The USA needs lots of energy infrastructure quickly, but MOST of this new infrastructure should be owned by the public to avoid the mistakes of the past.  We need to imitate nearly all of our world competitors.  Nobody does it like the US, because our way doesn’t work!  Our way pits public needs/fears against the profit motive of private ownership. All we get is ugly legal battles and substandard results.  Enough already.

The US needs to sell tax free, reasonable yield, federal ENERGY BONDS to pay for the needed infrastructure.  These bonds should only be available to US citizens who pay taxes in the US, and financial institutions that are registered in the US - no foreign owners that can throw a wrench into our plans.  After the first 5 years, let the proceeds from sales and services start paying back the bondholders.  Energy Bonds will do for this mess what War Bonds did for us in World War II.

NEEDS:

New clean coal power plants NOW, as soon as we can build them.

Nuclear power generating plants, as soon as we can build them - new design Light Water Reactors (LWR’s) and (proven for 50 years now) Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactors  (LMFBR’s).  LMFBR’s are a RENEWABLE(+) energy source, like wind/solar.

LMFBR’s as soon as we can build them.  They produce 20% more fuel than they are using to produce electric power - the excess can go to LWR’s.  WE can supply ALL USA electric needs (and LWR’s) for over 1000 years with no new mining - proven fact. LMFBR’s have been reliably operating since 1951 in the US and France. (See EBR II and PHENIX, which have generated reliably for over 30 years).

Strengthen the bulk power electricity transmission grid that moves BIG power from region to region, to avoid the blackouts and brownouts that will soon be commonplace - and to move NEW big power from where it can be best produced to where it is most needed.

ALL of these new facilities should be built on land already owned by the federal government, so that NIMBY interference will be effectively blunted.  Perfect sites are closed military facilities and energy/weapons research sites.

More electric power is CRITICAL to converting oil usage to electric usage.  We absolutely have to get the OIL needle out of our arm, or we will forever be in trouble.

 FIX DETAILS:

The Department of Transportation manages our transportation infrastructure, which is owned by the US PUBLIC!  DOT did not steal any turnpikes from anyone.  They strengthened the limited access highway system with PUBLICLY owned interstates.  That helps keep tolls in line, and has made ALL the products we buy less expensive by reducing delivery expense.  Construction and repair of the highways is done by contractors under DOT, and a lot of money goes into private payrolls every year.  The same would be true of DOE managed facilities.

The Department of Energy (DOE) needs to manage the ENERGY infrastructure that will be publicly owned.  DOE management should be assisted by, but not blocked by, the US EPA to assure that responsible practices  are employed during drilling, construction, and operation of ALL US PUBLIC owned facilities.  With the public owning the facilities, and paying for the environmental protection, there will be no "conflict of interest."  If the public wants green, they’ll pay for it - if they don’t want to pay for it - then it stops!  The same rules should apply for public/private.

US DOE (assisted by US EPA) will have to manage the construction and operation of publicly owned oil drilling rigs, public refineries, public coal power plants, new public small scale hydroelectric stations, publicly owned large scale clean coal facilities, and newer/safer nuclear plants - both the Light Water Reactor and Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactors.

The OILGOPOLY wants to start drilling on their 68 million acres.  The US government should issue those permits, but only if the oil company accepts two contract rules:

First, the permit for the private well would only be issued AFTER the company had successfully bid for a public well and has that public well producing acceptably (within a one year limit from start of drilling).  If a second private well is desired, then a second public well must be bid and activated, and so on. This factor will keep private wells from coming on line while the public wells "just don’t."  Business is business - that’s why contracts are needed.

Second, the oil company must agree to allow both a resident DOE and EPA inspector unfettered access to all aspects of the public well, and must allow a resident EPA inspector at the private well, also.  The nuclear industry has lived under this arrangement for decades.  Also, the EPA rules for both the public and private facilities should be the same. 

This level of EPA involvement ought to satisfy reasonable environmental concerns. 

This "FIX" will give the public the beginning of the energy independence it needs, provide lots of good jobs quickly, make a bunch of money for the oil companies working for the DOE and themselves, satisfy the environmentalists, provide quality investments for US persons and entities, and the PUBLIC will own the tools of its own energy future - no more to be held hostage by other countries or companies. 

This fix will work, and everybody wins.  How good is that?

Please help get this done by showing it to your politicians.  This country’s energy and economic future is too important to play partisan political games.  Thanks for reading this long piece.

Note that there is also another reactor design called an Advanced Burner Reactor.  It touts itself as a "burner of transuranic waste", which would make you think it is a "nuclear garbage burner"  It is a cousin of the LMFBR (whose business is to MAKE transuranic material, because it is a valuable nuclear material - it is NOT WASTE!)

 For easy to understand additional information, check on the following site for the Depart of Energy:

http://www.gnep.energy.gov/gnepAdvancedBurnerReactors.html.

