Voters ought to seek out new sheriff

To the editor:

I was impressed that the Clark County Commission tabled the vote on the sales tax increase for the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department (“County taps brakes as public raises questions,” Wednesday Review-Journal).

But what disturbs me more is that Sheriff Doug Gillespie has ignored a recommendation to fire an officer, and in reading the Review-Journal, we’re also told it has taken months to bring another officer to court to face charges of intimidating and sexually harassing women (“Officer charged after harassment allegations,” Aug. 7). No doubt Sheriff Gillespie and police union leader Chris Collins are doing everything they can to keep this officer employed.

Just maybe when the next election comes around, we will have a new sheriff, and our commissioners can find a way to get away from the police union. Otherwise, we will be faced with the Gillespie Gestapo and Mr. Collins, who will continue to ignore the rights of citizens. Hopefully, the voters will realize how bad it is and make sure that Mr. Gillespie is not re-elected. Then we can get a new sheriff who can work with a budget, respect the rights of citizens and hold bad cops accountable.

JOHN GIESLER

LAS VEGAS

Reid and renewables

To the editor:

Sen. Harry Reid’s proposals to mitigate climate change do not include responsible differences. He asks us to adopt renewable energy policies that will also create good-paying jobs, but never mentions the thousands of jobs lost in the fossil fuel and coal industries, by at least a 3-1 ratio. Nor does he expound on the increased cost for energy, which greatly disadvantages the middle class and the poor.

This isn’t an argument against renewable energy. It is a reminder to consider the most fragile element in the equation: working-class people. The elites can afford the consequences. We need legitimate ideas to protect the rest of us.

TOM HOOVER

LAS VEGAS

ObamaCare

To the editor:

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is the signature achievement of the Obama administration. So why all the waivers, favors and delays (“Waivers, favors,” Aug. 7 Review-Journal editorial).

President Barack Obama had previously provided large businesses with an allowable delay in the employer mandate portion for up to one year. The ACA required members of Congress and their staffers to participate in the insurance exchanges, but in doing so, they would lose their gold-standard coverage from the Federal Employees Health Plan, so a suspension was provided in the portion of the law that negatively affects congressional members and staffers. The National Treasury Employee Union, which represents IRS workers, also wants out of ObamaCare.

For ObamaCare to succeed, it will require everybody’s participation. The more people who participate, the lower the price per participant; the fewer the people, the higher the price. That is simple Math 101.

My question to everybody is: For those of us left in the middle class, where is our waiver?

ANITA TOSO

LAS VEGAS

Water rights

To the editor:

I don’t understand the objections to Clark County reaching out to rural Nevada to get the water it needs. Seeking water from rural areas has been going on since ancient Rome, if not before. You can still see the aqueducts the Romans built when you travel to the regions in Europe they occupied.

Another way of looking at this problem: Should New York City rely only on the water inside its boundaries? That’s pretty much what the opponents of the pipelines are arguing.

Let’s remember that Clark County is the economic engine for Nevada. Its population of 2 million and its 40 million annual visitors provide some 80 percent of the state’s income. Cut off the water, and these same ranchers and farmers will wonder why they’re not getting state funding. Plus, thousands of Nevadans up and down the state would lose their jobs.

We’re not in Rome, but let’s do as the Romans did.

RICHARD J. MUNDY

LAS VEGAS

Hiding news

To the editor:

Way back when the George Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin incident first surfaced, there was unprecedented media coverage. Mr. Zimmerman’s life was covered from the cradle up to the point of the shooting. Mr. Martin was presented selectively, to the age of 12 years. Through the efforts of President Barack Obama, Attorney General Eric Holder, Revs. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson and Rep. Charles Rangel, Mr. Zimmerman was ultimately charged and faced trial.

The president even led us to believe that if he had a son, that son would look a lot like Mr. Martin.

Mr. Zimmerman was found not guilty. That should’ve been the end of this issue, but not for all the aforementioned agitators, who insisted on fanning the flames. And I must say, they did a fine job of that.

Then, in just the past week, we learn that three black teenage boys severely beat a white teenage boy on a school bus in Florida. The incident was recorded by cameras on the bus, then released (inadvertently?) a month after it occurred. The beating took place on July 9 — five days before the verdict in Mr. Zimmerman’s trial.

Why was this information withheld for so long, while everything about Mr. Zimmerman was before the public almost immediately and lasted forever? Was the bus beating incident withheld by those agitators because Mr. Zimmerman’s trial was not yet finished? Whatever happened to conscientious reporters who presented the news accurately, truthfully and in a timely manner? There will be dire consequences for these racially biased news offerings.

WAYNE P. BROTHERTON

AMARGOSA VALLEY