Newsroom: (541) 346-5511
Suite 300, Erb Memorial Union
P.O. Box 3159, Eugene, OR 97403
E-mail: editor@dailyemerald.com
Online: www.dailyemerald.com
Oregon Daily Emerald
COMMENTARY
Editor in Chief:
Brad Schmidt
Managing Editor:
Jan Tobias Montry
Editorial Editor:
Travis Willse
Wednesday, November 19,2003
EDITORIAL
Nation location:
U.S. ranks low
on geography
comprehension
Ambrose Bierce, the 19th and 20th century satirist,
wrote that "War is God's way of teaching Americans geog
raphy." But, much to Bierce's would-be dismay, it seems
that recent military conflicts haven't prompted much in
the way of American education. In any case, in deference
to National Geography Awareness Week, we see fit to de
vote this space to failings in American geographical litera
cy, and the importance of individual awareness of the
world as it stands today.
In November 2002, the National Geographic Society
surveyed people ages 18-24 in nine countries, including
America (as well as American 25- to 34-year-olds), testing
their geographical mettle.
And young America fared abysmally, answering correct
ly, on average, only 23 of the 56 worldwide survey ques
tions. (By contrast, Swedish youth averaged 40 correct an
swers; young American adults barely edged out their
Mexican counterparts, who averaged 21.) How many could
find Iraq on a map? Thirteen percent. The figures for Iran
and Israel are about the same. Twice as many — 34 per
cent — could determine that the island used in a season
of "Survivor" is in the South Pacific.
Americans seem to have gaping holes in knowledge about
their homeland, too; About a third of Americans grossly
overestimated the U.S. population, placing it above 1 billion
people (the real figure is less than 300 million). And only 30
percent could locate New Jersey. And in a coup d'ignorance,
11 percent can't find America on a world map.
Media attention seems to figure heavily in what people
know, too. Most (58 percent) of young Americans knew
that al-Qaida and the Taliban were based in Afghanistan,
but they still fared worse than young adults in every other
surveyed country. Worse, only 17 percent of those Ameri
cans could actually find the nation on a world map.
In the modem world of the cosmopolitan and the su
perconnected, geographical awareness is more important
than ever, making the average American's ignorance of
simple geographic facts all the more distressing, and the
need for reform all the more pressing.
Fortunately, the survey itself hints at possible remedies for
the situation. Among young American adults, those with at
least some college education averaged 30 correct responses
(those with less education averaged only 21). Exposure to
other cultures is correlated, too: U.S. respondents who had
traveled outside the country in the past three years averaged
nine points higher than those who hadn't.
One of the most interesting and starkest discrepancies
was between the Net-sawy (a U.S. average of 28 correct an
swers) and those who aren't (only 17).
What's the key here? It may be redundant, but educa
tion — self-education in particular — is key to geo
graphical knowledge, and therefore for a solid founda
tion for digesting the complexities of a contemporary,
interconnected world.
EDITORIAL POLICY
This editorial represents the opinion of the Emerald
editorial board. Responses can be sent to letters
@dailyemerald.com. Letters to the editor and guest
commentaries are encouraged. Letters are limited
to 250 words and guest commentaries to 550 words.
Authors are limited to one submission per calendar
month. Submission must include phone number and
address for verification. The Emerald reserves the right
to edit for space, grammar and style.
EDITORIAL BOARD
Brad Schmidt Aimee Rudin
Editor in Chief Freelance Editor
Jan Tobias Montry Ayisha Yahya
Managing Editor News Editor
Travis Willse
Editorial Editor
Energy
<1 i
We spectators in the curiosity known as
American democracy get to watch a doozie
unfold this week. Overshadowed by a new
Medicare bill is an energy bill introduced
this week to the sideshow known as the full
Congress. Again, we'll sit on the sidelines as
politicians and industry analysts decide our
interests and futures.
The congressional GOP human-body
snatchers, after 10 weeks of closed-door
meetings, finalized their plans for the
first major overhaul of energy policy in
over a decade.
If you love deregulation and corporate
welfare as much as the next red-blooded
American, you'll love this contentious piece
of crap. It does little to wean the country
from the petrochemical teat of fossil fuels, to
protect against more blackouts, to defend
the environment or to emphasize conserva
tion over consumption.
