Why respect Madison’s view of Constitution?

To the editor:

Walter Williams’ Jan. 13 column on the Constitution is full of cherry-picked quotes, false assumptions and beliefs our founders are infallible.

For instance, Mr. Williams quotes James Madison’s veto message of a bill constructing roads and improving canals. This is a cherry-picked quote. I could have just as easily quoted Republican President Dwight Eisenhower signing a much bigger bill starting the interstate highway system.

Then Mr. Williams plays his “got you” game by asking whether Mr. Madison was ignorant of the Constitution or whether it had been amended since his comments. Although Mr. Madison was the principal author of the Constitution, this is still only Mr. Williams’ interpretation of the document.

My question: Was Mr. Eisenhower ignorant of the Constitution? Or did Mr. Eisenhower just have a different interpretation — one long upheld by the Supreme Court?

Mr. Williams also uses the myth that Mr. Madison was one of the founders of the country, therefore, people such as him and Thomas Jefferson are infallible.

But they were far from that. Let’s not forget that these people said that a black slave was just three-fifths of a person. They also had strong and varying opinions of their own actions. These were the people who trusted the selection of U.S. senators to state politicians rather than the people. They considered women property. So why is Mr. Jefferson’s “general welfare” interpretation any more important than Franklin Roosevelt’s or Ike’s?

Mr. Jefferson himself had to broaden his constitutional interpretation when he executed the Louisiana Purchase because his critics said he had no power to do so.

Ray A. Cohn

Las Vegas

Poor house

To the editor:

I see on Wednesday’s front page that Sen. Harry Reid said Nevada is on its own — no financial help is coming from the feds. He went on to say that congressional Democrats would be happy to provide budget aid, but that the Republicans would block it.

Wow, those nasty Republicans. Or could it be that Sen. Reid and his fellow Democrats have already spent the federal government into the poor house, giving huge amounts of our dollars to bail out the likes of California, Illinois and New York?

Jim Woods

Henderson

Financial mess

To the editor:

Sen. Harry Reid is playing “gotcha” on the people of Nevada.

First, Sen. Reid led the passing of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. (Isn’t marketing great?) The act moves 16 million people to Medicaid (35,000 in Nevada to a total of 311,000 people), a program for which the states are responsible for 45 percent of the cost. This currently costs Nevadans $500 million annually and soon will rise to $600 million.

This without input from the citizens of Nevada or their elected state officials.

Second, Sen. Reid leads the extension of unemployment benefits to 99 weeks. Yes, this too is a cost imposed on the states with no consideration for the impact on the state budgets.

Then he puts together a program for the states to “borrow” funds from the feds. This, of course, must be paid back with interest. Nevada now owes the feds $645 million, and that number will soon move to $825 million.

All of this without the people of Nevada or their elected officials having a voice in the decision.

Now Sen. Reid stands in front of the press to say “gotcha.” There is no choice for you — our elected officials and people of Nevada — but to raise taxes because I am not going to help you. Going even further, he says it is his opponents who stand in the way of him helping us. How disingenuous can one be?

If Sen. Reid were truly interested in helping Nevadans, he would place the budget-busting decisions he has made on the table — along with supporting the repeal or re-design of two decisions that have impacted our economic future in such significant ways.

I don’t oppose unemployment benefits or less costly health care. This is about placing politics ahead of the people.

At the same press conference this week, Sen. Reid stated, “We have to do more to create small business opportunities.” Yet he leads Congress to decisions that have no consideration for taxes on small businesses, which leave entrepreneurs no choice but to hire fewer people. He says the politically popular thing, all the while acting to make doing something about the issue more difficult.

Coming to the table to help resolve the mistakes of the past is the way forward. Let us hope that Sen. Reid will get the message soon — as the clock is ticking on the financial mess that has been created.

Gary Doyle

Las Vegas

Simple test

To the editor:

In response to Donna Coleman’s Wednesday letter regarding drug testing for the unemployed:

The state of Nevada should let it be known that all applicants for unemployment and/or welfare benefits will be subjected to drug testing upon application, and thereafter on a regular basis.

Nevada would save millions of dollars that would be redirected to worthy recipients. Drug users would still be welcome to move to California, Arizona or elsewhere to apply for benefits to feed their drug habits.

Michael Sayward

Boulder City