A conservative’s take on Ely issue

James Moldenhauer, North Las Vegas

Wednesday, Aug. 31, 2011 | 2:01 a.m.

A Las Vegas Sun editorial from Monday, “A quandary in Ely,” demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of how conservatives analyze political issues. The editorial deals with the current federal subsidy to provide regularly scheduled air service to Ely, and it closes with the suggestion that conservatives are inconsistent.

Conservatives do not start out with a preconceived result in mind, such as either supporting or opposing federal help to rural areas. The typical conservative would first consider whether the specific proposed expenditure is something the government should be doing in the first place.

In the case of the Ely air service subsidy, a position that government involvement is inappropriate is reasonable. It might be justifiable to claim in some situations that the government should construct an air facility (runways, terminal, control tower, etc.), but subsidizing the actual travel is another thing altogether.

Also, is the project cost effective or a good investment? What are the costs and benefits or payoff, financial or otherwise? And then the clincher: Is the proposed expenditure important enough to actually put in the budget? Not every conceivable beneficial idea deserves funding.

Conservatives have no problem with the government funding roads or encouraging power generation projects that make engineering and economic sense. National parks and paying property taxes are also fine.

Lastly, I had no trouble getting to Ely a few years ago without flying, and there seemed to be all kinds of modern communications available such as telephones, the Internet and satellite TV.