LETTERS.(ISSUES & INSIGHTS)

Bush's Principle Deficit

Why does it stand "to reason that America's security -- and the world's -- would be best served with more cheap energy" as stated in "The Florida Message" (Editorial, Thursday)?

Whether the energy is cheap or not does not appear to have any correlation to national security. America has to develop a coherent long-term strategy to deal with its energy requirements. The criteria for developing this strategy should not focus on exploiting a nonrenewable resource just because it is there. A better approach to national and world security might be to concentrate on breaking the need for petroleum. This might be a long-range goal, but maybe the problem calls for a solution which is multigenerational.

As for the decision in Florida, unfortunately I think that some of President Bush's recent decisions are short on principle. Another example of sacrificing long-term goals (i.e., worldwide free trade) for short-term results (votes in steel-producing states). Politics as usual.

Bill Williams, via e-mail

Shaking Up Nuclear Waste

IBD is wrong when it states in "Nuclear Revival?" (Editorial, May 28) that disposal issues for nuclear waste have been solved. Nothing could be further from the truth. Waste from nuclear power plants remains toxic for tens of thousands of years. The "solution" of burying it in Yucca Mountain delays the inevitable. And what of the transportation problems? Surely the thought of plutonium shipments on crumbling interstates and rail lines should give sober men pause.