Congressman Owens says BP fund “a good start”
June 16, 2010–On Tuesday, North Country Representative Bill Owens (D-Plattsburgh) signed a letter moving through the U.S. House calling on oil giant BP to set aside $20 billion for reparations to Gulf spill victims.
In his Oval Office address Tuesday night, President Obama said he would demand BP create the fund.
Today, BP executives came to the White House and, after conferring with the President, agreed.
(Side note: The man who oversaw payments to victims of the 9/11 attacks, lawyer Kenneth Feinberg, will also manage the oil spill money.)
Rep. Owens told NCPR today that BP’s injection of $20 billion into the Gulf reparations fund was “a good start.”
He’s also supportive of the President’s call for a new energy policy weaning the U.S. off fossil fuels. But, Owens says any energy legislation must also address job creation and must not hamper the nation’s economic growth.
That’s a tall order, but Owens says he believes investments in renewable energy research at universities and private labs is crucial to moving the U.S. toward increased usage of renewable energy.
Tune in to All Before Five this afternoon at 4:45 to hear Congressman Owens’ thoughts on the spill, the reparations fund and where we need to go from here.
I, for one, am pleased to see the moratorium on further deep water drilling. It should be extended indefinitely and broadened to include any type of oil/gas drilling in waters of any depth. This country needs to end it’s dependence on pertoleum products. Electric cars are the future. Of course, the electricity shouldn’t come from petroleum-fired or coal-fired plants. No nuke plants either.
Electricity must be either solar or wind-based. As for the wind power, it needs to come from somewhere nobody lives. Whether, it’s the Kennedy’s in Mass or the “Kennedy’s” in Hammond, no one wants to looks a turbine. And, there dangerous, too!
Each of us should try, for just one day a week, to use no petroleum products or products that use pertroleum in their manufacture. We have to start making a difference now or the world will no longer exist.
” Of course, the electricity shouldn’t come from petroleum-fired or coal-fired plants. No nuke plants either.
Electricity must be either solar or wind-based. As for the wind power, it needs to come from somewhere nobody lives. Whether, it’s the Kennedy’s in Mass or the “Kennedy’s” in Hammond, no one wants to looks a turbine. And, there dangerous, too!”
I agree our dependence will end, but limiting our choice to just electricity and just from solar and wind isn’t practical.
I agree that we need to utilize more solar and wind. However, we still need the stability and reliance of traditional power generation. Meaning we absolutely must consider nuclear and natural gas as part of that equation. If anything we need to remove coal from the equation. Not a popular suggestion I know, but it’s extremely dirty and dangerous (i.e the recent mine disaster in West Virginia). Natural gas seems the “cleanest” fossil fuel and we’re finding huge sources of it here in the Northeast.
How dare President Obama shake down BP for a slush fund to redistribute wealth in the Gulf states?
Alternative energy is starting to sound like a pipe dream we have been talking about it since Jimmy Carter and have made very little progress. The bottom line is people don’t want it, they want big cars, big homes, cheap heating and A/c and cheap gas. When gas hits 8-10 per gallon we will see real change, until then I don’t think much will change.
Fossil fuels are still the cheapest option for the consumer.
PNElba said:
How dare President Obama shake down BP for a slush fund to redistribute wealth in the Gulf states?
That’s a pretty good paraphrase of Michele Bachmann from last night, including the scary “redistribute wealth” catchphrase. But redistribution of wealth means taxing higher incomes at a greater rate than lower incomes, as all state and federal income taxes have done since they were first introduced.
You can argue about whether that is fair or wise tax policy, but you can’t compare the practice with negotiating a dedicated fund to compensate people for damages caused by the activities of a corporation. The wealth of Gulf Coast fisherman and tourist businesses have been wiped out by an accident resulting from an attempt to maximize a company bottom line. If you object to a process to compensate the victims, you are advocating redistributing the wealth of shrimpers and beach vendors into the pockets of BP shareholders.
Dale Hobson
NCPR web manager, wearing his opinionated hat
Sarcasm never has gone over well on blogs.
Dale says,
“If you object to a process to compensate the victims”
This is not that.
This is a shake down to create a slush fund. This is what I object to.
Probably the last in line to receive the funds will be the ones who need it.
JDM only objects to BP taking responsibility.
All of this personal responsibility talk is communist.
No, the President and his administration circumventing the Judicial branch and Legislative branch is a real problem. Same as he did by firing the CEO of GM IIRC and taking over the company, I believe Chrysler went the same way. That’s not his job, that’s not supposed to be in his power and it’s wrong. Whether anyone cares enough to do anything about it? Who knows.
I got the sarcasm first time around PNElba. You almost sounded sensible there for a second…