Joe Barton's Apology to BP

[Griff]

Interesting thoughts Rich. There is a potential conflict here, anyone who has read their Ayn Rand is going to be a little uncomfortable but there is no indication that due process won't be observed. Exxon screwed the pooch, BP cannot be allowed similar shenanigans. I liked your two principles, the second one was disposed of during the Bush administration and gives me pause this morning as a gas company helicopter carries its load overhead. Corporations seem to have human rights without human responsibilities, that makes me a little nervous.

[glatt]

As much as I disagree with him, I actually respect Joe Barton for making that statement. Conservatives have long abhorred government meddling in business practices, and he's being consistent on that point at a time when it's wildly unpopular to say such a thing.

The rest of the two-faced conservatives who were saying "drill baby drill" just a short while ago and are now condemning BP do not have my respect.

[jinx]

But wasn't it the regulations against (safer?) drilling in shallower waters and places like ANWR that put BP out there drilling deep in the gulf in the first place?
I mean, enacting regulations in an attempt to be more environmentally conscious did kind of backfire here to some degree...

[richlevy]

Originally Posted by jinx

But wasn't it the regulations against (safer?) drilling in shallower waters and places like ANWR that put BP out there drilling deep in the gulf in the first place?
I mean, enacting regulations in an attempt to be more environmentally conscious did kind of backfire here to some degree...

There was a very good response to that in the Inquirer editorials.

Bottom line. BP and everyone else is there because:

1) We are running out of oil in shallower water. Even opening ANWR would not equal these reserves. There is profit to be made.

2) The oil companies convinced the Bush administration that deep water drilling could be done safely due to improvements in equipment. This was a lie.

As for the cause of the accident, it still has to be determined, but anecdotal evidence suggests severe shortcuts in safety to meet a deadline. When even Haliburton is warning you to slow down, you know you're on the edge. From what I hear, they saved $500,000 in equipment costs and $12-20 million in lost time by cutting corners.

This will shape up to be one of the worst man made economic disasters in US history. Another one was the Great Northeast Blackout of 2003. Approximately 55 million people out of power for 2 days.

So far, neither of these disasters were terrorist events. Both were traced to specific corporations. The blackout was caused at least in part by FirstEnergy's failure to cut back trees, plant maintenance failures, and procedural failures.

Ironically, 11 deaths are claimed for both disasters.

The blackout contributed to at least eleven fatalities,

No terrorists - just executives with suits, briefcases, and Powerpoint presentations on 'cost cutting'.

This is why Barton is an asshat. Government regulators will never be able to keep up with every decision. They do not need to. With business it is always about managing risk. If I cut here, what's the worst that could happen and how much could it cost me? Exxon and FirstEnergy got off light, and this may have sent the wrong message.

We want entrepreneurs and businesses to take risk, as long as the risk they take is to themselves. We do not want businesses taking risks with the livelihoods of tens of millions of people. The message needs to be "We can only regulate so much. Make whatever decisions you can legally make, but be advised that you will be held responsible for damages."

When in doubt, remember the Ford Pinto memo.

Expected Costs of producing the Pinto with fuel tank modifications:

• Expected unit sales: 11 million vehicles (includes utility vehicles built on same chassis)
• Modification costs per unit: $11.00
• Total Cost: $121 million
  [= 11,000,000 vehicles x $11.00 per unit]

Expected Costs of producing the Pinto without fuel tank modifications:

• Expected accident results (assuming 2100 accidents):
  180 burn deaths
  180 serious burn injuries
  2100 burned out vehicles
• Unit costs of accident results (assuming out of court settlements):
  $200,000 per burn death*
  $67,000 per serious injury
  $700 per burned out vehicle
• Total Costs: $49.53 million
  [= (180 deaths x $200k) + (180 injuries x $67k) + (2100 vehicles x $700 per vehicle)]

[morethanpretty]

Originally Posted by glatt

As much as I disagree with him, I actually respect Joe Barton for making that statement. Conservatives have long abhorred government meddling in business practices, and he's being consistent on that point at a time when it's wildly unpopular to say such a thing.

The rest of the two-faced conservatives who were saying "drill baby drill" just a short while ago and are now condemning BP do not have my respect.

He's already retracted his apology.

Originally Posted by AP

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Who's sorry now? Rep. Joe Barton, that's who.

The Texas Republican, the House's top recipient of oil industry campaign contributions since 1990, apologized Thursday for apologizing to the chief of the British company that befouled the Gulf of Mexico with a massive oil spill.

His double mea culpa plus a retraction, executed under pressure from fuming GOP leaders, succeeded in shifting attention from the tragedy, BP's many missteps and the stoic British oil chief at the witness table, to his own party's close connection to the oil industry.

Barton started the ruckus at midmorning when he took aim at the $20 billion relief fund for victims of the spill sought by the White House and agreed to by BP.

"I apologize," Barton said to BP CEO Tony Hayward, who was sitting at a witness table for another of Congress' ritual floggings of wayward corporate heads.

"I do not want to live in a country where any time a citizen or a corporation does something that is legitimately wrong is subject to some sort of political pressure that is - again, in my words, amounts to a shakedown," Barton said. "So I apologize."

Incensed at the gift Barton had given Democrats, Republicans came close to stripping Barton of his post as chairman-in-waiting of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. GOP leaders summoned Barton to the Capitol and demanded he apologize in specific terms. The leaders threatened to launch a process to strip Barton of his seniority on the powerful panel, a particularly painful threat to any long-term lawmaker, according to two knowledgeable Republican officials who demanded anonymity so they could speak freely about private meetings.

LINK

Yeah, consistency in douche-baggery political sleezy hypocrisy.