Representatives Pete Domenici, R
N.M., and the insanely pro-business Billy
Tauzin, R-La., announced the comple
tion of the Energy Policy Act of 2003 late
last Friday.
"This is, in essence, a pro-jobs bill,"
Tauzin proclaimed. He and his fellow
party members say the bill will create one
million jobs. But, from the standpoint of
a penniless young American who is
watching his country slowly fall to pieces,
the "jobs" most guaranteed in this 1,700
page legislation are those of business
friendly politicians and their financial
contributors. The big losers again are tax
payers and the sorry saps who will inherit
the environmental mess that was our do
mestic energy policy.
The president of the National Environ
mental Trust, Philip Clapp, called the act
a step in the wrong direction.
"Below the water line is up to $ 100 bil
lion in new national debt to provide tax
breaks to the oil, gas, coal and utility in
dustries," he said in a press release.
According to the Center for Responsive
Politics, energy companies have poured
almost $70 million into political dona
tions with almost 75 cents of every dollar
going to Republicans.
This current legislation very much ap
pears to be a kickback to powerful energy
corporations for their faithful and altru
istic participation in our perfected demo
cratic processes.
While the draft does offer some faint
glimmers of pragmatic and progressive
Joseph Bechard
Cultural obstetrician
thinking, the bulk of the bill is enough to
make anyone with a soul ask what life is
really about.
One of the most questionable inclusions
is some $20 billion in tax incentives to coal,
oil, gas and nuclear energy companies.
Oregon Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden,
quoted in Hie Oregonian Saturday, said:
"What it sounds like is being served up is
a tribute to yesteryear, a hodgepodge of
subsidies to well-connected industries."
One of the most appalling features
comes in the bill's repeal of the New
Deal-era Public Utility Holding Compa
ny Act. By doing away with this 68-year
old provision, Republicans would re
move restrictions on the ownership of
utilities and set up perfect conditions for
a rash of mergers similar to those seen in
the communications industry after the
passage of the Telecommunications Act
of 1996.
Also to the delight of utility compa
nies, the bill will delay for three years
plans to create a national grid with re
gional managers. Many experts believe
the disjointed and unregulated grid sys
tem currently in use is partly at fault for
the mid-August blackout in the north
eastern United States and parts of Cana
da. A national grid would have encour
aged more sharing between regions of
the grid.
Another particularly unsettling stipula
tion would exempt producers of MTBE —
an additive used as an oxygenate in gaso
line to make it bum more cleanly — from
product liability lawsuits filed after Sept.
5. This would essentially terminate hun
dreds of millions of dollars in lawsuits re
lated to the pollution of groundwater
supplies by neglectful companies.
The bill would also relax some envi
ronmental laws and hasten permit-grant
ing procedures in order to facilitate ener
gy production on public lands.
On a slightly more positive note, the act
would require production of ethanol, a
corn-based gasoline oxygenate, to double by
2012. And by 2015, MTBE would be phased
out completely as a gasoline additive
But the Republicans' inclusion of the
ethanol rule and their decision to stay out
of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
were seen as concessions made to De
mocrats in order to speed the act's pass
ing. These minor Republican compro
mises might be enough to butter some
Democrats' environmental bread, but the
bill offers little to get really excited about.
The Washington Post reported Sunday
that until 2020, the conservation measures
in the bill would be roughly equal to three
months of national energy consumption.
The legislation is expected to cruise
through the House but meet some resist
ance in the Senate. Spineless Democrats
could filibuster, but their lack of passion
and guts could be enough to give the
bill's authors just what they wanted.
This new Republican scheme fails to
remedy many of the current problems in
our energy policy, and we should all hang
our heads in shame if it passes.
It fails to increase automobile emission
standards, it fails to secure the energy
grid, it gives companies little incentive to
explore renewable resources and it gives
no regulatory muscle to protect against
what one Associated Press writer called
"Enron-style market manipulation."
Not only would this bill be a huge pay
off for some less-than-reputable compa
nies, it would cost taxpayers billions of
dollars in times of economic uncertainty,
and it would point our energy policy
down the wrong road for years to come.
Contact the columnist
at joebechard@dailyemerald.com.
His opinions do not necessarily represent
those of the Emerald.