This is the follow-on piece on restructuring "public education" into "Citizen Competency Training", so that the public "education" dollar gets the citizen results it should get, and getting total cost to the public reduced in the process.  Any student who can complete the different phases in reduced time, should be allowed to, and move on.  We heap boredom on MANY good students with our current approach - and it costs us more money, as well.

The other piece dealt with getting grades 5-8 rebuilt into "Basic Life Competency’, such that the final certification would show that the student could navigate through a real life budget, make informed shopping decisions, solve domestic problems effectively, including basic parenting skills, etc.   Earning this certification would make them a viable life partner or productive employee for many industries.  Many students would not need to go beyond this level at public expense, saving the taxpayer a bundle at $6,000/yr/student  (conservative  #).  In no case should "Public Training" investment in any student exceed 13 years.  College level investment in engineers, doctors, dentists, teachers, etc is not a part of this discussion.

One of our tough competitors - China - already expects this and more from their students.

How badly do we need Basic Life Competency?  Just last night my wife and I each had a double scoop cone at a convenience store.  The clerk said, "They are $1.80 each".  I said, "How much total?"  She said, "I’ll go ring it up."  I said, "It’s $3.60 total, trust me.  Here’s a $5 bill.  How much is the change?"  She pauses for 10 seconds and says "$1.30?"  I left her the 40 cents part for a tip - I figure she’s going to need it.  If she’s only getting paid half of what she’s supposed to get paid, she won’t know it!  She was probably 17, but the math was easy.

What about students who are better or worse than Basic Competence?

Those who are unable to master Basic Life Competency get an attendance certificate only.  Student’s would be able to quit school at age 16 if they want to. At 18 years of age, they will be done with public training - period.  These students would be available for agriculture, junk food stands, garbage pickup, and any other general labor work that we need plenty of help.

Those whose performance in the "Basic" phase warrants continued public investment could go on to "Career" competency training not to exceed 2 years.  Health care, electrician, plumbing, machine operator, food service specialist (chef or assistant) etc. careers would be among these.  Again, 13 years total investment is the limit, and a Certificate of Attendance for those who can’t pass the Competency exam at the end of the "Career" phase.

For those whose adademic performance in the "Basic" phase warrants, a two year "Academic" competency curriculum should prepare them for the college experience.  Again, a 13 year investment limit and same sort of certifications. I’ll let the "Academics" decide what that two year curriculum should look like.  A split between "Arts" and "Science" in the final year may be appropriate, but EVERYONE should be competent on public infrastructure, supporting technology, and economics.

At the age of 15, my older brother’s college buddy stopped by and took me for a curvy, 5 minute, 50 mph ride on his BSA 350c single.  The needle would be in my arm for the next 40 years, and would put me on a path on which I would:

1) Own and ride 55 motorcycles, from 50cc Honda manual clutch, to Indian Chief foot clutch, and a whole bunch of middleweights in between.

2) Teach my first wife and all three of our kids to ride, and would teach a Japanese nuclear engineer how to ride a manual clutch motorcycle in my back yard - so that he could return to Japan and leave the only family car for his wife to drive. 

3) Only sustain two minor injuries in over 200,000 highway miles.

It has been an amazing adventure.

The first bike, a 50cc Honda manual clutch, taught us (my older brother and me) to ride on slippery yard grass and gravel (cheap spills), and watch out for other traffic - without having enough speed or power to force ourselves into trouble.  But, with a top speed of 43 mph, it was too small to ride safely even on two lane state roads.  We needed "bigger, with more power".

Shoveling cow manure, and cultivating fields 12 hours a day during my 16 year old summer, I put together enough to buy a 160cc Ducati Jr.  It could cruise at 55 mph, but was still a little slow for the 60mph state 2 lane roads.  "Bigger, more power".

We got a Bultaco 175cc (2 stroke) road bike that could cruise at 65mph, but had no battery in the system.  The horn sounded like a siren as the engine speed changed, and it would blow out the headlight at high rpm just as you were showing a Harley 250 Sprint what it would do.  You guessed it, we needed "bigger, more power".

WE lucked across (1.5) Indian Chiefs for $150 (in 1966).  One was a troubled, but complete, bike that had springer front end and seat, right grip spark advance, left grip throttle, tank shift lever and suicide foot clutch.  The other bike was a frame and 3 bushel baskets of "stuff".

Unfortunately the carb was goofed up enough that you could not get it kick started.  We would rope tow it with my 1955 ford V8 to get it started.  On the third try, we got it to keep running without it running over the tow car.  I tweaked the carb settings some, and we took it for a ride.  At 50 mph, it began a speed wobble that wouldn’t stop until down to 30 mph.

