Thanks, Diane, for sending me this. By the time I saw it, it was all over the news.
Ugly, isn’t it?
BP probably held it back, because analysis of the video reveals that the leak is over 70,000 barrels a day. The original estimate from the Coast Guard, based on BP data was 5,000 barrels per day. So what we have is one Exxon Valdez disaster every four days.
Democrats in the Senate are trying to raise the liability cap from $75 million to $10 billion. That’s still too low. BP annual profit is double that. The only cap for a disaster of this magnitude is $infinity. But even the overly lax cap of $10 billion is too much for the GOP.
Alaska’s senior senator blocked legislation Thursday that would have dramatically increased liability caps on oil companies, in the wake of one of the industry’s biggest disasters.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) objected to a voice vote request by Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) on the bill, which would have spiked the maximum liability for oil companies after an oil spill from $75 million to $10 billion. The legislation has significant support from Democrats, and the White House has indicated it backs an increase in liability caps.
But Murkowski said the legislation is “not where we need to be right now” and would unfairly advantage large oil companies by pricing the small companies out of the market. Murkowski did signal that she would be open to "look at the liability cap and consider raising it.” Just not at this moment.
Menendez, speaking to reporters after the bill was halted on the Senate floor, said the opposition indicates that Republicans are on the side of the oil companies, not the American people. There had been no formal floor debate or roll call vote requested on the legislation.
“It’s straightforward, it’s common sense,” Menendez said. “Either you want to fully protect the small businesses, individuals and communities devastated by a man-made disaster — this is not a natural disaster; this is a man-made disaster — or you want to protect multibillion-dollar oil companies from being held fully accountable. Apparently there are some in the Senate who prefer to protect the oil companies.”… [emphasis added]
Inserted from <Politico>
Murkowski offered two main arguments. First is that Big Oil has unlimited liability already, because anyone can sue them. Tell that to the victims of Exxon Valdez spill. After twenty years, many have died of old age waiting to see the first penny. The people whose livelihoods are gone need justice now, not 20-30 years from now… if the live that long.
Second, Murkowski argued that it would put “mom and pop” operators out of business by making the cost of their liability insurance so high that they could not afford to operate. Earth to Murkowski! Is anyone home? There are no mom and pop companies in deep offshore drilling. If there were, any company that cannot afford liability for the damage they cause has no business being in business. If I can’t afford auto liability insurance, I have no business driving a car.
Many in the GOP are shaking their heads in mock shock that one lone Senator could do such a thing. Don’t you dare believe that! Theses greedy Republicans goose step in lock step. Murkowski was assigned this role, because she does not face reelection until 2014. The GOP is seeking to help Big Oil avoid responsibility without appearing to do so.
Corporations are NOT people! Money is NOT speech!
25 Responses to “GOP Sides with Big Oil”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Daddy gave little Lisa his job for a reason, and this is the reason.
Lisa Murkowski is too stupid to wipe, but she knows how to protect her daddy’s (and her) bagmen.
And the GOP’s as well JR.
Alaska has a vested interest in supporting big oil. They know on which side their bread is buttered – or how to fill their pockets with silver.
So does the Republican Party, Leslie.
Murkowski is simply part of the best government oil money can buy. And, of course, Palin is a self-centered no-mind absolute idiot. Utterly disgusting.
Jack, you’re being mich too nice. Say what you think. 😉
I would have thought no less coming from Murkowski. Let’s plop her and Palin in the middle of the spill.
Lisa, that would pollute the oil spill. 😈
Ha!
“GOP Sides with Big Oil!”
“Bear Shits in Woods!”
“Pope Practices Catholicism!”
Senator Murky is really reaching with this one. If protecting small mom-and-pop deep-sea oil-drillers is the best excuse she can think of for opposing this, they’re pretty much out of ideas.
Right on all three, Infidel.
They’ve been out of ideas since No Millionaire Left Behind trashed the economy.
Tom, what really surprised me was today I read an article by the Associated Press that BP is still claiming it’s only 5,000 gallons a day! I didn’t send it to you because it really would have irked you (as it did me)!
As for the limitation, I believe there should be NO LIMITATION regarding the damages. They claim there have been over 100 law suits filed – also that BP has lost $30,000,000,000 in revenue from the drop in their stock and that they should not be further penalized – how much horse-pucky is that!!!
The on-going damage is almost not calcuable at this time – it just sickens my heart…..
Yes you did, Diane. And you were right, except for one thing. Nothing can irk me, except me. But I irked the hell out of me in response to it. 🙁 Depending on the news cycle, I’m likely to use it tomorrow.
When I said that the cap should be $infinity, that’s exactly what I meant. If BP’s investors learn that they will get away with it, watch that stock rebound.
Remove the word “almost”, and I’m with you.
PS – Also just think of all the sea life that will die – the billions of dollars in damage to the seafood industry and how prices on seafood will rise to the consumer. I’m sure I’m missing a lot of other negative consequences from this catastrophe, but these are just a couple that are instantly evident to me.
I agree and have mentioned all those in recent days. My biggest fear is that the dispersants will kill the Florida reefs and destroy a unique ecosystem upon which millions of cancer and AIDS sufferers depend for their medicine, among many other catastrophic effects.
The thing that really pisses me off is that the oil companies don’t even pay the full price of the clean up, and the “clean up” is never really completed anyway, because you can only clean up a minimal percentage of the oil contamination once the oil genie is out of the well-bottle and spread about everywhere. Not that they’re going to pay, but how do you put a limit on such momumental, catastrophic damage???
Welcome, Nicolai. I agree. I posted the current state of Prince William Sound a few days ago. After 20 years, most of the oil is still there. The only answer I have to your question is that I can’t. The damage is unestimable already, and it may be generations before we even know what all the damages are.
All depends on how big this ultimately gets and which way it spreads. If it moves out past Florida and Cuba, the Gulf Stream could carry it all over the northern Atlantic.
I agree, That’s part of why I said it’s unestimable.
Every time politicians (of both parties) bend over for their corporate donors, they always make it sound like they’re doing it for small businesses and everyday people. Riiight.
And I have some lovely alpine mountain property for sale… in Kansas.
The Gulf Coast, tarred and (by the Coast Guard)–feathered.
You did it, Ivan You’re over my head. 🙂
TomCat,
Yeah my Poli/Sci prof used to say the same thing.
–Tar from the oil spill in the Gulf; feathers from the unkown crap the Coast guard sprinkles over the tar to try to break it down.
Ivan, the stuff is from BP, not the CG.