The foundation stones of our public education system are wobbly bricks, not boulders of substance. It was designed in such a manner by Count Bismark in order to churn out common denominators to staff the factories (and armies) of the industrial age. And here we are, a century and a quarter later, still churning out common denominators as if big mills dominate the landscape.
The education bureaucracy has avoided changing this ancient formula that generates common denominators because modern standardized tests have been tweaked to mathematically prove that most students test "above average." Why should the bureaucrats change the system when they can fudge the test results? The parents, more than anybody, are happy with the outcomes.
Parents hate to spend their evenings going over homework with their kids when they’d rather watch reality programming on television. ("My Name Is Earl" can be considered in this genre.) Parents love the fact that their kids are almost guaranteed to graduate from high school. Parents are thrilled when their sons and daughters are bestowed with "honor student" bumper stickers. Parents cherish the PROMISE scholarship for students with grade-inflated B averages.
You’ve read in your local newspaper that one-third or more of high school students are not only on the honor roll, but one-third of that group has a 4.0 average. You have also read in your local newspaper that high school graduating classes now typically have multiple valedictorians. Six valedictorians are not uncommon and a dozen or more is no longer rare.
This has gotten out of hand, but there is a solution.
Across the state, we have a cadre of outstanding teachers. Perhaps the best algebra teacher is in Mason County. Perhaps the best English literature teacher is in Berkeley County. And so on. Why not let these peer-reviewed, outstanding teachers teach every student in West Virginia high schools? Technology can make it happen.
In this day and age, Mr. Jones could stand before a camera in Point Pleasant at 9 a.m. and broadcast his algebra class to every high school in West Virginia. Ms. Smith could then go on at 10 a.m. to broadcast her views on "Great Expectations" from Martinsburg. Every hour, your sons and daughters would receive instruction from the best teachers available. This method of teaching would outshine even that of the most exclusive prep schools.
For my great expectation to work, barriers would have to be demolished. First and foremost, the teachers' unions would have to admit that most teachers are mediocre and then convince mediocre teachers that they would be better off as highly-paid classroom monitors and teachers' aides.
The second, and even more difficult task, would be getting the parents on board. Parents understand that Ms. Smith would have great expectations of her students when they took the exam on "Great Expectations." No longer would a last-minute read of "Cliffs Notes" on the internet suffice for an A or B grade. Little Johnny might not be so learnéd in Ms. Smith’s class!
When one out of eight (12%) high school students make the honor roll, then you know that the system is doing its job of not only raising standards but also of weeding out the students who are not college material. When one out of three students make the honor roll, then you can appreciate why colleges and universities struggle to graduate half or fewer of their matriculating classes.
There is one other aspect to my high-tech classroom of the air that merits consideration. If done right, snow days would be a thing of the past. Broadband can bring the classroom of the air to every house via satellite, DSL, or cable. And don’t tell me that there are households that cannot afford broadband. For decades, the satellite dish has been known as West Virginia’s state tree.
An education is not something you should ever sell out for. When you do earn an "A", your first question should be "Why wasn’t the class harder?" Yet under our education system, we have embraced low expectations and rewarded ourselves handsomely with Ozian certificates for successfully guessing answers from multiple-choice lists.
The day is coming when China, Japan, and India challenge our position as world leader. Asian parents have long understood that their children’s education is the way to success. Unlike Americans, they could care less about bumper stickers.
We have given government a monopoly on public education. That doesn’t mean we should accept mediocrity and an archaic system of teaching.
Friday, January 13, 2006
Friday, December 30, 2005
It's Time for a New Year!
After several years of intensive research, I have finally completed my genealogy study. It has been an amazing experience in learning who my ancestors were. Some were notable, most were just regular folks, and a few obviously were scoundrels. I thought I’d pass along biographical sketches of a few of the more interesting ancestors in my family tree.
ADMIRAL BEAUREGARD PIERRE LAROQUEFORT:
The Admiral is my only known ancestor of French origin. He was declared a hero during the Battle of New Orleans by Andrew Jackson. During the battle, Captain LaRoquefort sailed into New Orleans with a hold full of bananas. His ship was a month late arriving at port and the bananas had ripened to a rich brown color. But all was not lost as he directed his crew to spread the bananas on the streets of the French Quarter, thus causing the British soldiers to slip and fall during their advance. Jackson awarded a field promotion to Admiral for my great-great-grandfather LaRoquefort.
Based on further research, I also learned that France built the Maginot Line along the arc of a banana to honor the exploits of Admiral LaRoquefort.
RUGBY QUILP D’URBERVILLE:
He was an itinerant cobbler from Exmoor in Devonshire. He arrived at Boston in 1693 claiming to be the sole heir of Lord Bartelby Pecksniff D’Urberville, Twelfth Earl of Exmoor. It turned out that he was the illegitimate son of Lord Bartleby and Miss Tess Mountoffen. She worked in the Lord’s castle as a pastry maker and was renowned for her meat pie concoctions.
"R. Q.", as he was known in Massachusetts Bay Colony court records, convinced many Boston merchants that he was the scion of royalty and ran up quite a tab before being sentenced to Debtor’s Prison in London. Before leaving Boston, he had managed to impregnate my great-great-great-grandmother, Dorcas Micawber.
