Tough Days Ahead - Speculations On The Fate Of The Nation During The Second Bush Term
by Lee H. Goldberg
While I've certainly never been afraid to use these pages to occasionally take a pot-shot or two at a politician or policy I disagree with, I have also recognized that most readers come here for technical information, industry gossip, and the odd bits of trivia that make analogZONE fun to read. That's why I've usually bitten my tongue and tried to follow my partner Paul's advice to keep my work on our web site relatively apolitical. Unfortunately, I feel that the recent re-election of George Bush as president poses enough problems for our nation's future that I am compelled to break with this policy.
Since I am neither an economist, an educator, nor a foreign policy expert, I don't have the credentials or expertise to address many of my differences with the Bush administration's policies. Instead, I'll draw from my experience as an engineer to address the few areas I know pretty well -- energy, environment, and civil rights.
Based on the last four years' actions, it's pretty apparent that the nation's energy policy has been, at best, one of benign neglect. Despite a few token efforts at hydrogen and solar technology development (which have been mostly ineffectual corporate handouts) the Bush administration has done nothing to reduce our dependence on increasingly scarce fossil fuels while our domestic oil production capacity continues to decline (see the latest DOE summary for details). Besides the possible long-term ecological consequences (I'll get to that later), giving doctors and lawyers huge tax breaks for Hummers (Editor's Note: A loophole being removed at the end of 2004) and obstructing any improvements in vehicle fuel efficiency regulations makes us increasingly dependent on imported oil and natural gas. With 62% of our oil coming from overseas (American Petroleum Institute July 2004 figures), our economy and strategic strength is increasingly in the hands of on unstable Persian Gulf states and questionable allies like Russia.
Our dependence on foreign energy can be viewed as either a crisis, or an unprecedented opportunity to create new technologies, products, and services that would improve our balance of trade and create entire new industries to drive our economy into a new century of prosperity. While the government cannot impose its dictates on a market economy, it can provide vision, and leadership, that could align the nation's industries around this more hopeful future. Government leadership in the form of focused tax incentives, market-based regulations, and strategic investments in research are essential to help redirect corporate energies to match our national interests. A responsible president could lead by example, encouraging citizens to adopt more responsible consumption habits.
Unfortunately, Mr Bush and his cabinet have done precisely the opposite, and encouraged the most wasteful behavior within both industry and the consumer sector. The result is that ever-larger portions of our GNP are going offshore to pay for our fuel while American industries struggle with high operational costs and find shrinking markets for their less energy-efficient products. Given the lack of vision displayed during the first four years, and the well-documented ties to the petroleum industry, I can only expect that things will get much, much worse during this second term.
This administration has also turned its back on environmental issues. The President and his associates have disguised their assaults on our wilderness, wetlands, air, and drinking water with political doubletalk and legislation bearing deceptive titles such as "Clear Skies" and "Healthy Forests" which gut current protections and parcel out irreplaceable natural resources to the highest bidder. Unless an informed and active citizenry rides herd on them, there is no reason to expect that Mr Bush or the newly-elected congress will do anything other than continue to roll back the environmental legislation and to oppose any new measures to preserve the planet for our kids.
We are also falling further and further behind the rest of the developing nations in terms of global environmental compliance. The recent adoption of the Kyoto Protocols by Russia puts this minimal global warming reduction initiative into effect against our deep-rooted opposition that now makes us the equivalent of an outlaw nation. Oddly, adopting the very same energy conserving technologies that we could have used to reduce our dependence on imported fossil fuels could have rapidly brought us into compliance with the Kyoto accords. Thanks to this striking lack of environmental leadership our industries will lack the incentives to modernize their operations to meet new global trends towards reduced toxicity, energy efficiency, and product recycling. Over time, our manufacturers will become less competitive as their operating costs soar and the products they produce lose market share as they fail to meet global environmental standards.
Finally, I must briefly touch upon the vast arsenal of surveillance technologies that are being widely deployed to monitor the movements and communications of the US population in the name of "Homeland Security." While it is arguable that some level of internal intelligence must be put in place to counter the threat of terrorism, it is essential that we approach these measures with the grim understanding that they have great potential for misuse and could serve to undermine the very freedoms we are trying to preserve.
Without due deliberation and exercise of proper restraint, tools like Carnivore (aka DCS1000) e-mail monitoring system, the "Lawful Intercept" technologies built into all modern communication systems, and the "Total Information Awareness Initiative" could easily become the means for identifying and suppressing legitimate political dissent. Unfortunately any debate on the subject has been howled down in a frenzy to secure the nation against a vague and ill-defined enemy. "Terrorist" has replaced the McCarthy-era term of "communist" as we rush to sacrifice our constitutional rights on the altar of security.
So what happens when we put these effective surveillance methods at the disposal of over-zealous officials with a political agenda? We may be about to find out. "The so-called "Patriot Act" and "Patriot II" measures give law enforcement agencies unprecedented, and potentially unconstitutional, powers to invade private citizens' lives in the pursuit of terrorist activity. And "suspected terrorism" is already being used as a fig-leaf to justify the use of these tactics in more mundane criminal investigations. With one Texas legislator already having illegally invoked the Patriot Act to track down his political opponents, it's not a long stretch of the imagination to see a day when simply holding unpopular views makes you a target for cyber-scrutiny, or maybe even worse.
It would be ironic if, in his zealous efforts to protect our country, Mr Bush's administration undermined the very principles of free speech, tolerance, and respect for human rights upon which the nation is built.
The next four years will be a challenging time as a small minority of ideologues in the White House attempt to force their will upon an entire nation. Unless these alarming trends are reversed, America will face grave environmental, political, and economic consequences as we devolve into a polarized, isolated, and backward nation that no longer influences the world except through intimidation. Despite this, I'm still proud to be an American and will continue to fight for the rights and basic principles that my ancestors left Russia to enjoy here a hundred years ago. It's going to be a difficult four years, but I'm betting that that 200 years of democratic tradition and the common sense of a strong people will prevail.
Comments? Questions? Any ideas of what really went on in Florida and Ohio? Write me at lgoldberg@green-electronics.com.