Friday, January 26, 2007
The President's actual words to Congress and the nation Tuesday
evening were, "Our country is pursuing a new strategy in Iraq,
and I ask you to give it a chance to work." But I kept thinking
back to the chorus of the 1969 John Lennon song, "Give Peace A
Chance." It became an anthem at peace protests. Perhaps George
W. Bush remembers it too. After all, in 1969 he was 23 and a
member of the National Guard, but was never called up.
"It's in our vital interest to diversify America's energy
supply," the President said, "and the way forward is through
technology." He's absolutely right, as long as we choose the
right technologies. You may recall his 2003 State of the Union
speech; he assured us that Freedom Car, "powered by hydrogen and
pollution free," is the answer. This year he did not mention
hydrogen. Hydrogen is dead. Last year Bush lamented America's
addiction to oil, but the only thing that held down consumption
was soaring prices. This year, Bush called for greater use of
ethanol. Congressmen from the corn belt applauded wildly, but
Mr. Bush didn't mention corn. Ethanol from corn is simply an
agricultural subsidy. He was talking about making ethanol from
switch grass and wood chips. Cellulosic ethanol has one big
advantage: too little is known to say it can't work.
"We made a lot of progress," the President said, "thanks to good
policies here in Washington and the strong response of the
market." I'm not sure what progress he had in mind, but roads
were clogging with gas guzzling SUV monsters until fuel prices
soared. If SUVs had been held to a reasonable CAFE standard,
Ford would not have neglected improvements of its standard
models, and might not be faced with cutting back, or worse.
Unlike most State of the Union addresses, the President made no
attempt to touch on all the critical issues the nation must deal
with this year. With the exception of health care, the speech
was devoted to Iraq and related terrorism issues. Coming out of
a congressional election dominated by the Iraq War, that may be
understandable. But here are a few terms a scientist might be
inclined to search for in the speech and would not find: Basic
research, which faces a severe funding crisis, failed to make the
cut. Neither was the stem cell controversy, which pits religious
fundamentalism against basic human compassion, touched on. Nor
was the space program, which has evolved into a sort of pointless
reality show adventure. Climate change and global warming, the
major threats to civilization, warranted a bare mention. And
finally, whatever happened to missile defense?
|
