Gulf Coast Reactions to Obama's Speech

After the Oval Office speech made by Barack Obama, the reactions of the people affected along the coast of the Gulf of Mexico were bound to be recorded. Many residents feel that the situation has turned „comical“ because of the confusion, doubt, and lingering problems with the clean up and it leaves many Gulf Coast citizens feeling helpless. The inaction many feared would occur is not happening; rather, the problem is all of the chaos that is occuring, hindering progress towards cleaning the coast. They also have some doubts about Obama's comments of making „BP pay“ and whether or not that is really and truly possible. There are also problems with the amount. Several people have filed claims for damages and have only been payed small amounts. The amount of economic depression caused in the region is massive, as tourism, shipping industries, fishing and other seafood gathering, and of course the oil industry itself have all halted. Regina Shipp, a small restaurant owner has lost over $57,000 herself from just several weeks of being closed. Other tourist attractions, such as those in Florida, depend on having a clean Gulf in order to make parasailing, swimming, and other aquatic options avaliable for tourist purposes. In another twist, ABC interviewed 3 individuals after Obama's speech and found that all three were critical of the president. This is in stark contrast to what happened after hurricane Katrina when the same reporter asked 6 individuals on where to appropriate blame: not one blamed then President Bush but instead bashed the local and state government for not being prepared and for mishandling the situation. A new poll showed that 50 percent said that Bush handled Katrina better than Obama handled the oil spill, while only 35 percent chose Obama's handling of the spill over Bush. Is this a result of the time factor in which Gulf residents are hangry now? Or is it about the Gulf states being traditionally red states, or is Obama's honeymoon period run out?

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/rich-noyes/2010/06/16/double-shock-abc-shows-gulf-residents-panning-obama-s-oil-spill-speech-a
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/16/obamas-oil-spill-speech-g_n_613926.html

photo: http://www.limitstogrowth.org/WEB-Graphics/BayOilSpillSign.jpg

BP Repiration Payments and When They Will be Delivered

Although everyone concerned wishes that the oil spill had not occurred, British Petroleum is at least making repiration payments to those affected. BP has said they will provide up to 20 billion US dollars to go toward those people affected by the oil spill and have set up a third company party with around 1,000 employees processing claims around the clock. So far, over $100 million has been payed out in the seven weeks since the fund has been set up to over 31,000 claims. In addition, a further $100 million is being set aside for layed off workers of the oil rigs. In order to fund this arrangent, BP has recently stopped paying their dividends to stockholders and will possibly not start paying again until late 2011. This disaster, despite being terrible for the environment, has also called into question certain laws and responses to oil disasters. The Oil Pollution Act passed by Congress in 1990 states that companies are only liable for up to $75 million dollars. This law is of course outdated, as many revolutions and changes in oil drilling and extraction methods has happened in the last 20 years as well as the amount of money being made by said oil companies (BP alone made $17 billion last year). In addition to the energy laws being considered, these liability issues must also be accounted for to prevent disastors from springing up again. The amount of money being talked about is immense, so, just like during the aftermath of hurricane Katrina, the panel from BP should be weary of fraud as unscupuous people try to recieve handouts. Although 31,000 checks have been written, over 64,000 claims have been recieved. Whle the Gulf states may never recover fully from the spill, at least BP is accepting some responsibilities and is prepared to help those affected recouperate their losses.

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/world/2010-06/20/c_13359123.htm

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/06/16/business/main6588695.shtml

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/10/AR2010061002538.html

Comparing Oil Spill to 9/11 and Reforming of Government Policies

Although it seems as if terrorism and enviromental issues are not compatible issues to compare, their effects have been felt in governmental policies and the way the presidents in charge have handled them are similar. After the terrorist attacks of September 11^th, George W. Bush took the oppurtunity to enact many new laws including Patriot Acts (involving security and allowing easing of regulations on law enforcement information review) as well as creating the Department of Homeland Security. Although many will argue that the two events can not compare because of the death toll, the fact remains that both will change the face of the government in a major factor. Environmental reforms are being discussed, with Obama looking to creating a greener America. Most of this will stem from energy reforms which will lessen the United State's dependence on oil, both foreign and domestic. Despite this grand ambition, the problem lies with management of energy resources, not inspiration and will power, making his abilities limited. That being said, his focus will remain on moving away from the fossil fuels to prevent climate changes and move away from risky off shore drilling (such as what caused the oil spill). Although one would think that moving green would be a great thing for the nation, Obama is basing his plan on Spain's green model. The Spanish government recently gave the green jobs industry a time period in which to cut costs because the industry was bankrupting the country. Everyone, including the people in the oil industry themselves, know that energy reform is needed, but will this catastrophy have the same governmental reform effect that 9/11 had?

http://www.infowars.net/articles/june2010/140610Green.htm

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20100616/us_time/08599199689800

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,594835,00.html

Blog Entry 1: Republican Senator's Apology to BP

In the midst of a crisis such as the oil spill, it is hard to get Republicans, Democrats, and the others to all decide and band together on any facet of the problem (although this is common theme all of the time!). One thing a Republican senator from Texas managed to do was unite both parties. Joe Barton apologized to British Petroleum CEO Tony Hayward for what he perceived as a „government shake down“ in order to recieve the most amount of money from BP. Although the statement was later retracted, it still will have far reaching consequences and raise some interesting questions. One of the consequences involves the entire politics of the United States, as the Democrats were supposed to lose ground in the Senate and House of Representatives. Although, Barton tried to distance himself from the Republican party when making the statements, his affiliation with the party is enough of a problem that many pundits are predicting that the supposed congressional losses might be offset. In addition to raising questions of the long term affects on the Republican party because of the disrespectful comments, questions also arrose over the advisability of having the system of compaign funds being made avaliable through private funds, as Barton is a major benefactor of compaign funds from the gas and oil industries. This factor probably had much to do with his „apology“ towards the person in charge of the large oil company. Although the apology was swiftly retracted, damage was already done to the Republicans running in the November congresional election. It also brought up questions about the validity of using private campaign funds, something which does not occur in Germany.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE65G42D20100617
photo:http://i.ytimg.com/vi/dL5FkkHm9uI/0.jpg