I got it to kick start once, and headed down the road.  After a half mile, it stalled, and I coasted it to the side of the road.  When I put my foot down in the pea gravel, it slid under my foot and down it went at a dead stop.  At a tough 160#, I could not get it back on its tires.  I walked home to get help, stood it up, pushed it home and never rode it again.  Bigger with more power - hah!  I modified my plan slightly.

The number 5 bike was a NEW 441cc BSA Shooting Star 4stroke single with a compression release to get it started.  After the Indian, it seemed easy.  I had that bike from 1967-70.  It went across the country from Ohio to the San Francisco bay TWICE in a crate.  My dad was such a gem to crate it up twice to send it to his sailor sons.

The number 6 bike was a Suzuki 500 titan 2 stroke twin that I rode overnight from Vallejo to National City, California (550 miles), stayed two days, then did an 850 mile straight through to Albuquerque, New Mexico.  I found out that it’s really cold overnight at the end of March in the Arizona high country near Flagstaff.  Even in ski gloves, my hands were freezing and the throttle kept going shut.  I dropped the bike at the dealer for its 4000 mile check and walked to a motel.

Slept overnight, picked up the bike in the midday, and went 1428 miles in 28 hours straight to meet my dad’s pickup truck just east of Indianapolis. I had taken so much noDoze with coffee that I couldn’t sleep for 12 hours after I got home.  It’s official - 20 year olds can be idiots.  That was the last of my "over 500 mile" trips.  Several hundred shorter trips occured. 

The number 7 bike was a Suzuki 250 X6 for around town riding only.

The local players in the electricity business are THE BEST AT TAKING CARE OF LOCAL CUSTOMER SERVICE NEEDS - PERIOD!  That includes investor owned, rural electric cooperatives, and municipal utilties.  The federal government will NOT be helpful entering this arena.  "Distribution" (161,000 volts and under) operations within the service territory, meter reading, and billing resolutions have been adequate.  All legitimate prudent operating and maintenance expenses should be included in the rates allowed.  Rate of Return should be continued for new distribution substations, etc in this realm as it has for the last 75 years.

Generating capacity already owned by a utility should remain the property of that utility.  Until it is fully depreciated, it is part of their rate base.  The investors should not be cheated out of their property or return. Nuclear investments not fully allowed into the rate base initially could eventually be paid back at the final tail end. Once the generating station is fully depreciated, the utility may want to sell it to the government.  I  do NOT recommend "buying" it at that point, because the maintenance costs will make it a poor buy for the taxpayer.  Some happy exceptions may  occur, if the utility has properly maintained the plant until it is sold to the government.  I suspect there won’t be many.  In any event, the government must NOT be compelled to buy any of these - that would be a lousy idea! 

However, the federal government must aggressively become a significant player in the generation and bulk power part of the business. 

Any NEW generation capacity is best built by the government, and we will need a lot of it!  The need to convert from crude oil, natural gas, and propane uses to electric is critical.  Geothermal closed loop wells, battery powered car chargers, electric night freight trains, and many others will need more generating capacity as quickly as we can build it. 

THE OUTPUT POWER OF THESE PLANTS WILL BE SOLD AT COMPETIVE PRICES TO PUBLIC AND PRIVATE UTILITIES (AT THE SAME PRICE) TO PAY BACK THE GOVERNMENT "ENERGY" BONDS THAT WERE SOLD TO BUILD THE PLANTS.  NO TAXES SHOULD BE NEEDED TO DO THIS.

Building and operating these plants will give huge benefits to our economy. This is instant GOOD JOBS for many across the country - a real economy booster, not $600 to spend on Chinese goods at Walmart.  The best part is that this approach will leave the taxpayer OWNING something of value.  Giving up drilling rights in public lands, and tax breaks to private companies just enriches investors at taxpayer expense, and leaves us held hostage.  Enough of that already.

Because of the difficulty investor owned utilities now have in selling construction bonds for ANY type of base load plant, the few new generating stations have been largely natural gas-fired turbines.  These compete with home and business uses of natural gas and drive the prices sky high.  Gas turbine peaking construction must be halted - it is a public policy going the wrong way.

The federal government WILL have to take over the "bulk power transmission grid" that moves huge amounts of power from where it is being produced, to the service area where it will be used.  Currently, that is the part of the system that operates at 345,000 volts (345kv) and above.  The key to this split is whether the line serves only one utility.

The depreciated "book" value for the "grid" system is established in the rate filings by all of the investor owned utilities.  The utilities cannot earn any more return on that investment than what that filing states.  That is the price that should be paid for the system.  The "return" that they should get is the amortized mortgage payments that the federal government has to make to the utility to take over "ownership" of the system.  These payments will made out of the fees the government will charge to move power across the system.  The utilities already charge each other those charges, so nothing should change except who owns the system.

