelius and other liberals think the government should. Conservatives and the vast majority of parents think parents should.
It is precisely because parents love their children so much that most prefer that they -- not Carson City bureaucrats -- determine what their child eats.
AB254 wasn't any better. It would have given government bureaucrats the ability to fine employers if "any employee has access to a hazard." The ambiguity of this phrase would have let bureaucrats fine employers for almost anything.
Imagine a construction worker working with a nail gun. Properly used, a nail gun is an important tool. Improperly used, it can be deadly. Is access to a nail gun a finable offense? The law would have left that up to a bureaucrat.
Mr. Sebelius thinks government bureaucrats should have this practically unlimited ability to fine because of the tragic deaths of construction workers on the Strip.
Except, as reported in media accounts, the problem wasn't that OSHA was powerless to fine construction companies or didn't know about the unsafe working conditions. The problem was that "investigators found serious safety violations in the cases, but the agency often did not follow up with aggressive enforcement. Instead, after meeting privately with contractors, the agency withdrew or reduced fines."
So Mr. Sebelius' argument for giving government more power rests on the fact that, a few years ago, a bureaucracy failed to properly use the power it already had.
That, in a nutshell, is the case for liberalism. Government misused its power, so we must give it more power -- and if you don't agree with that, you're starving children and endangering workers.
The "abstract vision" that Mr. Sebelius mocks, and that conservatives and libertarians fight to maintain, is freedom. It is the commitment of believers in freedom that stops government from fully controlling families and businesses.
And I'll take that philosophy -- and its practical implications for people -- every time.
Victor Joecks
Las Vegas
The writer is the communications director for the Nevada Policy Research Institute, a libertarian think tank based in Las Vegas.
Climate change
To the editor:
No one should be in the least surprised with President Obama's decision to shelve the Keystone XL pipeline project (Sunday Review-Journal editorial). After all, most of the pipeline's proponents, particularly the Canadian and Alberta governments as well as the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, shot themselves in the foot by supporting the main factor driving the anti-oil sands movement -- the belief that our carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions are the main cause of climate change. If you accept that hypothesis, then the outcome is obvious -- any project that leads to large CO2 emissions will be at risk.
Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper said in October that approval of Keystone XL was a "complete no brainer" for President Barack Obama. He was obviously wrong.
The real no brainer is that, if those who support the oil sands don't want pipelines that allow shipment of the products of oil sands to be blocked, then they are going to have to work out an effective way of addressing the climate scare.
Taking their talking points from Al Gore and other climate activists and completely ignoring reports such as the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (nipccreport.org) that show that the climate scare is groundless, is a recipe for continued failure.
Tom Harris
Ottawa, Canada
The writer is executive director of the International Climate Science Coalition.
Comments
Terms & Conditions
The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The Review-Journal does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please use the Report Abuse button.
Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 24 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
Economy killing taxes. Have you all forgot the 5 cent per gallon tax increase on diesel by slimeball Bill Clinton? You are paying for it. The trucking companies just passed the cost on to you. You wonder why prices went up? Everything is shipped on a truck. Thanks Bill, friend of the people. This is the same guy who passed sales tax on food in Arkansas. More selective memory on the part of the media.
Minden63. Unless you are totally clueless, you would understand that not all school employees in this state are unionized. Come up with another reason to complain.
When you see the number of guys who are eager to *volunteer* you know how grossly OVERPAID our "professional" cops are.
President Zerø has NEVER wavered in his goal of higher energy prices for American citizens. NEVER. Hence, NO pipeline, no drilling off the shores of America, plenty of wasted money on higher solar and wind energy sources (who just happen to be Ø contributors - imagine the coincidence of THAT!) and higher prices at the pump.
This anti freedom poser in OUR White House MUST BE DEFEATED in 2012. Think of the children!
Cars MUST have the right of way. I've taught my kids NOT to step out in front of moving traffic despite what crosswalk, light, crossing guard, etc. say until AFTER they've assessed the situation for themselves.
They MAY be in the right, but they'll be DEAD right.
Excellent letter, Mr. Joecks, but really, no one takes 'statist'Steve seriously anymore. He's been off the mark on everything from the economy to metro shootings to politics. His column provides comic relief and nothing more.
Agreed seeker2be. Went past an elem school on sloan between sahara & charleston. I was doing the 15mph while being tailgated by someone either picking up or dropping off their kids in too much hurry to follow the law protecting THEIR kids. People dropping off/picking up their kids were racing to get out of the parking lot in front of me so that they did not have to do 15mph behind me. Target these people also and fine them big time.
When an elementary school like the one on the corner of Burnheim and Rochelle allows students and parents to jay walk , double and triple park, as well as use baby carriages to stop traffic to jay walk during drop off and pick up there is no wonder children are not learning anything nor are laws being enforced. When the city of North Las Vegas is too cheap to pay for crosswalks especially on Las Vegas boulevard from Civic Center to Craig and condones jay walking it is understandable why pedestrians are killed jay walking. There should be big fines for both pedestrians and drivers who violate the law. It will never happen.
The writer and the U.S. government are so worried about GHG from the oil sands yet nothing is ever said about all the coal fired refineries in the U.S. that spew many many more times GHGs than the oil sands do. How much more GHG emissions are spewed by all the tankers crossing from the mid east or coming into the Gulf from Venezuela bringing their unethical unregulated oil. Just because you take a picture of "emissions" from the oilsands in the winter when it is 30 below doesn't mean their emissions are higher than refineries in California. They are not.
How many of the free lunch families have $70 - &150 cell phone bills, $100 - $200 cable tv and broadband bills and/or $400 - $700 car payments? BUT those are necessities. Someone will feed my kids.