While the military and the rest of the USA is following the problems in Iraq, Turkey and the rest of the world, a select group of senators and congressmen have put together an energy plan to help distroy the future of the USA. In the sort term their plan lets Americans continue to live FAT, BUMB and HAPPY while the country wastes all their natural reasources. In other words, they're morgaging the future of the country. Rather than tighten their belts and start develop plans to conserve and save reasources for future Americans, their senators and congressmen like their previous leaders have taken the easy way out. They've decided to find more reasouces to waste rather than find ways to save.

For some time now I've been complaining about the steps backward the cars of today have taken. In the 1970s, a car that was built like a tank and didn't need seatbelts could get about 20 to 25 miles to the gallon. Today's cars weigh about 1/2 as much fold up like slinky in an crash and require seat belts and air bags to live though a car crash. In the 1970s a bumper protected your car so minor bumps meant no insurance invovlement. Everyone looked at their bummpers and deided no damage was done. Today you might need a tow-truck for the same type of crash. So what has technology got us? A more expensive car, less safety in a crash, and a need for all kinds of additional safety equipment to protect us because the car is built to self-distruct on impact.

The question is why aren't today's light-weight cars getting an equivalant gas or petrol increase in mileage? We know it's the stupid anti-polution devices they added to the car. Again the question is what kind of mileage would we be getting on a 1970's engine today if we continued using technology to imporve that engine? I'm sure that engine would be a lot better than today's wasters. In fact, I bet the increased mileage would offset the polution.

If a 2003 car that gets 30 miles to the gallon and gives of 15 pollutins that would be about the same as a updated 1970 car that got say 40 miles to the gallon and gave off 45 pollutins. What I'm saying is the world has been antipollution wise and safety/engine/fuel usage foolish. Someone better start doing a cost verses benefit analysis before stupid people follow rich carpetbaggers. I guess you could say our congressmen and women just aren't technical enough to being going what they're going. Anyday now I expect them to buy 100 new Brookyn Bridges from some lobbist. What the heck they're the lastest and greatest on the market. We heard it from the designer at the club over cocktails and dinner jsut after our golf game.

Enough of what we;re doing wrong. Let's talk about what we need to do to fit this problem. I guess the first thing is decided as Americans you want to ensure a rich, healthy safe country for future generations. If you don't care about the next generation, then most likely you won't want to sacrifice now to help them. So for anyone that wants to help the next and future gernerations, you've got to start electing congerssmen and women that can't be bought and are willing to be held accountable for what they do.

That being said, first of all you can't make the auto industry produce the best cars if they can produce cheaper fall apart junk that the country is willing to buy. Just think about it. Why would I want to build a car that'll last 15 to 20 years if I can sell you one that'll self-distruct in 3 years. I'll make more money selling you a new car every three years than building one that only has to be replaced every 10 years.

So how do you make the auto industry produce a better car? You make their customers demand a better car. Unforunately, that means you raise fuel prices to force customers to look for cars that get better fuel economy. Then you allow insurance companies to significantly raise car insurance premiums for self-distruct cars and allow them to significanly discount tanks.

This can't happen over night and you also have to give people time to get rid of their old fuel wasters. So congress has to pass a fuel stamp bill. Every registered driver gets "X" amount of stamps per month. And with those stamps they get to buy fuel at a cheap rate. Once they run out of stamps they pay the new super high fuel rate. That'll force people to think about using mass transit and finding other ways to get around like walking which is going to make the population healthier too. It'll also get people thinking about buying a new car that gets really great mileage. So guess what the car industry starts having problems selling fuel wasters and they start making more fuel saving cars. If you don't think that's the way it works check the car sales after the 1973 oil enbargo.

The other thing we talked about was increasing/decreasing car insurance based on the bumper and weight of the car. There are several companies that do crash tests and those cars get distraoyed in 5 or 10 mile in hour crashes. The insurance companies will have all the data they need to decide which cars get the discount based on those tests. The only change in the test should be that they have to use a 1970 car as comparison. Get some old 1970 cars from the junk yards and use them and the standard for crash testing. Most of those testes don't use a running car anyway. They're pulled by a machine to insure the exact speed and position for the impact.

So there you have it. Is congress going to continue to waste the country into distruction or can they find the needed votes to start the country on the road to recovery. I betting on distruction. That's why I don't want to be and American any more.

One more thing, when the USA was founded, a congessman or woman didn't have to know anywhere near what they have to know today. In fact, they were most likely invovled in just about everything (farming, horses, building houses, church,....) and knew almost every business person in their town. So if a bill came up about the newspaper I'm sure they talked to their local company. If a bill cam up about farming they knew all about it. But today, they have to vote on bills about space, war, planes, computer software, hospitals, doctors, medican, meoney for other nations, treaties and the list goes on and on. How can you expect them to make the BEST choice when it comes to writing a bill or passing a law. Most of them are only lawyers and have no idea what the impact onthe country any of their bills might have. Example: the car fuel mileage bill. The auto industry jsut invented the SUV and it isn't covered by the bill.

I hate to say it but government has to get bigger. The country needs an industry technical branch composed of experts from every area of todays modern business. They would have to review any bill that effects their technical area and lobbists would interface with these experts not your congresspeople. Once they review the bills they'll present their findings to congress with pros and cons for each side and a recommendation to congress. Then congress would vote on the bill and they would have to justify voting against the recommendation of their technical expert staff to their people.