GEORGE WASHINGTON ALLEN:
First of my ancestors to settle in what is now West Virginia, he served in the Revolution and was given land in lieu of wages for military service. As was the custom in that age, he was required to clear the land and plant corn to prove his homestead claim. He then turned his interests to distilling his crop which allowed him to increase his landholdings. He married Peg(gotty) M’Choakumchild and they had thirteen children that lived to adulthood.
EDGAR ALLAN ALLEN:
A fourth cousin, I include him because of his literary skills. He went west in the 1870’s and wrote famous short stories such as: The Mule of the Baskervilles, A Tale of Three Cities, The Casket of Lemonjello, and The Pit and the Metronome. For two decades, Edgar Allen was a newspaper reporter and wrote obituaries for the Tombstone Gazette.
Here’s hoping that your 2005 helped you find your roots.
ADMIRAL BEAUREGARD PIERRE LAROQUEFORT:
The Admiral is my only known ancestor of French origin. He was declared a hero during the Battle of New Orleans by Andrew Jackson. During the battle, Captain LaRoquefort sailed into New Orleans with a hold full of bananas. His ship was a month late arriving at port and the bananas had ripened to a rich brown color. But all was not lost as he directed his crew to spread the bananas on the streets of the French Quarter, thus causing the British soldiers to slip and fall during their advance. Jackson awarded a field promotion to Admiral for my great-great-grandfather LaRoquefort.
Based on further research, I also learned that France built the Maginot Line along the arc of a banana to honor the exploits of Admiral LaRoquefort.
RUGBY QUILP D’URBERVILLE:
He was an itinerant cobbler from Exmoor in Devonshire. He arrived at Boston in 1693 claiming to be the sole heir of Lord Bartelby Pecksniff D’Urberville, Twelfth Earl of Exmoor. It turned out that he was the illegitimate son of Lord Bartleby and Miss Tess Mountoffen. She worked in the Lord’s castle as a pastry maker and was renowned for her meat pie concoctions.
"R. Q.", as he was known in Massachusetts Bay Colony court records, convinced many Boston merchants that he was the scion of royalty and ran up quite a tab before being sentenced to Debtor’s Prison in London. Before leaving Boston, he had managed to impregnate my great-great-great-grandmother, Dorcas Micawber.
GEORGE WASHINGTON ALLEN:
First of my ancestors to settle in what is now West Virginia, he served in the Revolution and was given land in lieu of wages for military service. As was the custom in that age, he was required to clear the land and plant corn to prove his homestead claim. He then turned his interests to distilling his crop which allowed him to increase his landholdings. He married Peg(gotty) M’Choakumchild and they had thirteen children that lived to adulthood.
EDGAR ALLAN ALLEN:
A fourth cousin, I include him because of his literary skills. He went west in the 1870’s and wrote famous short stories such as: The Mule of the Baskervilles, A Tale of Three Cities, The Casket of Lemonjello, and The Pit and the Metronome. For two decades, Edgar Allen was a newspaper reporter and wrote obituaries for the Tombstone Gazette.
Here’s hoping that your 2005 helped you find your roots.
Friday, December 9, 2005
Along With Atlas, West Virginia Shrugs
In 1991, the Library of Congress and Book of the Month Club surveyed readers and asked them to name books that had made a difference in their lives. As you would expect, the Bible finished in first place. You will be surprised to learn that Ayn Rand’s 1957 novel, Atlas Shrugged, was in second place, leading all other books.
Jeff Allen, a railroad-hopping hobo, is one of my favorite fictional characters. We meet him in "The Sign of the Dollar," the 20th chapter of Atlas Shrugged. Jeff is discovered hiding in Miss Dagny Taggart’s personal rail car. Miss Taggart, by the way, is no mere rich dame on holiday; she is the Operating V. P. of Taggart Transcontinental railroad.
Rather than have the conductor throw Jeff Allen off the train, Miss Taggart unexpectedly invites him to join her for supper. And it is their dinner conversation that succinctly explains Ayn Rand’s view of communism and compulsory unionism. The dinner scene, in many ways, is the essence of Ayn Rand’s philosophy.
Jeff Allen had been a machinist and shop foreman at the Twentieth Century Motor Company plant in Wisconsin. When the owner of the company died, his heirs recommended a new employee compensation plan: From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. Still ashamed of his actions after twelve years, Jeff Allen admits that he and the other workers voted the plan in.
Jeff Allen’s dialogue, spoken in the inner sanctum of Ayn Rand’s heroine, is both riveting and compelling. He explains how unproductive workers bled the talented and ambitious workers of not only their paychecks, but of their will to work. No matter how much the ablest produced, the needs of the non-productive were never satisfied.
With regard to the author’s writing style, her metaphors are often over the top and harsh to a fault. Even so, I would submit to you that the answer as to why West Virginia’s best and brightest young people have left here in droves for jobs in other states is because West Virginia government has adopted a semblance of "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" in its tax laws and spending policies. For decades, the business sector has been charged ever-escalating taxes and fees to pay worker compensation benefits, unemployment benefits, Medicaid benefits, public employee benefits, and public education costs. For decades, businesses have closed or moved their operations out of state. For decades, West Virginia’s students have learned the three R’s-readin’, writin’, and route 77.
But wait! Times have changed. We now have a new slogan: West Virginia is open for business. Yes, there certainly have been some noteworthy changes in public policy over the last year or two. Unfortunately, there is a great deal of talk in the halls of the Capitol about allowing state employees to organize collective bargaining units.
