by Christopher E. Renner
I attended the public forum on June 18 concerning the proposed Kansas Department of Transportation project to upgrade the K-18 corridor between Ogden and Manhattan. This public meeting was well attended and facilitated. I arrive a little late to the meeting, so I missed the name of the woman facilitating, but it was obvious that she was trained in the National Discourse model for discussing complicated questions like the K-18 proposal.
The purpose of the meeting was to provide the public an opportunity to hear about a competing proposal brought forward by Joe McGraw and other business owners on the K-18 corridor.
Each side was given 15 minutes to present their proposals.
KDOT began by explaining the difference between a Freeway vs. an Expressway. Freeways are accessible only at interchanges, ie, I-70, and carries a maximum amount of through traffic and have the maximum amount of restrictions to access. Freeways have .591 fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles. On the other hand, Expressways are high-speed multi-lane roads with access at most public roads, ie, US 24 between Manhattan and Wamego. Expressways have 1.521 fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles.
KDOT prefers a Freeway to an Expressway for the K-18 corridor because of the growth in traffic over the next 25 years. Currently there are 18,000 vehicles per day traveling on the existing road. This number is expected to rise to 30,000 vehicles per day by 2030, which is the lifetime of the new road. Of the 18,000 vehicles on K-18, 2/3s or 11,880 travel between Manhattan and Ogden.
The KDOT proposal would whereas the KDOT proposal would have changes in the roadbed at Ogden and after the airport and drivers would access the expressway via diamond interchanges at Ogden, the airport, Scenic Drive, and the Miller Parkway/Davis Drive intersections.
McGraw began his proposal with an introduction about the fact that Manhattan is changing and his feelings that we need to “slow down” the pace of the change, - this from a political conservative who pro-business and anti-government! Go figure. He proposed to make Ft. Riley Blvd. a TRUE boulevard, keeping to the K-18 in the current K-18 roadbed and placing traffic circles at Scenic Drive, the Airport and at the entrance to Ogden. Effectively slowing down rush hour traffic to a crawl. So instead of taking 10 or 15 minutes to get home, it would take anywhere from 30 to 60.
McGraw claimed to have 100% of residents of Eureka Valley behind their proposal. They claimed that traffic circles would slow down traffic and make the existing road safer. They also were all about “allowing business” to develop along Ft. Riley, as is happening along eye sore I-70 has become in Junction City, so that Manhattan “could compete for economic dollars.” They concluded their proposal with using Seth Childs road as an example of what K-18 could become.
At the beginning of the evening the facilitator encourage us to “care about people,” “question to help understanding,” and “think creatively” in order to generate a consensus solution to the problem being proposed.
I sat there listening, I was reminded of a Albert Einstein quote: "We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.” Both proposals reflected thinking that is more in line with a 1960s view of the world, than one that is looking 30 years down the road.
Back in the 50s Manhattan leaders were given the option of having the proposed new interstate highway we know call I-70 to follow US-24 and the Kansas River Valley from Junction City eastward to Topeka. Manhattan’s leaders of that time exercised their same shortsightedness that I was seeing at this meeting; they told KDOT and the federal government that they didn’t want any 4-lane highway coming through their town. As a result millions of additional tax dollars have had to be spent by the state of Kansas and federal government to create 4-lane corridors between Manhattan and I-70; Manhattan and Wamego; and now Manhattan and Junction City. Had we used foresight and doing what is best for the common good, rather than allowing local economic and political interests to dictate that decision, we wouldn’t even be having a discussion about K-18 today. Why can’t we learn from our past mistakes?
The reason I ask this question is that I saw nothing creative in either the KDOT proposal, and certainly not in Joe McGraw’s proposal. Both are based on the concept that in 2030 we will still all be driving individual cars, that petrol will still be readily available, and that our lifestyles will not have changed in the face of global warming and the depletion of natural resources. These underlying assumptions of status quo being what 2030 will look like greatly disturbed me. We are once again using the vision of Manhattan leaders in the ‘50s and are really missing the boat to a future which energy independence and mass transit is normative.
