• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Poll: BP Oil Spill Response Rated Worse than Katrina

ReverendHellh0und

I don't respect you.
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
79,903
Reaction score
20,981
Location
I love your hate.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Poll: BP Oil Spill Response Rated Worse than Katrina

Poll: BP Oil Spill Rated Worse Than Hurricane Katrina; Most Americans Favor Pursuit of Criminal Charges According to ABC News and Washington Post Poll - ABC News


By more than a 2-to-1 margin, Americans support the pursuit of criminal charges in the nation's worst oil spill , with increasing numbers calling it a major environmental disaster. Eight in 10 criticize the way BP's handled it – and more people give the federal government's response a negative rating than did the response to Hurricane Katrina.


Beaches across four Gulf shore states brace for oil onslaught.
A month and a half after the spill began, 69 percent in a new ABC News/Washington Post poll rate the federal response negatively. That compares with a 62 negative rating for the response to Katrina two weeks after the August 2005 hurricane.



I am not suprised by this at all. Many of us have been saying this for a while. It seems that we are spinning wheels here with this oil spill. I am particularly disturbed by bubs thread where we could have been a month into building the berms that a ducth company says could be done in 4 months not 9. /facepalm
 
Last edited:

Taylor

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 31, 2009
Messages
16,203
Reaction score
6,345
Location
US
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I'll have to admit some surprise here given the amount of hate toward Bush. Public opinion will only continue to sour as we're exposed to images of oil-soaked birds, closed beaches, seafood costs through the roof, etc.

This is also not going to help the jobs picture.
 

Objective Voice

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 14, 2008
Messages
11,388
Reaction score
4,076
Location
Huntsville, AL (USA)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
What I think is so interesting about polls and/or threads like this one is that these are the same people (Conservatives) who continue to state the government should stay out of the business of private enterprise. But the moment private enterprise screws up suddenly everyone's calling for the head of "big government" to step up and do something. Really...what do you expect the man or his Administration to do exactly? What more could the White House possibly do in a situation like this?

1. The last major oil spill of this size that took place in the GOM occured in 1979 by a Mexican oil company. The same containment procedures were used and the spill continued until a relief well was drilled in August of that same year.

2. People quickly forget that 11 people died in this tragic accident. The sinking of the oil rig was a rescue and recovery event before it became and environmental containment and cleanup incident. People need to remember that.

3. By all accounts, BP didn't share all the information they had w/the White House initially. It took about a week before the Obama Administration knew the full details of how much oil was spewing from the well, as well as the difficulties it would take to cap it.

4. Although not the first oil rig to spring a leak in the GOM, it IS the first to happen in such deep water.

5. Society expects that the government should have all emergency equipment on "standby" for such disasters. Well, where's the responsibility of private enterprise? BP made the mess and by law wasn't it their responsibility to take all necessary safety precautions including ensuring their backup systems worked and that they had enough boom and skimmers under their control to promptly respond to this disaster before any other entity was involved?

I think anyone who's blaming the President and his Administration for doing nothing or little to nothing are placing blame in the wrong place. It's not the role of government to handle such disasters. This is all on BP w/the federal goverment providing oversight toward capping the well, the cleanup effort and ensuring that those who have legitimate claims against BP to be paid.

In the mind of some, I guess the government was suppose to set aside emergency equipment and keep it on standby for every private company who dedices to take the risk of drilling in deep water and put the coastal environment in danger such a disaster happen. I'm I reading the pundits correctly?

The government was suppose to keep hundreds if not thousands of miles of boom onhand in the event of such a disaster; this isn't the job of those private oil companies who have decided to take the risk and drill for oil off-shore.

The government was suppose to set up berms along coastal/island areas and water inlets in anticipation of such a disaster.

The government was suppose to have hundreds of skimmers vessels waiting off the Gulf coast for just such a catastrophy.

The government is suppose to add to this man-made environmental disaster by burning oil off the Gulf coast and further risk tourism along LA, MS, AL, FL beachfront areas.

The government, NOT BP, has killed jobs along the Gulf coast because it was they and not BP who caused this oil leak?

This is the exact same government that only a few months ago was saying "stay out of the affairs of private business", right?

Sidenote: There is still a country to run. The man doesn't need to be their 24/7. That's what delegating responsiblity is all about. He's done that. IMO, the best move he has made was releaving the female Coast Guard officers who was initially overseeing the cleanup effort and coordinating events w/Commodore Allen. This man is getting the job done!!!
 
Last edited:

ReverendHellh0und

I don't respect you.
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
79,903
Reaction score
20,981
Location
I love your hate.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
What I think is so interesting about polls and/or threads like this one is that these are the same people (Conservatives) who continue to state the government should stay out of the business of private enterprise. But the moment private enterprise screws up suddenly everyone's calling for the head of "big government" to step up and do something. Really...what do you expect the man or his Administration to do exactly? What more could the White House possibly do in a situation like this?



This is a strawman.


FAIL






1. The last major oil spill of this size that took place in the GOM occured in 1979 by a Mexican oil company. The same containment procedures were used and the spill continued until a relief well was drilled in August of that same year.


wait, we were using containment plans from 1979? what happened to the 1994 plan?



2. People quickly forget that 11 people died in this tragic accident. The sinking of the oil rig was a rescue and recovery event before it became and environmental containment and cleanup incident. People need to remember that.



:roll: lame




3. By all accounts, BP didn't share all the information they had w/the White House initially. It took about a week before the Obama Administration knew the full details of how much oil was spewing from the well, as well as the difficulties it would take to cap it.


link please.



