A couple professors decided to answer the question: Does your government represent We the People? Using 20 years worth of data they found that the opinions of 90% of Americans have essentially no impact at all on the completely corrupted Congress.

---

Original Here

Have you ever felt like the government doesn’t really care what you think?

Professors Martin Gilens (Princeton University) and Benjamin I. Page (Northwestern University) looked at more than 20 years worth of data to answer a simple question: Does the government represent the people?

Their study took data from nearly 2000 public opinion surveys and compared it to the policies that ended up becoming law. In other words, they compared what the public wanted to what the government actually did. What they found was extremely unsettling: The opinions of 90% of Americans have essentially no impact at all.

This video gives a quick rundown of their findings — it all boils down to one simple graph:

https://youtu.be/5tu32CCA_Ig
Note: All sources linked at the bottom of this page

---

Princeton University study: Public opinion has “near-zero” impact on U.S. law.

Gilens & Page found that the number of Americans for or against any idea has no impact on the likelihood that Congress will make it law.

“The preferences of the average American appear to have only a miniscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy.”

One thing that does have an influence? Money. While the opinions of the bottom 90% of income earners in America have a “statistically non-significant impact,” Economic elites, business interests, and people who can afford lobbyists still carry major influence.

Nearly every issue we face as a nation is caught in the grip of corruption.

From taxation to national debt, education to the economy, America is struggling to address our most serious issues. Moneyed interests get what they want, and the rest of us pay the price.

They spend billions influencing America’s government. We give them trillions in return.

As the cost of winning elections explodes, politicians of both political parties become ever more dependent on the tiny slice of the population who can bankroll their campaigns.
 
To win a Senate seat in 2014, candidates had to raise $14,351 every single day. Just .05% of Americans donate more than $10,000 in any election, so it’s perfectly clear who candidates will turn to first, and who they’re indebted to when they win.

In return for campaign donations, elected officials pass laws that are good for their mega-donors, and bad for the rest of us.

Our elected officials spend 30-70% of their time in office fundraising for the next election. When they’re not fundraising, they have no choice but to make sure the laws they pass keep their major donors happy — or they won’t be able to run in the next election.

---

Sources

1. Gilens and Page, “Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens,” Perspective on Politics, 2014.
2. Washington Post, “Rich People Rule!” 2014.
3. Washington Post, “Once again, U.S. has most expensive, least effective health care system in survey,” 2014.
4. Forbes Opinion, “The tax code is a hopeless complex, economy-suffocating mess,” 2013.
5. CNN, “Americans pay more for slower Internet,” 2014.
6. The Hill, “Sanders requests DOD meeting over wasteful spending,” 2015.
7. CBS News, “Wastebook 2014: Government’s questionable spending,” 2014.
8. The Heritage Foundation, Budget Book, 2015.
9. The Atlantic, “American schools vs. the world: expensive, unequal, bad at math,” 2013.
10. CNN Opinion, “War on drugs a trillion-dollar failure,” 2012.
11. Feeding America, Child Hunger Fact Sheet, 2014.
12. New York Times, “Banks’ lobbyists help in drafting financial bills,” 2014.
13. New York Times, “Wall Street seeks to tuck Dodd-Frank changes in budget bill,” 2014
14. Sunlight Foundation, “Fixed Fortunes: Biggest corporate political interests spend billions, get trillions,” 2014.
15. Sunlight Foundation, Fixed Fortunes database, 2015.

Well my previous post was too hot to handle and got pulled. Too bad. So to tide you over I put up this hilarious but disgusting parody cum true story of the U.S. Government.

---

The Night Watchman

---

July 18, 2015 | Original Here                                            Go here to sign up to receive email notice of this news letter

Whether True Or A Parody The Night Watchman Has A Valid Story
And An Entertaining One

THE NIGHT WATCHMAN

Once upon a time the government had a vast scrap yard in the middle of a desert.
Congress said, “Someone may steal from it at night.”
So they created a night watchman position and hired a person for the job.
Then Congress said, “How does the watchman do his job without instruction?”
So they created a planning department and hired two people, one person to write the instructions, and one person to do time studies.
Then Congress said, “How will we know the night watchman is doing the tasks correctly?”
So they created a Quality Control department and hired two people. One was to do the studies and one was to write the reports.
Then Congress said, “How are these people going to get paid?”
So they created two positions: a time keeper and a payroll officer then hired two people.
Then Congress said, “Who will be accountable for all of these people?”
So they created an administrative section and hired three people, an Administrative Officer, Assistant Administrative Officer, and a Legal Secretary.
Then Congress said, “We have had this command in operation for one year and we are $918,000 over budget, we must cut back.”
So they laid-off the night watchman.

