In The News
Transcript of Inhofe Senate Floor Remarks on Menendez Liability Bill
Tuesday May 25, 2010
If we will recall, last week when I objected to the arbitrary figure, the cap of $10 billion, it was because it was arbitrary. I quoted a lot of people in the administration saying we do not want to have--it should not be an arbitrary cap. One of the complaints I had was, if you do have an arbitrary cap and that was at $10 billion, that would mean only the big five plus the national oil companies--Venezuela, China, certainly--would be in a position to do this work offshore.
It is my feeling if you take the $10 billion off and make it totally unlimited, that could very well shut out even the five and leave nothing but national oil companies in a position to be doing it.
Democrats on the Record Expressing Concern with Menendez Liability Bill
Tuesday May 25, 2010
Posted by Matt Dempsey matt_dempsey@epw.senate.gov
Democrats on the Record Expressing Concern with Menendez Liability Bill
WATCH: Baucus Latest Dem To Expresses Concerns with Unlimited Liability - (June 30, 2010) Transcript: Senator Baucus: I know we had a hearing on this subject, Madame Chairman. It's starting to bother me that last year, roughly, we don't legislate very much. I'm speaking generally, and I'm speaking only from my own personal experience with the Finance Committee. We don't' have any mark-ups any more. We don't burrow down and ask tough questions of witnesses, trying to establish proper policy, near as much as we used to. Rather, a lot of amendments and bills are more in the nature of message amendments and bills. And I find it disconcerting. I know there was a hearing on this subject, regrettably I wasn't here for that hearing. But I do have some concern about a total removal, a total unlimited liability.
Congress Daily: Democrats on the Record Expressing Concern with Menendez Liability Bill (Wednesday, May 26, 2010) - Earlier this month, Interior Secretary Salazar told the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee the White House and Congress need to work in bipartisan harmony to determine how much more companies should pay for damages linked to a major oil spill like the one in the Gulf of Mexico. The same day, President Obama sent a more pointedly partisan message to Senate Republicans. Obama released a statement while Salazar was still testifying accusing Republicans of engaging in "special-interest politics" in rejecting attempts by some Senate Democrats to increase a $75 million liability cap to $10 billion. Salazar had reminded two Senate panels just hours earlier that Obama had sent legislation to lawmakers the prior week, saying more work was needed to specify how much liability limits should be raised.
WATCH/READ: Begich Echoes Murkowski/Inhofe/Salazar Concerns on Menendez Bill
SEN. MARY LANDRIEU (D-LA): “But The Question Of This Liability Issue Going Forward -- I Want To Commend You [Sec. Salazar] For Taking Your Time To Decide On The Right Answer, Because If We Don't Do This Correctly, We Could Put Independent And Smaller Companies That Employ 1.8 Million People In This Country At Risk, If This Issue Isn't Handled Correctly. So With All Due Respect To My Colleague, Who I Have The Utmost Admiration For, Senator Menendez And Others That Are Calling For Unlimited Liability, It Will Put Out Of Reach The Possibility For Insurance, Which Is Extremely Important For This And Any Industry To Have To Operate. So It Has To Be Done In The Right Way, And I Thank You For Taking Your Time On The Details Of That.” (Energy And Natural Resources Committee, U.S. Senate, Hearing, 5/18/10)
THE HILL: Salazar says Dem bill to raise oil company liability could hit smaller drillers - Senate Republicans may have gained an unexpected ally in their battle against a Democratic bill to raise the cap on oil company liability for offshore spills: Interior Secretary Ken Salazar. Twice in recent days, Republicans have blocked Democratic efforts to win quick passage of legislation that would raise the economic damages cap from $75 million to $10 billion. Sens. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and James Inhofe (R-Okla.) -- who have blocked the Democratic bill -- argue that a cap too high would make it financially impossible for smaller and independent oil-and-gas companies to operate offshore. Salazar made a similar argument before a Senate panel Tuesday. "You don't want only the BP's of the world to essentially be the ones that are involved in these efforts," he told Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) during a hearing on the Gulf of Mexico oil spill held by the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.
The Washington Independent - Obama Administration Wants It Both Ways on Gulf Spill Liability (5/19/10) - There have been plenty of headlines generated by President Obama's apparent criticism of Senate Republicans for blocking legislation to raise the oil spill liability cap. The implication has been that Obama supports the Democrats' proposal, which would hike the cap from $75 million to $10 billion. Not so. Testifying before Congress yesterday, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar told lawmakers that the administration supports lifting the cap, but the $10 billion figure is "inadequate." And by "inadequate," he didn't mean that it's too low (some have suggested that there should be no liability cap at all), he meant that it's too high. Lawmakers, he said, have to be "thoughtful" not to impose a cap that pushes smaller oil companies out of business just because they can't afford the drilling insurance.
