GOP Blocks Oil Spill Liability Bill

[JollyRoger]

That depends on what the definition of 'is' is.

I'm using the understanding of the law as it existed at the Founding. That slice of apple pie works for me.

 

[JerichoHill]

Nah, have the criminal trial first, and if he is found guilty, allow the family members to sue him for the emotional distress or what have you... If he's not found guilty there is nothing to sue him for.

But that is NOT how the legal system functions.

 

[FriendlyFire]

$77,000 is more important than poor white people in Louisiana who didn't vote for him.

Not to worry Obama is only racist against poor people. He has a racist history of giving Trillions of dollars to Rich white people and has a deep seated love of rich white people. Also I never said Obama was a racist.

EDIT: Also how dare you round down the amount by $51 Are you trying to reduce the huge amount of money BP gave Obama? Do you know how much influence $51 dollar buys?

 

[mangxema]

God damm OBAMA sold us out for $77,051

That sounds a lot less bad when you see this:

Former Alaska Republican Gov. Sarah Palin stirred up more controversy over the oil spewing into the Gulf of Mexico Sunday when she suggested that the administration’s response was linked to “the oil companies who have so supported President Obama in his campaign.”

...

Asked whether she thought the administration of President Barack Obama was doing a good job handling the crisis caused by the British Petroleum spill, Palin said, “I don’t know why the question isn’t asked by the mainstream media and by others if there’s any connection with the contributions made to President Obama and his administration and the support by the oil companies to the administration.”

She continued: “If there’s any connection there to President Obama taking so doggone long to get in there, to dive in there, and grasp the complexity and the potential tragedy that we are seeing here in the Gulf of Mexico — now, if this was President Bush or if this were a Republican in office who hadn’t received as much support even as President Obama has from BP and other oil companies, you know the mainstream media would be all over his case in terms of asking questions why the administration didn’t get in there, didn’t get in there and make sure that the regulatory agencies were doing what they were doing with the oversight to make sure that things like this don’t happen.”

According to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics, Republicans receive far more campaign money from the oil and gas industry than do Democrats.

So far in 2010, the oil and gas industries have contributed $12.8 million to all candidates, with 71% of that money going to Republicans. During the 2008 election cycle, 77% of the industry’s $35.6 million in contributions went to Republicans, and in the 2008 presidential contest, Republican candidate Sen. John McCain received more than twice as much money from the oil and gas industries as Obama: McCain collected $2.4 million; Obama, $898,000.

This is a decades-long trend, the center says: Since 1990, oil and gas companies have donated $238.7 million to candidates and parties, with 75% of the money going to Republicans....

 

[Formaldehyde]

There is a $75M cap on damages? No wonder they aren't trying very hard to resolve it!

Whose bright idea was this?

There is no contract between the government and BP limiting damages. A statutory damage cap is just that--statutory.

The damages cap is a law limiting the damages that plaintiffs, such as a class action brought by Gulf coast fisherman, could sue for. The government is free to pursue a very hefty fine, much bigger than 75 mil, by filing criminal charges.

I sure hope you are right. The government should effectively own all the assets of Trans Ocean and BP at this stage. This is likely going to cost tens of billions to clean up.

 

[nc-1701]

Given that Congress had the chance to force oil companies to implement safety equipment that would have prevented this but willfully chose not to, yes BP should not be held responsible for this. BP operated within the law and Congress deemed additional safety equipment unnecessary even though they knew what could happen without it. That is TOTALLY on Congress.

It wouldn't. Congress is still responsible for choosing to not pass the bill that would have required the safety equipment that would have prevented this. They willfully prevented such legislation and it doesn't matter whether they did so due to lobbying or not. if that is the case, vote the congressmen out that were susceptible to lobbying efforts.

In the end, Congress is responsible for this mess and therefore us taxpayers have to pay for the cleanup.

Using this exact same logic...

Congress has not made any law stating that I must cover my car in large airbags to prevent it from damaging things I run into. But if I run into something I'm still liable for the damage I cause because it was my responsibility not to run into things and/or choose to voluntary get additional protections to reduce the damage I cause.

Similarly the Federal government does not require you to lock your gun in a gunsafe, but if your gun is out and goes off accidentally harming someone or something you are responsible. The "The government is responsible for not requiring me to be safer therefore any damage I cause is really the government's fault because if they had forced me to lock up my gun it wouldn't have happened." defense is utter bullocks.

Whatever happened to personal responsibility for damage you cause? My viewpoint is simple, charge the company the full cost of all clean up efforts and economic damage (eg. if the gulf fishing industry loses 500 million in revenue for the next five years until fisheries rebound make BP pay them the full 2.5B). No punitive measures or fines, just make BP pay for every penny of clean up and damage, and if they can't cover all of it we shouldn't cap it and make taxpayers suffer. Just seize all of BP's American assets, auction them off o pay for as much of the clean up as possible and permanently ban BP from doing business in America or with American companies. Companies need to be responsible enough to clean up the messes they create, and America doesn't need childish corporations that need a government to clean up after them.

 

[Birdjaguar]

EDIT: Nice post ^^^^^

There are at least four levels of responsibility for this tragedy.