NOW slowly, let it sink in.
Quietly, we go like sheep to slaughter. Does anybody remember the reason given for the establishment of the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY during the Carter administration?
Anybody?

No?
Didn’t think so!
Bottom line is, we’ve spent several hundred billion dollars in support of an agency, the reason for which very few people who read this can remember!
Ready?
It was very simple… and at the time, everybody thought it very appropriate.

The Department of Energy was instituted on 8/04/1977, TO LESSEN OUR DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGN OIL.

AND NOW IT’S 2015 — 38 YEARS LATER — AND THE BUDGET FOR THIS “NECESSARY” DEPARTMENT IS AT $24.2 BILLION A YEAR. IT HAS 16,000 FEDERAL EMPLOYEES AND APPROXIMATELY 100,000 CONTRACT EMPLOYEES; AND LOOK AT THE JOB IT HAS DONE!

38 years ago 30% of our oil consumption was foreign imports. Today 70% of our oil consumption is foreign imports.

NOW, WE HAVE TURNED OVER THE BANKING SYSTEM, HEALTH CARE, AND THE AUTO INDUSTRY TO THE SAME GOVERNMENT?
Hello!! Anybody Home?
Signed….The Night Watchman

---

Paul Craig Roberts is interviewed by Greg Hunter on the subject of Obama's lie-based push to bomb Syria: Why he insists on doing it (radicalization of Muslims in Russia and China), what would be the effect on the U.S. economy (worse than it already is) and what would be the ultimate consequences if he suceeds (World War III).

---

Syria will Lead to World War III and it will be Nuclear-Paul Craig Roberts

---

4 SEPTEMBER, 2013                                                                                                                         Original Here

By Greg Hunter’s USAWatchdog.com 

Former Assistant Treasury Secretary Dr. Paul Craig Roberts says, “Let’s cut to the chase.  It’s got nothing to do with Syria.  The reason they are looking for a fabricated excuse to attack Assad is to continue the radicalization of Muslims in the hopes this spreads into the Muslim populations of Russia and China. . . . Washington intends to weaken the two giants it cannot run over.”  Dr. Roberts goes on to warn, “I think this will lead to World War III, and that, of course, will be nuclear.”  One big dilemma Dr. Roberts points out, “The issue is will any aspect of the government have any credibility if they back Obama when the rest of the world already knows he’s lying through his teeth? . . . This time the big lie didn’t work like it did in Iraq.”  On the economic front, Dr. Roberts worries, “If they start abandoning the dollar, the collapse of the exchange rate will bring down the whole house of cards in the United States.  The Fed will lose control.  The banks will fail.  Prices will rise dramatically.  People will essentially not be able to pay their bills.  It will be an unbelievable mess.”  What would happen to gold with a Syrian war?  Dr. Roberts says, “If you get a real collapse in the dollar, gold could be $30,000 an ounce.  Who knows?”  Join Greg Hunter as he goes One-on-One with economist Dr. Paul Craig Roberts.

Related Posts:

• Washington is Arranging Support of the Dollar-Paul Craig…
• If Bullion Were Not a Threat Government Would Not Attack It-
• Controversy Over Iran’s Nuclear Program is a Hoax-Paul…
• America is Going to Crash Big Time-Paul Craig Roberts
• One-on-One with Paul Craig Roberts #2

Paul Craig Roberts is the greatest American truth teller of our times. He sees through today's America like a doctor studying an x-ray. And the cancer he sees is the exact opposite of what most Americans imagine to be "the greatest country in the world." Instead of "liberty and justice for all" today's American government is now a totally corrupt kleptocracy in possession of the power (and the stupidity) to destroy the human race. Obama's determination to attack Syria come hell or high water is just the latest step in that direction. Wake up America!