4. Although not the first oil rig to spring a leak in the GOM, it IS the first to happen in such deep water.


You can thank environmentalist wackos for sending these rigs out so far. :shrug:


5. Society expects that the government should have all emergency equipment on "standby" for such disasters. Well, where's the responsibility of private enterprise? BP made the mess and by law wasn't it their responsibility to take all necessary safety precautions including ensuring their backup systems worked and that they had enough boom and skimmers under their control to promptly respond to this disaster before any other entity was involved?


Oil spill burn plan in place, but fire booms weren't


washingtonpost.com


:shrug:



I think anyone who's blaming the President and his Administration for doing nothing or little to nothing are placing blame in the wrong place. It's not the role of government to handle such disasters. This is all on BP w/the federal goverment providing oversight toward capping the well, the cleanup effort and ensuring that those who have legitimate claims against BP to be paid.


As i have pointed out with simple links, the government thought it was part of thier role to protect the coast..... that said, i think there is enough blame to go around, including BP and the last 3 administrations for failures at all levels.


In the mind of some, I guess the government was suppose to set aside emergency equipment and keep it on standby for every private company who dedices to take the risk of drilling in deep water and put the coastal environment in danger such a disaster happen. I'm I reading the pundits correctly?


yes, that some was bj clinton, and the us coast guard who thought that. the government leased the areas and pushed them further out to sea, not only should they not allow bp or other to drill unless bp can clean and contain a spill, but the government who is responsible for the environment (epa anyone) better damn well have a back up plan that can be implemented.


The government was suppose to keep hundreds if not thousands of miles of boom onhand in the event of such a disaster; this isn't the job of those private oil companies who have decided to take the risk and drill for oil off-shore.

yes, according to to thier very own plan.


The government was suppose to set up berms along coastal/island areas and water inlets in anticipation of such a disaster.


strawman.



The government was suppose to have hundreds of skimmers vessels waiting off the Gulf coast for just such a catastrophy.


if they wanted to push them out that far and lease the area, they better be able to protect the coast from a failure of bp or others. yes.


The government is suppose to add to this man-made environmental disaster by burning oil off the Gulf coast and further risk tourism along LA, MS, AL, FL beachfront areas.


:lol: you are right, oil slicked beaches have no effect on tourism....


The government, NOT BP, has killed jobs along the Gulf coast because it was they and not BP who caused this oil leak?

it was "they" who have shut down all drilling.


This is the exact same government that only a few months ago was saying "stay out of the affairs of private business", right?

Sidenote: There is still a country to run. The man doesn't need to be their 24/7. That's what delegating responsiblity is all about. He's done that. IMO, the best move he has made was releaving the female Coast Guard officers who was initially overseeing the cleanup effort and coordinating events w/Commodore Allen. This man is getting the job done!!!

:lol: had Obama had his way, the coast guard would not even have been there.
 

Objective Voice

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 14, 2008
Messages
11,388
Reaction score
4,076
Location
Huntsville, AL (USA)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Rev,

Point 1 - As I listen to the news (daily I might add), those inidividuals within political circles who are speaking the loudest in opposition of how the Obama Administration has handled this oil spill are Republicans/Conservatives. Just turn on your TV and watch. I'm by no means saying that others aren't equally upset about it, but the loudest voices are (obviously) Republicans.

Point 2 - As of July 1, 2006 in accordance with the EPA's National Contingency Plan (Title 40, chap. 1, part 109.5) that covers oil spills, it is the responsibility of state, local and reginal government agencies to ensure the necessary equipment for oil spill containment and cleanup are readily available when called upon. (You can also review the 1994 EPA NCP guidelines here.)

Point 3 - So, what you're saying is protecting the environment was more important than a search and rescue of human lives? Save the shrimp, but leave bodies floating in the water. (Okay, so I'm being sarcastic, but that's pretty much how I viewed your response to my paragraph #2 above.)

Point 4 - See times lines linked below:

Timeline A (Day-to-day tracking of events from April 20 - May 24, 2010; note Obama Administration's direct involvement from April 20 - May 1)

Timeline B (shorter timeline from 20-30 April from DeepSea News)

Point 5 - Looks like those environmental wackos were right..to a degree. Granted, an oil spill of this size may have stood a better chance of being capped/shut-off in shallower waters, but as the President said and as the 1994 EPA NCP guidelines state, each oil drilling company is suppose to file a Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasures (SPCC) certificate w/the federal government that outlines exactly how they would respond to such a disaster. Obviously, BP/Deepwater Horizon were not prepared for a disaster of this magnitude! (Note: I haven't been able to find BP's SPCC to determine what their contingency plans were prior to the spill; if I find it I'll post it here.)

Point 6 - Obvious reason for not buring the oil can be read here.

Point 7 - (See point #2)

Point 8 - Not all off-shore drilling has been shut down; just permits for new deep water drilling, as well as most (if not all) deep water drilling per Pres. Obama's interview on the Today Show (6/8/10; a series of videos can be selected here - first 3 are germaine to the President's frustrations w/the spill, oil companies and government regulations)

Point 9 - You're over simplifying the proposed drawdown of the Coast Guard's role here. It's no different than the military as a whole conducting base realignments in an effort to streamline resources and maximize their ability to be more affective in performing their duties. Nothing new here, but yeah. I'd be alittle concerned if the drawdown was too narrow and hampered the Coast Guard's effectiveness to respond to national disasters like this.
 

