Copyright 2002 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution  

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
March 24, 2002 Sunday, Home Edition
SECTION: Editorial; Pg. 10F

LENGTH: 624 words

HEADLINE: OUR OPINION: Talk of change after Sept. 11 a bunch of gas

BYLINE: CYNTHIA TUCKER

SOURCE: AJC

BODY:
The worst attack ever on the continental United States --- the terrorist assault of Sept. 11 --- supposedly changed the nation forever. But a mere six months later, the change is hard to see. Indeed, the landscape looks depressingly familiar.

Church attendance has settled back to usual levels. Travelers still smuggle dangerous objects past airport security guards. American culture remains superficial (celebrity boxing was a ratings smash!) and self-absorbed. And politicians continue their short-sighted quest for self-preservation.

With elections looming, Congress caved in to both Big Business and Big Labor (aligned on this issue) to resist raising the fuel-efficiency standards for automobiles. That means that Americans will continue to be overly dependent on petroleum flowing from dangerous parts of the world, and American soldiers will continue to put their lives at risk to defend our right to drive inefficient vehicles.

So remind me again --- what has changed?

The terrorist atrocities of Sept. 11 should have stunned Americans into acknowledging the price we pay for guzzling gas. While we constitute only 4.5 percent of the planet's population, we use 26 percent of its petroleum. The vast majority of that petroleum comes from foreign sources, including Saudi Arabia --- a difficult ally whose Islamist culture produced 15 of the 19 hijackers.

The easiest way to lower our dependence on foreign petroleum is to require greater fuel efficiency in our vehicles. While President Bush and his oil buddies insist on drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, that won't help. According to a recent report from the Bush-led Energy Department, the United States will have to import 62 percent of its oil by 2020 if we don't drill in ANWR.

So what's the yield if we do drill? We'll import 60 percent, the report said. That's hardly worth the damage to the Alaskan wilderness.

Conservation is clearly the best way to approach the problem. American technology already has the means to raise fuel efficiency. All that's required is the will.

That, however, was sadly lacking last week, when the U.S. Senate fell for the misinformation spread by automobile manufacturers and their workers, who claim that greater fuel efficiency will raise the cost of cars and compromise safety. The increased cost would lead to fewer vehicles sold and, in turn, more workers laid off, they contend.

The Senate voted to give the Transportation Department two years to study whether safety and employment would be affected by higher Corporate Fuel Economy standards. That's a cop-out. There is already solid evidence the critics' claims are false: They made the same claims in 1985, the last time CAFE standards were raised, and their dire predictions never came true.

Road deaths and injuries per mile traveled have steadily declined, and jobs in the automobile industry hit their peak in 1999. (Admittedly, many of those jobs were in foreign-owned companies, such as Honda.) The American automobile industry simply doesn't want to change the way it has comfortably done things for decades.

Because GM and Ford won the debate last week, more young Americans will have to put their lives on the line to defend oil pipelines. The United States now imports about 25 percent of its oil from the tumultuous Persian Gulf region. By 2020, that is expected to increase to 40 percent.

With a volunteer military, the burden of defending American's oil interests will be borne disproportionately by the working class, while the middle class continues to show its patriotism by plastering American flag decals all over its huge SUVs.
 
Cynthia Tucker is the editorial page editor. Her column appears Sundays and Wednesdays.

LOAD-DATE: March 24, 2002