Help In These Times raise $10,000 in three weeks! Donate now!
PrintDiscuss
Features » February 10, 2004

Two Little Words

By Sandra Steingraber

Share   Facebook Digg del.icio.us Newsvine   StumbleUpon Reddit Furl Propeller

It came as a two-word directive right after the remark about protecting American businesses from “needless federal regulation” and right before the one about the glories of free trade. It was embedded in the middle of a longish sentence that seemed to include an encoded message about drilling Alaska’s wilderness for oil: “…so I urge you to pass legislation to modernize our electricity system, promote conservation, and make America less dependent on foreign sources of energy.”

“Promote conservation”: Bush’s sole reference to the environment in the 2004 State of the Union address. One hundred eighty-two words about the imagined threats posed by gay marriage. (And what were those again?) Two words—sort of—about the real threats to our collective habitat.

Given that the state of the union is, in some demonstrable ways, dependent on the state of the union’s environment, a bit more commentary seems in order. How is our nation’s air supply faring? What is the status of our drinking water? Our topsoil? How are the union’s fish stocks holding up? Here are 182 words on the subject that an environmentally minded president might have said:

New research shows that small particulate matter, as from the burning of diesel fuel, is a dangerous threat to our health. Inhaling these particles contributes to asthma in our children, preterm labor in our pregnant mothers, and heart disease in our elders. We cannot afford this loss of human productivity. Moreover, our dependency on coal to generate energy not only fouls our air, but poisons our fish with mercury. Because of mercury contamination, sport-caught fish are now unfit for consumption in many of the nation’s states and mothers wonder how many tuna fish sandwiches they can safely feed their children. This is unacceptable. At the same time, pesticides and fertilizers threaten our groundwater. There is no point in looking for water on Mars when our nation’s own drinking water supplies are being poisoned by chemicals largely derived from barrels of foreign oil.
Tonight I call upon Congress to reform our environmental policies in ways that will end our 19th Century dependency on coal and oil. Let’s invest in wind and solar power. Rebuild our public transportation system. Buy organic. Promote conservation.
  • Help In These Times publish more articles like this. Donate today!
  • Subscribe today and save 46% off the newsstand price!
Biologist Sandra Steingraber is a visiting distinguished scholar at Ithaca College in Ithaca, New York. Her most recent book is Having Faith: An Ecologist’s Journey to Motherhood.

More information about Sandra Steingraber
Share   StumbleUpon Facebook Digg del.icio.us Reddit Newsvine Propeller Furl
  • subscribe to print magazine

  • Reader Comments

    Pebble Bed nuclear reactors are an interesting new technology that should also be investigated. Nuclear energy does not pollute the land or the water. Granted, nuclear waste is a pain to deal with. But vigilant safeguards have thusfar prevented any accidents (Now I’m definitely going to get a lot of hits on that statement!).

    Wind power and solar power are not going to be able to handle our power needs in a reasonable time frame or for a reasonable cost.

    And yes, terrorism is a concern. Placing these in remote locations, underground, can address this issue. How about putting a couple of massive power plants out near Yucca Mountain?

    Just a thought.

    Posted by Ty on Feb 11, 2004 at 12:04 AM

    TY I used to hate seeing your name take up space in the forum but after laughing at your ass more than a few times I invite you to please post as much as possible. These days we could all use a good laugh. I might even cancel my cable subscription. Who needs comedy central when we’ve got you?

    Posted by APRIL 26, 1992 on Feb 12, 2004 at 3:02 AM

    What is “Pebble Bed”? Why is April so angry? Why is Dubya still in office?!

    Posted by Chris on Feb 12, 2004 at 4:37 PM

    The Bush League is not concerned about the ecology any more than they are concerned about the welfare of brown-skinned “furriners” or even the econimc health of America’s working poor. To suggest that Duh-Be-Yah might bend to consider something other than this quarter’s profit motive for America’s richest corporations is silliness. Oh, well.

    Posted by MartySchrader on Feb 12, 2004 at 6:21 PM
  • register a new account »Posting Security

    To participate in our forums, please register for a free account.
Appeared in the March 1, 2004 Issue
Also by Sandra Steingraber
If you like what you're reading, why not help pay for it?
IN THESE TIMES COMMUNITY MEMBERS