ReverendHellh0und

I don't respect you.
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
79,903
Reaction score
20,981
Location
I love your hate.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Rev,

Point 1 - As I listen to the news (daily I might add), those inidividuals within political circles who are speaking the loudest in opposition of how the Obama Administration has handled this oil spill are Republicans/Conservatives. Just turn on your TV and watch. I'm by no means saying that others aren't equally upset about it, but the loudest voices are (obviously) Republicans.


Really, even that crook rengel is pissed. :shrug:


Point 2 - As of July 1, 2006 in accordance with the EPA's National Contingency Plan (Title 40, chap. 1, part 109.5) that covers oil spills, it is the responsibility of state, local and reginal government agencies to ensure the necessary equipment for oil spill containment and cleanup are readily available when called upon. (You can also review the 1994 EPA NCP guidelines here.)



http://www.debatepolitics.com/gener...cy-plan-oil-spill-and-failure-government.html



Incorrect. a spill of this magnitude falls directly in the laps of the federal government, specifically the coast guard and the EPA...






Point 3 - So, what you're saying is protecting the environment was more important than a search and rescue of human lives? Save the shrimp, but leave bodies floating in the water. (Okay, so I'm being sarcastic, but that's pretty much how I viewed your response to my paragraph #2 above.)



Hyperbolic. We can multitask. :shrug:



Point 4 - See times lines linked below:

Timeline A (Day-to-day tracking of events from April 20 - May 24, 2010; note Obama Administration's direct involvement from April 20 - May 1)

Timeline B (shorter timeline from 20-30 April from DeepSea News)


I've seen these. point?



Point 5 - Looks like those environmental wackos were right..to a degree. Granted, an oil spill of this size may have stood a better chance of being capped/shut-off in shallower waters, but as the President said and as the 1994 EPA NCP guidelines state, each oil drilling company is suppose to file a Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasures (SPCC) certificate w/the federal government that outlines exactly how they would respond to such a disaster. Obviously, BP/Deepwater Horizon were not prepared for a disaster of this magnitude! (Note: I haven't been able to find BP's SPCC to determine what their contingency plans were prior to the spill; if I find it I'll post it here.)


I agree here regarding the plan. Why did the federal government fail to notice BP did not have an adequate plan? Who do you fault for this?

Obama must have known about this failure of a plan since he suggested we cut the funding to the coast guard for such cleanup.





Point 6 - Obvious reason for not buring the oil can be read here.



The only thing obvious I see here, is confirmation of my other point that this falls in the lap of the POTUS, coast guard, and the EPA. Thanks for this. :thumbs:



Point 7 - (See point #2)

Point 8 - Not all off-shore drilling has been shut down; just permits for new deep water drilling, as well as most (if not all) deep water drilling per Pres. Obama's interview on the Today Show (6/8/10; a series of videos can be selected here - first 3 are germaine to the President's frustrations w/the spill, oil companies and government regulations)


very well.



Point 9 - You're over simplifying the proposed drawdown of the Coast Guard's role here. It's no different than the military as a whole conducting base realignments in an effort to streamline resources and maximize their ability to be more affective in performing their duties. Nothing new here, but yeah. I'd be alittle concerned if the drawdown was too narrow and hampered the Coast Guard's effectiveness to respond to national disasters like this.



it was a cut in funding suggestion not a drawdown of role. :doh:
 

Ockham

Noblesse oblige
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2009
Messages
23,909
Reaction score
11,001
Location
New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
This is not going to get better. The longer this goes on, and I think the oil will continue to gush out until the fall sometime.... the worse it will get. The political fallout for the White House will be massive and may actually bring down Obama - especially when it comes out that Obama didn't speak to BP's CEO after 50 days... and the excuse is "he'd just tell me what I'd want to hear". An incredulous, ignorant, and naive answer from a guy who can't lead himself out of a wet paper bag.

This oil spill will, daily be the full story until it's stopped and will envelope all and every other issue that the WH tries to bring up. That could be good or bad --- the Administration can try to slide things under the radar while everyone's mad about the Gulf, but then again, every day it gets worse - ever day more criticism occurs, more wildlife and coastlines are dying and the majority of the oil is not coming up to the surface but traveling in plumes deep under water - where it'll land? Who knows.

Once the oil impacts are fully realized - and that might not be for another 3-6 months - it will be the worse than Katrina and this will be unrecoverable, no matter the propaganda the White House tries to spin.
 

hazlnut

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 27, 2009
Messages
11,963
Reaction score
3,543
Location
Naperville, IL
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Originally Posted by Objective Voice
What I think is so interesting about polls and/or threads like this one is that these are the same people (Conservatives) who continue to state the government should stay out of the business of private enterprise. But the moment private enterprise screws up suddenly everyone's calling for the head of "big government" to step up and do something. Really...what do you expect the man or his Administration to do exactly? What more could the White House possibly do in a situation like this?


This is a strawman.


FAIL

BULL****.

It describes your hyper-partisan obsession with Katrina vs Oil Spill to a friggin' T.

You scream and cry about BIG GOVERNMENT getting out of way of BIG BUSINESSES...

However, since the oil spill you've been laughingly hypocritical.... Where's my nanny-state?!! Where's my President?!!

But it's not about Katrina or the oil spill, it's just about you posting another attack on Obama, finding fault with your President not matter how hypocritical you look... If only the Feds were as transparent as you are.