Taking over the bulk power transmission system, and strengthening it will help avoid upcoming blackouts similar to what occured in Northeast Ohio a couple of years back.  Otherwise, that will happen again, and probably worse.  Blackouts are horribly expensive to homes and businesses.

Entering the generation field would put us on the same approach that NEARLY EVERY OTHER developed country uses.  It is time to enter the 20th century - we will just be a little later than some other competing countries.

Incredible, but true!  We are in Iraq because of our energy dependence on the Mideast.  We have that dependence because it USED TO BE cheaper to pump oil out of the desert and "ship" it to the US to privately owned BIG OIL refineries.  The Mideast wars of the past 2 decades have changed which approach is more economical and which approach is better for the US economy and US JOBS!  We need energy independence from BOTH the mideast and BIG OIL.

BIG OIL has found out it can make a lot more profit by NOT building any new refineries.  The artificial shortages are making them billions in profit without investing a dime.  They would say that the NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) problem has made new refinery construction impossible.  That part is also true, and we can fix ALL of that very quickly.

The US public is paying through the nose for motor fuel, heating fuel, the war itself, and millions of jobs lost to overseas because so much of our money is going overseas.  We are paying through the nose, yet we get no fresh air.  If that money gets spent in the US, we’re much better off.

The HUGE cost of this Iraq war is roughly 100 billion dollars per year, or about $8 billion/ month.  If we were spending that money to build refineries and new coal/nuclear plants, we wouldn’t need to be spending money in the mideast at all in two years.  AND, many of our higher paid workers would be working hard to build those new PUBLIC generating plants and new PUBLIC oil refineries.  Now THERE’S a "stimulus."

No joke folks.  We need to get our federal government, starting with congress and this batch of presidential candidates to embrace the following approach, NOW!  Use federal "Energy" bonds to fund it.

Start building federally owned refinery capacity now on land already federally owned by our Department of Energy (National Laboratory grounds in the west, primarily.)  Most have had previous nuclear research facilities on them, and would not face NIMBY problems.  Idaho National Enginering Laboratory in Idaho for one. There are several more in the western US.  (Let’s not forget closed Air Force and Army Bases on this one either.)

The western national labs happen to be very close to federally owned lands that could have FEDERAL drilling safely done on them to get the oil out of the ground.  Eastern national laboratory and weapons facilities could be used to build nuclear power plant complexes to help us shift from a gasoline and natural gas economy to a clean, carbon free economy.  Where will the nuclear fuel for all this electricity come from?

Amazingly, the very first electricity generated from nuclear power (IN 1951)was in the Idaho desert at Experimental Breeder Reactor 1 near Arco, Idaho.  This small demonstration plant powered up the nearby town of Arco to demonstrate that the technology would work.  In 1962, EBR 2 was built nearby and demonstrated the entire Breeder Reactor Cycle.  This actual generating station was part of the Idaho power grid for several DECADES.

The French loved EBR 2 enough to build a 10 times scale-up plant called Phenix (actual spelling) in the 1960’s.  This technology is not new.  How important is breeder reactor technology?  (Take a deep breath.)

Using breeder reactor technology for electricity would supply 100% of all US electricity needs for 1500 years (FACT!) using the pure uranium that is already stored as a useless byproduct from weapons enrichment.  No further mining would be needed.

A short explanation is necessary here.  Remember, this is not pie-in-the-sky stuff like "fusion" that "might be workable someday."  This technology has been proven for over a half century, and the facts I am telling you are TRUE.  This will be easy to understand.

Less than %1 of natural pure Uranium is useful as a nuclear fuel (U235).  99% is U238, which makes a great paperweight.  In order to make a bomb work, the 235 part must be "enriched" to over 90% purity, which leaves a whole lot of 238 with "nothing to do afterwards".  NOT TRUE!

A "breeder" reactor produces electricity for awhile, and ends up with more good nuclear fuel in the core than it started out with!  You actually have to shut it down and remove part of the fuel it makes, and use it in another CONVENTIONAL nuclear generating station.  The Breeder converts the useless U238 into Pu 239 - an excellent fuel for reactors that is safe enough that I have carried it in my own hands.  It is way safer than mouse poison, and that’s allowed in your home! 

Don’t be scared by ignorant screamers about this.  They are counting on you being dumb enough to buy their screaming without checking with REAL experts. 

Progressively embracing this infrastructure will fairly rapidly free us from the tyranny of the mideast wars and BIG OIL’s stranglehold on all of us through oil man buddy Bush and his cronies.  This is not a conspiracy - it is simply business - politics is a tool to maintain cash flow for your friends. 

I have often wondered where Nader got his funding for all his scare tactics - and I still wonder if it’s BIG OIL.  Don’t let false science (Union of Concerned Scientists - there’s a laugh - check their actual credentials compared to true professionals in the industry).  Check into this technology in "Intro to Nuclear Engineering" college textbooks for the true story.  Would you read the chiropractor’s weekly newsletter to find out about open heart surgery?  Get the real truth from the true experts, not from sharlatans.