Let’s leave it at this-saying you’re open for business while saying you’re in favor of a closed shop is a contradiction in terms.
For all practical purposes, public school teachers already represent a collective bargaining unit. That system, while never tightly glued to begin with, is starting to unravel even more. Eastern panhandle teachers want pay adjustments for the region’s higher cost of living. Since they can’t get that pay increase under the present system, many have opted to teach in Virginia. Ironic, isn’t it, that our teachers can earn much more money in a right-to-work state?
To be sure, Atlas Shrugged is a work of fiction; there was no Twentieth Century Motor Company nor did Taggart Transcontinental rule the rails. The story line, however, rings true with readers because Ayn Rand eloquently translates this simple truth: Employees are not simple pegs to be driven into convenient holes by the powers that be.
If West Virginia does allow state employees the right to form collective bargaining units, then organized labor faces a very risky situation. In recent years, unions haven’t had much luck winning elections. Should state employees reject union representation, and there is likelihood that they will reject the union if given the chance, it would have the same effect as if West Virginia passed a right-to-work law. Now that message really would announce: West Virginia is open for business.
Let ‘em vote.
Jeff Allen, a railroad-hopping hobo, is one of my favorite fictional characters. We meet him in "The Sign of the Dollar," the 20th chapter of Atlas Shrugged. Jeff is discovered hiding in Miss Dagny Taggart’s personal rail car. Miss Taggart, by the way, is no mere rich dame on holiday; she is the Operating V. P. of Taggart Transcontinental railroad.
Rather than have the conductor throw Jeff Allen off the train, Miss Taggart unexpectedly invites him to join her for supper. And it is their dinner conversation that succinctly explains Ayn Rand’s view of communism and compulsory unionism. The dinner scene, in many ways, is the essence of Ayn Rand’s philosophy.
Jeff Allen had been a machinist and shop foreman at the Twentieth Century Motor Company plant in Wisconsin. When the owner of the company died, his heirs recommended a new employee compensation plan: From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. Still ashamed of his actions after twelve years, Jeff Allen admits that he and the other workers voted the plan in.
Jeff Allen’s dialogue, spoken in the inner sanctum of Ayn Rand’s heroine, is both riveting and compelling. He explains how unproductive workers bled the talented and ambitious workers of not only their paychecks, but of their will to work. No matter how much the ablest produced, the needs of the non-productive were never satisfied.
With regard to the author’s writing style, her metaphors are often over the top and harsh to a fault. Even so, I would submit to you that the answer as to why West Virginia’s best and brightest young people have left here in droves for jobs in other states is because West Virginia government has adopted a semblance of "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" in its tax laws and spending policies. For decades, the business sector has been charged ever-escalating taxes and fees to pay worker compensation benefits, unemployment benefits, Medicaid benefits, public employee benefits, and public education costs. For decades, businesses have closed or moved their operations out of state. For decades, West Virginia’s students have learned the three R’s-readin’, writin’, and route 77.
But wait! Times have changed. We now have a new slogan: West Virginia is open for business. Yes, there certainly have been some noteworthy changes in public policy over the last year or two. Unfortunately, there is a great deal of talk in the halls of the Capitol about allowing state employees to organize collective bargaining units.
Let’s leave it at this-saying you’re open for business while saying you’re in favor of a closed shop is a contradiction in terms.
For all practical purposes, public school teachers already represent a collective bargaining unit. That system, while never tightly glued to begin with, is starting to unravel even more. Eastern panhandle teachers want pay adjustments for the region’s higher cost of living. Since they can’t get that pay increase under the present system, many have opted to teach in Virginia. Ironic, isn’t it, that our teachers can earn much more money in a right-to-work state?
To be sure, Atlas Shrugged is a work of fiction; there was no Twentieth Century Motor Company nor did Taggart Transcontinental rule the rails. The story line, however, rings true with readers because Ayn Rand eloquently translates this simple truth: Employees are not simple pegs to be driven into convenient holes by the powers that be.
If West Virginia does allow state employees the right to form collective bargaining units, then organized labor faces a very risky situation. In recent years, unions haven’t had much luck winning elections. Should state employees reject union representation, and there is likelihood that they will reject the union if given the chance, it would have the same effect as if West Virginia passed a right-to-work law. Now that message really would announce: West Virginia is open for business.
Let ‘em vote.
Friday, November 4, 2005
West Virginians Endured After 1985 Flood
As happened in 1888, most of West Virginia was covered by flood waters in 1985. And as before, the deluge was more like a flash flood than slow rising waters. The damage done in 1985 was, of course, much worse.
After any natural disaster, it is almost impossible to describe the devastation to man-made structures in relevant terms. The reason we lack the words is that Nature exerts forces that humankind cannot begin to fathom. When Nature goes on a rampage, we have but one option and that option is evacuation.
In November 1985, nobody thought that the Tygarts, Cheat, Potomac, and Greenbrier rivers would rise as fast and as high as they did. Nearly fifty people drowned as a result. Were it not for the fact that "higher ground" is always one step away in our state, the death toll could have been in the hundreds, if not thousands.
When I surveyed the flood area, the damage that concerned me the most was the wholesale loss of important bridges. Highways are nothing without bridges. With some two dozen main highway bridges completely washed away, it was obvious that recovery efforts would be much more difficult.
