4
Lawmakers weigh how to make BP pay
A clean-up worker walks along a stretch of oil-contaminated beach in Grand Isle, La.
To view this content, Javascript must be enabled and Adobe Flash Player must be installed.
Nine percent. That's how much BP shares gave up today. Almost 10, if you really want to know. This is a big week for the oil company. We're expecting to learn what BP's decided to do about its dividend. A matter of no small interest to those shareholders who've seen almost 60 percent of their investments disappear. CEO Tony Hayward is going to be the special guest of a congressional committee later this week. He will also meet with President Obama at the White House before the president's speech. It's no secret what the president will say. He wants the leak stopped, and he wants victims of the oil leak -- not BP shareholders -- to get paid first. In fact, he wants to make sure those victims get paid. Period.
By Rob Schmitz
BP CEO Tony Hayward says his company will pay all legitimate claims for the Gulf spill. But will he do it? That's what Louisiana Treasurer John Kennedy wants to know.
"Show me the money," Kennedy said. "I want to see it. I want to know that the money will be there. I'm glad BP is the fourth largest company in the world, I'm glad they have $81 billion in assets, I appreciate their commitment to pay us in full. Show me the money. Put it into escrow."
Last week, Louisiana and Florida demanded BP set aside $7.5 billion into an escrow account to pay for the mounting damage to their economies. Now the Obama administration wants to take over, demanding BP finances a fund managed by a third party to pay victims of the spill. The president could ask for direct government control of the fund, but energy industry analyst Kevin Book says that wouldn't look good to our British friends, many of whom are BP shareholders.
"One country's solution is another country's problem right now, and the last thing you want is the perception that the U.S. federal government has reached into the coffers of a British company," Book said.
A British company, says Book, that also contributes jobs and capital to the U.S. economy. The amount BP pays, says Book, has to be big enough to reassure American voters, but modest enough to ensure BP doesn't go bankrupt in the process. Last week, a group of Democratic senators asked for a $20 billion fund -- that's around twice the amount of cash BP currently has on hand.
I'm Rob Schmitz for Marketplace.
We just made a trip to the Alabama coast to witness the devastation ourselves. Aye. But what was even worse was the hopelessness heard in conversations. Park Rangers, Volunteers, even a BP engineer, told us that everything was for show. BP didn't want to cap the well. They wanted everything to fail so they could drill into the sides and salvage the oil without destroying the well. So we are left with the understanding that the destruction of entire ecosystems and ways of life, are worth less then gallons of crude. BP can never pay enough to repair what they have single-handedly destroyed.
I have no desire to defend BP, but we should go slow on the blame. BP really is trying to fix the problem. Before you engage in blame, remind yourself: (1)This was not an intentional oil spill. (2)BP does care about the bad PR the spill is creating. (3)Fixing the leak is extremely difficult engineering.
�What should Obama say tonight about the Oil Disaster?� Like the one word advice that Dustin Hoffman received in "The Graduate", Obama should level with and advise the American people; "I've got one word to share with you folks. Our future and survival depends on confronting it. Just one word to say to you --- EMPIRE." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHGCvJjat1E&feature=related Here's my slightly more explanatory answer to the NYTimes' article, ""Obama Plans to Force BP's Hand on Oil Spill Fund", on what Obama must say: "First, it's not a 'SPILL' and should never be referred to as such, since doing so merely helps the global corporate/financial/militarist EMPIRE's continuing propaganda war against all of us, our children, 'our' former country, 'our' former democracy, our dying environment, our assaulted earth, and our very species. Obama's coming address will mean absolutely nothing (except that he is a pawn of this global EMPIRE) unless he "Breaks the Silence" (as Martin Luther King did in 1967 at Riverside Church, and JFK did in 1963 at American University) about the disguised EMPIRE which is the proximate CAUSE of all foreign and domestic "Sorrows of Empire" [Chalmers Johnson], such as all the EMPIRE-CAUSED; imperialist foreign war crises, domestic financial crises, global environmental crises, economic oppression crises, social injustice crises, torture crises, spying crises, 'police-state' tyranny crises, 'targeted assassination' crises, unSupreme Court unlimited corporate cash crises, the overall democracy crises, and all inhumanity crises directly CAUSED by this inhuman global corporatist EMPIRE." Alan MacDonald Sanford, Maine
Two terms come to mind, “extortion†and “slush fund.â€
“Extortion†in that Barama seems to have renewed his penchant for taking one person’s assets and giving them to someone else, someone with more “pull.†(Remember how he ignored clear bankruptcy laws to push union funds ahead of secured creditors in the Chrysler bankruptcy?) Well, now he’s going to badmouth BP for “not cooperating†if BP doesn’t pony up an “escrow†fund to pay these claims in an amount to suit Barama’s whims.
“Slush fund†because the allegedly “independent†trustee will be handpicked by Barama, Reid, Pelosi and maybe Markey and Waxman. Any suggestion by BP as to an alternative trustee, or objection to Barama’s favorite will be labeled “lack of cooperation†by Barama’s propaganda mill (see “extortionâ€, above). The government – oops, “independent†– trustee will pay out billions to Barama’s supporters for “claims†having only the remotest connection to the “spill.†Reid says the fund would not limit BP’s liability: Anyone who has observed government will realize that rather than a “ceiling†it would become a “floorâ€.
The most egregious part of the whole proposal is the suggestion by some senators that BP be responsible for the consequences of actions by government, particularly the loss of revenue to states due to royalties not received for oil that is not pumped from wells that are not drilled because of a government “moratorium†on permitting, drilling and activating wells.