Help me run with this one folks!  It’s for the future of our kids and their kids for the next 1000 years - honest!

As stated in the posting that follows this one, we can achieve a massive reduction in school property taxes by reducing the number of years that some of our students spend in public school.  At more than $6,000/year/student, the potential savings are considerable.  How can we do that, without shorting our students in preparing for life?

"Training for life competency", instead of "educating for enrichment" is the answer. Our current "no child left behind" approach is leaving a lot of kids behind in REAL life.

Kindergarten through grade 4 are fine as is for now, including the type of teaching certification required.  So long as the kids aren’t passed into grade 5 until COMPETENT in the 3 R’s, the next two stages will do fine.  An effective competency exam must be passed to exit grade 4 into Basic Life Competency.  If this exam is not passed by age 10, the student is placed in a far different program.  For "quick" students, they should be able to pass through this phase in an accelerated time frame, without having to spend the full 5 years.

A "Basic Life Competency" Certificate will be awarded to those who pass the final exam.  This should be very meaningful to employers and prospective life partners alike.  

Grades 5-8 will be spent on Basic Life Competency, taught by teachers with certifications to match.  Current "middle"school teachers will have to certify as "Basic Life Competency Instructors" by scoring at least 95% on the final exams that their students will have to take.  They will also have to demonstrate mastery of the new instruction strategy within their area of Basic Life Competency.  This should not take long for currently competent middle school teachers.  Those areas should be Social Success, Economic Solutions, Infrastructure, Society Challenges.  Art and music classes could be available as electives, but not required.

Certification to teach at this Basic Life Skills level should be open to anyone who can pass the related competency exams, and then the related instruction strategy for the area they will instruct.  It should not have any artificial barriers related to a College of Education curriculum. It should include a six month in-class apprenticeship with a certified instructor in that part of the curriculum. 

Many knowledgable, talented retired or semi-retired persons are available who could REALLY motivate our students to succeed.  The same holds true for all vocational programs, and the "Academic Preparatory" part of the program. 

The "Academic Preparatory" program should be taught by those with a 4 year degree in a related major, who can score over 80% on the related Curriculum Competency exam.  Real world work experience in the field should count the same as a College of Education degree. The Curriculum Competency Exam requirement must be met by traditional College of Education grads as well.  We cannot afford trainers who don’t really know what the student is being trained for. 

The "Basic Life Competency" curriculum should span the current grade 5-8.  The curriculum should progressively explore real life economic, social, and infrastructure aspects in a manner that shows how to apply mathematical skills to household and retail situations, formation and adherrence to household budgets, family and friend dispute resolutions, BASIC home repairs, etc. 

Always focus on real world situations to demonstrate how school skills apply to life.  Part of our problem with what we now "teach", is that the kids don’t really see "why?"  When I would sub math classes at all levels, right after putting my name on the board, I would write "Math! - It’s ’YO MONEY!"  We would go from there with a few real life examples and into the lesson.  If there is no real life example, why are we teaching it?

WHY?  Right now, we have numerous students who resent being in class, do nothing but disrupt and waste time, and MAKE NO EFFORT of any sort to improve themselves.  We need to invest only in students who will invest in themselves.  The students who actually CANNOT master this material resent being in school.  What is the point insisting on either one being in publicly funded school for additional years?  Let them begin a working career at age 16.  After working 6 months (at least 500 hours) for a non-family member, a maximum of one more year of training would be allowed at public expense.

For those who DO pass the Basic Life Competency Exams, additional public training is available based on demonstrated skills and personal preference.  The "Career Skills" part of public education should end up in a specific certitication of competency, or certification of attendance if final competency cannot be achieved in the scheduled course length.  None of these should exceed two years in length.  Same for the "Academic Competency" path. 

Many vocational paths will be shorter.

The vocational courses should be ones that actually have career opportunities.  Health care, law enforcement, construction or factory production apprenticeships, machinist, welder, mechanical or electrical maintenance, food service, commerce, etc. for instance. No public funds should be spent for rock star, park ranger, etc.  (No real opportunities, no funding.)

"Academic Competency" courses also should not exceed two years as part of publically funded "secondary" schooling.  Again, a Competency Certificate for those who pass the final exam, and an Attendance Certificate for those who don’t. For those who test in the upper 50% statewide, another two years of "College Preparatory" curriculum should be available at a consolidated "district" facility.  After that, no further "local" public funding would be allowed.

At all stages in this process, rapid completion should be possible and encouraged to avoid boredom in classes.  Demonstrating competency should be the only advancement criterion.

In no case should a student receive more than 13 years of training at public expense in the secondary realm.  Most will receive only 10-11, and some could be as little as 9.  That difference is a lot of tax dollars!