Although many towns and rural hamlets were initially isolated from outside help, that isolation did not stop the people who lived there from immediately beginning the clean-up. And that is not so surprising because people who live in the mountains or on farms are much more self-sufficient than their urban cousins. How many urbanites own a chain saw or a shovel?
If I had to characterize the West Virginians that I met during the flood recovery, I would call them "resilient." I remember a Pendleton County family who lost their house and possessions but had not left their land. They had covered an outbuilding with tarpaper and moved in rather than leave for a faraway motel. How many urbanites have outbuildings?
There are big differences between urban and rural areas when it comes to natural disasters. The first is that showboating reporters like Geraldo Rivera ignore rural disasters. The second is that urban disaster areas are almost totally dependent on government agencies for recovery efforts.
As we recently saw in New Orleans, the local, state, and federal governments were routinely criticized for mounting such a slow response. But if one were to be objective in his critique, it takes time (sometimes days) to get to the disaster area. Just because the rain stops doesn’t mean the surrounding floodwaters have started to recede.
In West Virginia, state agencies and National Guard units have earned pretty good marks for flood response over the years. There does tend to be criticism of the federal response but that is primarily due to the fact that people expect FEMA and the SBA to open their checkbooks wider than Congress has authorized.
In the end, government cannot make victims whole again. Government executives as well as grandstanding politicians should paint a realistic picture when it comes to disaster response. False hopes in a time of disaster are usually more devastating than the sense of hopelessness that victims experience on the day of the disaster.
In any natural disaster, a community’s self-sufficiency is its best hope for a speedy recovery. West Virginians were the model of resiliency in the aftermath of the 1985 flood. Not only did they help their neighbors by donating food, clothing and money, but they banded together to rebuild their communities.
I was very proud to be involved with relief and rebuilding efforts in 1985. Those of us at the Department of Highways did our best to get the roads and bridges rebuilt before winter set in. But in my heart, I know that our best would not have been good enough had the people in the flood area been as helpless as the city folk in New Orleans.
There’s something to be admired about people who can hold their own until the cavalry arrives. In recognizing the 20th anniversary of the great West Virginia flood, we should remember the resiliency of the survivors.
David G. Allen served as Assistant Commissioner of the WV Department of Highways, 1985-1986.
After any natural disaster, it is almost impossible to describe the devastation to man-made structures in relevant terms. The reason we lack the words is that Nature exerts forces that humankind cannot begin to fathom. When Nature goes on a rampage, we have but one option and that option is evacuation.
In November 1985, nobody thought that the Tygarts, Cheat, Potomac, and Greenbrier rivers would rise as fast and as high as they did. Nearly fifty people drowned as a result. Were it not for the fact that "higher ground" is always one step away in our state, the death toll could have been in the hundreds, if not thousands.
When I surveyed the flood area, the damage that concerned me the most was the wholesale loss of important bridges. Highways are nothing without bridges. With some two dozen main highway bridges completely washed away, it was obvious that recovery efforts would be much more difficult.
Although many towns and rural hamlets were initially isolated from outside help, that isolation did not stop the people who lived there from immediately beginning the clean-up. And that is not so surprising because people who live in the mountains or on farms are much more self-sufficient than their urban cousins. How many urbanites own a chain saw or a shovel?
If I had to characterize the West Virginians that I met during the flood recovery, I would call them "resilient." I remember a Pendleton County family who lost their house and possessions but had not left their land. They had covered an outbuilding with tarpaper and moved in rather than leave for a faraway motel. How many urbanites have outbuildings?
There are big differences between urban and rural areas when it comes to natural disasters. The first is that showboating reporters like Geraldo Rivera ignore rural disasters. The second is that urban disaster areas are almost totally dependent on government agencies for recovery efforts.
As we recently saw in New Orleans, the local, state, and federal governments were routinely criticized for mounting such a slow response. But if one were to be objective in his critique, it takes time (sometimes days) to get to the disaster area. Just because the rain stops doesn’t mean the surrounding floodwaters have started to recede.
In West Virginia, state agencies and National Guard units have earned pretty good marks for flood response over the years. There does tend to be criticism of the federal response but that is primarily due to the fact that people expect FEMA and the SBA to open their checkbooks wider than Congress has authorized.
In the end, government cannot make victims whole again. Government executives as well as grandstanding politicians should paint a realistic picture when it comes to disaster response. False hopes in a time of disaster are usually more devastating than the sense of hopelessness that victims experience on the day of the disaster.
In any natural disaster, a community’s self-sufficiency is its best hope for a speedy recovery. West Virginians were the model of resiliency in the aftermath of the 1985 flood. Not only did they help their neighbors by donating food, clothing and money, but they banded together to rebuild their communities.
I was very proud to be involved with relief and rebuilding efforts in 1985. Those of us at the Department of Highways did our best to get the roads and bridges rebuilt before winter set in. But in my heart, I know that our best would not have been good enough had the people in the flood area been as helpless as the city folk in New Orleans.
There’s something to be admired about people who can hold their own until the cavalry arrives. In recognizing the 20th anniversary of the great West Virginia flood, we should remember the resiliency of the survivors.
David G. Allen served as Assistant Commissioner of the WV Department of Highways, 1985-1986.
