Obama's Katrina, polling worse than Bush

I'm just not sure what they expect the government to do. The oil spill is bigger then what any nation can handle.
 
Glaucus said:
I'm just not sure what they expect the government to do. The oil spill is bigger then what any nation can handle.
Click to expand...

He can certainly do more than talking big while doing absolutely nothing. BP has proved to be incapable to containing the spill. ExxonMobil or Chevron should have been brought in weeks ago.
 
redrumloa said:
He can certainly do more than talking big while doing absolutely nothing. BP has proved to be incapable to containing the spill. ExxonMobil or Chevron should have been brought in weeks ago.
Click to expand...

He's not doing nothing. He just isn't getting the media play he needs to look like he's doing more. However, that being said, the Katrina and Deepwater events are not particularly similar.

In Katrina the federal government was responsible for the levees. There was disagreements between local, state and federal governments about who was responsible for what but in the end it's all government and they could have worked out their differences after the fact. There was plenty of warning (for years and up front) that governments should have been doing things better and there was warning of the hurricane itself in which the governments should have been better prepared. Governments at all levels were responsible and the biggest level of all couldn't get a response together when it was asked for one.

In the case of the oil leak, yes, there were years of warnings, the government failed to clamp down on private businesses that were acting cavalierly and Obama shares some blame but that goes back a way. The number one big difference is that this is the responsibility of BP and they are a private company and that makes things difficult. BP was supposed to be responsible for having emergency crews and boats and oil booms on 24 hour standby. It was something they had agreed to and yet it was something that they only pretended to do. Because they didn't provide the resources when they were supposed to, the boom wasn't there when it was needed. The coast guard actually got in on the booming pretty quickly. BP, the guys who were supposed to be on the hook for this, failed. Because they didn't have boom on site the slick got away. Nobody can make up for that lost time. So the government can set about doing cleanup and coastal reinforcement and they have. The national guard have been out there building berms and the coast guard have been booming.

But the biggest issue is the ongoing spill from the well. What is the government supposed to about that? So long as BP is in charge of getting that fixed then it's BP's fault, but if the federal government steps in, kicks them off the well head and takes over then the feds will own it from there on in and BP will have a way to wiggle out of responsibility in the courts for the next 30 years while every Tom, Dick and Harry who loses their job in fishing down there will be after the government for money and not BP - AND every talking head on TV will be bashing the government for trying to step in to an industry that they know nothing about, etc, etc, etc. Bring in the other oil companies? Do you think they want to touch this either? Anyone touching that well is inviting liability. Everyone sees that it is better to let BP alone take the fall.

The only way it would make sense for the government to take over would be if they could take complete ownership of BP so that they can squeeze every cent out of the company later to cover the full cost of the cleanup and fair compensation. That can't ever happen because BP isn't American - and it wouldn't happen anyway, because that is blasphemy in America.

The government has already a robust response but just how "socialized" do you want the response to get? Don't people want the government to be smaller and to spend less money?
 
redrumloa said:
He can certainly do more than talking big while doing absolutely nothing. BP has proved to be incapable to containing the spill. ExxonMobil or Chevron should have been brought in weeks ago.
Click to expand...
Well, I don't know about Exxon or Chevron, but I do know that no one is an expert at this sort of thing, we're covering new ground. Also, they are brining in people, everyone from NASA to James Cameron is brainstorming or advising. Only so many ships and ROVs can be on site at any given time, so throwing more bodies/ships/ROVs can be counter productive.

There have been some who have suggested that the US gov use a nuclear device to close the well, and although the Soviets have done this, it has been dismissed as too risky. It could cause a massive oil leak from the sea floor itself.

So I'm still at a loss as to what any president could do to fix things.
 
redrumloa said:
He can certainly do more than talking big while doing absolutely nothing. BP has proved to be incapable to containing the spill. ExxonMobil or Chevron should have been brought in weeks ago.
Click to expand...
Obama did state he consulted with Oil Executives, this was about a week or two ago. I'd have to track down the source.

But, here's the thing the oil companies have the subs and the technology the government doesn't. This case there's lots of 'libertarian' principles. Under the Bush administration the check valve, which is given a high probability of working, was made optional because 1/2 million was too much to spend. The technology to do these repairs are in the hands of the oil companies. The US Government has some research subs but only a handful, at best, could go to that depth. The industry, as Republicans have demanded BTW, has been left to it's own devices to establish itself and to ensure proper safety and clean up measures are in place. Governments around the world have approved even deeper wells that not only Gov. subs can't get too nor can the oil company's.

'Nuke it from orbit, it's the only way to be sure' -- MotherRussia's response.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top