If by 2030, we are going to have 30,000 cars traveling between Ft. Riley and Manhattan, I am sure the number is based on the assumption that each car will have one passenger - the driver. I live close to Ft. Riley Blvd, and last year when they were working on the Seth Child interchange, was able to set and watch traffic in the morning and evening. The vast majority of cars with Fort decals on their from window had one passenger in them.
Given the state of the world and growing political disintegration of the Middle East into civil war, it would seem to me that we ought to be making decisions about what our future is going to be based on the assumption that we will not have as much petroleum available to us as we assume we do today.
What I took away from the meeting was that Manhattan will need a means to move 30,000 people per day between Ft. Riley and the neighborhoods in which those people live. 30,000 cars is more than just wasteful, it is down right immoral when we think of the lives lost in Iraq for oil. If we were truly concerned about the future of our community, wouldn’t it seem obvious that what is needed is not another highway?
The mathematics is simple: Most cars get poor gas mileage, but lets say they get on average 26 mile per gallon carrying one person. Whereas if that same gallon of gas was placed in a bus could get we would get 115 mpg per person and in that gallon were placed in a train, we would get 7,800 miles per gallon per person.
So, why is KDOT and the County Commissioners using the same thinking that cause the problem we face - congested, unsafe highways, instead of thinking about a new alternative that lightrail link connecting Manhattan and the Fort? Maybe because they have never heard Einstein’s thinking on the matter. Maybe because they just plain lack creativity. In any case, it is the same thinking that put I-70 eleven miles south of town and continues to cost the taxes payers on the state.
A rail link with express trails could have passengers to and from the Fort in as less as 10 minutes. Express trains could be connected to bus routes in the city of Manhattan providing efficient, energy-saving and much less polluting connections from home to work for a majority of the people - 11,880 at the current rate. Providing them financial savings, helping get our nation and community off our oil addiction, and improving the quality of air we breath.
It is time we started thinking about a future which isn’t weighed down with the same mistakes we have made in the past. It is time we got serious about Global Warming and the planet we will leave to the next generation.
25 June 2007
11 June 2007
Saving the lives of our children
8 June 2007.
by Christopher E. Renner
Today we have discussed in detail the issue of HIV/AIDS. After 25 years this disease is still treated as a taboo subject in general US culture with nearly 40,000 new HIV infections occurring each year in the US. No one needs to be infected with HIV in 2007 and yet it is still happening. People still believe you can get it from toilet seats or by touching a HIV+ human. Why do these beliefs continue to persist in the information age?
The answer is simple: as a nation we fail our children and young adults daily because instead of providing scientific and medically valid information, we have political leaders toeing the ideological line of religious fanatics. As a result, young people today are more at risk of infection not only of HIV, but a broad spectrum of antibiotic resistant sexuality transmitted infections (STIs) because of sexphobic religious leaders and their followers.
Sex education is critical in providing young people with the information and skills they need to make responsible, informed choices about their sexual and reproductive lives. While parents are and should be the foremost sexuality educators of their children, many would like help from schools and community-based organizations. Currently no federal program is dedicated to supporting age-appropriate, medically accurate sex education that emphasizes the benefits of abstinence and educates young people about contraception and prevention of sexually transmitted infections, despite the proven effectiveness of such programs. The lack of a federal program leaves many sex education decisions in the hands of state governments.
Across the country, state legislatures continue to offer sex education legislation. Last year, 28 states, spurred on in large part by religious reactionaries, have introduced 115 bills that attempt to determine what students will or won’t learn about human sexuality. While several states introduced positive measures that will enforce responsible and comprehensive sex education programs, many states introduced bills that would prevent abortion-providing agencies from teaching sex education in schools and would prioritized funding to agencies that did not provide abortions or contraception.(1)
But the vilest treat of all is how the media has ignored the Waxman Report. In 2004, Rep. Henry Waxman (D — CA), released a report about the state of abstinence-only sexuality education which the Bush administration and the fanatics in the Religious Right has force upon not only the US public education system but tied to development aid across the world.
