Congratulations to last week's winners: Sean Donahoe, Karen Kroslowitz, Joraine McKellar, Christine Perry, and Diane Sturgeon.

Responses to the last question: Overwhelmingly, Currents readers do not support President Bush's plan for dealing with the energy crisis. They want to see conservation and renewable energy resources playing a much larger role in any strategy. A sampling of readers' views follows.

"Bush and his big-oil cronies invented the 'energy crisis' to undermine (destroy, if possible) the environmental movement and punish California for rejecting him in the last election. His program is more plutocratic tyranny and childish spite than an actual plan."

"This is a short-sighted plan that will bury the next generation in debt. We need to face the reality that we can not use up the world's resources. The plan should be centered on using technology to improve efficiency and mandate renewable energy sources. Conservation should be taught in schools."

"Can you say Haliburton? This plan (which stems from a report issued by the office of the VP) doesn't necessarily benefit the large oil corporations, but it most definitely WILL benefit those firms that are contracted by the big firms for construction and maintenance purposes. That means more money for Cheney's ex-associates. Isn't it great how self-confidently the VP asserts his own self-interest as the good of the country/party/ticket/whatever?"

"Any plan that neglects conservation is irresponsible. Calling for increased nuclear consigns our radioactive waste problems to our children. We need an energy plan that conserves fossil fuels while aggressively promoting clean alternatives."

This week's question: Weigh in and Win is taking a break for the summer. Would you be interested in seeing it, or something like it, return in the fall?

Return to Front Page