Dina Titus is going to be a GREAT representative for Nevada and will no doubt help bring the CHANGE we all desire to Washington. From Wall Street to Main Street, we will all be so much better off in the next two years. The enthusiasm and hard work that she and other new representatives like her will bring to Congress is exciting and a breath of fresh air for Americans.

On a somber note, its too bad Joe Heck lost such a close race against an opponent that never showed her face. As negative as things got against Beers, who frankly, deserved it, Heck's race was no walk in the park.

I think that Steven Horsford and Bill Raggio will have a great working relationship and that Buckley will work diligently with them to bring our state out of the financial wreck it is in. "No New Taxes" Gibbons will be overrun and forced to support a more fair and equitable tax structure that ensures a more secure revenue stream. He will meet the same fate as George H. W. Bush and lose big time in 2010.

McCain can now hopefully return to Congress being the real Maverick and leader he has shown us he can be. With the prospect of being President now out of reach, he can focus on being the reformer we all knew and loved in 2000.

By the way, Palin who?

Nance-

If golf courses got this exemption, then wouldn't the argument be about tax evasion, not tax increases? If you subscribe to this "incentive", then why do you oppose incentives for renewable energy and efficiency?

Also, if golf courses are open space, then shouldn't me and my family be able to go picnic on them, say the 15th fairway with a nice view of the mountains?

Does anyone know how much water we waste annually on these courses? How many jobs would be lost if these course owners had to pay taxes? (My guess is 0) How many of the courses are owned by out of state businesses? How much profit would these guys lose? (My guess, not enough to make them shut down)

What would shut them down? Supply and demand. Fewer people paying green fees and fewer tourists coming to Las Vegas might ultimately cost us a few courses. If we lose a few out of 58, well, I think all of those golfers that are still golfing would find a way to golf here, don't you think?

I think it is always important to look at the whole picture, don't you think Nance?

Hey KDR81 and JFNance32:

This is a story about efficiency, which is something I would think you would appreciate. Do you demand efficiencies in government and support free markets and the accumulation of wealth? Then making our grid more efficient and looking for ways to cut energy use in our homes, businesses, and government buildings should be championed by both of you.

I just don't understand how either of you can take a nice op-ed from the LV Sun and knock the paper for things that have nothing to do with the piece. This is not a report about renewable energy or government subsidies. This is about a better way of doing things.

California's utilities are de-coupled, meaning that basically, they make money by providing reliable service, not producing and selling energy. Apply this same thinking to government, that it should provide efficient and reliable service, not just come up with ways to always expand for the sake of expanding. Makes sense right?

Also, I wouldn't try the "shareholder and profits argument" that distinguishes the utilities from government. I only draw comaparisons so as to create an argument that I would hope you would see fit to agree with.

There are public and private utilities across the country that are both run well and run poorly. By guaranteeing a rate of return to the utility (de-coupling profits from sales), you protect their value and allow them to grow, albeit, at a pace that ensures reliability and fewer price spikes.

You two probably sit around a table at Denny's drinking coffee, trying to come up with these brilliant arguments. Your opposition to using fewer resources and protecting the public's health seems dim. You basically oppose the creation of 1000s of jobs and the creation of new inventions that will in turn create even more wealth for our community. All in the name of "anti-environmentalism", which is such a weak and narrow position to take anyways.

Or do you just sit around and say "meh" to each other, then like automatrons, go back to your keyboards and just spew out nonsense.

Either scenario seems likely.

JFNance32-

Get a life. You post on here all the time and you always say the most meaningless, partisan things. You should get the facts straight on the difference between "voter registration fraud" versus "voter fraud" and how both impact elections.

1. Groups that register voters MUST turn in the forms. ACORN, according to press accounts and the registrar of voters office in Clark County, turned in the forms with notes attached to forms that were possibly fraudulent registrations.

2. NO ONE, including your resourceful and highly intelligent dog, can vote if they don't actually show up. It is highly unlikely that the "paid government poll workers" and the "paid by special interest group monitors" would allow your dog to vote, no matter how charming he might be. The same could be said for anyone stupid enough to try and vote as Tony Romo or Terrell Owens.

3. Voter fraud occurs when your dog, or someone less charming that is trying to pass themselves off as a Dallas Cowboy, actually commits the act of voting. At that point, your charming dog and the Dallas Cowboy impersonator will be charged (and you will probably be charged as well for aiding and abetting your dog).

4. This is a partisan ploy by Sue Lowden, plain and simple. If she succeeds at anything it will most likely be at gaining 3-5 seconds of Katherine Harris type fame. If this effort doesn't help her raise money for her party or her candidates, then why do it? It's just not strategic, which pretty much sums up the Republican Party's efforts this cycle.

So JFNance32, why don't you step away from the keyboard, go play fetch with your dog, and get some fresh air.

KDR81-

You have no evidence of that statement being true. We don't take advantage of our state's homegrown energy like Wyoming, Colorado, and Texas do. We need to develop our renewable energy resources and create green jobs to jump start our local and rural economies. But I assume the point you are making is that anything green must be bad because it must be about saying no or more regulation, right? Give it a rest.