OV described you to a T. -- So, the FAIL (epic or otherwise) is all yours, buddy.:2wave::2wave:
 

ReverendHellh0und

I don't respect you.
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
79,903
Reaction score
20,981
Location
I love your hate.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
BULL****.

It describes your hyper-partisan obsession with Katrina vs Oil Spill to a friggin' T.

You scream and cry about BIG GOVERNMENT getting out of way of BIG BUSINESSES...

However, since the oil spill you've been laughingly hypocritical.... Where's my nanny-state?!! Where's my President?!!

But it's not about Katrina or the oil spill, it's just about you posting another attack on Obama, finding fault with your President not matter how hypocritical you look... If only the Feds were as transparent as you are.

OV described you to a T. -- So, the FAIL (epic or otherwise) is all yours, buddy.:2wave::2wave:



Nice tantrum. have anything on the topic or are you just turgid once again for the Greatness that is the Good Reverend.


and by all means, please lets not stoop to lying as you are known for when addressing me and stick to my actual position, not your partisan hack mouth foaming fantasies of what you would like my position to be.,



The FEDGOV by law is tasked with containment and cleanup in addition to BP according to LAW. As you can see by searching my posts, I blame clinton, bush, AND obama for the failure of the FEDGOVS role in this disaster.


Obama even admits this failure.

Obama concedes mistakes in oil spill as he halts drilling | McClatchy


I applaud him for this. Now, he needs to, as he says "kick ass" and actually do something other than suggest defunding the coast guard for cleanups of such spills...
 

j-mac

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
38,362
Reaction score
11,332
Location
South Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
BULL****.

It describes your hyper-partisan obsession with Katrina vs Oil Spill to a friggin' T.

You scream and cry about BIG GOVERNMENT getting out of way of BIG BUSINESSES...

However, since the oil spill you've been laughingly hypocritical.... Where's my nanny-state?!! Where's my President?!!

But it's not about Katrina or the oil spill, it's just about you posting another attack on Obama, finding fault with your President not matter how hypocritical you look... If only the Feds were as transparent as you are.

OV described you to a T. -- So, the FAIL (epic or otherwise) is all yours, buddy.:2wave::2wave:


Where are the skimmers, and other assistance that 17 other countries offered, and were turned down by Obama?


j-mac
 

somepeoplesay

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2010
Messages
198
Reaction score
74
Location
Austin, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Well, considering this is a man made disaster for which BP is solely responsible, i'm not surprised. The Katrina comparisons kind of fall flat, a natural disaster has different implications then one made by a global corporation.
 

ReverendHellh0und

I don't respect you.
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
79,903
Reaction score
20,981
Location
I love your hate.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Well, considering this is a man made disaster for which BP is solely responsible, i'm not surprised. The Katrina comparisons kind of fall flat, a natural disaster has different implications then one made by a global corporation.



I guess you are not aware that by law, the coast guard and the EPA are also responsible for cleanup. :shrug:
 

Taylor

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 31, 2009
Messages
16,203
Reaction score
6,345
Location
US
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Well, considering this is a man made disaster for which BP is solely responsible, i'm not surprised. The Katrina comparisons kind of fall flat, a natural disaster has different implications then one made by a global corporation.
The implications are the same... respond accordingly. People are no more blaming Obama for creating the oil spill than they blamed Bush for creating a hurricane.
 

Zyphlin

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 21, 2005
Messages
51,312
Reaction score
35,173
Location
NoMoAuchie
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Um....in regards to the "partisan hackiness" and the attempted hypocrisy cries.

Can someone link me to an outcry of Conservatives during Katrina that said the Federal Government SHOULDN'T do anything? I believe a large part of the Conservative complaint at that time was due to disproportional amount of blame the Federal Government was getting for their lacking response when compared to the criticism found for the individual state responses. This is doubly true in regards to the lack of proper city response as well in regards to New Orleans, as the Federal Government should be focusing more on the overall scale then simply having to focus on a singular city.

I honestly can't remember many if any conservatives on this site or in the media that were saying that the federal government should NOT do anything or should have no place in it. Which is the only way your rather mind boggling hypocrisy argument would actually make sense.

Its fully justifiable within conservative ideology to give aid and attempt to fix problems caused by major disasters, be it man made or natural, that can have an impact on either the safety of the Nation or on Interstate Commerce. No, if your local town of 5,000 people floods and 6 houses are destroyed its not out of the realm of possability to believe that many conservaties may not feel that the Federal Government should sweep into your town offering millions of dollars of aide. However if multiple states are being affected by a wide scale disaster that can affect a large amount of commercial industries that will have a siginificant affect on the economy of a number of states and thus the United States while making ports less accessible that is completely justifiable for Federal involvement.

So Conservative Ideology has no real big issue with a Government stepping in to help with a Hurricane or a Tornado or an Earth Quake, why then should it not be for a man made disaster? Now, stepping in to help does not mean excusing the private industry from their responsability or culpability. However since it is something the govenrment should be doing they shouldn't simply sit back on their haunches and wait at the expense of the countries potential economic or tangible safety. For example, lets say instead of an oil spill there was a major nuclear reactor meltdown seemingly because the company used a cheaper part that ended up being faulty. Would you suggest then as well that the Federal Government should not do anything or take its time waiting on the company owning the nuclear facilitity to do something about "Their mess" or should it act in the name of safety for the country?

See the very essense of your theory that you use as the baseline for your insult to conservatives in attempting to label them hypocrites is based on hyperbolic stereotypes equating Conservatives with Anarchists and a seemingly devoid memory of history in believing that Conservatives have been against the federal government playing a role in any major disaster before.

