I have been having a very hard time figuring out whose side Obama is on. Here's the trouble I run into:
- BP's interests are to have the cheapest oil cleanup possible.
- America's interests are to have the best oil cleanup possible.
- The White House has consistently underestimated the amount of resources needed for the cleanup.
What I see is that 1 and 2 are in conflict, and 3 is more consistent with 1 than with 2.
Let's work this out a little more...
From the very earliest days of the oil spill, there should have been way more skimmers in the Gulf of Mexico removing oil from the water before it could wash ashore. But that would have been more expensive than having fewer boats. So that's one factor to consider, the cost.
The other factor to consider is the Coast. The well-being of the Coast is in direct conflict with concerns about cost. The better we protect the Coast, the more it will cost. Without concerns about cost, there should have been ten times as many skimmers than there were early in the spill. Even now, there are not enough skimmers.
So the question comes up, why didn't the Obama administration try to get more skimmers and boom to the Gulf of Mexico? Why didn't they demand that BP do what was necessary to get more boats on the water? Even vessels of opportunity could have been outfitted with water filters that could have helped to remove oil from the water. Boat owners around the country could have been offered $20,000 a day to help with the cleanup efforts.
But how could the country pay $20,000 a day?! How would the taxpayers pay for that? Well, we wouldn't. The cost is not our concern. The cost is BP's concern. The Coast is our concern. That is the unfortunate thing, that America's interests, the Coast, are in direct conflict with BP's interests, the cost.
We want the biggest, most spectacular cleanup you can imagine, with every available boat in the world out there filtering water, regardless of the cost. What does the cost mean to us? The whole thing will be free for us. We want to save our Coast. The cost is irrelevant.
But that is not the case for BP. For BP, the cost is all that matters. They want no more than the absolute minimum number of boats working to clean up the oil. They are a business. They do not want to pay any more than they have to. They cut corners on their drilling to save money, and it caused the spill. Now they are cutting corners on the cleanup to save money. It is what they do. They are a business. Their job is to save money.
So there's the conflict, BP wants a small, cheap cleanup, and America wants a huge, expensive cleanup. So which side do we see the Obama administration coming down on? Are they working for America's interests or for BP's interests?
Well, from what I have seen, the cleanup efforts have not been up to the task. They are not even the minimum required number of boats. They are nowhere near enough. We need more skimmers. We need more boom. And we need more vessels of opportunity outfitted with water filters in the Gulf of Mexico, removing oil from the water before it can wash up.
But we do not have these things. We do not even hear the Obama administration asking for these things from BP. So, when I consider the conflicting interests of America and BP, and I look at what the Obama administration is doing, I have a really hard time not concluding that Obama is acting more in BP's interests than in ours.
You can also tell from the response of Americans and BP. Americans are upset that oil is washing up. BP does not seem to be upset with the size of the cleanup force they are being asked to provide. It seems BP is happier with what the Obama administration is doing than Americans are. You can imagine the opposite, where Obama demands that BP pay more money to get more boats out in the Gulf. In that case, Americans would be happy to hear that Obama is going to bat for them, and BP would be angry and resistant. But that's not what we see. BP is not resistant, but Americans are, again suggesting that Obama is doing more what BP wants than what Americans want.
So given all that, I have a really hard time not reaching the conclusion that Obama is working for BP, not for America. What about you? How do you explain the fact that the Obama administration has consistently allowed BP to under-resource the cleanup? Are they just incompetent, or are they complicit?