---

Obama Has Decided That It Is Safer To Buy Congress Than To Go It Alone — Paul Craig Roberts

---

September 1, 2013 | Original Here                                               Go here to sign up to receive email notice of this news letter

Obama Has Decided That It Is Safer To Buy Congress Than To Go It Alone

Paul Craig Roberts

While still claiming dictatorial powers to start a war on his own authority, Obama put his unilateral attack on Syria on hold when he received a letter from more than 160 members of the House of Representatives reminding him that to take the country to war without congressional approval is an impeachable offense and when he saw that no country that could serve as cover for a war crime, not even the puppet British government and the NATO puppet states, would support America’s announced military aggression against Syria.

Obama got away with attacking Libya without an OK from Congress, because he used Washington’s NATO puppets and not US military forces. That ploy let Obama claim that the US was not directly involved.

Now that the lack of cover and the challenge from Congress has caused the would-be tyrant Obama to put on hold his attack on Syria, what can we expect?

If Obama were intelligent, and clearly anyone who would appoint Susan Rice as his national security adviser is not intelligent, he would simply let the attack on Syria fade into the background and die as Congress returns on September 9 to face the insoluble problems of the budget deficit and debt ceiling.

A competent administration would realize that a government that is unable to pay its bills without heavy use of the printing press is in far too much trouble to be worrying about what is going on in Syria. No competent administration would risk a military strike that could result in a Middle East conflagration and a rise in oil prices, thus worsening the economic situation that Washington faces.

But Obama and his collection of incompetents have demonstrated that they have no competence. The regime is also corrupt, and the entire edifice rests on nothing but lies.

Now that the White House realizes that Obama cannot commit a war crime without cover, here is what we can likely expect. The argument will move away from whether or not Assad used chemical weapons and become an argument that Congress must not undermine US prestige and credibility by failing to support President Obama, the latest front man for American wars of aggression.

The White House will bribe, cajole, and intimidate the Congress. The regime’s argument will be that with America’s prestige and credibility on the line, Congress must support the President. The President and Secretary of State have made unequivocal statements of Assad’s guilt and their determination to punish Assad. Given Washington’s insanity, the way Washington punishes Assad for (allegedly) killing Syrians with chemical weapons is for Washington to kill more Syrians with cruise missiles.

If this doesn’t make sense to you, you don’t belong in Obama’s government or in the American media, and you could never be a neoconservative.

The White House will argue that Obama has compromised with Congress by letting Congress vote on the decision, and that Congress’ part of the compromise is to give its support. Meet us half-way, the White House will say.

The Israel Lobby, Susan Rice, the neocons, and warmongers such as Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham will argue that lack of support for Obama’s attack on Syria hurts America’s credibility, aids the “terrorists” and “leaves America defenseless.” It is bad enough, they will argue, that Obama has shown indecision by waiting for Congress’ approval and irresolution by substituting a limited strike for the original plan of regime change.

Faced with threats of a cutoff of campaign donation munificence from the Israel Lobby and the military/security complex, the House and Senate can be brought into line to “support the country” as it commits another war crime. The combination of bribes, intimidation, and patriotic appeals to support America’s prestige can swing the Congress. No one really knows if the 160 or so members of the House are sincere about putting Obama on notice, or whether they simply want something. Perhaps they only want Obama to cough up for their approval.

If Congress gives its backing to another American war crime, British Prime Minister David Cameron can go back to Parliament and tell them that Obama “has now brought Congress on board, thus providing cover, and if Parliament doesn’t go along we will be cut out of the money.”

Few British politicians, other than George Galloway, are comfortable with being cut out of the money.

If Cameron brings Parliament around, the other NATO countries might decide to get on the payments bandwagon. The overriding rule of Western civilization is that more money is better than no money.

Washington and its NATO European puppets will criticize Russia and China for using their Security Council vetoes to block the UN from bringing justice, freedom, and democracy to Syria. These faux arguments will be used by the presstitute Western media to undermine the importance of the UN Security Council’s opposition to Washington’s attack on Syria. Why should Washington be deterred by Security Council members who support Assad’s use of chemical weapons, the US media whores will ask. The prostitutes that comprise the US media will do all in their power to ensure that Washington kills yet more Syrians. Killing is America’s hallmark.

As the history of humankind proves, people will do anything for money. Noteworthy exceptions are Edward Snowden, Bradley Manning, and Julian Assange. Were any of these truth-tellers to have gone to Washington and say, “buy me,” in exchange for their silence Washington would have provided large fortunes with which they could live a life of comfort.