Conservatives are not anarchists. Limited government is not no government.
As to being against the federal government having any role in the aftermath of a major disaster, well, I'm eagerly awaiting links for proof.
 

Objective Voice

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 14, 2008
Messages
11,388
Reaction score
4,076
Location
Huntsville, AL (USA)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
The point to my opening remarks in my initial post herein (post #3) was simply to illustrate the hypocrisy, that the very same people who cry "government, stay out of private affairs" are the same people who all but demand government involvement in situations like this. The fact of the matter is yes, government does have a role to play in such disastererous situations whether naturally occuring (i.e., tornado, flood, hurricane, earth quake, volcanic eruption over populated area, etc.) or man-made such as this oil spill. The issue here is how much of a role should they play?

If you look at the NCP where local, state and regional governments responsibilities are, you'll see that they (as well as the private business entity according to their SPCC on file w/the federal government) are to act as "first responders" to such crisis and that the federal government steps in only when it has been determined that local, state and regional governments and/or private enterprise can't handle the situation.

TITLE 40--PROTECTION OF ENVIRONMENT

CHAPTER I--ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (CONTINUED)

PART 109_CRITERIA FOR STATE, LOCAL AND REGIONAL OIL REMOVAL CONTINGENCY

PLANS--Table of Contents

Sec. 109.5 Development and implementation criteria for State, local and regional oil removal contingency plans. Criteria for the development and implementation of State, local and regional oil removal contingency plans are:

(a) Definition of the authorities, responsibilities and duties of all persons, organizations or agencies which are to be involved or could be involved in planning or directing oil removal operations, with particular care to clearly define the authorities, responsibilities and duties of State and local governmental agencies to avoid unnecessary duplication of contingency planning activities and to minimize the potential for conflict and confusion that could be generated in an emergency situation as a result of such duplications.

(b) Establishment of notification procedures for the purpose of early detection and timely notification of an oil discharge including:

(1) The identification of critical water use areas to facilitate the reporting of and response to oil discharges.

(2) A current list of names, telephone numbers and addresses of the responsible persons and alternates on call to receive notification of an oil discharge as well as the names, telephone numbers and addresses of the organizations and agencies to be notified when an oil discharge is discovered.

(3) Provisions for access to a reliable communications system for timely notification of an oil discharge and incorporation in the communications system of the capability for interconnection with the communications systems established under related oil removal contingency plans, particularly State and National plans.

(4) An established, prearranged procedure for requesting assistance during a major disaster or when the situation exceeds the response capability of the State, local or regional authority.

(c) Provisions to assure that full resource capability is known and can be committed during an oil discharge situation including:

(1) The identification and inventory of applicable equipment, materials and supplies which are available locally and regionally.

(2) An estimate of the equipment, materials and supplies which would be required to remove the maximum oil discharge to be anticipated.

(3) Development of agreements and arrangements in advance of an oil discharge for the acquisition of equipment, materials and supplies to be used in responding to such a discharge.

So, Rev, you are correct...from a certain point of view. The federal government is responsible for this cleanup effort, but only after it has been determined that neither the private entity nor the local, state or regional governments can handle it. Furthermore, nowhere have I read in the NCP where the federal government is responsible for ensuring that equipment is on-hand for handling the capping or cleanup efforts of a major oil spill of this magnitude. However, it's clear that the oil drilling company and the state are suppose to have all necessary equipment on hand to handle such a catatrophy. It could easily be argued that BP and perhaps even the state of LA wasn't prepared for this. Still, all entities - private, state and federal governments - have a role to play here. But for what it's worth, I don't blame the government in how they've handled this situation to date according to the law as outlined above. I blame BP!!!
 
Last edited:

ReverendHellh0und

I don't respect you.
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
79,903
Reaction score
20,981
Location
I love your hate.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
The point to my opening remarks in my initial post herein (post #3) was simply to illustrate the hypocrisy, that the very same people who cry "government, stay out of private affairs" are the same people who all but demand government involvement in situations like this. The fact of the matter is yes, government does have a role to play in such disastererous situations whether naturally occuring (i.e., tornado, flood, hurricane, earth quake, volcanic eruption over populated area, etc.) or man-made such as this oil spill. This issue here is how much of a role should they play?

how is that hypocritical? I don't get applying federal law to a cleanup and not wanting the government to take over my healthcare is hypocritical. this is far to black and white thinking.



If you look at the NCP where local, state and regional governments responsibilities are, you'll see that local, state and regional governments (as well as the private business entity according to their SPCC on file w/the federal government) are to act as "first responders" to such crisis and that the federal government steps in only when it has been determined that local, state and regional governments and/or private enterprise can't handle the situation.


and they were. however the FEDGOV was ill prepared to respond when they failed.



So, Rev, you are correct...from a certain point of view. The federal government is responsible for this cleanup effort, but only after it has been determined that neither the private entity nor the local, state or regional governments can handle it. Furthermore, nowhere have I read in the NCP where the federal government is responsible for ensuring that equipment is on-hand for handling the capping or cleanup efforts of a major oil spill of this magnitude. However, it's clear that the oil drilling company and the state are suppose to have all necessary equipment on hand to handle such a catatrophy. It could easily be argued that BP and perhaps even the state of LA wasn't prepared for this. Still, all entities - private, state and federal governments - have a role to play here. But for what it's worth, I don't blame the government in how they've handled this situation to date according to the law as outlined above. I blame BP!!!