1: The crews working on the rig. If any of the people working there did not follow procedures or neglected to do things as they should, there is culpability at this level. Knowing that systems do not work and not fixing them or trying to get them fixed adds to ones responsibility.

2: Corporate level. If any of the managers of the three companies made decisions, changed procedures or told on site crews to do things that increased the probability of the explosion, then they have responsibility. Like the coal mining business, neglecting safety for profits that results in death and destruction will quickly make you responsible.

3: Federal oversight. If in the weeks and months leading up to the explosion, those who are responsible for inspecting this platform neglected to do their job, then they have responsibility for for the the failures they did not see corrected.

4: Congress. If congress were an independent body, it would be more responsible for failing to pass laws to protect our shorelines and oceans. But congress is not. They are bought and paid for by corporations and other interested parties. They answer, or not, to the people and unfortunately get a pass in this instance.

There are individuals who should be held accountable here. Most of them reside in levels 1 & 2. I suspect that most of the responsibility lies with the various mangers who met on the rig the night before the explosion and made decisions about what was to be done the following day. They and the companies they work for must bear the brunt of the fix and the penalties.

 

[warpus]

But that is NOT how the legal system functions.

Well, obviously it's broken somehow then, if you have one court ruling that he's guilty of a crime and another court ruling that he isn't guilty of that exact same crime - and both rulings are allowed to stand.

 

[Askthepizzaguy]

Under the Sea (Part II)

Music

The shoreline is always cleaner
In somebody else's state
You dream about moving out there
But that is a big mistake
Just look at the oil around you
Right here on the gulf coast shore
Such wonderful crude surrounds you
What more is you lookin' for?

Under the sea
Under the sea
it's spilling quicker
and getting thicker
all thanks to B.P.
Up on the shore they work all day
to remove the oil, they slave away
While oil's flowin'
and oil rigs are blowin'
Thanks to BP

Down here all the fish feel crappy
As up on the shore they roll
And birds on the land ain't happy
They sad 'cause they black as coal
But bird on the shore is lucky
'Cause they might get cleaned with soap
More than I can say for fishies
For them I guess there's just no hope.
(Oh no!)

Under the sea
Under the sea
Nobody beat us
Fry us and eat us
In fricassee
We what the land folks loves to cook
Covered in oil we off the hook
Soon we be rottin'
and then be forgotten
Under the sea
Under the sea
No need to feel skittish
Unless you're a blowfish
Naturally
Even the sturgeon an' the ray
They get the urge 'n' start to pray
Quick, let's all commit
to more drilling permits
Under the sea

Newt starts the chant
And Limbaugh will rant
And Glenn Beck will cry
As fish start to die
And Palin be nailin
which buzzwords need sayin
Say "drill, baby, drill" my friends
(Yeah)
The taxpayers will pay
For Big Oil's mistakes
While they make a play
to stop new legislation
and lobby the Congress
to halt all progress
They know where it's at
An' oh how that Congress blows!

Under the sea
Under the sea
When the sardine
starts turning green
It's okay with me
Who cares about all those fishermen?
We got more money than we could spend!
Each little exec
keeps getting paychecks
Thanks to BP
Blowout prevention
has national attention
Thanks to BP
Each little snail
Says we should jail
Carl-Henric Svanberg
And Tony Hayward
it's starting to suck here
For each clam and duck here
Under the sea

 

[Theige]

Well, obviously it's broken somehow then, if you have one court ruling that he's guilty of a crime and another court ruling that he isn't guilty of that exact same crime - and both rulings are allowed to stand.

No, the two courts, in this case civil court versus criminal court, have different standards for the burden of proof.

In a civil trial, "if the jury believes that there is more than a 50% probability that the defendant was negligent in causing the plaintiff's injury, the plaintiff wins." (http://www.rbs2.com/cc.htm)

 

[MagisterCultuum]

I tend to think criminal trials ought to have three possible verdicts: Guilty, Not Guilty, and Not Proven. With a Not Guilty verdict there would be no double jeopardy, whether through a criminal or civil trial. A Not Proven verdict however would allow for a civil trial and let the prosecution appeal for a new criminal trial if they can show damning new evidence has been discovered.

(While I'm at it, I'd also guarantee the judge and each juror the right to cross examine to the same degree as the lawyers if they so choose.)

 

[Bestbank Tiger]

Do you know how much influence $51 dollar buys?

Well, these same politicians won't allow a doctor to take so much as a pen from a pharmaceutical rep, or a real estate agent to accept anything of value from a mortgage broker or title attorney. The only logical conclusion is politicians can be bought for that price snce they think everyone else can be bought that cheap.

 

[Truthbuster]

Hi - Nice to join the site,

There are two misconceptions circulating re Obama & BP/Big Oil Contributions, mostly fuelled by Sarah Palin trying hard to make people believe that Obama was "in bed with BP & the oil companies"...presumably so folks wouldn't notice that it's actually the Republicans that had the "cozy relationship" - and that relationship played a central role in the Gulf disaster.

