So raise lift the cap for future spills?

Reader comment on: Obama EPA Chief To Headline Fundraiser
in response to reader comment: She pulled out

Submitted by benjamin (United States), May 25, 2010 22:49

It sounds like you would favor Menendez's proposal to lift the cap for future spills. In the absence of effective regulation, this is the only possible way to dissuade companies from repeating this disaster. If they don't have to pay the full price, they will continue to take unnecessary risks. My problem though, and this speaks to why we need a fund, is that what if BP goes under? Or a smaller firm causes this problem and can't afford the cleanup?

If we don't make BP pay for everything, the taxpayers will get stuck footing the bill, which would be an example of reverse-robin hood in the extreme. I read an article today that made a pretty compelling case that forcing BP would to pay ex post facto would stand up because the law on the books is written such that if the firm ignores any safety precautions, the limit is lifted. It is pretty hard to imagine based on what has leaked out so far about the incident that some corners were not cut.

Note: Comments are moderated by the editor and are subject to editing.

Other reader comments on this item

Comment on this item