I blame both. The failure of Government here is the lack of preparedness as indicated by law in the 1994 plan. Do you argue it was logistically ready?
 

Crunch

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 18, 2009
Messages
4,063
Reaction score
890
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
The truth is starting to come out....

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), top Republican on the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform released documents Thursday night showing the Coast Guard recorded on April 21 -- less than 24 hours after the Deepwater Horizon explosion -- the magnitude of the oil leak disaster in the Gulf of Mexico.

“Potential environmental threat is 700,000 gallons of diesel on board the Deepwater Horizon and estimated potential of 8,000 barrels per day of crude oil, if the well were to completely blowout,” the Coast Guard reported in a log of events from the immediate aftermath of the April 20 explosion -- shedding new information on the first days of the disaster.

“These documents raise new questions about whether the White House was slow to respond to an incident that was quickly recognized by the Coast Guard as a potentially catastrophic threat to the environment,” Issa said upon release of the documents. “It appears as if this administration would rather tell a half-truth if the full-truth doesn’t fit the story they want to tell.”


Coast Guard Logs Show White House Knew Extent of Oil Spill within 24 Hours - HUMAN EVENTS
 

washunut

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 13, 2009
Messages
11,767
Reaction score
3,386
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
BULL****.

It describes your hyper-partisan obsession with Katrina vs Oil Spill to a friggin' T.

You scream and cry about BIG GOVERNMENT getting out of way of BIG BUSINESSES...

However, since the oil spill you've been laughingly hypocritical.... Where's my nanny-state?!! Where's my President?!!

But it's not about Katrina or the oil spill, it's just about you posting another attack on Obama, finding fault with your President not matter how hypocritical you look... If only the Feds were as transparent as you are.

OV described you to a T. -- So, the FAIL (epic or otherwise) is all yours, buddy.:2wave::2wave:

In a way it is sad to read the excuses coming out of the " I love Obama " crowd.

The above I find among the most intellectually dishonest talking points. People who advocate small government are not the same people who want NO government. Protecting the nation is something that small government people consider to be one of the things it should do.

Thus protecting our seabeds, beaches etc and doing all possible to stop it from hitting land should be a fundemental chore of government in my view.

What it should not do for example is delay for weeks the state's ability to build defenses that is an abuse of an out of control Federal government.
 

Objective Voice

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 14, 2008
Messages
11,388
Reaction score
4,076
Location
Huntsville, AL (USA)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Crunch,

All that shows is that the CG/White House were still brainstorming trying to determine the size and scope of exactly what they were dealing with. It falls directly inline with RADM Landrey's initial comments while assessment of the situation from day-1. Everyone at the federal level including BP believed that residual oil was leaking from the oil rig and not the well-head. It wasn't until day-3 when they got ROVs down to the seabed did anyone know for sure that the problem was worse than expected. Just look at Timeline A.

Washunut,

I can't speak to the reason for the delay except to say if all entities where truly following their emergency oil spill contingency plans - BP and each affected state particularly LA - and being honest about what was happening alot of the initial response lag time could have been avoided.

Per the EPA NCP, the federal government is suppose to have this superfund available just for oil spill containment, recovery and cleanup. I'm sure Gov. Jindal requisitioned for some of those funds to erect berms along LA's coastline and/or inlets. My question, however, would be why didn't the state already have their own superfund available? Did they use it up responding to Katrina? If so, it's certainly justifiable that they requested for more federal financial assistance. And even if they did have such funds available, it still would have been justifiable for them to ask for more. Nonetheless, my point here is if they had, in fact, incorporated their own superfund into their NCP chances are they could have begun erecting those berms alot faster and not relied on the government to disburse funds for them to do so - atleast not initially. Thus, the question I have based on what I've read of the NCP is why wasn't the state of LA rather than the federal government more prepared to tackle this problem? Where's the state's responsibility in their level of preparedness in this matter?

Again, all entities have a role to play here. Let's not put the blame just on BP or the fed where preparedness is concerned.
 
Last edited:

Gill

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 5, 2005
Messages
8,713
Reaction score
1,907
Location
The Derby City
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
The point to my opening remarks in my initial post herein (post #3) was simply to illustrate the hypocrisy, that the very same people who cry "government, stay out of private affairs" are the same people who all but demand government involvement in situations like this. The fact of the matter is yes, government does have a role to play in such disastererous situations whether naturally occuring (i.e., tornado, flood, hurricane, earth quake, volcanic eruption over populated area, etc.) or man-made such as this oil spill. The issue here is how much of a role should they play?

If you look at the NCP where local, state and regional governments responsibilities are, you'll see that they (as well as the private business entity according to their SPCC on file w/the federal government) are to act as "first responders" to such crisis and that the federal government steps in only when it has been determined that local, state and regional governments and/or private enterprise can't handle the situation.



So, Rev, you are correct...from a certain point of view. The federal government is responsible for this cleanup effort, but only after it has been determined that neither the private entity nor the local, state or regional governments can handle it. Furthermore, nowhere have I read in the NCP where the federal government is responsible for ensuring that equipment is on-hand for handling the capping or cleanup efforts of a major oil spill of this magnitude. However, it's clear that the oil drilling company and the state are suppose to have all necessary equipment on hand to handle such a catatrophy. It could easily be argued that BP and perhaps even the state of LA wasn't prepared for this. Still, all entities - private, state and federal governments - have a role to play here. But for what it's worth, I don't blame the government in how they've handled this situation to date according to the law as outlined above. I blame BP!!!

