Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 53

Thread: Poll: BP Oil Spill Response Rated Worse than Katrina

  1. #21
    Guru
    Crunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Seen
    12-21-10 @ 05:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    4,063

    Re: Poll: BP Oil Spill Response Rated Worse than Katrina

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    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
    There is no such thing as a “Natural Born Dual-Citizen“.

    Originally Posted by PogueMoran
    I didnt have to read the article to tell you that you cant read.

  2. #22
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,766

    Re: Poll: BP Oil Spill Response Rated Worse than Katrina

    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.

  3. #23
    ANTI**ANTIFA
    ReverendHellh0und's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Temple of Solomon
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:32 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    75,609

    Re: Poll: BP Oil Spill Response Rated Worse than Katrina

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    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.,
    Let evil swiftly befall those who have wrongly condemned us

  4. #24
    Sage
    Gill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    The Derby City
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 10:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    8,686

    Re: Poll: BP Oil Spill Response Rated Worse than Katrina

    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

    • "The America Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money." -- Alexis de Tocqueville





  5. #25
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,973

    Re: Poll: BP Oil Spill Response Rated Worse than Katrina

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    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.

  6. #26
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,766

    Re: Poll: BP Oil Spill Response Rated Worse than Katrina

    Quote Originally Posted by Crunch View Post
    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
    First off, the timeline I linked to (Timeline A) was done by private citizens, not the White House. Second, even the timeline you linked to clearly states that the 110K bpd were "worse case scenario" estimates by the Coast Guard and not factual data. Moreover, even the Coast Guard believed that oil was leaking from the rig and not the well-head. Therefore, nothing you've provided contridicts what was initially reported except that neither the Coast Guard nor the White House provided worse-case scenario estimates. What was provided, however, where the original "best-guess" estimates based on what BP knew at the time.

    As to federal responsibilities per the NCP, even section 300.105(a)(3) states that the fed is to coordinate cleanup efforts w/state, local and private agencies. Nonetheless, I'll conceed that since this spill happened in coastal navigational waters across multiple states that the fed should be in charge here. I have no problem falling on my sword when the facts bare fruit contrary to my initial position. My problem here, however, was everyone jumped on the government for not being involved from the start or not doing enough to contain the situation when by all accounts they've been involved from the beginning and the law clearly states who the first-responders are in a situation like this. Logistics might be another issue. You can argue whether or not the fed should keep more boom on-hand or release funding for berms more readily, etc., etc., but exactly where would they keep the resources and equipment? This is why it falls on the local and state governments to act as first responders, not the fed.

    IMO, I believe our government is doing everything humanly possible to effect a resolution to this problem.

  7. #27
    Sage

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:01 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    8,353

    Re: Poll: BP Oil Spill Response Rated Worse than Katrina

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    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.
    I agree that other entities could/ perhaps should have been better prepared. It has been mentioned to me that LA did ask for to build the berms around their marshland a year earlier. I am sure sure if that is correct.

    That does not really excuse the Feds from taking 3/4 weeks to OK the building of the berms when we found ourselves in an emergency situation. Also I am surprised the coast guard did not have some better contingeny plans for a major spill in U.S. waters. The militrary usually has plans in case of just about anything.

    Let's face it there is plenty of blame to go around. The President as leader of the Federal government, can't in one breath say we are in charge and the next, don't blame me. Talk about kicking someone's a**, to me just makes him sound like a bully. It is easy to kick BP around the room, g-d knows that they deserve it, Obama wanted to be president. He knows that leaders get too much credit when things go right and too much blame when things go wrong. nature of the job. Just another sign to me that he was not emotionally ready to have this job.

  8. #28
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Last Seen
    09-20-10 @ 05:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    198

    Re: Poll: BP Oil Spill Response Rated Worse than Katrina

    Quote Originally Posted by Reverend_Hellh0und View Post
    I guess you are not aware that by law, the coast guard and the EPA are also responsible for cleanup.
    Of course the Government should clean it up, why on earth would anyone trust BP to do so? Haha, I think you've missed my point. In my view, this disaster is a result of a policy that allows too much deregulation, which was initiated by Bush and continues into Bush 2.0's current administration. So yes, government is partially at fault here, but it's still BP's mess and we have to ask ourselves whether this oil addiction is really worth it.

  9. #29
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:24 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,450

    Re: Poll: BP Oil Spill Response Rated Worse than Katrina

    Quote Originally Posted by washunut View Post
    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.
    That's right. All that falls under that, "general welfare", part of the Constitution.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  10. #30
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:24 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,450

    Re: Poll: BP Oil Spill Response Rated Worse than Katrina

    Quote Originally Posted by somepeoplesay View Post
    Of course the Government should clean it up, why on earth would anyone trust BP to do so? Haha, I think you've missed my point. In my view, this disaster is a result of a policy that allows too much deregulation, which was initiated by Bush and continues into Bush 2.0's current administration. So yes, government is partially at fault here, but it's still BP's mess and we have to ask ourselves whether this oil addiction is really worth it.
    What kind of regulation could have prevented this blowout?
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •