The Basic Situation
One of the primary
reasons the United States is so far behind the rest of the world with
respect to the use of the Modern Metric System (SI) is a lack of
leadership, from both government and industry — but especially from
government.
The U.S. Government
has a clear mandate and, in the opinion of many, a clear obligation to
provide such leadership. The U.S. Constitution leaves many decisions up to
the individual States. However, laws respecting weights and measures
(along with currency) are clearly the responsibility of the Congress of
the United States.
Article I, Section 8, Paragraph 5
of the United States Constitution states:
The Congress shall have the
Power ...
... To coin Money, regulate the
Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and to fix the Standard of Weights
and Measures.
(The words shown in
italics are in Paragraph 1, but apply to both Paragraph 1 and each of
the subsequent paragraphs.)
Doubtless, most
Americans appreciate Congress' power to regulate the nation's currency.
Day to day business transactions would be a nightmare if the individual
states had the power to mint and determine the value of their own
currency.
Unfortunately, with
respect to weights and measures, Congress has made little more than a
recommendation. Although the legal definition of the size of "traditional"
units of measure, such as the inch, is based on metric units, Congress has
decided that the use of the metric system shall be on a voluntary basis.
We intend to
provide some of the history of congressional actions, on this or a linked
page, at a later date. We shall also look at areas where progress towards
genuine metrication has, indeed, been made. In the meantime, you may want
to take a look at a NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology)
document on
The United States and the Metric System. NIST was established
by Congress in 1901, as the National Bureau of Standards (NBS). The name
was changed to NIST in 1988 (see
A Brief History of NIST).
[Top of
this page]
The 1998 Climate
Orbiter Fiasco
Every so often, a
news item drives home to us the problems caused by a half-hearted approach
to metrication. The loss of NASA's Mars Climate Orbiter was based, as now
appears to be very clear, on the use by a major subcontractor of
non-metric units, despite the requirement by the contractor with whom they
were dealing to use metric (SI) units.
Opponents of
metrication are saying, not surprisingly, that the Orbiter would not have
been lost if NASA and all of its contractors used the "traditional" units
of measure. Such a position ignores the fact that NASA cooperates with the
European, Japanese and Russian space agencies (among others), all of whom
use SI units exclusively.
In the meantime,
the NASA Inspector General's office has published a report (on January 20,
2001), making no fewer than eight recommendations regarding the use of the
modern metric system within NASA. To download or display the report, visit
the Downloadable Documents
section.
[Top of
this page]
The Cost of Delay
The loss of the
Mars Climate Orbiter ($125 million of taxpayers' money for the vehicle
alone) provides an opportunity for Americans to drive home to their
Government the foolishness of having only a "voluntary" system of weights
and measures. The longer the United States delays affirmative decisions in
this area, the more problems it will have, not only in dealings with the
rest of the world, but within its own borders.
It's interesting,
in this context, to note that every U.S. Federal agency is officially
required to:
... use the metric
system of measurement in its procurements, grants, and other
business-related activities, except to the extent that such use is
impractical or is likely to cause significant inefficiencies or loss of
markets to United States firms such as when foreign competitors are
producing competing products in nonmetric units.
Metric Conversion Policy for Federal Agencies
Signed on July 25, 1991, by George H. W. Bush, President
There appears to be
no published information about the degree to which federal agencies are
complying with this requirement. However, the policy was reiterated by the
U.S. Department of Commerce, in
NIST Special Publication 814 (1998 Edition). There can be no
doubt, though, that the term "significant inefficiencies" is open to
subjective interpretation.
Twenty seven states
(see SI News and
Events) are already ahead of the others, at least with respect to
the metric labeling of a wide range of products. The departments of
transportation of fifteen states, including the two most populous ones
(California [Caltrans] and New York [NYDOT]) already require contractors
to bid exclusively in SI units. The departments of transportation of
several other states require SI units generally, but allow exceptions.
This is encouraging, but it's not
nearly enough.
[Top of
this page]
You Can Make a
Difference
You can write or
email both of your state's U.S. Senators and your Member of Congress,
calling on them to support positive moves towards metrication.
Additionally, rather than simply wait for Congress to overcome its current
inertia, you can write to your state government and its legislators to
encourage them to do all they can at their level.
[Top of
this page]
Write to Both
of Your Senators, to Your Member of Congress, to Your State Legislators,
to The White House, to House and Senate Committees, to Cabinet Secretaries
and to Newspaper Editors
We've made it easy
for you. Click on one of the links below. Among them, they provide links
to the web sites of all U.S. Senators, all state legislatures, almost all
Members of Congress, key committees in both the House and the Senate, the
White House, and all the Cabinet Secretaries.
You can also write
letters to the Editors of local, regional and national newspapers, giving
you an opportunity to influence the opinions of other readers and,
moreover, to urge your newspapers to use rational metric units in their
reports — especially reports of events outside the United States, where
the information provided by their sources is already in metric units.
Remember that
public opinion is a major factor in political decision making.
|