Has senator lost touch with Nevada?

Tuesday, Oct. 4, 2005 | 8:21 a.m.

Sen. Harry Reid voted against the confirmation of John Roberts as chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. He justified his position by voicing his concern over certain opinions that Roberts wrote while he was working for the Reagan administration. Roberts was just doing his job. All attorneys have an obligation to serve their clients without regard to personal beliefs.

Roberts handled many cases. He served clients with diverse backgrounds. He was an excellent attorney and did not acquire his professional stature by promoting his own agenda. He is well-versed in the law. He respects precedent. He is a good man and well qualified to be chief justice.

Is Reid really in touch with his constituents? Was Reid's "no" vote a mandate from the state he represents, or was his vote more representative of a personal agenda? Reid claimed that his vote was for "the American people," but I thought that a majority of Americans approved of Roberts. It would seem that his vote was based on a personal view that Roberts might turn out "to be the wrong man for this job."

Nevada voters were part of the millions of Americans who put a Republican president in office. Admittedly, Reid has consistently opposed Yucca Mountain, and a majority of Nevadans agree with his position there. However, I believe that he spends only a small part of his time on issues that are important to Nevadans.

At the next opportunity, I predict Nevadans will vote for someone with a fresh approach to Washington politics, and a personal dedication to serve the citizens of Nevada.

Clorinda Fontano

North Las Vegas