Considering how corrupted the US government is and how determined Washington is to have its way, the UN chemical weapons inspectors are at risk. It is unlikely that they will have an accident like SEAL Team Six. But unless they are sequestered like a jury, they are targets for bribery. If the UN report doesn’t support the White House position, the Secretary General will be pressured to make the report inconclusive. After all, Washington writes the checks that keep the UN in business.

No one should expect the US Congress to vote on the basis of the evidence. Moreover, Congress has so far shown no understanding that regardless of whether Assad used chemical weapons, it is a war crime for the US to commit naked aggression against Syria, a country that has not attacked the US. It is not Washington’s business how the Syrian government puts down the effort by al-Nusra extremists to overthrow it.

Obama’s argument that it is OK to kill people with white phosphorus and depleted uranium, as the US and Israel does, but not with sarin gas, has no logic. http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/08/the-u-s-and-israel-have-used-chemical-weapons-within-the-last-8-years.html

Washington itself has contingency plans to use nuclear bunker busters against Iran’s underground nuclear energy facilities. If Washington believes that weapons of mass destruction are impermissible, why does Washington have so many of them and contingency plans to use them? Is Washington regretful that Washington dropped two nuclear bombs on civilian Japanese cities at the very time that the Japanese government was doing everything in its power to surrender?

Ever since the dangerous Cold War ended, hot war has been the mainstay of US foreign policy. George H.W. Bush attacked Iraq after Bush’s ambassador gave Saddam Hussein the green light to attack Kuwait. Clinton attacked Serbia on false pretenses and without any constitutional or legal authority. George W. Bush attacked Afghanistan and Iraq on the basis of lies. Obama renewed the attack on Afghanistan and has attacked also Yemen, Pakistan, and Somalia. Obama sent his NATO puppets to attack Libya, sent mercenaries into Syria, and now intends to prevent his mercenaries’ defeat by attacking Syria.

Washington is building a string of military bases around both Russia and China. These bases are extremely provocative and foretell nuclear war.

The US, a country with a vast nuclear weapons arsenal, whose political leaders are both corrupt and insane, is a great danger to life on earth. That Washington is the number one danger to the world is now universally recognized, except by Americans who wear their patriotism on their sleeve. These gullible dupes are the enablers of the demise of humanity by war.

Until the US economy collapses, Washington still has printed money, and it can buy acquiescence to its crimes. Washington can rely on the presstitute media to tell its lies as if they were facts. The world will not be safe until the American house of cards collapses.

I feel sorry for those uninformed Americans who think that they live in the best country in the world. Too few Americans care that their government has destroyed countless lives from Central America and Vietnam to the Middle East and Africa. The US military routinely murders civilians in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, and is responsible for as many as 1,000,000 Iraqi deaths and 4,000,000 displaced Iraqis. The American definition of “the best country in the world” is the country that can murder the most innocent people, people who have never attacked America, people who once looked upon America as the hope of the world and now see a deadly threat.

Too many Americans have no idea that one-fifth of their fellow citizens are dependent on government support, or if they do know, they blame the unfortunate for being leeches on the taxpayers’ purse. In the US wages and employment opportunities are declining. There are no impediments to the looting of citizens by financial institutions. There are no constraints on the lawlessness and brutality of the police, and no limit to the lies that keep the American population entrapped in the Matrix unaware of reality.

How such a people can retain liberty or restrain a government committed to war strains the imagination.

Those Republicans who worry about our children’s and grandchildren’s debt burdens are worried about a future that might never come about. Washington’s hubris is pushing the world toward nuclear war.

“The best country in the world” is the evil force that is destroying the lives and prospects of many different peoples and might yet destroy all life on earth.

---

Permalink

Congress: Still Working Hard at Being Ineffective, Useless Seat-Warmers

November 8, 2011 By Tina Dupuy

 I asked an Occupier in DC named Rob Wohl, why the movement he’s a part of is resonating with people – why as over 3,000 Americans have been arrested in demonstrations and even journalists and vets have endured tear gas and rubber bullets, the movement is still growing.


His answer? “Because we are analytically correct.”


What does that mean? Apparently, they believe they have the facts on their side.  History certainly is. And as author Michael Lewis said when asked about the Occupy Wall Street movement, they also have justice on their side.