The report examined school-based sex education curricula used by programs funded under Special Projects of Regional and National Significance Community-Based Abstinence Education (SPRANS), the fastest-growing source of federally funded abstinence education. Since 1996, nearly $1 billion in state and federal funding, under three funding streams, has been spent on abstinence-only education that denies young people information about contraception beyond failure rates. Another $170 million in federal funds was spent in FY 2005, despite a lack of evidence supporting the effectiveness of this approach.(2)
The report found that the curricula used by more than two-thirds of government-funded abstinence-only programs contain misleading or inaccurate information about abortion, contraception, genetics, and sexually transmitted infections:
• The abstinence-only program “Me, My World, My Future” states, "Tubal and cervical pregnancies are increased following abortions." According to obstetric textbooks, previous abortions are not correlated with ectopic pregnancies.
• “Choosing the Best, The Big Talk Book” states, "[R]esearch confirms that 14 percent of the women who use condoms scrupulously for birth control become pregnant within a year." In fact, when used correctly and consistently, only two percent of couples who rely on the latex condom as their primary form of contraception will experience an unintended pregnancy.
• “Why kNOw” states, "Twenty-four chromosomes from the mother and 24 from the father join to create [a fetus]." Human cells are actually comprised of 46 chromosomes; 23 from each parent.
• “WAIT” Training incorrectly states that HIV can be transmitted through tears and sweat. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), HIV is only transmissible through blood, semen, and vaginal secretions.(1)
The Waxman report also found that many abstinence-only curricula even go so far as to blur the line between religion and science, and treat gender stereotypes as scientific fact. It found that these curriculums:
• grossly underestimate the effectiveness of condoms and other contraceptives in preventing pregnancy and STIs;
• make false claims about the physical and psychological risks of abortion;
• offer misinformation on the incidence and transmission of STIs;
• replace scientific facts with religious views and moral judgments; and
• distort medical evidence and basic scientific facts.(2)
In the past 10 years, Congress has wasted more than $1 billion on dangerous abstinence-only programs that deny teenagers vital information about birth control and responsible decision-making — while approximately 750,000 U.S. teens become pregnant and four million get a sexually transmitted infection each year. And right now, our federal government is spending another $176 million on these dangerous programs. Programs that do not work!
It's time to stop wasting money. The vast majority of parents support responsible, comprehensive sex education, and that's what the Responsible Education About Life (REAL) Act is all about. The REAL Act will provide funds for medically accurate, age-appropriate sex education in schools. H.R. 1653/S. 972 legislation introduced by Reps. Barbara Lee (D-CA), Chris Shays (R-CT), and Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), will appropriate funds for programs that provide age-appropriate, medically accurate information on the values of abstinence and the health benefits and side effects of all contraceptives and barrier methods as a means to prevent pregnancy and reduce the risk of contracting sexually transmitted infections (STIs), including HIV/AIDS.
The vast majority of parents in the United States support responsible sex education. A study conducted by the Kaiser Family Foundation in 2004 reveals that parents want schools to do more in the way of preparing their children for real life. In addition to the basics of reproduction, information about HIV/AIDS and other STIs, and messages about abstinence, all of which are standard in comprehensive sex education classes, parents want the following topics to be covered by sex educators: correct use of condoms, other forms of birth control, how to get tested for STIs, and the emotional consequences of becoming sexually active.(3)
In a 2001 poll of 1,750 registered voters, 85 percent agreed that all students should receive age-appropriate information about contraception and the prevention of sexually transmitted diseases. Seventy percent of these voters strongly agreed (Lake, Snell, Perry & Associates, 2001).(4)
America's leading medical and public health experts support responsible sex education, including the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American Nurses Association, and the Society for Adolescent Medicine, as well as leading public health experts and educators like the American Public Health Association.
