"GAS USAGE FALLS IN WASHINGTON" OR ANOTHER REASON THE AP IS A FRAUD



Under the caption, "Gas use falls in Washington," Ms. Rebecca Cook of the Associated Press, (AP), commits journalistic atrocities upon the truth. But, then, I would not expect anything else from the AP or an AP hack. The supposed period of decline is 1992 to 2002.

Her crimes were printed on page C10 of my beloved local paper, The Peninsula Daily News, October 23, 2002.

Now anyone who has driven Washington State roads during this time should be acutely aware that someone is playing fast and loose with the facts if they attempt to make such a statement.

Ms. Cook compounds the lie by crediting the success in decreasing gas consumption to "growth management" regulations and maintaining that "Density is the key." In fairness, I will state that Ms. Cook disclosed that British Columbia, Canada, with "the strictest growth management regulations in the Northwest . . . " had an increase, which her source found "perplexing." Oh, really?

It then became fairly clear to me that the change in gas usage that was being discussed was not an absolute one, but a "per capita" one. That phrase was used for British Columbia. Later, only "average person" or "average" were used. There was no explanation whether that meant average driver or average for the population. Big difference. There was some "mumbo jumbo" about "demographic shifts," while maintaining "density is the key." Do you want to be a sardine or a man?

What does "Washington cut gas use by 2 percent . . . " mean to you? It does not mean per capita. It is too easy to say "per capita" if you want to convey the right message. Gas use did not fall in Washington, it went up. I don't care about per capita. In fact, I predicted that it would go down. Does anyone remember why?

We have a bunch of evil "social engineer" types whose purpose it is to con you. What did they do? They have flooded the area with aliens, legal and otherwise. Suppose you have a house or apartment with two or three families, 10 or 15 people living in it and one or zero automobiles. That's good for lower per capita gas consumption statistics, right? See how good they are at saving fuel with their "growth management!"

And, there are other things at work. If you are using the number of drivers as the base in your per capita figure, I added three new drivers to the pool during that time. My oldest turned 16 in 1992. My other 3 got their licenses during the period in question. If they drove as many miles as I, there would be a real problem. Thus, per capita in our family went down.

Now, if you use total population as the base, our family helped dilute the per capita number there too. A grandchild who didn't quite pass her driver's exam yet. In fact, she has about 15 years to go before she can even take it. If you use total population, you are a bit of a liar unless you are sure the young won't grow up to be drivers. I suspect aliens (not the outer space variety) made a larger contribution in this area than we did - - - that "growth management" thing again).

There was not one mention, in the article, of total gallons used during this period. That should set the warning bells off also. So, what are the facts? Mine are incomplete, but as follows:

Year 2000, 2,614,703,000 gallons of gasoline used on Washington highways.
Year 1992, 2,312,005,000 gallons.

Tell me is that a decrease?

Now, let us look at the number of licensed drivers (holding the "basic license" or designated as "operators" after 1996):

Year 2000, 3,738,973 (probably 1999 number).
Year 1993, 3,772,022 (1992 not available, but this was probably the 1992 number anyway).

(Source: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/ohimstat.htm)

It appears that the number of people holding the basic license or designated as "operators" has decreased. More people driving without licenses these days? It may be more prevalent than people care to admit in my neighborhood. (Note, 3/17/05: I just realized another reason the number seems to have gone down. Some of us drivers are now more equal than others. We have new classes of drivers - - - various classes of CDLs (Commercial Driver's License). Anyone holding one of these, and that includes all truckers and bus drivers, would not be counted now as "operators." Or would they? I need to double check).

My numbers included only gallons of gasoline used on Washington highways as that appears to be only the subject in the AP story. All motor fuels used on Washington highways is an even larger number, of course. What about the increase in diesel fuel? I don't know. I didn't look into it. Nor did I investigate the use of "gasohol" (ethanol) which I thought we were able to do away with in this state. It appears to still be in use. Is that use expanding?

And, it must be said that motor vehicle fuels used in Washington is an even larger number than just those used on our highways. There is an investigation going on in Eastern Washington where a firm is accused of using "non-highway" fuel on our public roads. So, is the numerator portion of someone's per capita calculation understated? So many questions!

With so many questions, we don't need to start off with lies. My figures only go to 2000. Do you believe much has changed since then?

Copyright © 2002, Donald L. Beeman. All rights reserved.

Other Essays On Fraud
Other Essays
Table of Contents (up, more)
HOME (up, most)