(Video): Press Corps Grills Gibbs Over the Obama Admin's Response to the Oil Leak

... starts about 3 mins in so you dont have to hunt for it. Quite a long exchange. Take it or leave it, but this is why they're not "sending in the fleet" as Tweety suggested they should on Friday.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pIiqGH-psuA&playnext_from=TL&videos=YeGEgx86BiI&feature=sub



Gibbs cites the 1990 Oil Pollution Act as why they cant just "get in there and take over" as the press keep insisting they should. Provisions in that act applicable to #oilpacalypse are....

§1002(a) Provides that the responsible party for a vessel or facility from which oil is discharged, or which poses a substantial threat of a discharge, is liable for: (1) certain specified damages resulting from the discharged oil; and (2) removal costs incurred in a manner consistent with the National Contingency Plan (NCP).

§1002(c) Exceptions to the Clean Water Act (CWA) liability provisions include: (1) discharges of oil authorized by a permit under Federal, State, or local law; (2) discharges of oil from a public vessel; or (3) discharges of oil from onshore facilities covered by the liability provisions of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline Authorization Act.

§1016 Offshore facilities are required to maintain evidence of financial responsibility of $150 million and vessels and deepwater ports must provide evidence of financial responsibility up to the maximum applicable liability amount. Claims for removal costs and damages may be asserted directly against the guarantor providing evidence of financial responsibility.

§1018(a) The Clean Water Act does not preempt State Law. States may impose additional liability (including unlimited liability), funding mechanisms, requirements for removal actions, and fines and penalties for responsible parties.

§1019 States have the authority to enforce, on the navigable waters of the State, OPA requirements for evidence of financial responsibility. States are also given access to Federal funds (up to $250,000 per incident) for immediate removal, mitigation, or prevention of a discharge, and may be reimbursed by the Trust fund for removal and monitoring costs incurred during oil spill response and cleanup efforts that are consistent with the National Contingency Plan (NCP).

§4202 Strengthens planning and prevention activities by: (1) providing for the establishment of spill contingency plans for all areas of the U.S. (2) mandating the development of response plans for individual tank vessels and certain facilities for responding to a worst case discharge or a substantial threat of such a discharge; and (3) providing requirements for spill removal equipment and periodic inspections.

§4301(a) and (c) The fine for failing to notify the appropriate Federal agency of a discharge is increased from a maximum of $10,000 to a maximum of $250,000 for an individual or $500,000 for an organization. The maximum prison term is also increased from one year to five years. The penalties for violations have a maximum of $250,000 and 15 years in prison.

§4301(b) Civil penalties are authorized at $25,000 for each day of violation or $1,000 per barrel of oil discharged. Failure to comply with a Federal removal order can result in civil penalties of up to $25,000 for each day of violation.

§9001(a) Amends the Internal Revenue Act of 1986 to consolidate funds established under other statutes and to increase permitted levels of expenditures. Penalties and funds established under several laws are consolidated, and the Trust Fund borrowing limit is increased from $500 million to $1 billion.
Information obtained from the US Environmental Protection Agency

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Exxon_Valdez_oil_spill_what_was_the_resulting_law_changes

"Make Obama Look Incompetent Day" on all the Sunday shows.

...they are trying to hide behind a law, as though that is the absolute end of discussion on the matter. It sounds like they are trying to find reasons they can't take charge, because they really don't want to. That's how I saw it. And the legal parsing is just infuriating. Tone deaf. Gibbs is so busy tap dancing that he does not seem to be understanding the urgency, at least that is how it looked to me.

Does the White House Press Corps have an email address? Someone should send them the text of the National Emergencies Act:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/98-505.pdf

--snip from CRS1--
Under the Powers delegated by such statute, the President may seize property, organize and control means of production, seize commodities, assign military forces abroad, institute martial law, seize and control all transportation and communication, regulate the means of free enterprise, restrict travel, and, in a variety of ways, control the lives of United States citizens.
--snip--

(taken from this DU thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=8391891)

Maybe one of the White House Press Corps could ask Mr. Gibbs if the National Emergencies Act might apply and could be used to override the 1990 Oil Pollution Act?

Yeah, that'd give the teabaggers a field day.

...it does not mandate martial law as the only response.

My point is, the President has broader powers than Gibbs will admit to. They are saying that the only law that applies is the Oil Pollution Act of 1990. But if he recognized this as a national emergency he could take control.

I understand why he may not want to, I just don't agree. My problem with what is happening, is the obvious lack of coordination, as well as the occasional story such as yesterday when Louisianians (sp?) commandeered BP boats and went ahead with actions that will protect the shore and wetlands where oil is coming in. If the government were in charge, with one person at the head of the efforts, presumably that could ensure that we don't see a bunch of BP boats sitting idle while oil laps up to the shore. That is exactly the kind of thing where it comes in handy to have a clear chain of command, without ambiguity about who's in charge.

I genuinely believe no one wants the oil to keep spreading and everything is being done to control it. The real message of this oil spill should be that we don't have the ability to control everything and that we all need to push for a fundamental change in how our society is run so that it is less oil/energy dependent. Do we really need to drive so much? Do we need recreational flights or cruises? What about all the petroleum based plastics in our lives? Then there are the petroleum based fertilizers that are used in our conventionally grown foods...People want cheap food after all. This is not about blaming Obama or even BP - BP like it or not is providing a product we demand by our lifestyles - We need to be the ones to say we don't need these things anymore.

They took crazy shortcuts and lied completely about their ability to clean up a situation not only like this but much worse. Now they continue to lie and CYA.

We have 2% of the world oil reserves, use 25% of the oil, and the product is sold on the world market so why is it again we need so desperately right this second?

...that is why it would be good to have a single chain of command at this point.

As for your other points, I wholeheartedly agree.

divers down to the leak (tweety did that) I worry for the intellectual abilities of our country to problem solve..

It is all emotion and roaring..

They call it "heart"

Stupid is now "heart"


You cannot make this stuff up