New census data released shows we have record high poverty in this country. It’s up to 16 percent or 49.1 million Americans (that’s over five New York Cities). We have the worst wealth inequality in the industrialized world (meaning we’re on par with some third world countries). We have the highest health care costs in the world. And a recent study by the Economic Policy Institute notes, “U.S. productivity grew by 62.5 percent from 1989 to 2010, far more than real hourly wages for both private-sector and state/local government workers, which grew 12 percent in the same period.” Basically Americans are working much (much) harder for much (much) less. Pair that with the fact U.S. businesses are making record profits and that’s why Americans have taken to the pothole-laden streets to protest.

It’s not just about the bank bailout. It’s not just about Wall Street. It’s about the goal of the wealthy to milk their fellow citizens until they’re completely dry. And while regular Americans are condescended to about their proverbial bootstraps, the U.S. government has helped the wealthy at every turn. So it’s no surprise they’ve won. And now that people are brittle and dusty – there are encampments all over the country.

The question isn’t, “Why are there so many people sleeping in parks?” The question is, “Why aren’t there more?

In the wake of this massive protest – right in the middle of the tenure of the lowest rated House in our nation’s history – a group of men and women whose approval rating of 9 percent is hovering just above the margin of error – what do they do? They pass another symbolic (think: busy work) nonbinding resolution to reaffirm “in God we trust” as the national motto.

I could have made that up as satire and I’d get a letter saying I was being too harsh.

Time spent on a bill (of which there are FOUR versions) reaffirming a phrase already on every denomination of money, every courthouse and most public buildings is about as contemptuous as this body of seat-warmers can get.

It’s “let them eat cake” with a little of King George III​’s “the colonies will submit” thrown in for flavor.
Yes, the do-less-than-nothing House has passed a whopping 54 bills originating in their chamber in their nearly full year in office. Their counterparts in previous congresses usually author and pass three times that. And if you subtract passing go-no-where bills to defund NPR, Planned Parenthood and other specters like Obama Czars and take into account their days off (next year they’re only set to work 109 days out of the ENTIRE year) – they’ve put in a lot of effort to be ineffective.

Which is what you’d expect from self-hating government workers like the House leadership. They’re illustrating how lazy, stupid and useless government can be – by example.

To sum up: the American people are paying more for less, working more for less and asking more…and Congress is doing (wait for it) LESS.


The Occupiers are right. They are “analytically correct” in their assessment. Their government is failing them. As another Occupier put it, maybe it’s “time to replace Congress with people.”

Tina Dupuy
Taking Eternal Vigilance Too Far 

THE DIVERGING PATHS OF SCIENCE IN U.S. AND BRAZIL

Blogger: Cuckoos in the Congress and the White House are toying with sacrificing U.S. science to the false gods of deficit reduction. The government of Brazil is proving itself to be a heck of a lot smarter.

---

Science 26 November 2010:
Vol. 330 no. 6008 p. 1155
DOI: 10.1126/science.1200554

EDITORIAL:

Protect U.S. Science Funding

Alan I. Leshner

(Summary)

The recent power shift in the U.S. Congress reflects in part the public's desire to get the U.S. economy quickly back on track and the federal budget under better control. In recognition, both the Obama Administration and the Republican Party leadership are considering significant budget reductions. These could result in 5 to 10% (or greater) cuts in R&D allocations for fiscal years 2011 and 2012. The consequences would be severe. Federal agencies, which often commit their funds years in advance but only pay them out in later years, would have little left for new and competing renewal grants. Agencies could see funding success rates fall to below 1 in 10 applications, and new investigators—the seeds of the future—could be hit even harder. These kinds of budget cuts work against the ultimate national goals of restoring the U.S. economy and its international prowess. It is well documented that science, engineering, and technology fuel innovation and economic growth. That is why virtually all competitor countries, including India, China, and Korea, are increasing investments in science and engineering research, development, and education. U.S. funding looks like it could be heading in the opposite direction.

---

Science 3 December 2010:
Vol. 330 no. 6009 pp. 1308-1309
DOI: 10.1126/science.330.6009.1308

National oil company Petrobras inaugurated a $700 million research center in Rio

News Focus | Science in Brazil

Tapping a Deep, 'Pre-Salt' Bounty

Antonio Regalado

Three years ago, a drill bit struck immense oil deposits deep off the coast of Brazil. Petrobras, the national oil company, tapped undersea fields now estimated to hold about 80 billion barrels of oil and natural gas—about three times the size of the reservoir under Prudhoe Bay, Alaska. It brought the promise of new wealth and expectations that Brazil will climb to the world's top rung of achievement in science and technology.

