BP Apologies and Republican Insincerity

Posted by: Bill Pearlman
Published on June 18th, 2010 @ 09:59:33 am , using 366 words
Category: Commentary

The Joe Barton fiasco has the GOP leadership grasping at slippery moves to repair his now infamous remark about the 'slush fund' (20 billion to help families and businesses affected by the oil spill) a presidential 'shakedown.' Markey from Mass was the first to contradict this and the BP CEO was asked if he thought it was a slush fund/shakedown and he correctly said 'no'. Strange out there, with Republican insiders demanding retraction or threatening to remove seniority from Barton. But it gets richer:

 

Republicans in Congress want the public to believe that they were furious with Joe Barton for apologizing to BP and calling the $20 billion compensation fund a "shakedown," but the reality is that most of them agree with what Barton said.

Take, for example, these words from GOP congressman Tom Price, the head of the Republican Study Committee (my emphasis):

However, in an administration that appears not to respect fundamental American principles, it is important to note that there is no legal authority for the President to compel a private company to set up or contribute to an escrow account.

BP’s reported willingness to go along with the White House’s new fund suggests that the Obama Administration is hard at work exerting its brand of Chicago-style shakedown politics.

Aside from the apology, the substance of what Price said was no different than what Barton said, yet no Republicans have raised their voice in protest of Price. None of them have demanded an apology from him, nor have they demanded apologies from other Republicans like Haley Barbour or Michel Bachmann who made similar comments. The reason is simple: Republicans, like Joe Barton, hate the idea of the compensation fund.

Oh, sure, they know it looked stupid for Joe Barton to apologize to BP for being pressured to establish the fund. And they wish he hadn't done that, because they hate looking stupid.

But they agree with him. They think he's right.

They desperately hope that forcing Barton to issue a transparently bogus "apology" for apologizing to BP will make the issue go away, but their unwillingness to demand a retraction from Tom Price is all the proof you need of their utter insincerity.

Dailykos 6-18-10

PermalinkPermalink

2 comments

Comment from: Steve Belasco [Member] Email
Determined to give no quarter the right has rallied to criticize the $20 billion compensation fund set up by BP and the White House. The criticisms are so wide of the mark that they are laughable and would deserve no comment except that they are made with such pomposity. No less a commentator than David Brooks has contended that creation of the fund undermines the rule of law. In his view the guy who lost his fishing business to the oil slick should file a lawsuit against BP and if and when BP is found to have been negligent then and only then should the guy be entitled to compensation. He, like the instigator of the whole “controversy” Joe Barton, makes the assumption that BP resisted creation of the fund. A nanosecond of reflection would tell you otherwise. BP has conceded that the failure of its well resulted in a national disaster and stated quite publicly that it would compensate all who suffered losses. There is no large controversy. BP is already on its knees. No one has to bring them there. No arms were twisted. There was no shakedown. Indeed, the only legitimate criticism I can see is that the government has relieved BP of the unpleasant responsibility of administering the relief it promised and taking the heat for the inevitable glitches. BP gets credit for stepping up with dollars and hands the administrative nightmare over to the government. That guy who lost his fishing business to the oil slick can now go someplace, file a claim and get some money. His interest in whether BP is a villain or an innocent victim of unpredictable circumstance is nil. He has lost his livelihood. Undermine the rule of law my foot, David Brooks. To the extent that the White House’s effort means quicker delivery of money to victims it has done precisely what I would want my government to do: Cut to the chase. That it had to take BP out of the limelight of public opprobrium as far as it could to get the result was a downside it was willing to tolerate. I am too.
06/20/10 @ 11:22
Comment from: Joe Moore [Visitor]
The conspiracy theorists have Obama doing all this to stop drilling. The truth is another matter; BP are pigs in the floating oil and the Republicans are right in the muck as well
06/27/10 @ 14:07

Leave a comment


Your email address will not be revealed on this site.

Your URL will be displayed.
(Line breaks become <br />)
(Name, email & website)
(Allow users to contact you through a message form (your email will not be revealed.)