You can join this effort by telling Congresswoman Nancy Boyda and Senators Brownback and Roberts to support the REAL Act. You can also sign an on-line petition at:
http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/rrr/petition.asp
We need responsible people to speak out against the culture of fear and dis-information of the Religious Right for the lives of our youth and the future health of our nation. HIV/AIDS can be prevented. We can dramatically reduce the health risk to all young people by provide accurate, medically sound education. It is time we threw off the yoke of religious fanaticism and became the a nation whose health policy is founded on fact, not fiction.
Sources:
1. Planned Parenthood, http://www.saveroe.com/issues/sex-education/misinformation-abstinence-only, accessed June 7, 2007.
2. Guttmacher Institute http://www.guttmacher.org/media/inthenews/2004/12/03/index.html, accessed June 7, 2007.
3. National Public Radio /Kaiser Family Foundation /Harvard University Kennedy School of Government 2004 Poll "Sex Education in America
4. Lake, Snell, Perry & Associates and Deardouff & Associates/The Media Company Nationwide. (July 2001) Survey of 1750 Registered Voters Nationwide. Presentation for Planned Parenthood Action Fund.
by Christopher E. Renner
Today we have discussed in detail the issue of HIV/AIDS. After 25 years this disease is still treated as a taboo subject in general US culture with nearly 40,000 new HIV infections occurring each year in the US. No one needs to be infected with HIV in 2007 and yet it is still happening. People still believe you can get it from toilet seats or by touching a HIV+ human. Why do these beliefs continue to persist in the information age?
The answer is simple: as a nation we fail our children and young adults daily because instead of providing scientific and medically valid information, we have political leaders toeing the ideological line of religious fanatics. As a result, young people today are more at risk of infection not only of HIV, but a broad spectrum of antibiotic resistant sexuality transmitted infections (STIs) because of sexphobic religious leaders and their followers.
Sex education is critical in providing young people with the information and skills they need to make responsible, informed choices about their sexual and reproductive lives. While parents are and should be the foremost sexuality educators of their children, many would like help from schools and community-based organizations. Currently no federal program is dedicated to supporting age-appropriate, medically accurate sex education that emphasizes the benefits of abstinence and educates young people about contraception and prevention of sexually transmitted infections, despite the proven effectiveness of such programs. The lack of a federal program leaves many sex education decisions in the hands of state governments.
Across the country, state legislatures continue to offer sex education legislation. Last year, 28 states, spurred on in large part by religious reactionaries, have introduced 115 bills that attempt to determine what students will or won’t learn about human sexuality. While several states introduced positive measures that will enforce responsible and comprehensive sex education programs, many states introduced bills that would prevent abortion-providing agencies from teaching sex education in schools and would prioritized funding to agencies that did not provide abortions or contraception.(1)
But the vilest treat of all is how the media has ignored the Waxman Report. In 2004, Rep. Henry Waxman (D — CA), released a report about the state of abstinence-only sexuality education which the Bush administration and the fanatics in the Religious Right has force upon not only the US public education system but tied to development aid across the world.
The report examined school-based sex education curricula used by programs funded under Special Projects of Regional and National Significance Community-Based Abstinence Education (SPRANS), the fastest-growing source of federally funded abstinence education. Since 1996, nearly $1 billion in state and federal funding, under three funding streams, has been spent on abstinence-only education that denies young people information about contraception beyond failure rates. Another $170 million in federal funds was spent in FY 2005, despite a lack of evidence supporting the effectiveness of this approach.(2)
The report found that the curricula used by more than two-thirds of government-funded abstinence-only programs contain misleading or inaccurate information about abortion, contraception, genetics, and sexually transmitted infections:
• The abstinence-only program “Me, My World, My Future” states, "Tubal and cervical pregnancies are increased following abortions." According to obstetric textbooks, previous abortions are not correlated with ectopic pregnancies.