CONTRIBUTIONS FROM BIG OIL

From 1990 - 2010 Big Oil were open in their preference for Republicans, by giving them the lion's share of their cash, 75% of $238.7 Million. Eleven Republicans and two Democrats were in the TOP 13 Recipients. President Obama came in at #10 with $973,051. President Bush #1 with $4,808,936, John McCain #2 with $2,677,064.
Seven Republicans received more than $1 Million. These numbers do not take BP PACS into consideration.

1. Bush, George W. (R), $4,808,936
2. McCain, John (R-AZ), $2,677,064
3. Hutchison, Kay Bailey (R-TX), $2,137,225
4. Gramm, Phil (R-TX), $1,682,814
5. Cornyn, John (R-TX), $1,638,450
6. Barton, Joe (R-TX) $1,447,880
7. Inhofe, James M (R-OK) $1,228,223
8. Pearce, Steve (R-NM) $981,272
9. Young, Don (R-AK) $980,263
10, Obama, Barack (D), $973,051
11. McConnell, Mitch (R-KY) $860,261
12. Nickles, Don (R-OK), $841,388
13. Vitter, David (R-LA) $783,835
14. Landrieu, Mary L (D-LA), $757,744


Starting with BIG OIL 1990 - 2010:
"Individuals and political action committees affiliated with oil and gas companies have donated $238.7 million to candidates and parties since the 1990 election cycle, 75% of which has gone to Republicans.

http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/totals.php?cycle=2010&ind=E01

2008 Presidential Election/OBAMA
2008 - $901,051
http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/recips.php?ind=E01&cycle=2008&recipdetail=A&mem=Y&sortorder=U

2000 & 2004 Presidential Election/Bush
2000 - $1,960,851
BP PAC - $97,235
http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/recips.php?ind=E01&cycle=2000&recipdetail=P&mem=N&sortorder=U

2004 - $2,690,575
BP PAC $60,275
http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/recips.php?ind=E01&cycle=2004&recipdetail=P&mem=N&sortorder=U

CONTRIBUTIONS FROM BP

The #1 recipient of cash from BP is Rep Don Young (R-Alaska) with $115k, here's why:

Here are the top recipients of BP employee contributions, with Obama in #1 spot with $77,051, $3,751 more than Don Young.

Obama, Barack (D-Ill) $77,051
Young, Don (R-Alaska) $73,300
Stevens, Ted (R-Alaska) $53,200
Bush, George W (R-Texas) $47,388
McCain, John (R-Ariz) $44,899

Obama and Young change positions when BP PACS' contributions are added. Obama doesn't take PAC money. Young received an additional $42,500 between 1998 & 2010, increasing his total to $115,800, $38,749 more than Obama.

BP PAC CONTRIBUTIONS TO REP. D YOUNG:
$6,250 BP America PAC 1998
$1,000 Amoco PAC 1998
$6,250 Standard Oil PAC 1998
$6,000 BP PAC 2000
$5,000 BP PAC 2002
$4,500 BP PAC 2004
$4,000 BP PAC 2006
$4,000 BP PAC 2008
$1,000 BP PAC 2010

There you have it - setting the record straight!
Truthbuster

 

[ParkCungHee]

So you are saying that it is congress's fault because they under regulated the oil companies and BP should get a pass on the clean up because they put profits over safety and their failure to protect the ocean wasn't technically illegal?

Actually...yes. That sounds pretty reasonable. How about, rather then jumping on BP because they're the ones who happened to be on hand when a broken system failed, how about we blame the people who established a broken system.

 

[Oerdin]

The GOP has always hated accountability. That's just a fact.

 

[JollyRoger]

Actually...yes. That sounds pretty reasonable. How about, rather then jumping on BP because they're the ones who happened to be on hand when a broken system failed, how about we blame the people who established a broken system.

Wasn't BP the party that happened to be running the rig that failed? Why shouldn't they be jumped on? If they need the government to tell them how to handle every detail in order to avoid disaster, perhaps we should just nationalize the industry.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

Is the damage worth only $75 million?

 

[Cutlass]

Is the damage worth only $75 million?

We'll be lucky if it's only 1000 times that.

 

[I'm Cleo!]

Regarding the civil / criminal thing, it's not that hard to understand:

A criminal trial requires proof "beyond a reasonable doubt." It's tough to meet, and the jury instructions will reflect that. Let's call it 95%. A civil trial requires that the plaintiff prove the defendant is responsible "by a preponderance of the evidence." That's 50%+1, and it's going to be in the jury instructions ("more likely than not" or something to that effect). So in the O.J. Simpson case, all we actually know from his acquittal is that the jury wasn't 95% sure that he had murdered Nicole Brown Simpson and her male companion. Likewise, we know the civil jury was convinced that he had probably killed her and her male companion. Ignoring differences in the individual trials (lawyers, witnesses, &c.), from 51% to 94%, we have the O.J. situation.

Cleo

 

[GoodGame]

Newsflash: It did just get plugged. http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/05/28/2911583.htm

Now they might be able to estimate the dollar value.


In other news, Obama is postponening all offshore drilling for a review: http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/05/27/2911527.htm