TPMDC
Chamber: No Taxpayer Money For Oil Spill Recovery (VIDEO)
U.S. Chamber of Commerce CEO Tom Donohue
Share
Send to a friend!
Chamber of Commerce President Tom Donohue has issued a statement clarifying his position on who should pay for damages resulting from the Gulf oil spill. Congress, he seems to say, shouldn't legally require BP to cover all costs, but BP will ultimately have to pay for everything.
The spill, Donohue says, "will require significant long-term attention from BP, the federal government, state and local authorities, volunteers, and the entire business community. While the depth and breadth of the consequences are unknown, clearly BP will have to assume its responsibilities over the long-term."
"Let me be clear: the recovery costs should not be on the backs of American taxpayers or the businesses that have been adversely affected by this tragedy," Donohue adds.
How to hold BP's feet to the fire, so they don't skip out on damages, which are expected to run tens of billions of dollars? That much is unclear. "We believe that abandoning the rule of law and retroactively changing the liability cap is not the best approach."
That puts him roughly in the same position as House Minority Leader John Boehner, who acceded yesterday that BP will ultimately have to pay the full tab.
At a Christian Science Monitor media breakfast on May 28, Donohue clearly insisted that the government (meaning taxpayers) would have to pitch in to defray the costs of the spill.
"It is generally not the practice of this country to change the laws after the game," Donohue said. "Everybody is going to contribute to this clean up. We are all going to have to do it. We are going to have to get the money from the government and from the companies and we will figure out a way to do that."
Those remarks got Boehner into trouble yesterday, when he first echoed them, and then refused to distance himself from the Chamber. Ultimately, though, Boehner broke from Donohue and, through a spokesman, said BP will be on the hook for every penny.
Video of that comment here:
I've put a call in to the Chamber for further clarification, and will report back if they provide any more information.
Comments (17) | Join the Conversation!
Leave a comment
Follow us!
Most Popular
TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com
TPM Top News
© 2010 TPM Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
mike from Arlington
June 11, 2010 2:55 PM
""Let me be clear: the recovery costs should not be on the backs of American taxpayers or the businesses that have been adversely affected by this tragedy.
"As I stated at the breakfast, we believe that abandoning the rule of law and retroactively changing the liability cap is not the best approach. Any changes to the cap need to be done very carefully and with full consideration of the broad economic consequences to companies far beyond those directly involved in the spill."
Those two statements contradict what's he's trying to imply. If the liability cap isn't change, who the hell does he think is going to be covering the costs of reimbursing the millions of workers affected, Santa Clause?
This along with modern day conservatism lives in some alternate universe where logic doesn't exist.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Ann Arbor
June 11, 2010 4:08 PM in reply to mike from Arlington
That is some impressive bamboozlement by Donohue. Only thing I can figure: He means the recovery costs up to the $75 million cap "should not be on the backs of American taxpayers or the businesses that have been adversely affected by this tragedy." (As if that were in question.) Above that, we're screwed.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Beetlejuice
June 12, 2010 7:28 AM in reply to mike from Arlington
To be perfectly honest and blunt, when Donohue says ..."It is generally not the practice of this country to change the laws after the game,"...I think he should think first.
For instance, if I were driving down the road and get distracted for a second and the distraction causes me to drift across the centerline of the highway and collide with an on-coming auto, I would be at fault for being negligent. The case of this oil spill is pretty much the same...an error in judgment and we all make them from time to time.
However, if a person or persons in the auto I collided with die as a result of my negligence, I am now faced with the charge of manslaughter...I didn't intent to kill anyone, but my negligence caused the untimely deaths of another or other individuals.
There wasn't a change in the rules or laws, and nothing was changed after the accident to specifically single me out. The death of the individual(s) itself moved the traffic violation to the charge of manslaughter.
So in the case of the oil spill, BP is guilty for being negligent in their actions. However, the extent of the spill is such that the normal fines levied for being negligent are not adequate for the damage their negligence caused. It is more on the same level as the charge of manslaughter.