Pres. Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva celebrates the “second independence” oil discoveries will give Brazil.

Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva once termed the oil strike “a second independence for Brazil” and promised to use the oil revenue for education and public health. But Brazil's R&D sector has been first to benefit. This October, Petrobras inaugurated a sprawling new $700 million research center in Rio de Janeiro. At the event, da Silva, a former union leader with a fourth-grade education, left no doubt what the vast R&D complex represents to him: “Brazil will never have to lower its head to anyone again,” he roared to a boisterous crowd of oil workers.

Deep-water petroleum exploration is Brazil's largest technology project, and Petrobras's money is pouring into research labs throughout the country. In order to retrieve the oil, which lies a daunting 7 kilometers below the ocean surface, Petrobras has opened a fire hose of funding that is “changing the face of science in Brazil,” says Angela Uller, dean for research at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, whose campus on an island outside the city also houses Petrobras's R&D Center, known as Cenpes.

Petrobras now spends about $1 billion a year on R&D, including some $225 million that goes directly to universities, for which Petrobras has been rushing to outfit laboratories, erect new geophysics centers, and train a new generation of engineers. “We want to transform the technological capabilities of Brazil and help build university labs equal to any in the world,” says Carlos Tadeu da Costa Fraga, head of Petrobras R&D operations.

Rio's engineering school, known as COPPE, is the biggest single beneficiary of the oil gusher. Petrobras has paid for the construction of numerous laboratories on campus, including the world's deepest wave pool, used to test automobile-sized models of oil platforms. “It's starting to look like Dubai around here,” says Segen Farid Estefen, a director of COPPE, which gets about $60 million a year from Petrobras. He says the industry-academic complex on the island is the “largest offshore oil research cluster in the world.”

Petrobras, founded in 1947, began to follow the scent of oil offshore in the mid-1970s, investing in R&D to extend its reach. Brazil was importing equipment from the North Sea and the Gulf of Mexico and adapting it to tropical conditions. But Brazil's decision to pump its own oil demanded growing investment in R&D.

“You cannot simply cut and paste,” says Martin Landrø, deputy chair of petroleum engineering and applied geophysics at the Norges Teknisk-Naturvitenskapelige Universitet in Trondheim, Norway. “You have to build up competence, and the easiest way to do that is to build up research. You have to bite the apple, so to speak.”

Landrø, who has visited Brazil three times to give courses to Petrobras geophysicists, says he's noticed an accelerating change in Brazil. “They have maneuvered from the position of being not so competent to being on the cutting edge in 10 years,” says Landrø.

Petrobras, the world's largest deep-water oil producer, is reaching depths where experience is scarce or nonexistent. At the Laboratory for Non-Destructive Testing, Corrosion and Soldering, for instance, four COPPE professors work alongside 30 Petrobras engineers to submit steel to corrosive hydrogen sulfide gas at extreme pressures. “At 7000 meters [below sea level], we don't have any information about how materials perform, or how long they can last,” says Oscar Rosa Mattos, director of the lab, which Petrobras paid $30 million to build in 2008. “My foreign visitors are surprised when they encounter a facility like this in Brazil.”

The superdeep petroleum deposits now being discovered are in the “pre-salt” zone, an area where organic matter was deposited 125 million years ago and later encased beneath thick layers of salt. These are “a new kind of geologic play. They are new types of reservoirs and there are lots of things being learned,” says William Fisher, a geologist at the University of Texas, Austin. One critical difficulty is spotting the oil reservoirs beneath the salt domes, frequently over a kilometer thick; seismic signals are hard to interpret. “As far as the potential discoveries—what is the potential volume of oil and gas—well, you can hazard all kinds of guesses, but it's going to be big,” says Fisher.

Estefen hopes that Brazil's exploration of the ocean does not stop at oil. He says the country could use its deep-water expertise to be at the forefront of wave energy and undersea communications, too. “The analogy I use is that deep-sea exploration can do in Brazil what the space race did for the United States,” Estefen says. “If Brazil only pumps oil, it would be a big loss.”