Nuclear 'Hot Potato' Game Unfair (5/9/02)
by Dean Hartwell
The Bush
Administration won a battle the other day when the House of Representatives
approved its plan to send nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain, Nevada. Proponents
said they wanted to reduce the number of people who live near nuclear waste
sites. Opponents countered that keeping waste at over one hundred reactors
throughout the United States beat the risk of transporting it.
We have to store our nuclear waste somewhere, but why Nevada?
Certain features of the state made it an easy target for the president. For
one, Nevada only has two members in the House of Representatives and thus
little clout with the rest of the body. For another, the state has
traditionally voted solidly Republican, allowing Bush some leeway to risk
upsetting their voters.
Thus, the supporters of the plan played a game of "hot potato" before
putting the waste in Nevada. Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert justified his
support by the high number of nuclear reactors (11) in his home state of
Illinois. Representative John Dingell of Michigan said that Congress should
"pass the issue unto" the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Dick
Armey of Texas, the House Majority Leader, told his colleagues that designating
one place for storing nuclear waste is a matter of "national
security."
Are we really more secure with our waste in one place instead of split up in
several? The people of Nevada certainly are not. Furthermore, transportation of
the expected 77,000 tons of waste will take over twenty years to accomplish.
The odds against having no unsafe deliveries are staggering.
This whole situation is especially unfortunate since Nevada does not produce
any nuclear waste. The Bush Administration should re-think its strategy of
deciding where to put nuclear waste. Currently, other states that use nuclear
power may benefit yet not have to suffer any of the risks. A more sensible
policy would be to keep the waste where it is created so that we do not subject
residents without any interest in nuclear power to its problems.
Of course, that is the current policy. Instead of throwing hot potatos around,
we should give them back to the ones who grow them.