A few months after the publication of an article I wrote for The Atlantic exploring what the education system would look like under an all private or all public school scenario, I was contacted by the editor of a publication called Ensia. Would I consider applying the same hypothetical scenario to fuel economy standards? I thought it was a great idea. The result was this article that discusses the potential impacts from proceeding with tough standards or abandoning standards altogether. In 2012, the Obama administration put in place fuel economy standards — phased in over time — that would roughly double the fuel economy of cars by 2025. President Trump has begun the process of rolling back the standards even though some automakers don’t support that. Statements from Honda and Ford indicate those companies are not asking for a rollback, while General Motors has said it is committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions and supports an all-electric future. With the contentious fuel economy debate currently unfolding, it was an opportune time to engage in this thought experiment. I had the chance to interview those of all different types of ideologies and backgrounds who provided their varying perspectives. I believe this approach of allowing experts to discuss these types of issues in a more academic context, outside the political fray, leads to important discourse. It’s anybody’s guess as to what ultimately will happen with the standards, which have already significantly improved the fuel efficiency of cars. But the more information that’s available to the public on the potential implications, hopefully the better informed the discussions will be.
In all the years I have been a journalist, the hardest interview I had to conduct was with a mother who had just lost her 16-year-old daughter to suicide less than a week before we spoke. As the mother of young adults, I could feel her pain as she sobbed into the phone, having to relive the horrific tragedy as she shared the intimate details of her daughter’s struggles. When tragedy strikes, journalists are often first on the scene. And it’s difficult to understand how we choose to pry into people’s private lives. But Cathy Housh, the mother of the teen, didn’t hesitate to speak with me. She realized that we shouldn’t be afraid to talk about suicide and that getting this subject out into the open will ultimately help to save lives. In fact, she’s made it her mission to push for legislation that will create programs to prevent it. I knew that reporting about teen suicide would be a tough sell for a woman’s magazine. And I applaud Good Housekeeping for running my article, in the April, 2016 issue. But it was a long journey, one that started when I turned in the first draft one-and-a-half years ago. Advertisers, the major source of revenue for magazines, typically don’t like to wrap their ads around an article focused on such a dark issue. Instead of the article being highlighted in the editor’s column as I hoped it would be, it was buried at the end of the magazine, surrounded by an ad for Clump and Seal cat litter and a promotion for heart medication. It would be ideal if the women’s magazines would give these kinds of meaty topics a higher profile. Still, it’s a start. And I feel gratified that my piece ran in a publication with a circulation of 24-million. It may be enough to get the word out about a tragedy that is becoming far too common among our teens.