The audit concluded that

the $40 million dollar program could be eliminated with

"little short or long term impact" on pollution

levels. A similar Arizona study determined that emissions

of oxides of nitrogen - or NOX - a major

precursor of smog, were cut by less than half of what EPA

projected. Some findings were even worse for the EPA

- Minnesota's study found no benefit from emissions

testing.

The bottom line is that

cars built since the mid-1980s are fuel-efficient and

have sophisticated controls for regulation of emissions.

Ten percent of the cars on the road make about 80-90

percent of the pollution. Most are older than 1981 models

and are in poor tune.

With new technology called

"remote sensing" these cars can be identified

remote sensing and eliminate all this emissions testing

nonsense? Aside from putting a lot of bureaucrats out of

business, and bucking the trendy establishment crowd that

also believes that more laws and regulations make life

better, there would be nothing wrong with it.

This same crowd, mostly

Clinton-Gore voters, are afraid of less government

spending because it might justify tax cuts - which

in turn would necessitate smaller or less government.

Besides, the more people you can get involved in a

problem, the more it appears you are doing something to

solve the problem.

If you are interested in

bringing some sanity to government, this is a good place

to start. Write or call your state and federal

representatives and senators and ask them to do away with

vehicle emissions testing and initiate remote sensing.

And remember the politicians who foisted this nonsense on

us in the coming elections.

William Fielder

Peachtree City