Friday, September 30, 2005
We Live in an Age of Hope, Unlike the 1970s
Words define an age and former NBC News anchorman Edwin Newman accurately captured the 1970s Americana in two of his books-Strictly Speaking and A Civil Tongue.
The 1970s were a strange time, indeed. President Richard Nixon and his Vice President, Spiro Agnew, resigned their respective offices. Congressman Gerald Ford had been all but shoved into the White House. Viet Nam ended in debacle. The gold standard was scrapped. Inflation not only soared but seemed impossible to control. And all of this happened before a "born again" president, Jimmy Carter, ran for reelection on a platform of "malaise", "stagflation", "misery index", "hostage crisis", and oil companies "rippin’ us off."
"Hopefully" is one of the 1970s words that Mr. Newman writes about. He points out that people had given up saying (correctly), "I hope that something will happen." Instead, Americans of all educational levels began saying, "Hopefully, something will happen."
Technically speaking, the adverb "hopefully" does not modify the verb in any sentence that begins, "Hopefully, …" That is why it’s usage is incorrect. But from a psychological viewpoint, "hopefully" came into accepted use because it captured the funk and angst of the 1970s. The American people, after all, had been conditioned to expect bad outcomes ever since President John F. Kennedy was gunned down. And we have not elected a U. S. senator to the presidency ever since Lyndon Baines Johnson so adequately demonstrated why we shouldn’t.
Given the failed missions of all the presidents from Kennedy to Carter, it is not surprising that people fell into the routine of saying, "Hopefully, something good will happen."
Times change, and eventually, good things happen. I am very reluctant to say that good times came about solely because of Presidents Reagan, Bush (41), and Clinton. Each of these administrations had their brush with failure. The Democrats wanted to hang Reagan and Bush over Iran-Contra and the Republicans returned the favor by trying to hang Clinton over Monica. All was not pretty during the 1980s and 1990s.
Rather than a president, it was the sacking of our embassy in Iran that dramatically changed people’s expectations. They changed from hoping something would happen to making something happen; from the passive to the active, so to speak.
As we all know, our embassy staff in Tehran was freed just as Ronald Reagan took the oath of office. But it was not Reagan, the man, who brought about the hostage release. This was not a case where Gary Cooper, armed with a badge and six gun, was standing alone in the street. On the contrary. The Iranians correctly read that the America people were ready for change and that they had hired a man who would, if need be, use our full military power to make that change happen.
Contemporaneously, Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher rallied Great Britain by defeating Argentina in the Falkland Islands war. It was Margaret Thatcher who best described the turnabout in 1980s attitudes when she said, "We have ceased to be a nation in retreat."
We are now a quarter century into the future. Yes, there still are negative thinkers among us who begin their sentences, "Hopefully, …" But the word that best describes our age is the frequently-used, one-word answer to even the most challenging of questions: "Absolutely!" And "Absolutely!" is spoken in a winner’s dialect whenever uttered.
As in the 1970s, we are paying record-high oil prices. The television networks report on the war in Iraq with the same anti-military bias that they did in Viet Nam. There are millions of hard-core Democrats who think the presidential election of 2000 was another Watergate. In essence, you do not have to look very hard to find enough negative sentiments to make one believe that we are reliving the 1970s.
But there is a difference in our age. People have positive expectations of all outcomes, no matter how dire the situation.
Witness the outpouring of aid after the Christmas tsunami in Asia or Hurricane Katrina on the Gulf Coast. In the face of overwhelming destruction, Americans have opened their wallets and their hearts to the victims of these disasters. And between disasters, Americans volunteered their time to patrol the Arizona-Mexico border and search for a missing girl in Aruba.
We live in an enviable age. We believe in ourselves, our motives, and the American way of life. And that is a refreshing change from the 1970s.
The 1970s were a strange time, indeed. President Richard Nixon and his Vice President, Spiro Agnew, resigned their respective offices. Congressman Gerald Ford had been all but shoved into the White House. Viet Nam ended in debacle. The gold standard was scrapped. Inflation not only soared but seemed impossible to control. And all of this happened before a "born again" president, Jimmy Carter, ran for reelection on a platform of "malaise", "stagflation", "misery index", "hostage crisis", and oil companies "rippin’ us off."
"Hopefully" is one of the 1970s words that Mr. Newman writes about. He points out that people had given up saying (correctly), "I hope that something will happen." Instead, Americans of all educational levels began saying, "Hopefully, something will happen."
Technically speaking, the adverb "hopefully" does not modify the verb in any sentence that begins, "Hopefully, …" That is why it’s usage is incorrect. But from a psychological viewpoint, "hopefully" came into accepted use because it captured the funk and angst of the 1970s. The American people, after all, had been conditioned to expect bad outcomes ever since President John F. Kennedy was gunned down. And we have not elected a U. S. senator to the presidency ever since Lyndon Baines Johnson so adequately demonstrated why we shouldn’t.
Given the failed missions of all the presidents from Kennedy to Carter, it is not surprising that people fell into the routine of saying, "Hopefully, something good will happen."
Times change, and eventually, good things happen. I am very reluctant to say that good times came about solely because of Presidents Reagan, Bush (41), and Clinton. Each of these administrations had their brush with failure. The Democrats wanted to hang Reagan and Bush over Iran-Contra and the Republicans returned the favor by trying to hang Clinton over Monica. All was not pretty during the 1980s and 1990s.