I know this will reduce total student years by at least 20% and give us better prepared kids.  I also know it will be fought tooth and nail by the "educator" establishment, which has become well entrenched since the days I was in public school.  This highly compensated, closed society will declare war on this whole concept.  Unfortunately for them, I am still right. 

School funding has become a major friction point across the country.  With staff salaries seemingly in the clouds compared to the wage reality of most of us, and the cost of seating each student higher than $6,000 per year, many are now voting against EVERY property tax school levy and most income tax school levies.  There are a few key truths we must remember.

1) WE MUST have reasonably successful PUBLIC INSTRUCTION or we will dangerously shrink our pool of skilled citizens to only the children of the wealthy.  My experience with the children of many of the wealthy is that they are not "hungry" enough to succeed in the difficult career paths that our society desperately needs.  Myself and my three siblings were very hungry and we all succeeded.  My own three youngsters were not wealthy, but had enough not to be hungry for success - and have had only limited success.  Many kids I know simply don’t care to work at all - except to beg from their parents, or from everyone else by "working" as a telemarketer.

2) Public Training COST must be reduced.  No matter how you fund it, it comes out of the taxpayer pocket, and the taxpayer is tired of paying so much.  We must reduce the total number of PUBLIC "school" years funded for those students who do not benefit from the effort.  We must also reduce public investment for those who do not wish to invest their own effort.  For those who can progress more rapidly than the norm, let them, as it will reduce the total cost of their training.  I’m sorry, but the "No Child Left Behind" philosophy is bankrupt. 

It is the responsibility of our school staffs to facilitate student success for those who try to succeed, but we cannot make them responsible for those students who will not try.  The student must WANT to succeed, and must make the EFFORT to succeed.  If they do not try, it is no one’s fault but their own.  We can do a better job of helping them believe they can succeed.

3) The desired result from publically-funded schooling is "citizen competency", not "academic enrichment!!!"  I do not want to fund classes FULL of students who only want to become art teachers or track coaches or any other form of professional academic!  The society we have desperately needs doctors, nurses, engineers, welders, power plant and sewage treatment plant workers, etc. to perform the REAL work of society. 

Our society desperately needs for every citizen to be able to construct a living budget, understand the realities of credit financing, be able to calculate the cost of materials to feed their families or do repairs and improvements to their homes. 

They need to understand the realities of the infrastructure upon which they are frequently asked to vote, either directly or indirectly.  Some students will become art or history teachers, or basketball coaches, and that is wonderful.  Lord knows, I wanted to be a basketball coach and foreign language teacher at one time - until I found out what their salary was in 1967! 

Luckily for myself and my country, I was able to master electronics, physics, engineering technology, and the complicated field of nuclear power plant operations before I became a highly effective nuclear trainer. 

Right now, the public's understanding of the very real infrastructure challenges facing us is terrible!  Frankly the general public doesn’t have a clue and are willing to buy expensive snake oil remedies that will not work.  This is a dangerous time when professional journalists print articles in which lawyers tell the public what "the better engineering approach is", while at the same time the journalist doesn’t let any engineering or business professional print reality rebuttals. 

We knew the public wasn’t going to get much from TV, but we thought the newspapers would remain effective.  Now our only chance is the schools?  Nope! I find science teachers telling students dangerous myths about nuclear generation, while their own background is in geology and meteorology.  This sort of irresponsible instruction has to stop!  It is a huge disservice to our students and to society!

Industry has to spend their own money to "train" employees to effectively and efficiently do their tasks for the employer.  This "training" is based on studies of exactly what skills and knowledges are needed to perform each key task.  The employee then learns supporting basics relevant to those tasks, the actual process for completing the task, and proves in the classroom setting that they can do the task.  Once COMPETENCY is DEMONSTRATED, the worker begins to perform their mission within the business. 

We need to use the same process to identify skills and knowledges for successful citizenship, parenting, and general workplace skills.  Once identified, focus public training on mastering those.  Once mastered, the student could move on into the arts, academia, engineering, business, or vocational skills pathways that fit their skills and interests.  We really must switch to this LIFE COMPETENCY, not academic enrichment approach, if we want to keep the schools funded and get our money’s worth.

WE, the real world public professionals, need to do this analysis for the public education sector, not members of the education establishment itself.  They will want to continue to "educate" students, so that they may succeed in the academic environment, because that is ALL most of them know.  Most educators don’t know first hand what success in the real world requires-they only guess.  They know how to become teachers!

If we don’t spend as many class hours on art, history, and literature - we don’t need as many of that type of teachers.  The resistance to any of these changes within the active teaching profession is going to be as bad as resistance to new stock market rules by established stock brokers.  To be compassionate, we will need to let attrition shrink these ranks, and just not replace the "extras".  Some will be able to remold into "Life Competency" trainers, I am absolutely certain. 