• “Choosing the Best, The Big Talk Book” states, "[R]esearch confirms that 14 percent of the women who use condoms scrupulously for birth control become pregnant within a year." In fact, when used correctly and consistently, only two percent of couples who rely on the latex condom as their primary form of contraception will experience an unintended pregnancy.
• “Why kNOw” states, "Twenty-four chromosomes from the mother and 24 from the father join to create [a fetus]." Human cells are actually comprised of 46 chromosomes; 23 from each parent.
• “WAIT” Training incorrectly states that HIV can be transmitted through tears and sweat. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), HIV is only transmissible through blood, semen, and vaginal secretions.(1)
The Waxman report also found that many abstinence-only curricula even go so far as to blur the line between religion and science, and treat gender stereotypes as scientific fact. It found that these curriculums:
• grossly underestimate the effectiveness of condoms and other contraceptives in preventing pregnancy and STIs;
• make false claims about the physical and psychological risks of abortion;
• offer misinformation on the incidence and transmission of STIs;
• replace scientific facts with religious views and moral judgments; and
• distort medical evidence and basic scientific facts.(2)
In the past 10 years, Congress has wasted more than $1 billion on dangerous abstinence-only programs that deny teenagers vital information about birth control and responsible decision-making — while approximately 750,000 U.S. teens become pregnant and four million get a sexually transmitted infection each year. And right now, our federal government is spending another $176 million on these dangerous programs. Programs that do not work!
It's time to stop wasting money. The vast majority of parents support responsible, comprehensive sex education, and that's what the Responsible Education About Life (REAL) Act is all about. The REAL Act will provide funds for medically accurate, age-appropriate sex education in schools. H.R. 1653/S. 972 legislation introduced by Reps. Barbara Lee (D-CA), Chris Shays (R-CT), and Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), will appropriate funds for programs that provide age-appropriate, medically accurate information on the values of abstinence and the health benefits and side effects of all contraceptives and barrier methods as a means to prevent pregnancy and reduce the risk of contracting sexually transmitted infections (STIs), including HIV/AIDS.
The vast majority of parents in the United States support responsible sex education. A study conducted by the Kaiser Family Foundation in 2004 reveals that parents want schools to do more in the way of preparing their children for real life. In addition to the basics of reproduction, information about HIV/AIDS and other STIs, and messages about abstinence, all of which are standard in comprehensive sex education classes, parents want the following topics to be covered by sex educators: correct use of condoms, other forms of birth control, how to get tested for STIs, and the emotional consequences of becoming sexually active.(3)
In a 2001 poll of 1,750 registered voters, 85 percent agreed that all students should receive age-appropriate information about contraception and the prevention of sexually transmitted diseases. Seventy percent of these voters strongly agreed (Lake, Snell, Perry & Associates, 2001).(4)
America's leading medical and public health experts support responsible sex education, including the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American Nurses Association, and the Society for Adolescent Medicine, as well as leading public health experts and educators like the American Public Health Association.
You can join this effort by telling Congresswoman Nancy Boyda and Senators Brownback and Roberts to support the REAL Act. You can also sign an on-line petition at:
http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/rrr/petition.asp
We need responsible people to speak out against the culture of fear and dis-information of the Religious Right for the lives of our youth and the future health of our nation. HIV/AIDS can be prevented. We can dramatically reduce the health risk to all young people by provide accurate, medically sound education. It is time we threw off the yoke of religious fanaticism and became the a nation whose health policy is founded on fact, not fiction.
Sources:
1. Planned Parenthood, http://www.saveroe.com/issues/sex-education/misinformation-abstinence-only, accessed June 7, 2007.
2. Guttmacher Institute http://www.guttmacher.org/media/inthenews/2004/12/03/index.html, accessed June 7, 2007.
3. National Public Radio /Kaiser Family Foundation /Harvard University Kennedy School of Government 2004 Poll "Sex Education in America
4. Lake, Snell, Perry & Associates and Deardouff & Associates/The Media Company Nationwide. (July 2001) Survey of 1750 Registered Voters Nationwide. Presentation for Planned Parenthood Action Fund.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
