NYT: Is It Obama’s Oil Spill Now?

[ProSense]

Knew this was coming.

Is It Obama’s Oil Spill Now?

By THE EDITORS

It’s been more than a month since the Deepwater Horizon oil rig exploded in the Gulf of Mexico. In the weeks since, the undersea gusher has spewed millions of gallons of oil, devastating local fisheries and threatening coastal wetlands and wildlife. On May 26, BP began its most ambitious effort yet to plug the mile-deep well with drilling mud, earlier attempts to stop the leak having failed.

Interactive: Tracking the Oil Spill President Obama will travel to Louisiana on Friday to assess the situation. Has the oil spill become a political liability for him, even though regulatory failures and lax laws were legacies of the Bush administration? What does Mr. Obama need to do to address growing public frustration over the spill?

Glenn Greenwald, Salon.com
Regina Lawrence, political scientist, Louisiana State University
Samuel Thernstrom, American Enterprise Institute
Matthew Kotchen, environmental economist, Yale University

more

Glenn Greenwald, Salon.com

Most complaints about the Obama administration’s handling of the BP oil spill are glaringly bereft of specifics. That’s unsurprising: there is little the White House can actually do to stop a massive underwater oil spill, and expectations that he do more are largely unreasonable.

<...>

Regina Lawrence, political scientist, Louisiana State University

There is no question that the oil spill has become a significant problem for the administration, since the capping and clean up will occur (or not) as the midterm election season ramps up.

<...>

Samuel Thernstrom, American Enterprise Institute

In the five weeks since the Deepwater Horizon disaster began, troubling questions have been raised about the accident’s causes and consequences. Most Americans just want to know whether the spill can be stopped. In Washington, however, there is almost equal interest in another issue: Who will be blamed?

<...>

Matthew Kotchen, environmental economist, Yale University

Is the oil spill in the gulf becoming President Obama’s Katrina? The answer is no. But the president should begin playing a more proactive role.

<...>

[Cha]

1. The newwhoretimes wants photoops and they

want them now.

[moondust]

2. M$M decided early on to make this "Obama's Katrina."

Doesn't matter what Obama does.

[Jennicut]

3. Lots of people on DU respect Greenwald's opinion.

Will they trust him over a toad like James Carville?

[TreasonousBastard]

4. Since it's brought up here several times a day, and...

some other places far more, it's seems it's about time it was discussed rationally SOMEWHERE.

But, of course this is seen by the peanut gallery as just more evidence of the Times being...

well something or other, but whatever it is it's probably not nice.

[depakid]

5. Anyone who thinks that the Obama administration will avoid its share of responsibility for the spill

is deluding themselves.

Professor Lawrence provides the best case scenario forward:

The key question is whether and how the president can turn this disaster into an opportunity to shape public thinking about not just his presidency, but about the role of government in regulating industry and safeguarding the public.

...the causal story that gets constructed around the disaster. President Obama has tried — in his typically cautious way — to frame the spill in terms of industry irresponsibility, forming a commission to “take a comprehensive look at how the oil and gas industry operates.”

But he has declined to seize the moment more forcefully. In the wake of the meltdown of the nation’s banking system and the Massey Energy mine explosion in West Virginia, now would seem to be a golden moment to evoke Americans’ belief in the necessity of government that steps in effectively before an industry makes a mess that cannot be cleaned up.

So, while the administration is increasingly coming under fire for an inadequate response to the spill, the real point is that government can be more effective in preventing these kinds of disasters than in cleaning them up after the fact. The president could take this opportunity to lead the public to that common sense conclusion.

This is basically what I've been saying- the administration has to own up to its regulatory failures (and the fact that it didn't heed the clear warning signs) in order to effectively engage in such a discussion.

[ProSense]

6. "the administration has to own up to its regulatory failures "

Her statement made no reference to President Obama owning up to regulatory failures. In fact, the NYT specifically points out the failures were Bush's.

[depakid]

7. Despite the starry eyed denaism, the regulatory failures belong to the Obama administration

It was THEIR responsibility- not Bush or Cheney's to take the necessary steps to deal with the agencies and keep this from occurring.

They'll either own up to it- or they'll have it hung around their necks like an albatross.