Sorry!  That’s the way it works, and the way it will work.  We, the taxpayers, pay for this industry, and it is our right to purchase ONLY the services we want - even from this very intrenched industry.  Right now, you pay only for the car you want, not the one General Motors wants to sell you.  Why should you have to pay for the public education that the public educators want you to pay for?

THE EMPEROR HAS NO CLOTHES!!  Public "education" needs to turn into "citizen competency" training.  Grades 9-12 need to be taught by those who have succeeded in the real world, most will probably be semi-retired from business or industry, and should receive a truncated teacher certification that lures them to groom our next generation to be successful.  The effort that current high school science books make to teach real world infrastructure is pitiful and frequently outright wrong.  Our students deserve accurate, realworld based science, not science the way a Ralph Nader group wants it taught. 

I have substitute taught in better and worse schools in my county as a semi-retired professional.  Let me say that traditional teacher certification should be required for those teaching Kindergarten through fourth grade.  I have "sub"ed in those classes and think they are still very effective and on target for what is needed for those ages.  The mix of art, music, literature, etc helps instill that school is fun and enlightening.  It’s the next four grades that need to receive round one of the modifications, followed by what we now call "high school".

Grades 5-8 should begin a refocused curriculum that uses real life problems to demonstrate the need for math and an understanding of technology (beyond surfing the internet or copying music files - that;s not "real" technology).  Begin to fully explore family problem dynamics, so that kids from normal homes don’t conclude their families are "dysfunctional" compared to some Dr Spock utopian model (another "teacher" with no real world experience raising his own children.) 

The way these topics are covered would have to be progressive and age relevant.  Students would have to demonstrate competency in social and infrastructure/household math/science problem solving - to move above the "BASIC LIFE COMPETENCY" level of school.  We do these kids no favors sending then into high school while they are still unable to figure out what 7 clamps at 60 cents is going to cost.

We, the mature and experienced more senior members of society, have to set the example of compromise that we are trumpeting to the broader electorate.  We ourselves MUST support compromises among "what’s best for the AARP membership",  "what’s best for those under 40", and "what’s best for those under 20."  We alone may have the wisdom to help legitimate competing interests to find what is best OVERALL for our society. 

The elderly of our society deserve compassionate care and respect for their contributions to the broader well-being of our society.  Those under 20 deserve a reasonable level of support in their efforts to become strong contributors to the well-being of our society.  Our working young people, raising their families and doing the bulk of the work in our society; need to have a reasonable society structure in which they can thrive as many of us did. 

In general, our history shows that a very successful system of "mutual and serial reciprocity" among three or four generations has worked for centuries.  For the overall good of our society, we need to maintain that multi-generational compact.  If we become self-centered, we kill the very golden goose that we are counting on in our own senior years.  What are the driving forces that are pushing us to abandon this centuries old success policy?

Part of it is simple economics.  "Unlimited wants vs the reality of limited resources" is the simple basis of much of modern economics.  It is a solid basis.  A related not-so-funny office sign says, "We have done so much for so many, for so long with so little - that now we can do everything for everyone, all the time with nothing."

Part of it is our own desire to live (almost) forever.  Not only must we take responsibility for our own actions, we must realistically face the mechanisms of our own demise.  There is no fountain of youth, and we must avoid the "vampire" approach of sucking the life blood out of the younger generation.  We get only one ticket - and only ride once.  Our average lifespan is greatly extended now compared to even 50 years ago.  I'm sorry, but I think it's long enough now.  Further gains for our elderly are coming at a terrible expense to our younger generations.

As a complete society, we need to decide how we will spend our limited resources.  We cannot spend every dollar we can find on the elite education of every child.  We cannot spend every dollar that we can find on extending the life of every elderly person for every day possible with the very best medical procedures.  We cannot tax every dollar earned to the extent necessary to pay for overblown policies at either end.  Somewhere in this is a very workable compromise that maintains important aspects for each group, but acknowledges that reasonable limits must be developed for each legitimate goal.  It is up to us to help articulate what those limits must be.

If we insist on the government doing exactly what we AARP members want it to do, and don’t compromise, we will kill the golden goose that makes our society what it is.  The "mutual and serial reciprocity" pact that has served us so well will be broken.  I strongly recommend that our generation rise above that and help produce a good future.

It is in our own best interest in establishing limits for our own extended care at public expense.  It is in our own best interest to help public education refocus on "life skills training" at public expense, with limits on the resources to be applied for those students who cannot (usually WILL NOT TRY to) succeed.  We must help re-establish authority tools for parents, teachers, and law enforcement members to reestablish order.  We must support progressive meaningful penal consequences for those who will not obey the law. 