Rather than a president, it was the sacking of our embassy in Iran that dramatically changed people’s expectations. They changed from hoping something would happen to making something happen; from the passive to the active, so to speak.
As we all know, our embassy staff in Tehran was freed just as Ronald Reagan took the oath of office. But it was not Reagan, the man, who brought about the hostage release. This was not a case where Gary Cooper, armed with a badge and six gun, was standing alone in the street. On the contrary. The Iranians correctly read that the America people were ready for change and that they had hired a man who would, if need be, use our full military power to make that change happen.
Contemporaneously, Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher rallied Great Britain by defeating Argentina in the Falkland Islands war. It was Margaret Thatcher who best described the turnabout in 1980s attitudes when she said, "We have ceased to be a nation in retreat."
We are now a quarter century into the future. Yes, there still are negative thinkers among us who begin their sentences, "Hopefully, …" But the word that best describes our age is the frequently-used, one-word answer to even the most challenging of questions: "Absolutely!" And "Absolutely!" is spoken in a winner’s dialect whenever uttered.
As in the 1970s, we are paying record-high oil prices. The television networks report on the war in Iraq with the same anti-military bias that they did in Viet Nam. There are millions of hard-core Democrats who think the presidential election of 2000 was another Watergate. In essence, you do not have to look very hard to find enough negative sentiments to make one believe that we are reliving the 1970s.
But there is a difference in our age. People have positive expectations of all outcomes, no matter how dire the situation.
Witness the outpouring of aid after the Christmas tsunami in Asia or Hurricane Katrina on the Gulf Coast. In the face of overwhelming destruction, Americans have opened their wallets and their hearts to the victims of these disasters. And between disasters, Americans volunteered their time to patrol the Arizona-Mexico border and search for a missing girl in Aruba.
We live in an enviable age. We believe in ourselves, our motives, and the American way of life. And that is a refreshing change from the 1970s.
Friday, September 2, 2005
Will West Virginia Lose the Potomac River? (part 2)
Part Two of Two
As many as a dozen federal regulatory agencies have some responsibility for the health of the Chesapeake Bay. Six states and the District of Columbia are responsible for the health of the Bay’s 64,000 sq. mi. watershed. I assume that none of the responsible bureaucracies are doing their job very well or one-third of the Bay would not have been declared "dead" in July of this year.
The usual suspects-light rainfall and agricultural runoff-were indicted in press releases. The EPA trumpeted that "new limits" agreed to by the states would further reduce nitrogen and phosphorous discharges in an effort to reduce dead zones. Then it was back to business as usual.
When you rub a dog’s nose in his own mess, he gets the message. When it comes to government, however, the lesson fails. In fact, the opposite happens. Regulators always respond with puppy dog faces; that they have neither the funds nor the manpower to fulfill their mandate. Whimpering gets them off the leash for another budget year.
Eventually, this do-nothing attitude will change because the people who draw their drinking water from the Potomac will begin to get jittery about intersex fish. As it is now, a dead crow in the Maryland suburbs creates hysteria about West Nile virus. Imagine the panic if a human health connection is made to endocrine-disrupting compounds in drinking water.
In a worst-case scenario, the Potomac watershed in eastern West Virginia is at risk of either being condemned in the public interest or declared a federal territory. Or perhaps, the federal courts would impose some form of environmental easement to accomplish the same. My belief that this could happen sounds far-fetched-hyperbole if you will. But in light of the recent Supreme Court decision on eminent domain, the rules of logic have changed.
The March 2002 issue of California Law Review contains the 100-page article "Is West Virginia Unconstitutional?" The last two sentences in the article read: "West Virginians may rest secure in the knowledge that their State is not unconstitutional. Probably."
If your lawyer wrote you a 100-page memo regarding your own legitimacy, how would you feel if he ended it by saying, "Probably."?
The authors also asked themselves, "Why would anyone care?…Given that…West Virginia is not…going to be absorbed back into old Virginia…" In other words, without a plaintiff with standing, nobody is going to force the issue of West Virginia’s statehood in court. I would like to see this article updated in light of Kelo vs. City of New London. For it appears to this non-lawyer that either the federal government or the municipal water districts of metropolitan Washington, DC have a unique opportunity to do exactly what New York City did to the Catskills--condemn a faraway watershed to provide drinking water.
Okay, that’s enough shock and awe.
West Virginia does have a window of opportunity to get out in front on the issue of intersex fish. But our attitude and response must be positive and inquisitive rather than the predictable role of regulators satisfied with assessing penalties and tinkering with discharge limits.
West Virginia is developing a promising biometrics industry through research and development. Thus, why can’t we use the R&D model to move to the forefront on stream and river research? The Potomac, more than any other river, ought to be a powerful magnet for federal research grants for our universities.
Thomas Jefferson was so inspired when he visited Harper’s Ferry that he wrote, "The passage of the Patowmac through the Blue Ridge is perhaps one of the most stupendous scenes in Nature." This is the same inspiration that we must embrace if we intend to clean up the river. But instead, we find ourselves living in an age when vandals have painted the very rock upon which Jefferson dipped his quill pen.
The Potomac River is under attack.
Dr. Robert E. Putz, Founder of the Freshwater Institute at Shepherdstown, WV contributed to this article.
