AS THE end of the impeachment trial drew ever nearer, a peculiar strain of
anxiety began to work its way into Washington conversations. With a hefty
portion of the local populace engaged one way or another in the dissemination
and processing of news, it became clear that the days of plenty were numbered.
What, oh what, were we going to do for material once the trial was over?
Now, it鈥檚 historical fact that one big news story is inevitably followed by
another in Washington; it鈥檚 our version of 鈥淭he King is dead; long live the
King鈥�. Nonetheless, even a short dry spell is cause for alarm after such a flood
of events. But they say that chance favours the prepared, and as luck would have
it, there is something to fill the post-impeachment void. It is the bug that
may hit some computer systems as the date switches from the end of one millennium
to the start of the next.
Almost every day, the so-called Y2K or millennium experts gather in
Washington for press conferences on the threat from the millennium bug. Polls
have been taken, the public is confused, there is worry and wonder in the land.
In fact, the millennium bug has all the trappings of an even better story than
sex in the White House and legal exegesis of the constitution. For one thing,
this time the outcome鈥攈ow much computerised chaos we are in for on 1
January 2000鈥攊s not only uncertain, it鈥檚 unknowable. So there鈥檚 no limit
on speculation! And this time it will be the techie crowd, from the academics to
the science press, who鈥檒l make the talk shows and earn all that overtime pay. So
bring on the bug! We鈥檝e got ten months to fill.
Advertisement
THE impeachment saga did manage to submerge a number of stories that might
have made headlines in quieter times. Take, for example, the report by the
Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel. These no-nonsense engineers and aerospace
experts are supposed to make sure that NASA is doing everything possible to make
space travel safe. Contrary to NASA鈥檚 repeated assurances that despite declining
budgets, an ageing shuttle fleet and uncertainties about Russian hardware,
everything is, as we say, 鈥� copacetic鈥� with the US鈥檚 space programme, the safety
panel is predicting storm clouds ahead. For example, its report says that
constraints on hiring 鈥渆ngineers, scientists and technical workers are moving
NASA toward a crisis鈥�, that training shortfalls threaten to 鈥渏eopardise
otherwise safe operations鈥�, and that NASA鈥檚 space station plans will expose
astronauts to radiation levels that are 鈥渢wice the limit for US airline pilots
and four times the limit for Navy nuclear operators鈥�.
Was there a public outcry over these shocking revelations? Hardly. The
Washington press corps was far too focused on Monica and Bill. NASA officials
caught on to that. They don鈥檛 plan to respond to the report until summer, by
which time it will be ancient history. Unless, of course, another shuttle blows
up.
THE FEDERAL government can be hard to pin down sometimes. Take the subject of
the public鈥檚 right to know what the government knows. That right is cherished
here, but in practice it鈥檚 catch-as-catch-can. Case in point: the government
this month decided to allow labels on wine bottles to describe the health
benefits of consuming the contents, or at least direct consumers to places where
they can find out about the benefits. Most tipplers have already committed these
to memory. They include a reduced risk of heart disease conferred by moderate
drinking. True, some of the information also points to links to breast cancer
and other ill-health effects of too much drinking. But wine makers are happy
that they can now tout the benefits of the occasional glass.
Simultaneously, the government is fighting public efforts to make the
Environmental Protection Agency release details of toxic chemicals produced and
stored around the country. Environmentalists and the generally curious want to
know where these things are and what harm they could do. The government,
however, worries that terrorists might be interested in the same information if
it were freely available on, say, the Web. Corporations are similarly
tight-lipped. So it seems we鈥檙e to be told what鈥檚 good for us, but not what may
be bad for us.