Am I wrong in my perception?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
KeithL
June 12, 2010 12:53 PM in reply to Beetlejuice
You forgot the only rule: IOKIYAR!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
John M
June 11, 2010 4:09 PM
The initial statement by the Chamber of Commerce and Republicans, not the follow up political corecting, indicate what Republicans and the Chamber if Ciommerce belkive... that they want to immunize BP of paying for anything and want to put it on the backs of the taxpayer (despite their sham of wanting to cut government sopending). Republicans and the US Chamber of Commerce want to ct government spending in the same way as Nevada Tea Bagger candidate Sharron Angle does.... Angle wants to cut government spending and benefits to YOU while she wants the government to pay for massages and saunas for prisoners costing $15,000 per prisoner per year.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
June 11, 2010 4:13 PM
It's perfectly clear what he means. BP has to pay for the cleanup and whatever fines (but, oh remember the poor widows and orphans who depend on those dividends when calculating them!) the government imposes, but anyone who suffered economic loss as a result of this catastrophe is screwed other than whatever token payments BP hands out on it's own initiative in the interest of P.R.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Subliminability
June 11, 2010 4:20 PM
The Chamber of Commerce competes with Fox News for the mantle of most nefarious institution in this country. Respectable businesses should ditch it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Official A
June 11, 2010 4:42 PM
A Poem
by Henry Gibson
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Bear
June 11, 2010 4:50 PM
Ok... don't make them pay because of rule of Law. Let's just fine the hell out of them for breaking the law. It that better?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cmpnwtr
June 11, 2010 6:28 PM
What an idiot! Who also thinks we're idiotic enough to believe that kind idiocy.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Knothead Jake
June 14, 2010 8:44 AM in reply to cmpnwtr
It's clear his job is talking bullshit. We can leave the part about assessing fines and billing in general to others clearly more capable and intelligent. Thank you Mr. Dononhue please sit down and shut your pie hole. Doofus
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
John M
June 11, 2010 11:07 PM
So The anti-U.S. Chamber of Commerce was for taxpayers paying for BP's oil spill before they were against it. Sounds like a typical Republican.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Old Marsalla
June 12, 2010 8:52 AM
Ahh, the old Ex Post Facto defense. Help me out, attorneys. Does not knowing that oil and water don't mix constitute gross negligence? Does filling up the Gulf of Mexico with a toxic sludge by sucking oil on the cheap not meet the standard? How about arguing with the guys on the rig about procedures and being wrong?
Maybe BP should be forced to purchase all the goods that pop up here from fashionclothes.com. That'll teach 'em.
I know nobody likes all caps, but
BP CLEAN UP YOUR OWN MESS
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
fkaZk0sm0
June 12, 2010 10:25 AM
i think he expects adam smith's invisible hand to cover the damages. i suppose the invisible hand will pull out some invisible cash from its invisible wallet.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Ugot2bkidnme
June 12, 2010 3:21 PM
Look this is real simple. Everyone - you, me and the neighbor -have oxen we don't want gored. Politicians play a zero sum game on us poor dumb slobs. Conservatives - "I'll cut your taxes and reduce spending", code for cuts to all those nasty entitlements. Liberals - "I'll spend more on you and make those rich assholes pay for it". Both claim to take from one and give to the other. They play us off one another while their corporate benefactors laugh all the way to the bank/wall street, etc. Don't have the answer but I DO KNOW this isn't working.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
thoody0633
June 13, 2010 9:27 AM
Best regards for you all,
Looking forward to your visiting.
=== http://www.shoes2.us/ ====
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ya
June 14, 2010 9:16 AM
input this URL:
( http://www.tnta.us/ )
you can find many cheap and fashion stuff
(jor dan shoes)
(NBA NFL NHL MLB jersey)
( lv handbag)
(cha nel wallet)
(D&G sunglasses)
(ed har dy jacket)
(UGG boot)
WE ACCEPT PYAPAL PAYMENT AND CREDIT CARD
YOU MUST NOT MISS IT!!!
look look look http://www.tnta.us
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?