LETTERS: Don’t risk future on Yucca Mountain
To the editor:
Yucca Mountain is supposedly this huge opportunity, one we can’t afford to unnecessarily reject. But it’s only the latest effort to shove nuclear waste down the throats of Nevada’s populace. The federal government doesn’t want us to get away, after it sunk many billions of dollars into this project without success. The feds don’t want to walk away with nothing to show for their time, money and effort.
As for the safety aspect, if my memory serves me correctly, we started out with the premise that if science proved that the waste could be stored safely, we could proceed with the project. But when studies stated that this was not the case, there was immediate talk of lowering the safety standards, which lets you know how much safety actually mattered.
Now, the millions of dollars in incentives that Nevada Reps. Cresent Hardy and Mark Amodei are interested in are merely an enticement to sell Nevada’s residents on Yucca Mountain. The promises of jobs and money are only suggestions of what might be. If we give the feds the go-ahead, by the time we discover that funding for these jobs or the money promised is not a reality, it will be way too late, and our future generations will have to worry about nuclear waste stored in our backyard.
Please do not trade our safety or the safety of future generations for the promises of jobs, wealth or whatever else that might be offered.
GALEN L. RICHTER
LAS VEGAS
Cheerleading for Reid
To the editor:
Sen. Harry Reid finally did the appropriate thing. The Little Caesar from Searchlight announced his retirement from public office. All I can say is, thank God!
Sen. Reid’s iron-fisted, autocratic rule of the U.S. Senate was a well-known fact. It was also a national disgrace. And his deep-seated, almost visceral hatred of different points of view was disgusting. And that’s just a small part of it.
However, in Nevada, there is another issue. Just how did Sen. Reid do it? How did a name-calling, power-obsessed politician get away with such behavior for so long? I believe the media in Las Vegas were complicit, including Review-Journal columnists such as Steve Sebelius and John L. Smith. They had the senator’s back, running interference for him, covering for him. They never held Sen. Reid accountable for anything.
Whenever it was absolutely necessary to confront a Harry Reid issue, they both simply deflected the problem with a short sentence or two, then pulled the old standby: The Harry Reid hard-scrabble upbringing. How many times have we heard that? He hitchhiked to school. He was a fighter. He grew up in a desert shack. Yes, and I’m sure he built the Hoover Dam, too. Enough!
Instead of critical analysis of Sen. Reid’s performance, what we got were homilies. Instead of honest exposure, we got insulating, circle-the-wagons journalism.
Journalists are the gatekeepers of the public trust. They have a responsibility to enlighten and expose inappropriate behavior in government. It is clear that both Mr. Sebelius and Mr. Smith were long-term enablers. Both were derelict in their duty to the public.
CHARLES CAST
HENDERSON
Difference of opinion
To the editor:
Regarding those upset with Review-Journal sports columnist Ed Graney, it never ceases to amaze me how an individual will threaten to cancel a subscription over one columnist. A newspaper is not defined by one person. There are many features and many newsworthy articles to be read. If you disagree with a person’s opinion, then so be it. Go on and read the others.
But it’s very childish to drop a subscription over one person’s opinion. The paper is not published around Mr. Graney’s column. Perhaps The New York Times would be more to your liking.
ROSE McKIE
LAS VEGAS