[ProSense]

8. "It was THEIR responsibility- not Bush or Cheney's " Despite the bullshit spin

the administration has nothing to own up to in terms of drilling regulation.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProSense]

10. "Fact is the Obama administration was negligent" Bullshit.

"Unfortunately, this time it's come back to bite us all big time."

Yeah, he ran out of "luck."

Mega FAIL.

[Kalun D]

14. Agree

the lack of MMS oversite started under bush and CONTINUED UNDER OBAMA

[boppers]

17. *oversight eom

[Kalun D]

12. Oh REALLY?

Not even pushing for more offshore drilling when they now know, and should have known previous that the MMS is full of Bush cronies?

so how come Obama hasn't backed off his push for more offshore drilling?

[ProSense]

18. What does that have to do with the regulatory issues?

That's the problem with these bogus arguments, conflating issues. A policy announcement has nothing to do with the regulatory issues that led to this disaster.

[Kalun D]

21. Everything

Why announce an increase in offshore drilling if you don't know whether the regulatory agency in charge is worth a crap because of the previous admin?

OR WORSE YET, why announce a drilling increase when you KNOW, as they should have, that the regulatory agency is compromised?

Has the White House backed off on their planned increase since this fiasco happened? That's even worse, it will take at least a year to clean up the MMS if not longer.

[Kalun D]

24. Obama Announced

that they were going to increase the use of a failed system

either not knowing it was compromised, when they should have known. Or knowing and not caring.

They should have know, there's no excuse, it was run by Bush for 8 years, even a 4th grader could figure that one out.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

11. Obama is not responsible for Halliburton attempting to plug and cap the well

sounds like Halliburton messed up

Drilling records from the doomed rig indicate that early on the morning of the blast, workers had begun preparing to plug and cap the well to move the platform to a new site.


Halliburton, a US oil services contractor, was responsible for cementing and plugging the well

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article7136969.ece

[Kalun D]

13. People on DU are woefully misinformed

watch the 60 minutes expose

BP is the direct cause of this problem. That and the lack of regulation that started under bush and HAS CONTINUED UNDER OBAMA.

BP knew the BOP was compromised in about 5 different ways, they knew it failed a negative pressure test.

BP over-ruled the driller and Transocean and ordered them to pull out the mud before Halliburtons last cap (of 3).

BP was rushing everyone because the project was weeks behind schedule.

[Jennicut]

16. Short term greed. They wanted to save money, obviously.

Their track record on safety issues in general is horrible. The EPA may ban BP from govt. contracts. http://www.marketwatch.com/story/report-epa-may-ban-bp-from-government-contracts-2010-05-26

I wonder about the record of other oil companies. We need to scrutinize them too.

[ProSense]

19. Nonsense.

"BP is the direct cause of this problem. That and the lack of regulation that started under bush and HAS CONTINUED UNDER OBAMA."

The Bush administration wrote the rules. You can claim Obama didn't reverse them in time, but they are not his administration's rule.

[Kalun D]

22. How Long

has Obama been in office? How long does it take to clean up MMS? Has Obama even made one step in that direction? We know for sure he wants to increase offshore drilling. How about taking a look at what allowed this disaster to happen before you raise the chances of it happening again?

whether Obama likes it or not, or whether he's going to deal with it or not.

THE BUCK IS STOPPING AT HIS DESK.

[Kalun D]

15. Sure He IS

if Obama is promoting more offshore drilling then he should have known MMS was failing because it was full of Bush Cronies

how long since Bush has been out of office? How long does it take to change things at MMS? Why would you rec more offshore drilling if you knew the regulatory agency was corrupt?

[ProSense]

20. "if Obama is promoting more offshore drilling"

He is responsible for Halliburton cementing the BP well?

Ludicrous.

[Kalun D]

23. The System is a Failure

Why is Obama promoting more drilling under a failed system?

The day Obama publicly promoted more drilling had he taken even one step to correct the mis-management at MMS?

Obama is partly to blame for allowing MMS to continue as it was when Bush left it.

Obama ia partly to blame for allowing BP to be involved with the clean up. Especially for allowing them to use toxic dispersants that are banned in BP's home country.

[FrenchieCat]

27. Any contract due to Obama's actions weren't going to occur until 2012.

Those who wanted more drilling for some time, were still pissed that the Offshore Drilling land opened by Bush had been closed as soon as Obama took office.

