When funds set aside for Iraq's reconstruction proved insufficient, President Bush pressed Congress for $71 billion for security and rebuilding operations. (The President also requested $16 billion for Afghanistan and other "war on terror" activities.) Yet despite mounting calls for more troops on the ground in Iraq, the Administration has remained steadfastly opposed to sending any. This could prove to be a serious mistake. During the war itself, the U.S. prevailed on the strength of technological and tactical superiority. But according to a new study by researchers at the RAND Corporation, who reviewed the seven previous U.S.-led nation-building exercises since World War II, one of the keys to successful nation building is large numbers of ground troops. For instance, consider the contrast between the relative success of such efforts in the Balkans and the slow, unsteady pace of reconstruction in post-conflict Afghanistan; the difference, the researchers found, is largely due to the fact that fifty times more soldiers per capita were deployed to Kosovo after the 1999 war than to Afghanistan after the 2001 conflict. For the United States to achieve a Kosovo-level per capita force presence in Iraq, it would have to deploy about 376,000 additional soldiers there. According to a recent Congressional Budget Office report, however, it's doubtful that the United States will even be able to sustain present force levels (about 150,000 soldiers) past 2004. In the best-case scenario, according to the CBO, only about 106,000 additional U.S. soldiers could be made available over the long term to rebuild Iraq—and a deployment of that size would further strain the already strained National Guard and reserve units.
—"America's Role in Nation-Building: From Germany to Iraq," RAND Corporation; "An Analysis of the U.S. Military's Ability to Sustain an Occupation of Iraq," Congressional Budget Office
In the nation's top fifty media markets during the seven weeks immediately preceding the November 2002 midterm election, more than half of all local television broadcasts gave no coverage whatsoever to political campaigns. As a result, according to researchers at the University of Southern California and the University of Wisconsin at Madison who examined more than 10,000 half-hour local television news broadcasts, most of the political information gleaned by local-news viewers came from paid advertisements: 80 percent of the broadcasts the researchers reviewed included at least one political advertisement; about half contained three or more ads. Another study, by the Alliance for Better Campaigns, suggests that although broadcasters ignore political campaigns in their news coverage, they are happy to exploit them for their revenue-generating potential: the price political candidates had to pay for television air time increased by 53 percent in the two months leading up to the November 2002 elections.
—"Local TV News Coverage of the 2002 General Election," Martin Kaplan (USC) and Ken Goldstein (UW Madison); "Profiteering on Democracy," Alliance for Better Campaigns
Seeking to assuage fears about the health threat posed by contaminated air at Ground Zero, the Environmental Protection Agency in the days immediately following the September 11 terrorist attacks issued a series of press releases that played down the risks of bad air in Lower Manhattan. One release, dated September 18, stated simply, "The air is safe to breathe." But a recent report from the EPA's inspector general suggests that the agency didn't have enough information in September of 2001 to make such a blanket statement about health risks. Moreover, the report reveals, 25 percent of the dust samples taken between September 11 and September 18 in fact exhibited asbestos levels high enough to warrant serious health concerns. What accounts for the agency's haste in reassuring the American public before the facts were known? White House meddling: according to the report, White House staff pressured the EPA into replacing cautionary language from drafts of early press releases with reassuring statements about air quality. If a report by Democrats on the House Committee on Government Reform is to be believed, the Bush Administration has not been shy about distorting scientific studies. The report documents numerous instances of the White House's "manipulating scientific advisory committees," "distorting and suppressing scientific information," and "interfering with scientific research and analysis."
For truck drivers accustomed to the long, lonely trek across the Great Plains, it has for years been a truism that Kansas is flatter than a pancake. Recently geographers from Texas State and Arizona State Universities proved that this truism is, in fact, scientifically true. According to a study published in the Annals of Improbable Research (the successor to the now-defunct Journal of Irreproducible Results), researchers removed a two-centimeter-wide sample strip from a warm restaurant pancake. Viewing the sample through a high-powered microscope, they were surprised to find its surface quite rugged. But the proof of Kansas's superior flatness was in the numbers. Perfect, platonic flatness has a mathematical value of 1.000. Whereas the pancake sample scored a very flat 0.957, Kansas was clearly flatter, scoring 0.9997. Producing this finding, though, proved difficult for the researchers, because Kansas is so flat that the software they were using first reported its flatness to be a perfect 1.000—unlikely even for Kansas. Several hours' worth of further computer programming was required before the researchers could make a proper measurement and then agree on a technical description of Kansas's essential characteristic: "damn flat."
—"Kansas Is Flatter Than a Pancake," Mark Fonstad, William Pugatach, and Brandon Vogt
If past years are any indication, January's annual meeting of the World Economic Forum, in Davos, Switzerland, will draw a large crowd of youthful anti-globalization activists, most of them from rich Western nations, who say they are fighting on behalf of poorer populations. According to a recent survey by the Pew Global Attitudes Project, however, popular support for globalization is in fact strong in the developing societies that it supposedly impoverishes. Pew reports that on average, about 92 percent of respondents in sub-Saharan Africa and 85 percent of respondents in developing Asian nations (such as Vietnam and Bangla-desh) think growing trade and business ties are good for their countries. Majorities in most African and Asian nations also had positive impressions of multinational corporations, and of the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and the World Trade Organization. People in the developing world do share some of the antiglobalization protesters' concerns: the majority of those polled agree that the gap between rich and poor is growing while the availability of well-paying jobs is diminishing.
—"Views of a Changing World," Pew Global Attitudes Project
There's a good reason why today's unemployed are having a tough time getting back to work: in many cases their old jobs have simply vanished for good. According to a study conducted by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, 79 percent of U.S. employment is now in industries undergoing "structural" job losses—meaning that employers have no plans to fill the positions they are cutting, even if the economy picks up. During previous downturns about half of the workforce was employed in industries going through cyclical unemployment, so more people who lost their jobs were likely to be rehired as companies ramped up their production. But structural job losses are harder for the labor market to recover from. Creating wholly new jobs involves more time and risk for companies than filling previously existing spots by recalling furloughed workers. And it's harder for laid-off workers to find new jobs (and to learn new skills) than to return to jobs they've previously held. Nevertheless, the report cautions that some concerns over the extent of recent job losses may be overblown. For one thing, unemployment rates remain relatively low compared to those seen in recent recessions. For another, discouraged workers—who are often cited as a source of "hidden" unemployment, because they've given up looking for work altogether and no longer appear in the government's official unemployment statistics—account for only six percent of those who have left the work force entirely since the recession began. Teenagers, who are now dropping out of school less frequently and devoting more time to studying during the summer, make up half of the hidden-unemployment total.
—"Has Structural Change Contributed to a Jobless Recovery?" Federal Reserve Bank of New York
We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to firstname.lastname@example.org.