Eliminating our dependence on foreign supplied oil and irresponsible profiteering Big Oil’s refusal to strengthen refinery capacity is a key need.  We put a lot of people to work building dams in the 1930’s, providing inexpensive power that fueled expansion in the West.  More worked for decades building the interstate system that eliminated many of the turnpikes and sharply reduced freight costs for our products.  We still have infrastructure that would do better if it were publically owned and managed.  Most business is better kept private.  Critical public infrastructure is not. It is time to fix this Achilles heel of our society.

We can put a lot of Americans to work drilling for PUBLIC oil on federal lands, building enough refinery capacity to eliminate artificial shortages, building enough SAFE nuclear and CLEAN coal electric power plants to avoid impending blackouts, and a strong enough bulk power transmission system to maintain flexibility among sources.  the tens of billions of dollars spent in the mideast could be redirected to REALLY ensuring our energy supplies.  We can do this!  We did it in the Great Depression, in World War II with war bonds, and we can do it now!

Who will insist on this?  "Divided We Fail" says WE will!  I say we will, too - and so much more.  We can. We must!

Seriously, the Court has ordered that the US make paper money discernible by blind folks.  While coins can be "felt up" fairly accurately, paper money is a bust for our friends who can’t see.  For all they know, they could be holding scraps of good stationery cut to the right size.  We can satisfy the court order and clean up other messy business while we’re at it.  It costs the Treasury a bundle to print $1 bills and mint pennies, and gas priced at $3.39 9/10???

Part of the law would have to make gas pricing at 9/10 of a cent illegal. With a price/gallon over $3, who is kidding whom?  When was the last time anyone had a "mil" in their pocket?  It’s been hundreds of years!  It’s time to readjust our money to make more sense in the modern times.  And, we can get more durable money in the process.

Prices are stated in a DECIMAL format ($8.45) that makes sense, but we pay for stuff in fractions of 1/20, 1/4, multiples of 5/20/50, etc.  We tell kids their stuff comes to 99 cents and they go crazy trying to figure out which coins add up to that.  No wonder they hate school.  We need to dump pennies, nickels, quarters, and paper $1/5/10/20/50.

Surviving coins should be the current dime, gold $1 coins, and a new $10 green anodized coin in the shape of a pentagon (makes sense to me.)  The only paper money would be a $100 bill that blind people could legally refuse to accept as change.  Court order satisfied, pennie problem solved, $1 paper problem solved.  (Plastic coin purse required.  They still make them.)

Immediately, checkout totals rounded DOWN to the nearest dime after taxes (whick will help end 99 cent pricing).  After 5 years, no one would have to accept obsolete denominations except banks.  After 10 years, only Federal Reserve banks would accept obsolete money.  After 15 years, no bankd would be required to accept it. Stores or persons could CHOOSE to accept old denominations, but won’t be required to. 

Kids would then be able to concentrate on how many shingles are in a roofing square, tablespoons in a quart, how many acres are in their 50’ x 50’ pond ( to buy fish to stock it) and other "still goofy" measurements units.

Please join me in harrassing our legislators on this critically important emergency legislation.  (I’m joking, of course.)

Overcrowded recreation facilities.  Underutilized factories.  Underutilized public school structures.  What day of the week is the 11th this month?  Unemployment for some and long workweeks for others.  How to fix?

Believe it or not, our current "Gregorian" calendar is a hodgepodge of the Roman calendar with other junk mixed in.  For instance, September and October means literally the 7th and 8th month - but are our 9th and 10th month. Let’s consider a more functional calendar.

We can eliminate Friday the 13th, all mondays, and "30 days hath September" with a stroke of the pen.  Every month would look exactly the same, so only one sheet would ever need to be displayed ( I will miss the pretty pictures.)  The 33rd would always be Thursday, and we would quickly memorize the rest as well.  Yes, 10 months in a year, with 6 days in each of 6 weeks, with no Mondays at all.

We could choose which of the 4 day workweeks we would prefer (Tues-Fri, Thurs-Sun, or Sat-Wed) and get our kids on the same schedule in school.  With 16% more weekend days, we would no longer need a bunch of 1 day holidays to get a 4 day workweek.  Holidays would be embedded in the "New Year Break" or "Midyear Break". Midyear Break would always be three days - for "National Heritage Day", "Parents/Family Day", and "Cultural Heritage Day." New Year Break would be either 2 or 3 days "Faith Day", "New Year Day", and the 3rd day would be "Social Achievement Day" to celebrate all presidents, equal rights advocates, snake herdsmen, etc.

Benefits? Lots? Avoided new construction of bigger schools.  Better use of restaurants, lakes, pools, bars, etc. Reduced unemployment and needing only ONE durable calenday page ( Okay-2 - one for "this month" and one for "next month").  Sure this is a wierd calendar, but no wierder than the one we use, and no weider than ones lots of other cultures are using. This would be just as "better" as "going metric!"