Powerful lobbyists running the Legislature

How $weet it i$! State Sen. Mike Schneider, D-Las Vegas, certainly became Father Christmas for NV Energy, with the last-minute passage of the amendments to the energy bill (“Last-minute approval irks some,” June 8).

So please refresh me: Why, exactly, do we have elections? Why don’t we just give free, open range to the lobbyists, who have immeasurably more power than we voting peons?

But then, not all lobbyists have the same power, do they? Lobbyists for public education and the university system had compelling data to improve education in Nevada, but that information fell on deaf ears. But NV Energy, gaming, mining — now that was a totally different story, wasn’t it?

Patricia van Betten

Blue Diamond

Medical bills

To the editor:

In response to Mark Traeger’s letter on Wednesday, he, too, is missing something in the auto insurance mandate vs. health insurance mandate debate.

Look at it this way. If you don’t have auto insurance, the government doesn’t pay if you have a wreck. But if you go to the county hospital and don’t have insurance, the government pays that bill. Which comes from your taxes.

ObamaCare is an effort to make everyone responsible for their own medical bills. What’s wrong with that?

Steve Jackson

North Las Vegas

Pay yourselves

To the editor:

In response to the letters from Mark Traeger and Rick Clawson on Wednesday arguing against government-mandated health insurance, I would make one point against their arguments.

When an individual decides to go without health insurance, he becomes a burden to me and all other taxpayers who end up paying his bill through higher insurance premiums and higher taxes for indigent health care. Thus, the only equitable way to spread out the cost of health coverage is to mandate that all people have insurance. Only in that manner do we all share in the burden of health care.

I would acknowledge the right of Mr. Traeger and Mr. Clawson if they would pledge to not seek health care if they personally cannot pay for it.

Stephen C. Anderson

Henderson

Reid vote

To the editor:

So, let me get this straight: Sen. Harry Reid opposes ethanol subsidies, which cost $5 billion annually. But he voted against repealing the subsidy because “he did not like the tactics used by (Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma) to force the Senate to vote.”

Well, boo hoo. The Grand Poobah got his feelings hurt. Never mind it is best for our country to start reducing the overall debt. How dare Sen. Coburn do anything that is not blessed by the great Sen. Reid!

I am not a resident of Nevada but Senate legislation affects the whole country, not just Nevada. Therefore, I believe I have a right to comment.

Then Sen. John Thune, R-South Dakota, says that ethanol takes the place of 445 million barrels of oil annually, which is the equivalent of $34 billion, that doesn’t go overseas. Sounds good on the surface, until you take into account that it takes oil to turn the corn into ethanol and, because it is highly corrosive, it takes trucks to transport it because it can’t be shipped via pipeline.

Not to mention the increase in corn prices that affect our food prices. Many foods use corn syrup. Just check the labels. Corn is also used as animal feed, increasing pork and chicken prices, to just name two.

Thank you, Sen. Reid, for nothing.

Kenneth W. Griffin

Mohave Valley, Ariz.

A true statesman

To the editor:

What a man the Honorable Sen. Harry Reid is. He doesn’t let $5 billion of taxpayer money get in his way when he has a gripe.

Seems that although Sen. Reid opposed subsidizing ethanol, with good reason, he voted for it because he didn’t like the tactics used by Sen. Tom Coburn to force a vote. Wonderful. Our great senator showed them.

I can’t help but wonder how much more taxpayer money our senator has given away because of his dislikes?

Jack Oliver

Las Vegas

Let them serve

To the editor:

I don’t understand why there is so much resistance to having gays and lesbians serve in America’s military. It’s not a novel idea. As of 2009, some 25 countries allow openly gay citizens to serve. They include most of our NATO allies, including Canada, France, Germany, Italy and the United Kingdom, as well as countries such as Israel, Ireland and Australia.

I think once gays are allowed to serve here, in a few short years nobody will care.

Richard J. Mundy

Las Vegas