Should the Republican Party be held responsible for its role in the BP Gulf oil disaster?

Question

Shortly after Bush and Cheney were elected in 2000, VP Cheney created a National Energy Policy Task Force. The task force issued a report in May 2001 which among other conclusions, decided that regulatory oversight of the oil industry was "often excessive and redundant" and "has become overly burdensome....the current regulatory structure fails to take sufficient account of these extraordinary advances, excessively restricting the environmentally safe production of energy from many known sources."
http://www.wtrg.com/EnergyReport/National-Energy-Policy.pdf

Within 2 months of the issuance of this report, House Republicans attempted to implement many of its suggestions in the so-called SAFE Act. Though the Republican-controlled House passed similar oil-friendly bills several times, fortunately the Democratically-controlled Senate prevented passage of these bills through 2003, ultimately resorting to a filibuster.

Unfortunately in 2004, Republicans gained control of the Senate in addition to their control of the House and Executive branch. Rep Joe Barton (a major global warming denier, coincidentally) quickly shepherded a bill through the House that included tens of billions in subsidies for Big Oil and other forms of dirty energy and dozens of other provisions to reduce or eliminate royalties paid by Big Oil to taxpayers, waive or eliminate environmental and safety reviews, and otherwise enhance Big Oil’s ability to exploit our natural resources with little or no oversight and with maximum profit. Andrew Lundquist, the executive director of Cheney’s energy task force in 2001, had become a lobbyist and was actively lobbying on the legislation on behalf of BP and other energy companies at this time.

The bill came to be known as the “Dick Cheney energy bill”, and Republicans finally managed to pass it in 2005. One of its worst elements had a direct role in eliminating the kind of regulatory oversight that may have prevented the recent blowout of the BP well. Section 390 of the legislation dramatically expanded the circumstance under which drilling operations could forego environmental reviews and be approved almost immediately under so-called “categorical exclusions” from the National Environmental Policy Act. BP’s blown-out well did not undergo an environmental review thanks to a categorical exclusion.
http://climateprogress.org/2010/06/04/cheney%e2%80%99s-katrina-bp-oil-disaste/

Should the Republican Party be held responsible for its role in the BP Gulf oil disaster?

Answer 1

For the benefit of those not familiar with the US system, the separation of powers means that there isn't a single "government", in the way that there is in Canada or the UK.



The no-nothing element in the Republican Party can certainly be blamed for the 2005 energy bill, and given the complexity of the American legislative process, we cannot sensibly regard Obama as remiss for not having yet managed to reverse that measure.



So yes, the Republican Party (and its environmentally reckless wing in particular) should most certainly be held responsible, and the right way to do this is at the polls.



Deplorably, it seems to be precisely that wing that is taking over the party.

Answer 2

There's nothing many people would like more than to pin the blame on this disaster on Republicans, and it is tempting to do so in a singular manner. However, there are regulatory agencies in place and the culture of those agencies, whether in agriculture, commerce or labor, are generally partial to the groups and sectors they oversee. It has always been this way.



To me, BP is the prime culprit in this mess but we as a society have forced exploration in these deep waters with little understanding of the risks and little taste for understanding the issues underlying our reliance on oil, both foreign and domestic.

Answer 3

Aiding & abetting, and accessory pop into mind! Both are liable positions.



Accessory : a person not actually or constructively present but contributing as an assistant or instigator to the commission of an offense —called also accessory before the fact b : a person who knowing that a crime has been committed aids or shelters the offender with intent to defeat justice —called also accessory after the fact.

Answer 4

Well, interesting question for this category.



Here in Canadian politics, we too have used the same technique of a sitting government blaming a current crisis on the policies of the previous government. Now I don't have a great background in American polititcs but in answer to your subject question I would have to "Possibly, at least in part".



For a large disaster like this one, usually the blame can be spread around but my own feeling is that BP is mostly responsible. Also, blame could be categorized as direct and indirect and again, I would put BP at the top of the list for direct responsibililty.



If I knew more about your (USA) politics I could give a better answer but my feeling is that the Republicans (i.e. Bush and Cheney) could have some indirect responsibility (as would obviously the current Democrats and it could also be argued the Democrats have some direct responsibililty).

Answer 5

No but the Democrats should be held responsible for the slow government response.



Things will be better when the republican regain control of congress in november.

Answer 6

most people, especially republicans, love to pretend that the bush era never even existed. They try to blame Obama for the spill, and obama for deregulating everything.



but it was in fact the republicans and bush and cheney that deregulated the oil industry and revoked environmental protections. This all happened long before Obama even took office.



Now the same people are bashing obama.... and Palin, the mother of all drilling advocates (she wants to drill in ANWR remember?) accused Obama of being in bed with the il industry.



I'm not saying he isn't. But Palin saying that and republicans blaming Obama for the de-regulation is the very definition of contradiction and hypocrysy

Answer 7

Probably, at least partially.

BUT the democrats were against it primarily because it republican sponsored; just like republicans are against democratically sponsored legislation.



BOTH sides work VERY HARD to collect lobbyist dollars, rather than do what is best for the citizens and country.



You can find similar examples in ALL federal agencies, including the military, and from both parties.

IF we held them ALL responsible there would be NO politicians and their aides, and government agencies left. They are ALL responsible for SOMETHNG done wrong or badly.

Answer 8

Four questions. Have you ever worked in heavy industry, oil, steel, power production, or mining? Ever buried any of your friends who have? Or are you another one of these "Harvard Business School Graduates" who thinks its not necessary to know anything about a business in order to manage or regulate it? Are you going to join up with those of us who have and are equally furious at both parties?

If you are, welcome to the TEA party/ 912 Rallies.

Answer 9

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0310/35223.html

Obama expands offshore drilling



Obama is biggest recipient of BP’s political action cash in the last 20 years

http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0505/obama-biggest-recipient-bp-political-action-money-20-years/





President Obama at Gulf: 'Buck stops with me' This was when he tried to take credit for plugging the hole and right after he staged a crude beach event where he picked up a planted piece of crude.



http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/37932.html





You have to translate everything that Obama says. What he really meant is that it is Bushes fault unless it goes well then it is mine. Blaming the evil Cheney is pretty silly. You must really live in an Austin Powers world.