Five major problems that must be addressed

To the editor:

Five major problems that the United States faces are gaining energy independence, curtailment of global warming, the mounting national debt, loss of good jobs and the exploding cost of health care, none of which are being adequately addressed by our elected officials. Why should this be when the solutions to these problems are readily available is astounding me.

All these problems could be addressed if only there was some sort of entity capable of implementing solutions based on the overall long term well being of the population rather than one beholding to special interests and short term benefit of a chosen few. What would such an entity be called? How about calling it, in the words of Abraham Lincoln, "a government of, for and by the people". 

Let's start by lumping together interrelated problems of energy independence, global warming and mounting national debt. Our dependence on imported oil is the major factor in all three. Eliminate the need for imported oil and our trade deficit and greenhouse gas emissions would be drastically slashed, we would have energy independence for all practical purposes and it could be done with existing technologies. How could this be possible you ask? By doing things like allowing Ford to market the new Focus that will get 62MPG without hybrid technology as it will do in Europe next month instead of imposing restrictions that will prevent it. As long ago as 2006, polls of Americans showed that we realize that we don’t get what the Europeans do, and wanted an average fuel economy of 40 MPG legislated. Yet we keep supporting those who encourage us to heap contempt on Europe for signing Kyoto and passing climate and energy legislation. The result is that Europe’s Ford buyers are offered a Ford Focus Econetic that is capable of (US) 62 MPG: available next month. Americans are offered a smaller Fiesta getting just 40 MPG, that won’t even be available till 2011. Implementing such existing technology along with enforcing realistic speed limits, mandating energy efficient products and other conservation programs would pretty much solve the trio of related problems. An added benefit to enforcing speed limits and imposing substantial fines is that it would probably make police departments and highway patrols self sufficient, at least until people learn to obey speed limits. 

That leaves us with the cost of health care and the loss of quality jobs to deal with and the answers to these problems are fairly simple as well. Have a government of for and by the people stop bowing to special interests, undo the damage done by trade agreements, end incentives for exporting jobs and implement readily available solutions to cut health care cost. 

Health care costs in the United states are far higher than those in many other developed countries while quality falls far short, in spite of the outright lies constantly being circulated, so why not adopt what works elsewhere and in parts of our own country and while we are at it accept the fact that elimination of unnecessary and often harmful procedures required if costs are to be contained. Of our total $2.3 trillion health care bill last year, a whopping $500 billion to $700 billion was spent on treatments, tests, and hospitalizations that did nothing to improve our health. Even worse, new evidence suggests that too much health care may actually be killing us. According to estimates by Elliott Fisher, M.D., a noted Dartmouth researcher, unnecessary care leads to the deaths of as many as 30,000 Medicare recipients annually.

That leaves us with the loss of jobs since trade agreements such as NAFTA were implemented. Ross Perot, who I voted for was right. That loud sucking sound heard after NAFTA went into effect was the sound of jobs being exported. Call it protectionism if you choose to but the fact is that if Americans who are willing and able to work are to have jobs, and if we are to have security in the future, products and services must be made in America. America's economic elite have long argued that the country doesn't need an industrial base. Quoting Richard McCormack (editor of Manufacturing and Technology News). "Without such a base consumer spending that pulled us out of previous recessions will not put Americans back to work. Without n industrial base , the nation's trade deficit will continue to grow. Without an industrial base there will be no economic ladder for future generations stranded in low paying service sector jobs. Without an industrial base the United States will be increasingly dependent on foreign manufacturing even for its key military technology" To keep the house of cards that our economy has become from collapsing Wall Street create money it did not have and Americans spent money they did not have but greed of the financial industry caused it to collapse. If there is any hope for pulling ourselves out of the economic hole we are in it a government of for and by the people must rebuild a manufacturing base.

Charles Leach

Lynchburg Ohio