Skip to main content

Originally posted here

There's major news this morning for all of us who've been fighting to preserve the Gulf Coast in the wake of the 2010 Deepwater Horizon case:

LONDON -- British oil company BP said Thursday it is in advanced talks with U.S. agencies about settling criminal and other claims from the Gulf of Mexico well blowout two years ago.


A person familiar with the deal says BP agrees with U.S. to pay billions of dollars in fines related to the spill.


The person, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak on the record about the deal, also said two BP employees face manslaughter charges over the death of 11 people in the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon oil rig that triggered the massive spill.


The person said BP will plead guilty to obstruction for lying to Congress about how much oil was pouring out of the ruptured well.


The Deepwater Horizon rig, 50 miles off the Louisiana coast, sank after the April 2010 explosion. The well on the sea floor spewed an estimated 206 million gallons of crude oil, soiling sensitive tidal estuaries and beaches, killing wildlife and shutting vast areas of the Gulf to commercial fishing.


Politically, it's interesting that this news comes so soon after President Obama's election to a second term. One has to wonder whether BP was waiting to see if it could get a better deal with a Mitt Romney administration with its known pro-Big Oil bias, and whether Obama's victory forced the company back to the negotiating table. And given the likely size and severity of the penalties, you'll be hearing a lot of spin in the coming days about what a great deal this is for the citizens of the Gulf. I will say this, it's about time that the feds -- who've appeared at many times over the last 31 months to be in the tank for BP -- took a more aggressive posture toward the firm.

Still, it's hard to believe the hype.

Ask yourself, if this is such a great deal for the American taxpayer and such a harsh rebuke to a company whose negligence killed 11 people and spewed 5 million barrels into the Gulf, why is BP so eager to sign off on this? I would argue that any settlement that is OK with BP must, by definition, not be enough of a penalty for the thousands of Gulf residents that the oil company's wanton misconduct made sick, or the marine life that's been damaged for generations to come.

Here are a few things to consider:

1) Is a BP settlement really better than bringing the company to trial before a jury of Gulf Coast residents who've seen their family and friends suffer harsh economic consequences and medical distress because of the company's wrongdoing? Remember, it was less than three months ago that the Justice Department filed court papers in New Orleans accusing BP of gross negligence, which would dramatically increase the penalty that BP would have to pay.

"The behavior, words, and actions of these BP executives would not be tolerated in a middling size company manufacturing dry goods for sale in a suburban mall," government lawyers wrote in the filing on Aug. 31 in federal court in New Orleans.


Some experts said a gross negligence finding could have added $21 billion in penalties. Is that money to restore the Gulf that's been left on the table?

2) Oil from the Deepwater Horizon site is still contaminating the Gulf. Twice in the last 15 months, this blog and our friends -- particularly the pilot and environmentalist Bobby Schumaker from the group Wings of Care -- have exposed fresh sheens of Macondo oil near the site of the Deepwater Horizon accident. Most recently, BP and the feds insisted that the oil was a small leak from a containment dome and that the problem has been fixed. But in recent days, Schunaker's flyovers have continued to discover fresh oil, raising the question of whether the actual source is a crack in the sea floor -- as we have long suggested.

In other words, how can you reach a settlement in a crime that's still ongoing?

3) I'm currently involved in a fairness hearing over a related matter: BP's proposed $7.8 billion settlement with residents and business owners in the Gulf. I've been arguing on behalf of my clients in that case for a do-over of the agreement -- in part because the boundaries for damages, along with other disparities, seem arbitrary and capricious, and in part because of the arguments above, that we're still coming to terms with the extent of BP's destruction.

So it concerns me that a too hasty or inadquate settlement with the feds may aid the rush to judgment in the $7.8 billion case.

Two final things to consider. BP made $25.7 billion in profits in 2011 -- a year it was supposedly still reeling from the aftermath of the spill -- and so its capacity to truly address the damage it caused is more than available. And since news of this supposedly harsh penalty, the company's shares have been trading about 1.5 percent higher on Wall Street this morning. Tens of thousands of Gulf Coast residents are still suffering from the aftereffects of the Deepwater Horizon catastrophe.

Is BP?

To read more about BP's settlement talks with the federal government, please check out: http://www.nola.com/...

To find out more about the federal allegations of gross negligence against BP, please read: http://www.reuters.com/...

Check out my Nov. 12 argument for a do-over in the $7.8 billion BP settlement at: http://www.stuarthsmith.com/...

© Smith Stag, LLC 2012 – All Rights Reserved

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site