LETTERS: Rooftop solar must prove it’s viable without massive subsidies

Rooftop solar viability

The rooftop solar industry received a short-term reprieve, yet its greed never subsides (“Rooftop-solar program still a go,” Aug. 27 Review-Journal). Currently, this industry and/or solar panel customers receive a 30 percent federal tax credit for every installation, so a $30,000 install receives a tax credit of $9,000.

This taxpayer-funded boondoggle not being enough of an incentive, the industry and its customers want all on-the-grid NV Energy ratepayers to continue subsidizing any excess rooftop solar energy purchases, needed or not, at more than double the per-kilowatt-hour rate that NV Energy pays its wholesale suppliers. What’s not to like about this deal if you’re in the solar industry?

China, the world’s No. 1 solar panel producer, has made all of its products cheaper by devaluing its currency, while our dollar valuation has increased dramatically, thereby reducing the cost of everything purchased from China, including solar panels and equipment. These valuation changes make rooftop solar equipment 30 percent cheaper than a year ago, yet the rooftop solar folks still want more money from taxpayers and ratepayers.

The message is clear: It’s time for the rooftop solar industry to see the light at the end of the tunnel. Either get financially justifiable without massive taxpayer and ratepayer subsidies, or go home.

Richard Rychtarik

Las Vegas

ESAs provide choice

Kudos to Gov. Brian Sandoval and the state Legislature for joining a handful of other states in granting choice through Education Savings Accounts, allowing Nevada parents to opt out of the dismally failing Clark County School District system. Our state is consistently ranked near the bottom in graduation rates, literacy and overall achievement and is clearly failing our kids.

I have always found it ironic that private schools in Las Vegas can educate our children with far better results for, in many cases, 60 percent of the total spent per pupil in public schools. Smaller class sizes, better-quality teachers and facilities, with greater results for less money. Imagine that! And those who can benefit the most from an ESA are at-risk kids from lower-income families, who would otherwise not be afforded the choice to attend quality private schools.

As to the American Civil Liberties Union’s nonsense lawsuit over allowing religiously affiliated schools to participate, all private schools qualify, so there is no favoring one denomination over the other (“ACLU sues to block education accounts,” Aug. 28 Review-Journal). With ESAs, parents and students win, and teachers unions and bureaucrats lose.

Dean A. Parker

Las Vegas

Clinton questions

It is ironic that the Review-Journal published an editorial criticizing Hillary Clinton for not taking questions, just days before her North Las Vegas town hall, at which she answered questions from Nevadans (“Clinton can’t duck questions at Nevada debate,” Aug. 14 Review-Journal). I was there. She got a lot of questions. She answered them all.

Everyone I spoke with loved the event. Maybe more ironic is that I saw she talked with reporters afterward and sat down with Telemundo. Yet the Review-Journal complained that she won’t speak with reporters. What exactly is the gripe here?

Most importantly, the Review-Journal said nothing about the conversations she’s had with voters across the country, including one discussion in Las Vegas at Rancho High School and another in Reno with veterans. Since day one, she has been talking with voters about her plans for the country and how to make the middle class mean something again. Disgruntled editorial boards won’t decide this election. The voters will, and that’s who Mrs. Clinton is talking to.

Tony Lomando

Las Vegas

Anti-Trump bias

I watched the news conference at which Donald Trump had Univision reporter Jorge Ramos removed, and I came away with a far different view than that reported by Reuters (“Univision anchor removed from Trump news conference,” Aug. 25 Review-Journal online).

Mr. Trump reportedly had Mr. Ramos removed because he didn’t like his question. Nothing could be further from the truth. Mr. Trump had just called on another reporter for a question when Mr. Ramos, a conflict junkie and supporter of undocumented immigrants’ right to enter the United States, began yelling his question. As this barrage began, Mr. Trump told him several times that it wasn’t his turn.

I did not see Mr. Trump ask security to take him out of the room, but I did see them go over to Mr. Ramos and escort him out. There was never a mention in the article or on any of the local news stations that he was allowed back in five minutes later and did ask his question and got an answer.

With the current media bias, it’s no wonder that our country is in the shape it’s in. People have not heard the whole truth for six years.

Carol McClendon

Henderson