WATCH: Inhofe-Salazar Share Concerns About Menendez Bill at EPW Hearing
WATCH: Salazar Shares Inhofe Concerns on Liability
KEN SALAZAR, Secretary Of The Interior: “[I]t Is Important That We Be Thoughtful Relative To That, What That Cap Will Be, Because You Don't Want Only The B.P.s Of The World Essentially Be The Ones That Are Involved In -- In These Efforts, That There Are Companies Of -- Of Lesser Economic Robustness.” (Energy And Natural Resources Committee, U.S. Senate, Hearing, 5/18/10)
KEN SALAZAR, Secretary Of The Interior: “The President Has Sent A Request To The Congress To Lift The Amounts On The Liability Limitation, But That Exact Amount Should Be -- Should Take Into Consideration The Kinds Of Facts That You Are Alluding To Here, Senator Inhofe, and so that's why the administration will engage with the congress and will figure out where the appropriate limit should be set. That's why there was not a specific number that was sent forth.” (Environment And Public Works Committee, U.S. Senate, Hearing, 5/18/10)
NO IMPACT
Tuesday May 25, 2010
NYT: Climate Fears Turn to Doubts Among Britons
Tuesday May 25, 2010
Nowhere has this shift in public opinion been more striking than in Britain, where climate change was until this year such a popular priority that in 2008 Parliament enshrined targets for emissions cuts as national law. But since then, the country has evolved into a home base for a thriving group of climate skeptics who have dominated news reports in recent months, apparently convincing many that the threat of warming is vastly exaggerated.
A survey in February by the BBC found that only 26 percent of Britons believed that "climate change is happening and is now established as largely manmade," down from 41 percent in November 2009. A poll conducted for the German magazine Der Spiegel found that 42 percent of Germans feared global warming, down from 62 percent four years earlier.
Barrasso: EPA cant regulate climate change
Monday May 24, 2010
With all due respect, it's hard to take his words seriously.
Instead of knocking down bureaucratic barriers, this administration has thrown up more walls. The president has devoted his first 16 months in office to passing legislation that creates more red tape and makes it harder for businesses to create new jobs.
If this is help, Americans don't want it. They just want Washington to get out of the way.
The EPA Will Know the Effect of its Policy
Monday May 24, 2010
This administration intends to be uncaring.
At least it will not be able to claim it did not foresee the effects its policies will have. Knowledgeable people are making sure it does.
Last fall, the EPA put a hold on 79 surface mining permits in four Appalachian states, including 23 valley fill permits in West Virginia.
Last week, the agency held a pro forma public hearing in Charleston on its intention to revoke the permit for Arch Coal's Spruce No. 1 Mine in Logan County. After many years of study and negotiations, the government issued a permit for that operation in 2007.
Republicans: EPA Holding Up More Coal Permits Than Disclosed
Friday May 21, 2010
A report by Republican members of the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, also finds actions by the Environmental Protection Agency under the Obama administration are disproportionately affecting small companies in the eastern U.S.
With 190 permits put under scrutiny as of March, more than the 79 publicly identified by the EPA, about 41% of the Appalachian region's annual coal production is on hold, the report found.
Begich Echoes Murkowski/Inhofe/Salazar Concerns on Menendez Bill
Thursday May 20, 2010
Are you disappointed in what she’s doing?
Senator Begich: Well actually if you read the president’s comments today he actually made a comment that the 10 billion depending on the situation we may get ourselves into only working with mega oil companies so we’ve got to be very careful.
Cooling Fear of a Malaria Surge from Warming - Last Word on Malaria? - Don't sweat it
Thursday May 20, 2010
Thune: Climate Rules Worse Than Cap-and-Trade
Thursday May 20, 2010
The plan Democrats devised would have raised the price of energy and every product or service that uses energy - in other words, pretty much everything. It would have destroyed jobs, expanded the federal bureaucracy and done almost nothing to help the environment or to reduce our nation's dependence on foreign oil.
Like the health care bill, it was a monstrosity that would not have solved the problems it set out to fix and instead would have harmed our economy and the well-being of American families. And just as we saw during the health care debate, when Democrats realized they faced overwhelming opposition from the American people, they looked for a way to ram through their policies anyway.
