Poll: How Many Think it's NOT the GOV Responsibility to Take Charge of a Historic, ongoing Disaster

of EPIC scale, in our 'homeland'?

yes or no in the subject line is enough.

however, if you agree that it isn't the GOV responsibility to take an active, authoritative, leadership role, please feel free to elaborate.

Just curious how many on DU actually believe that... I suspect it is a small minority.

please K&R if you disagree, it will make it much easier to count ;)

thanks DU :toast:

even if we aren't at an airport!


It seems like each new wave of government makes even less sense than before. Coincidental to the BP disaster, the local news paper had one full page about how many new regs and laws have come from this Administration. Toys, eggs, shoe polish,you name it, this Administration has it covered.

So they have us all covered on all the small stuff. It's only the big important stuff they cannot get a handle on.

:shrug:

and then send BP the bill. If they refuse to pay, prohibit them from selling their products in the US...

and hold them until they shut down the gusher, clean up the mess and pay the bill. Works for me.

Yup!

No, if it is an environmental catastrophe caused by a large corporation, that corporation is responsible for the clean-up. The government has a process under which it can declare an area an environmental hazard and charge the corporation or entity that caused it and its successors in interest for the cost of the clean-up.

Maybe, if it is a natural disaster. The government offers flood insurance to people who live in areas that are likely to flood. Here in California, we buy earthquake insurance (it's pretty expensive by the way) to help cover the costs of damages to our property if there is an earthquake. The federal government did not help the people of New Orleans very effectively. Most of the federal help in cases of earthquakes of fires is in grants or loans after the earthquake or fire's damages can be assessed. We pay to insure our homes in case of fires or earthquakes. I suspect the same is true of tornadoes. The federal government sends out emergency care for the days following the incident. It helps fix infrastructure to a very limited extent but beyond that states and individuals are on their own. Federal disaster relief is helpful but doesn't really do as much as people imagine who have never actually lived through a disaster.

Back in the San Francisco earthquake in the early 20th century, the federal government's help was a lot better. The feds sent in troops. In Katrina, the feds sent in thugs. Remember. New Orleans was an extremely bad disaster. But the city was pretty much left to its own devices until it became clear that the feds had to help.

The Gulf disaster is unique because

1) it is caused by a large private corporation not Mother Nature.

2) it is ongoing

3) nobody knows quite what to do about it because it the leak is very deep under the ocean and the technology involved in trying to stop it is daunting. Contrary to the common opinion on this website, I feel pretty certain, just knowing the broad interest in this problem and the dedication of scientists in this country, that lots of brilliant minds are trying to think of ways to stop the leak. I have not doubt that experts are working on how to stop the leak. It's just really hard. It may be impossible with today's technology. But no, it is not the responsibility of the government to clean up environmental messes made by private businesses. There have been many filling station underground tank leaks in this country. The owners of the filling stations and the oil companies are supposed to pay the bills or clean up the damages. When the damages were done long ago, it's hard to get someone to pay.

and a thought and I'm even willing to try a prayer that this next shot does stop the blowout... :)

in a sea of gnashing teeth.

:applause:

Sid

In your line of thinking: "..it is not the responsibility of the government to clean up environmental messes made by private businesses", do you think if a big fire is started by a private business, the government should just back off? Let it burn?

And as for the gusher.... if what we see so far from the "brilliant" minds after 35 days is really the best... we are foocked. Just thought you might want to know that.

I gave you a rec but the un recing crew has already been by. I got a 1 when I did it, and your count was still zero.

People who try to hide what other people think are cowards. Anyway, here's your kick.:kick:

The govt steps in over....floods, private enterprises giving way .

The govt takes over property under Eminent Domain, when "the public good" is considered to prevail.

The govt can ban certain activities---blasting rocket firecrackers; burning trash; hunting; lolling around naked in view of the street---on private property.

Etc.

The "BP is responsible" was a fool's excuse, a weakling's attempt at hope without any evidence of its existence.

:hi:

disasters after the Valdese Accident.

Are going to bail out BP????

I think we got mostly yes votes so far.

well, that is surprising

It's not like Katrina where manpower helps. In that case, they can throw the military and others at it. I wish there was something they could do to stop the leak.

but that's not the question, either.

ask for, and accept help.

there are 2 just to kick off the discussion.

What more do you want him to do? Don a flight suit with some tp in his jock?

edit typo

and why do i keep hearing about BP countermanding access to the site, and other areas related to the gusher, or EPA orders, and being justified by the Gov as being a private (read corporate) matter?

and I suspect you're listening to the wrong news sources.

easy

just trying to clarify that whole double negative thing.

Which in English is confusing enough, but then you get non-native speakers whose rules are basically the exact opposite.

Got it?

Over Democracy and the Constitution.

The government should be involved only if it is within the government's powers. That is far from a yes or no question.

It is for the right to make black and white and yes/no choices and to demand authority and decision from the Deciders.

to act in precisely these moments, and not be pushed around by corporations and their lawyers.

it is lame no matter who is in office.

a democracy, it seems we do have a responsibility to take charge or our representatives should, and that would be the government. Or doesn't the US Constitution mean anything any more? :shrug:

i am an eternal optimist but the experiences of the last decade really has left me jaded, but I refuse to surrender, no matter the odds.

operated by an international company in international waters. What power does the government have?

The U.S. considers water under it's control to be 212 nautical miles (370 km) from the U.S. coastline.

FYI

and I said the RIG was privately owned, not the Gulf.

resources

more...
http://oceanworld.tamu.edu/resources/oceanography-book/coastalzone.htm

and I know what you said, but like I said, the Gulf of Mexico is not privately owned, and they are having a MAJOR impact on it which makes their 'private rig' OUR concern.

See the caption beneath the photograph.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2010/05/01/2010-05-01_louisiana_oil_slick_oozes_to_shore_16m_gallons_spilled_still_gushing_obama_heads.html

Why do you think they asked and got, a waiver from MMS?
Yep, the US gave BP a permit to drill.

I've always been told/read that it was 28 miles out. It seems the Gulf is different than our other coastlines.

FYI

so hopefully the obama gets the MSG soon, and begins to take charge.