Oil Spills and other Misdemeanors.

It took almost a week before President Barack Obama made any statement to the public on what may become the worst environmental disaster in world history. It was eight days from the time it began to a committed federal response from the U.S. government. Now this event is being labeled as "Obama's Katrina" but is that a fair comparison?

I think it is important for me to be clear that I am not trying to put the blame of the accident on the U.S. federal government, or the President. The responsibility for this accident is British Petroleum, and theirs alone. I believe that British Petroleum should bare all the costs and be made liable for all damages that occur from this disaster. With that said, the U.S. federal government has precariously put the Office of the President of the United States in a position of responsibility. I will explain.

Back in 1994, perhaps motivated by the Exxon Valdez incident, the U.S. congress revised the excising National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan(NCP)to give greater power to the executive office in order to guarantee an "immediate" response to such circumstances. The condemning passage reads as follows:

The major revisions to the NCP being promulgated today reflect OPA revisions to CWA section 311. These changes increase Presidential authority to direct cleanup of oil spills and hazardous substance releases and augment preparedness and planning activities on the part of the federal government, as well as vessel and facility owners and operators. For example, revised CWA section 311(c) requires the President to direct removal actions for discharges and substantial threats of discharges posing a substantial threat to the public health or welfare of the United States. Revised section 311(d) requires a number of specific changes to the NCP, including the establishment of ``criteria and procedures to ensure immediate and effective Federal identification of, and response to, a discharge, or the threat of a discharge, that results in a substantial threat to the public health or welfare of the United States.''

This revision has made the federal government responsible to ensure the public health and welfare immediately, which they failed at epically. Right from when this accident initiated, it was the responsibility of President Obama to use every resource available to counter this disaster. Obviously this did not happen. Not to mention that the government was to put aside money from oil royalties to pay for the equipment, and resources to implement the NCP. So with the plan in place with the money to fund it, what happened? Why the slow and inadequate response to this disaster?

In President Obama's defense, the resources needed to combat this oil spill were never there. This revision had obviously become a Clinton-era money grab which proceeds were also enjoyed by the Bush administration. Although President Obama's administration is not entirely without guilt, they did have nineteen months to restore accountability to how funds are suppose to be allocated. The truth of the matter is that none of these administrations believed that a disaster of this magnitude could ever occur. President Obama had even some what implied that they believed the oil companies more apt to deal with these matters. This snafu is just another example of big government slight of hand.

What is even more perplexing is the lack, or the lack of media coverage, of the environmental groups speaking out or protesting this disaster. Perhaps it isn't all that bewildering considering how the media has treated this administration with "kid glove" since the 2008 Presidential campaign. I am sure there is outrage amongst the environmental movement, but the media knows that questions about the handling of this accident will lead back to the White House. Instead most of the major media outlets have chosen to cover the protests over the Arizona immigration law.

Once again it is truth that is the casualty. Our society relies on the press to relay facts and truth, instead we have a media that decides what facts we should know. They have allowed, and even aided, the government to politicize this event toward it's own ends, when they should be gathering information that helps soften the impact of this disaster and pointing out the inefficiencies so we can improve the response in the future. It is time for all of us to hold the press to the standards that they themselves have set. We can not allow the media to become a propaganda arm of the government so we must become more personally diligent on seeking truth. Our own complacency may be the greatest sin of all.