Further developments: Unlikely Bedfellows Lobby Against U.S. Gas-Guzzlers by Chris Baltimore WASHINGTON -- A group of former national security officials on Monday took up the cause of weaning U.S. drivers from their oil addiction -- normally the realm of environmental groups -- and asked the Bush administration to spend $1 billion on lighter, more fuel-efficient automobiles. Retail U.S. gasoline prices now averaging above $2 a gallon make U.S. reliance on foreign suppliers like Venezuela and Saudi Arabia a looming national security crisis, a group of 31 national security officials said in a letter to President Bush. "This really constitutes a national security crisis in the making," said letter signer Frank Gaffney, head of the Center for Security Policy, a thinktank, and a former Defense Department official under former President Ronald Reagan. Other signers included Robert McFarlane, Reagan's national security advisor, and James Woolsey, Central Intelligence Agency director under President Bill Clinton. In an uncharacteristic move, the security experts sought input from groups like the Natural Resources Defense Council, which have long lobbied for more fuel-efficient cars. "It's strange bedfellows but this is actually the real American majority," said Nicole St. Clair, a spokeswoman for the NRDC. "It's common sense." Policymakers should address rampant oil demand from gas-guzzling vehicles, and stop trying to solve the problem by opening land like the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling, she said. The letter urged the government to encourage car makers to design vehicles from lighter materials to improve mileage. It also endorsed the use of "plug power" -- hybrid vehicles that can run off internal batteries for short trips before switching to their internal-combustion engines. The program would cost $1 billion over five years. Regulations known as Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards require automakers to achieve an average fuel economy of 27.5 miles per gallon for all passenger cars sold, and 20.7 mpg for vans, sport utility vehicles and pick-up trucks. The standards have not been tightened for more than a dozen years due to opposition from Detroit. The average fuel economy has steadily dropped since 1988. It was 20.8 mpg for all 2003 model vehicles, according to the Environmental Protection Agency's annual mileage report. McFarlane told the White House that stricter mileage standards could help cut U.S. crude oil imports in half. The group's recommendations gave short shrift to hydrogen-powered vehicles, a Bush administration priority, because they will take decades to field. U.S. drivers should not depend on foreign suppliers like Saudi Arabia for security reasons, they said. Although Saudi officials say the kingdom's oilfields are protected from terror attacks, McFarlane said the oil installations are "extremely vulnerable from a military point of view." If Saudi oil facilities are damaged, "You're not talking about $100 (per barrel) oil. You're talking about well beyond that," McFarlane said. U.S. crude oil prices peaked on March 17 at $57.60 a barrel. Copyright 2005 Reuters

Never responded to chain letters. What a waste of time. If they are starting up again I would be concerned about my email being shared all over the place. Personal opinion that if people are into this again, they have too much time on their hands and probably less than what should be in keeping our contact info out of strangers hands. Those stupid junk mail senders have a habit of not using BC most of the time. I question if this if on purpose or ignorance. Usually just delete without opening, but a couple made me curious because of their handle. There are enough laws now, but similar to DoNotCall registrations, I would like to see one for emails too. ECommerce is grabbing too much of our info as it is

Boy, do I agree with all of you! I've had a lot of the same experiences and done a lot of the things you've suggested. (except for the You-Tube thing, that's funny!) It seems like as soon as somebody learns how to use a computer and how to e-mail people, that's what they start doing. It's the mark of a Newby. I have a cousin that doesn't e-mail me at all anymore because I asked her to stop sending stuff like that. I asked her nice, in much the same was as has been recommended here. Lots of genealogy buddies won't e-mail me at all anymore because I don't want the junk. It's not fair! I'd love to hear from all of them, just not the junk. An old classmate just happily continued sending stuff -- from work, yet -- until I blocked her e-mails from coming to me entirely. She hacked me off. I didn't like her very much while we were going to school with each other. I stole her boyfriend and still she wanted to be pals. --Especially after somebody came along and stole the guy from me! LOL I don't know why people get so insulted when they're asked not to send the junk stuff.

A couple of years ago when we had our windows, doors and out side trim painted. The contractor told us before quoting that she would need lead tests performed before here guys could start sanding etc. I asked her if she was ok with us doing a DIY test and she responded that that's what she was going to recommend we do. So I bought a home lead testing kit designed for painted surfaces. The kit contained several tests and a control that made sure the tests were working properly, thusly assured, we tested all windows and doors. The doors had several coats of paint, so we chipped some off to reach all paint layers and tested all of them. Luckily, we didn't find any lead. But all the old paint was white and I believe that lead was more commonly added to dark colors, as lead intensifies their colors. I don't remember how much I paid for the test kit, but I don't think I paid more than $30.- I subsequently tested a hand painted vintage advertising sign, the test turned dark purple (positive) in a hurry. Good luck with your reno!