You should read a little more of the laws you are quoting as proof the federal government has little responsibility for this cleanup:

Title 40: Protection of Environment
PART 109—CRITERIA FOR STATE, LOCAL AND REGIONAL OIL REMOVAL CONTINGENCY PLANS

Browse Next
§ 109.1 Applicability.

The criteria in this part are provided to assist State, local and regional agencies in the development of oil removal contingency plans for the inland navigable waters of the United States and all areas other than the high seas, coastal and contiguous zone waters, coastal and Great Lakes ports and harbors and such other areas as may be agreed upon between the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Transportation in accordance with section 11(j)(1)(B) of the Federal Act, Executive Order No. 11548 dated July 20, 1970 (35 FR 11677) and §306.2 of the National Oil and Hazardous Materials Pollution Contingency Plan (35 FR 8511).
Link

This law doesn't even apply to coastal waters.
 

Crunch

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 18, 2009
Messages
4,063
Reaction score
890
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Crunch,

All that shows is that the CG/White House were still brainstorming trying to determine the size and scope of exactly what they were dealing with. It falls directly inline with RADM Landrey's initial comments while assessment of the situation from day-1. Everyone at the federal level including BP believed that residual oil was leaking from the oil rig and not the well-head. It wasn't until day-3 when they got ROVs down to the seabed did anyone know for sure that the problem was worse than expected. Just look at Timeline A.

LOL...... nice try. For some odd reason, I trust the Coast Guard logs more than I trust the self serving time line from this inept administration.

Let’s compare the log with the statements from the admin.

This a nice little interactive graphic that shows the lies.

Coast Guard Logs Reveal Early Spill Estimate of 8,000 Barrels a Day - The Center for Public Integrity
 

Objective Voice

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 14, 2008
Messages
11,388
Reaction score
4,076
Location
Huntsville, AL (USA)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Rev,

Unless I've misread the NCP, it's not the fed's responsibility to be logistically ready to tackle this issue. That's the role of the state and the private oil company conducting the drilling. Think about it...

Who would be the first line of defense in a national disaster? Local authority? State government? The fed? I look at this situation in much the same way as I viewed 9/11. NYPD & NYFD along with local medical crews were the first responders and rightfully so. It's their city, their state. The fed stepped in when it became apparent that this was a national emergency. Until then, it was NYC's problem. Same thing here. NY's Port Authority was the command and control center on the ground while the FAA handled air traffic control. Eventually, the EPA and other federal agencies came in and took charge but until then local/state authority was initially in charge and handled the logistics for their emergency situation. Same thing here.
 

ReverendHellh0und

I don't respect you.
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
79,903
Reaction score
20,981
Location
I love your hate.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Rev,

Unless I've misread the NCP, it's not the fed's responsibility to be logistically ready to tackle this issue. That's the role of the state and the private oil company conducting the drilling. Think about it...


I think you misread it. Have you had a chance to review the link to the thread I created on who was supposed to do what?



Who would be the first line of defense in a national disaster? Local authority? State government? The fed? I look at this situation in much the same way as I viewed 9/11. NYPD & NYFD along with local medical crews were the first responders and rightfully so. It's their city, their state. The fed stepped in when it became apparent that this was a national emergency. Until then, it was NYC's problem. Same thing here. NY's Port Authority was the command and control center on the ground while the FAA handled air traffic control. Eventually, the EPA and other federal agencies came in and took charge but until then local/state authority was initially in charge and handled the logistics for their emergency situation. Same thing here.


Who exactly was local 150+ miles in the gulf, it is an "interstate commerce" condition and one that falls squarely on the federal government to regulate and by law were tasked to do so.,
 

Gill

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 5, 2005
Messages
8,713
Reaction score
1,907
Location
The Derby City
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
The federal government is solely responsible for oil spill response:

National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP)


Sec. 300.105 -- General organization concepts.

(a) Federal agencies should:

(1) Plan for emergencies and develop procedures for addressing oil discharges and releases of hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants;

(2) Coordinate their planning, preparedness, and response activities with one another;

(3) Coordinate their planning, preparedness, and response activities with affected states, local governments, and private entities; and

(4) Make available those facilities or resources that may be useful in a response situation, consistent with agency authorities and capabilities.

(b) Three fundamental kinds of activities are performed pursuant to the NCP:

(1) Preparedness planning and coordination for response to a discharge of oil or release of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant;

(2) Notification and communications; and

(3) Response operations at the scene of a discharge or release.

(c) The organizational elements created to perform these activities are:

(1) The NRT, responsible for national response and preparedness planning, for coordinating regional planning, and for providing policy guidance and support to the Regional Response Teams(RRTs). NRT membership consists of representatives from the agencies specified inSec. 300.175(b).

(2) RRTs, responsible for regional planning and preparedness activities before response actions, and for providing advice and support to the OSC or RPM when activated during a response. RRT membership consists of designated representatives from each federal agency participating in the NRT together with state and(as agreed upon by the states) local government representatives.

(3) The OSC and the RPM, primarily responsible for directing response efforts and coordinating all other efforts at the scene of a discharge or release. The other responsibilities of OSCs and RPMs are described in Sec. 300.135.

(4) Area Committees, responsible for developing, under direction of the OSC, ACPs for each area designated by the President. Responsibilities of area Committees are described inSec. 300.205(c).

