• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's 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!

AP IMPACT: Fed'l inspections on rig not as claimed

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
AP IMPACT: Fed'l inspections on rig not as claimed


AP IMPACT: Fed'l inspections on rig not as claimed - Yahoo! News



The AP sought to find out how many times government safety inspectors visited the Deepwater Horizon, and what they found. In response, MMS officials offered a changing series of numbers. The MMS has had long-standing issues with its data management.

At first, officials said 83 inspections had been performed since the rig arrived in the Gulf 104 months ago, in September 2001. While being questioned about the once-per-month claim, the officials subsequently revised the total up to 88 inspections. The number of more recent inspections also changed — from 26 to 48 in the 64 months since January 2005.

No explanation was given for the upward revisions. AP granted the officials anonymity because without that condition, communications staff at the Interior Department, which oversees MMS, would not have let them talk.

Based on the last set of numbers provided, the Deepwater Horizon was inspected 40 times during its first 40 months in the Gulf — in line with agency policy for offshore drilling rigs.

Even using the more favorable numbers for the most recent 64 months, 25 percent of monthly inspections were not performed. The first set of data supplied to AP represented a 59 percent shortfall in the number of inspections.

Interior Department spokeswoman Kendra Barkoff would not comment on the inspection numbers. Instead, she offered a general statement: "We are looking at all the questions that are coming out of the Deepwater Horizon incident."



This is a failure of Government, Again some asked what the big deal was when the ID's guy went rafting, welll we can see the ID was asleeep at the wheel.
 
Your tax dollars at work. Another reason why to eliminate alot of these government departments.

So they did not do as many inspections as they should, and this is reason to get rid of them so they do no inspections?
 
So they did not do as many inspections as they should, and this is reason to get rid of them so they do no inspections?

The burden of safety and upkeep should be the responsibility of the business. People tend to be more responsible when it affect their own wallet.
 
The burden of safety and upkeep should be the responsibility of the business. People tend to be more responsible when it affect their own wallet.

I hope you aren't using this disaster as an example of that. :rofl
 
This is a failure of Government, Again some asked what the big deal was when the ID's guy went rafting, welll we can see the ID was asleeep at the wheel.
no, you've got it all wrong, just ask gill. it was the coast guard's responsibility to prevent that explosion and spill. ;-)
 
The burden of safety and upkeep should be the responsibility of the business. People tend to be more responsible when it affect their own wallet.
that's completely nuts. could it be that's why automakers calculate the risk of lawsuits vs the cost of repairing defects, and choose whichever is least costly?
 
I hope you aren't using this disaster as an example of that. :rofl

No, thats my view in general.

that's completely nuts. could it be that's why automakers calculate the risk of lawsuits vs the cost of repairing defects, and choose whichever is least costly?

Which in turn will drive away potential good employees. People wont work somewhere that doesnt guarantee the safety of its employees.
 
The burden of safety and upkeep should be the responsibility of the business. People tend to be more responsible when it affect their own wallet.

Except that this disaster shows otherwise. BP and whoever else was involved did not keep up with their safety responsibilities.
 
Which in turn will drive away potential good employees. People wont work somewhere that doesnt guarantee the safety of its employees.

This has not historically been the case.
 
yes, they will. think coal mines.
 
Except that this disaster shows otherwise. BP and whoever else was involved did not keep up with their safety responsibilities.




Neither did the Government. And if BP lied about it the way the Government did. people would be in jail. :shrug:
 
Another case of the government getting in the way.

They took the money, said they were going to do a job, then didn't. If a contractor did that on a construction job it would be clearly "getting in the way" of the builder.

Talk about a straw man. This analogy fails badly. The govt. is the building inspector, not a contractor.
 
since january 09 (gee, what else happened that momentous month?), 3 lease sales, 103 seismic blasting projects and 346 drilling plans have all been ok'd WITHOUT the permits REQUIRED by LAW

meanwhile, mms DISSEMBLES before ap's journalistic INVESTIGATION, keeps CHANGING its numbers

obama's coziest agency actually "whited out" probably the most painful passages of its correspondence

not obama's katrina, the gulf is his chernobyl

THE BUCK STOPS

unfortunately, the oil doesn't
 
Neither did the Government. And if BP lied about it the way the Government did. people would be in jail. :shrug:

None of which I have denied. It also does not change the fact that BP did not keep things safe.
 
Inspectors can be contracted. Nice try, but you fail.

:rofl:rofl

So you think BP should have hired a different government agency to do the inspections?
 
This is a failure of Government, Again some asked what the big deal was when the ID's guy went rafting, welll we can see the ID was asleeep at the wheel.

I guess you haven't been following the story closely enough to know that that corruption at MMS is a systemic problem that has happened under 3 Presidents.

The notion that had Secretary Salazar not gone rafting or been lifted out of the Grand Canyon, then things would be different is so moronic and stupid it's not even funny -- A very pathetic attempt to draw some feeble comparison between this event and Katrina is the type of ignorance that allows systemic corruption to continue.

Instead of focusing on the specific individuals at MMS and BP that could have prevented this, you desperately play fifty-six degrees of separation between ineptness and corruption and President Obama.

Also, had you seen 60 Minutes last night, the BP rep on board the rig gave the orders to change procedures to speed things up with the well.
 
None of which I have denied. It also does not change the fact that BP did not keep things safe.




No they didn't, yes BP is to blame, all while the oil enters the gulf loop.....


But why lie about inspections and declaring it one of the safest platforms in the gulf if you as a government agency hold no shared culpability?


It really just amazes me how little blame the left in general is putting on the government. This is what you all wanted them to be responsible for. Now that they failed, there is nary a peep from the left about how the government failed miserably in protecting our coast and our environment.
 
Back
Top Bottom