As many as a dozen federal regulatory agencies have some responsibility for the health of the Chesapeake Bay. Six states and the District of Columbia are responsible for the health of the Bay’s 64,000 sq. mi. watershed. I assume that none of the responsible bureaucracies are doing their job very well or one-third of the Bay would not have been declared "dead" in July of this year.
The usual suspects-light rainfall and agricultural runoff-were indicted in press releases. The EPA trumpeted that "new limits" agreed to by the states would further reduce nitrogen and phosphorous discharges in an effort to reduce dead zones. Then it was back to business as usual.
When you rub a dog’s nose in his own mess, he gets the message. When it comes to government, however, the lesson fails. In fact, the opposite happens. Regulators always respond with puppy dog faces; that they have neither the funds nor the manpower to fulfill their mandate. Whimpering gets them off the leash for another budget year.
Eventually, this do-nothing attitude will change because the people who draw their drinking water from the Potomac will begin to get jittery about intersex fish. As it is now, a dead crow in the Maryland suburbs creates hysteria about West Nile virus. Imagine the panic if a human health connection is made to endocrine-disrupting compounds in drinking water.
In a worst-case scenario, the Potomac watershed in eastern West Virginia is at risk of either being condemned in the public interest or declared a federal territory. Or perhaps, the federal courts would impose some form of environmental easement to accomplish the same. My belief that this could happen sounds far-fetched-hyperbole if you will. But in light of the recent Supreme Court decision on eminent domain, the rules of logic have changed.
The March 2002 issue of California Law Review contains the 100-page article "Is West Virginia Unconstitutional?" The last two sentences in the article read: "West Virginians may rest secure in the knowledge that their State is not unconstitutional. Probably."
If your lawyer wrote you a 100-page memo regarding your own legitimacy, how would you feel if he ended it by saying, "Probably."?
The authors also asked themselves, "Why would anyone care?…Given that…West Virginia is not…going to be absorbed back into old Virginia…" In other words, without a plaintiff with standing, nobody is going to force the issue of West Virginia’s statehood in court. I would like to see this article updated in light of Kelo vs. City of New London. For it appears to this non-lawyer that either the federal government or the municipal water districts of metropolitan Washington, DC have a unique opportunity to do exactly what New York City did to the Catskills--condemn a faraway watershed to provide drinking water.
Okay, that’s enough shock and awe.
West Virginia does have a window of opportunity to get out in front on the issue of intersex fish. But our attitude and response must be positive and inquisitive rather than the predictable role of regulators satisfied with assessing penalties and tinkering with discharge limits.
West Virginia is developing a promising biometrics industry through research and development. Thus, why can’t we use the R&D model to move to the forefront on stream and river research? The Potomac, more than any other river, ought to be a powerful magnet for federal research grants for our universities.
Thomas Jefferson was so inspired when he visited Harper’s Ferry that he wrote, "The passage of the Patowmac through the Blue Ridge is perhaps one of the most stupendous scenes in Nature." This is the same inspiration that we must embrace if we intend to clean up the river. But instead, we find ourselves living in an age when vandals have painted the very rock upon which Jefferson dipped his quill pen.
The Potomac River is under attack.
Dr. Robert E. Putz, Founder of the Freshwater Institute at Shepherdstown, WV contributed to this article.
Friday, August 26, 2005
Will West Virginia Lose the Potomac River? (part 1)
Part One of Two
The Potomac River is under attack! What else would you call it when people use the Potomac, one of America’s great rivers, as a sewer to dump Chinese snakehead fish and Florida alligators? Although the recent discovery of these exotic castaways demonstrates the casual disregard that people have for the Potomac, there is a more sinister assault taking shape. Environmental contaminants from unknown sources are causing male bass to produce eggs--a condition known as intersex.
The discovery of intersex fish began with an investigation of a Potomac River fish kill in 2002. The dead fish had skin lesions and specimens were examined by different laboratories to determine the cause of the lesions as well as cause of death. In 2003, biologists at the U. S. Geological Survey’s Leetown Science Center in Jefferson County discovered the intersex anomaly. As to what causes intersexing has been a focus of their research since then.
Biologists suspect that endocrine-disrupting compounds (EDCs) are the culprit. That suspicion, however, does little to narrow the search for the actual compound or compounds that are responsible. For example, certain pesticides and herbicides are EDCs. And you cannot rule out pharmaceutical hormones. When excreted, the hormones in birth control pills find their way untouched through a wastewater treatment plant and end up in the river.
The same is true for other hormones; including those mixed in livestock feed. And it’s just not the man-made stuff that causes problems. Soy beans, red clover, and a whole host of other plants naturally produce phytoestrogens.
According to the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection, several sampling points on the South Branch of the Potomac exhibit above-acceptable levels of antibiotics. And there’s Roxarsone, an organo-arsenic compound fed to poultry. The arsenic (according to my reading) does not contaminate the chicken but passes through in the manure. In time, the arsenic in the manure drops out and is detectable as arsenate in water samples, especially those samples taken during a runoff event.
Get the picture? The sources for EDC contamination are many-from poultry barns to suburban lawns to households. The local grocery, pharmacy, and hardware store provide us with chemicals that we use routinely and without second thought in our daily lives.
To better understand the complexity of intersex fish and what it means for humans, my one big question has been, "If wastewater treatment plants do not remove the suspect EDCs, then does the downstream water treatment plant remove them before they can enter a municipal drinking water system?" The answer should be obvious to the non-scientist.
