State workers feeling a pinch? Join the club

In response to Ed Vogel’s Tuesday article, “State workers feeling strain”: Oh, the horror!

The pain these workers must be enduring. Never mind that they’ve had paid health care, retirement, hour lunches, weekends and holidays off, longevity pay, merit pay, step raises and cost-of-living adjustments.

They have made a living from the wallets of private-sector workers who have to pay for their own health care and retirement — all while supporting government employees through ever-increasing taxes.

Now state workers feel the pain those in the private sector have been enduring since the recession started. Cry me more tears. And, yes, I know they also pay taxes. But that is no more than rebating private-sector tax dollars, much like auto manufacturers do.

Join the club and quit your whining.

Warren Pawliuk

Pahrump

Separation of powers

To the editor:

There was a very interesting comment in the Review-Journal’s Monday article, “Politicians put justices to test.” Nevada Supreme Court Chief Justice Michael Douglas was quoted as saying the judicial branch “must be independent of politics and personalities and concerns as to public popularity,” and that the court has “one true allegiance and that is to the Constitution and the rule of law.”

My knowledge of Justice Douglas and my observation of the other members of the court tell me that, as citizens, we can take the chief justice at his word. The current makeup of the court is one of the best we’ve had and is light years removed from some of the nightmare courts we have had in the past.

That being the case, there is a question: Your honor(s), why are there government employees sitting in elected office in direct and blatant violation of the Nevada Constitution’s separation of powers clause, which clearly states that if you exercise authority in one branch (any elected official) you may not function in any other branch (government employees).

We have seen the court defend the separation doctrine many times — on its own behalf — but ignore it completely when it comes to the dangerous co-mingling of legislative and executive authority in the same hands.

If this court is truly serious about its “one true allegiance … to the Constitution,” then it is time to eliminate the most egregious violation of the document currently happening: government employees in elected office.

KNIGHT ALLEN

LAS VEGAS

Pony up

To the editor:

In as much as we face an immediate crisis with a considerably large payment on a portion of the national debt, and in as much as the Republicans and Democrats are entrenched in opposite positions, each of which has merit, it seems appropriate to “think outside the box.” There is a third possibility that requires the engagement of thousands of American citizens, yet provides an opportunity to save the nation’s honor while diminishing the amount we need to pay on the debt at this time.

During the Kennedy administration, a law was passed on June 27, 1961, that permitted individuals to give gifts to the U.S. government to be used only to reduce the public debt. Unfortunately, most citizens are unaware of this opportunity to serve. Nevertheless, over the decades, millions of dollars have been donated to the government under this provision. Money should be sent to the U.S. Treasury website, which is www.pay.gov (search for Gifts to Reduce the Public Debt). Or contributions may be mailed to Department G, Bureau of the Public Debt, P.O. Box 2188, Parkersburg, WV 26106-2188. In the present case, contributors should specify that the monies are to be used for the immediate debt crisis.

Citizens, rich and poor alike, can contribute to this fund in order to pay a portion of, or at least diminish, the amount owed on this current deadline. I suggest a committee be formed to head up a major national fundraising drive. It should be led by celebrities and individuals from both parties. Cities, states, businesses and organizations as well as private citizens could compete for recognition of their patriotic generosity. Efforts need to be transparent, with regular reports of progress in the news, on the Internet and on television.

There appear to be two possible objections to this suggestion.

First, many citizens do not trust the government to discipline its spending habits. It must be very clear that the donations do not provide the opportunity to spend more. Second, some economists may oppose the effort because they believe the money would be taken from the very important consumer market.

Nevertheless, I believe a concerted, ongoing effort to reduce this debt would find enthusiastic participants, make evident our determination to meet our financial obligations and demonstrate to the world the patriotic fervor of the American people.

JANE E. OLIVE

LAS VEGAS

Drawing the lines

To the editor:

I wish to lend my support to Steve Sebelius’ column in the Sunday’s Viewpoints section. He is quite correct to note that redistricting “is the most nakedly political act any politician ever engages in, and it’s never pretty to watch it happen.”

The members of the Legislature are remiss in their duties, and they failed us by not producing an acceptable redistricting plan. Gov. Brian Sandoval should place the committee in a room, shut the door and lock them in until they produce an acceptable plan. Once the plan is ready, then a special session can be called to vote on it, and Gov. Sandoval can sign it.

Redistricting is naked politics, and it does not belong in any other venue other than the political branches of the state government.

MARC GONZALEZ

LAS VEGAS