(d) The basic framework for the response management structure is a system(e.g., a unified command system) that brings together the functions of the Federal Government, the state government, and the responsible party to achieve an effective and efficient response, where the OSC maintains authority.
Link
 

Zyphlin

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 21, 2005
Messages
51,312
Reaction score
35,173
Location
NoMoAuchie
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
The point to my opening remarks in my initial post herein (post #3) was simply to illustrate the hypocrisy, that the very same people who cry "government, stay out of private affairs" are the same people who all but demand government involvement in situations like this. The fact of the matter is yes, government does have a role to play in such disastererous situations whether naturally occuring (i.e., tornado, flood, hurricane, earth quake, volcanic eruption over populated area, etc.) or man-made such as this oil spill. The issue here is how much of a role should they play?

Except the point you're "illustrating" isn't hypocricy, its your own apparent lack of knowledge of what conservative ideology actually stands for and their historical stances on things, which seems to be why you've made your remarks from the very beginning based not on actual history or any tangible fact but based on hyperbolic stereotypes, over generalizations, and gross misrepresentations of what Conservative ideology actually is and what is meant by the statement of wanting less "Big Government" or "government out of public affairs".

You seem to be laboring under a false impression, or perhaps putting forth a purposeful dishonest guise, that Conservatism is somehow anarchism. A desire for no government authority, for government to be involved in nothing, for the government to be completely detached. This is simply not the case. Conservative philosophy doesn't back this up, conservative legislation doesn't back this up, conservative history doesn't back this up. Only the extremely exaggerated stereotypes created by those most actively seeking a chance to deride and insult the conservative ideology and those that follow it ever present this kind of notion as if its fact, using nothing as evidence save for their own opinions about what individual statements meant void of any and all context surrounding them or honest intellectual thought regarding it.

There is no hypocrisy here. Conservatives in general want LIMITED government. They typically do not want a "nanny state", IE the government looking after each and every individual for their own individual well beings in regards to having a job, health care, etc. They want less government intrusion into the private sector and the markets. Primarily however they want the government to do what they believe it was limited to within the Constitution rather than expanding into everything and anything it see's fits on the loosest of loosely connected justifications. They see the "General Welfare" being a term focused more on the collective welfare of the country, such as its safety, rather than the welfare of each citizen individually.

Responding to major disasters that impact multiple states, have a significant affect on interstate commerce, and/or present a security or safety risk to the country is something that is within that scope. There is nothing hypocritical in that fact. To consider that conservatives are hypocritical for wanting the government to do something about this Oil Spill that is impacting multiple states shore lines it would require conservatives to either believe that there should be no government action on anything at all ever or there would need to be proof of past instances of major disasters where Conservatives have stated the federal government should not provide aid. The first option above simply isn't true, the second option has yet to be shown by anyone as having any truth at all.

If you look at the NCP where local, state and regional governments responsibilities are, you'll see that they (as well as the private business entity according to their SPCC on file w/the federal government) are to act as "first responders" to such crisis and that the federal government steps in only when it has been determined that local, state and regional governments and/or private enterprise can't handle the situation.

Exactly, which by the way was the main criticism Conservatives had of the media and democrats in the wake of Katrina as the federal government and Bush recieved the vast majority of the blame when the local, state, and regional governments all seemingly dropped the ball for no other reason than simply feeling like the Federal Government should do it. And, upon doing so, got relatively little of the blame in realition to the Federal Government who essentially had a lot more dumped on them, and faster, than reaosnable expected if the local and state levels had actually bothered to do anything (in regards to New Orleans at least, which was the focus of most attention on Katrina).

That is unlike here where initially the focus was primarily and completely on BP, and has continually been focused mostly on BP though more and more is getting shifted to the federal government as well. And guess what? I have no issue with that. I know from my perspective at least on this forum my complaints regarding Obama's actions on the oil spill was less complaining about what Obama was doing and complaining far more on how liberals and the media were presenting this and focusing on this and how STRIKINGLY different they were holding this president and BP responsable as compared to how they were holding Bush and New Orleans/Lousiana responsable.

I do think that BP should've been the first to try and respond. I do thinkthe states should respond. I do think that BP should be financing a large amount of this and I have no issues with them coming under penalties if they're found legitimately negligent about something. That said, it didn't take this very long to become relatively clear that this was a major issue that needed to be fixed sooner rather than later for the sake of a number of states economic security and the countries well being, and to do it sooner rather than later was going to need heavy federal support to the issue.

This was not some environmental problem where a company was dumping some toxins out back of their complex which contaminated a small local lake. This is the coast line of a number of states spanning hundreds of miles resulting in potential economic damage in the millions. Yes, by all means, force the company to do everything in their power to fix the initial problem or let the states decide on what punishments and how heavy to pressure them in regards to time at first, as its reasonble that they likely would've been able to fix it and the impact would be small in regards to the country. That is not the case in this instance and if you want to do something like require that federal plans to "fix" this must be partially subsidized or funded by BP or something of the sort, fine, but the federal government needs to be involved on an issue that is of this large of scale.

Afterwards if you want to figure out something in the future that if companies are found reasonable negligent in the cause of a man-made disaster such as this that requires the Federal Governments involvement that a temporary tax is levied upon them of "X" percent until such time that they have paid back half of what it cost the government? Fine, I'd be open to discussing something like that. But what we have to deal with is what we have now, and right now we have a major disaster on the shores on multiple states severely hampering the countries economic and possibly physical security and we need to be focusing on how best to fix that issue in the quickest and most efficient way first.

Or, to paraphrase a point Obama made that maybe he should take to heart.

Stop trying to constantly point fingers and shift blame and instead take responsability and get something done.
 
Top Bottom