With so many variables in play, and no simple, sure-fire way to remove EDCs from the river, perhaps we should consider an alternative method to clean up the Potomac.
The basic principle of water treatment has not changed much since the Chinese developed it some 5,000 years ago. The operative word in water treatment is "dilution." Whereas Chinese farmers used a series of settling ponds to dilute toxins, we supplant the ancient process with concrete settling basins, sand or activated carbon filters, and a shot of ozone or chlorine to kill bacteria. But the end goal is the same-reduce toxins from parts per million to parts per billion, and so forth.
Our mountains are tall enough to shortchange the Potomac watershed on rainfall, but they aren’t tall enough to provide a snow melt into the dry months of summer. If the Potomac had a stronger summertime flow, we wouldn’t be researching intersex fish or discussing the impact of EDCs.
I, for one, would hate to see the Potomac’s tributaries dammed at every pinch point just to dilute EDCs. But that may be the best solution available if intersex bass turn out to be the canaries in the coal mine. Regardless, the recipe for success calls for more water or less chemistry-dilution.
At present, we cannot draw definitive conclusions from the water and fish studies that have been done. Some bass exhibit intersex, others do not, and other fish species seem perfectly fine. We have no sure cause for the intersex phenomenon. And we do not have a chemical profile of the Potomac.
What we have at this point is a hunch. Playing a hunch often leads to conjecture. Conjecture invariably leads to hyperbole. And hyperbole occupies a special place in America-Washington, DC.
In Part Two, I will discuss the federal solution.
Dr. Robert E. Putz, Founder of the Freshwater Institute at Shepherdstown, WV contributed to this article.
The Potomac River is under attack! What else would you call it when people use the Potomac, one of America’s great rivers, as a sewer to dump Chinese snakehead fish and Florida alligators? Although the recent discovery of these exotic castaways demonstrates the casual disregard that people have for the Potomac, there is a more sinister assault taking shape. Environmental contaminants from unknown sources are causing male bass to produce eggs--a condition known as intersex.
The discovery of intersex fish began with an investigation of a Potomac River fish kill in 2002. The dead fish had skin lesions and specimens were examined by different laboratories to determine the cause of the lesions as well as cause of death. In 2003, biologists at the U. S. Geological Survey’s Leetown Science Center in Jefferson County discovered the intersex anomaly. As to what causes intersexing has been a focus of their research since then.
Biologists suspect that endocrine-disrupting compounds (EDCs) are the culprit. That suspicion, however, does little to narrow the search for the actual compound or compounds that are responsible. For example, certain pesticides and herbicides are EDCs. And you cannot rule out pharmaceutical hormones. When excreted, the hormones in birth control pills find their way untouched through a wastewater treatment plant and end up in the river.
The same is true for other hormones; including those mixed in livestock feed. And it’s just not the man-made stuff that causes problems. Soy beans, red clover, and a whole host of other plants naturally produce phytoestrogens.
According to the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection, several sampling points on the South Branch of the Potomac exhibit above-acceptable levels of antibiotics. And there’s Roxarsone, an organo-arsenic compound fed to poultry. The arsenic (according to my reading) does not contaminate the chicken but passes through in the manure. In time, the arsenic in the manure drops out and is detectable as arsenate in water samples, especially those samples taken during a runoff event.
Get the picture? The sources for EDC contamination are many-from poultry barns to suburban lawns to households. The local grocery, pharmacy, and hardware store provide us with chemicals that we use routinely and without second thought in our daily lives.
To better understand the complexity of intersex fish and what it means for humans, my one big question has been, "If wastewater treatment plants do not remove the suspect EDCs, then does the downstream water treatment plant remove them before they can enter a municipal drinking water system?" The answer should be obvious to the non-scientist.
With so many variables in play, and no simple, sure-fire way to remove EDCs from the river, perhaps we should consider an alternative method to clean up the Potomac.
The basic principle of water treatment has not changed much since the Chinese developed it some 5,000 years ago. The operative word in water treatment is "dilution." Whereas Chinese farmers used a series of settling ponds to dilute toxins, we supplant the ancient process with concrete settling basins, sand or activated carbon filters, and a shot of ozone or chlorine to kill bacteria. But the end goal is the same-reduce toxins from parts per million to parts per billion, and so forth.
Our mountains are tall enough to shortchange the Potomac watershed on rainfall, but they aren’t tall enough to provide a snow melt into the dry months of summer. If the Potomac had a stronger summertime flow, we wouldn’t be researching intersex fish or discussing the impact of EDCs.
I, for one, would hate to see the Potomac’s tributaries dammed at every pinch point just to dilute EDCs. But that may be the best solution available if intersex bass turn out to be the canaries in the coal mine. Regardless, the recipe for success calls for more water or less chemistry-dilution.
At present, we cannot draw definitive conclusions from the water and fish studies that have been done. Some bass exhibit intersex, others do not, and other fish species seem perfectly fine. We have no sure cause for the intersex phenomenon. And we do not have a chemical profile of the Potomac.
What we have at this point is a hunch. Playing a hunch often leads to conjecture. Conjecture invariably leads to hyperbole. And hyperbole occupies a special place in America-Washington, DC.
In Part Two, I will discuss the federal solution.
Dr. Robert E. Putz, Founder of the Freshwater Institute at Shepherdstown, WV contributed to this article.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)