This is how most who support drilling saw his proposal (guess they don't care for him much!):


Summer 2008: the Democrat-controlled Congress and President George W. Bush retired both the congressional and executive bans on offshore oil and natural-gas production, which effectively opened nearly the entire Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) for responsible energy production.

March 2010: Brother O announced that he, for the first time, is opening new lands in the OCS for energy exploration.

Brother O did not open anything; almost all of the OCS was already open for nearly two years. In fact, he locked up the entire West Coast, the North Atlantic, and portions of Alaska— areas that hold a resources potential of up to 77 billion barrels of oil—more oil than the entire Russian reserve and three times as much as the current U.S. recoverable reserves.

In addition, he also delayed a scheduled lease sale off the Virginia OCS from 2011 to 2012.
http://imkane.wordpress.com/2010/04/08/obama-didnt-open-new-lands-for-energy-production-he-closed-them/

“Obama’s False Promise on Offshore Drilling”
Steve Everly, American Solutions:


More than a year into his presidency and after imposing numerous delays on American energy production, President Obama announced today that he would open up portions of the Outer Continental Shelf to offshore drilling.

But the plan is defined more by what it restricts than what it opens up. The Obama administration chose to take off the table large portions of the OCS in an announcement that was supposed to be about expanding American energy.

The announcement signifies:

* No drilling in the Pacific Ocean.
* No drilling in a large portion of the Atlantic Ocean.
* No drilling in some of the most promising areas of the Gulf of Mexico.
* No drilling in much of Alaska.

While opening up any portion of the OCS for responsible energy development appears to be a great step forward, the truth is that none of this has been finalized, and most new drilling will not occur until after 2012 at the earliest.

The offering also comes with a hefty price: President Obama wants to force Americans to swallow a massive new energy tax before any state will reap the benefits from this new offshore drilling. The bill Mr. Obama urged Congress to pass last summer, the Waxman-Markey energy tax, would eviscerate the economy, killing more than one million jobs per year while raising the cost of energy for all Americans.

If an energy tax passes Congress this year, the negative impact on the economy will happen long before the first oil comes from these new offshore leases.

In addition, the multitude of steps to be taken before any of these lease sales are made after 2012 are still a work in progress. Each offshore tract that the administration proposes will no doubt fall victim to an array of court challenges and bureaucratic hangups, each of which will push back new offshore drilling even further.

Instead of following the will of the people and moving forward immediately with offshore drilling, the President is asking us to trust him to proceed in the future, kicking the can of energy independence years down the road. Recall that during the 2008 campaign then-Senator Obama affirmed his support for offshore drilling, only to take office and implement a series of delays and roadblocks to responsible oil and gas development.

According to a study by the American Energy Alliance, offshore drilling has the potential to create millions of new American jobs and could provide more than $2 trillion in new government revenue at the local, state, and federal level.

By delaying offshore drilling for at least another two years, the President’s decision does nothing to allow us to begin reaping those benefits. Mr. Obama’s insistence on imposing a new tax on American energy also hamstrings any future job creation or new drilling revenues.
http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=17617

[cherokeeprogressive]

25. Comical beyond belief.

This disaster was NOT Obama's fault. We know that.

It became his responsibility though the moment it started, by virtue of his office as President of the United States.

You are trying so hard to disconnect President Obama from the immediate urgency of this problem that it makes me laugh. It's His now. It's His. You need to suck it up and accept that fact. No amount of finger pointing, or screaming "What if McCain/Palin were in charge?" or "Who was in charge when...?" will change that. The year is 2K10. The President is Barack Obama. Rightly or wrongly, his legacy will include the greatest environmental disaster this country and maybe the world has ever seen, and how he reacted to it.

20,000+ people working on the problem 34+ days after it started ISN'T going to look good once it becomes history. You need to accept that fact, and start pushing for more pro-active involvement rather than pointing fingers at people who've been out of office for almost a year and a half.

You're trying too hard.

[ProSense]

28. "This disaster was NOT Obama's fault. We know that."

"You're trying too hard."


Yeah, I'm the NYT and all the people delivering the commentary.

Stop pretending that people aren't out there trying to pin the disaster, including the explosion itself, on the President.

[smalll]

26. If this "top kill" thing doesn't work, rightly or wrongly, it will become his.

We shall know soon enough.