# Why would Republicans object to the $20 billion BP clean-up fund? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 18, 2010, 1:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-would-republicans-object-to-the-20-billion-bp-clean-up-fund/543634 "2010-06-18T01:49:34Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![joebuck20](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/74df32/32.png) [@joebuck20](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/joebuck20)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2010, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-would-republicans-object-to-the-20-billion-bp-clean-up-fund/543634/41 "2010-06-18T15:00:43Z")
> [@spazattak](#): > > I don’t think this is accurate. I thought BP was ‘voluntarily’ putting the money into escrow to be managed by a 3rd party. Granted, it was suggested by the government, but as far as I can tell, no one is ‘confiscating’ money from BP. Exactly. That’s the impression I got. If they had really wanted to, BP could have told Obama to fuck off. Of course that would have resulted in even more bad PR and probably obliterated whatever reputation they had left, but they were well within their rights to do that. Now, of course their main motivation here was trying to fend threats of lawsuits, government meddling and the aforementioned negative PR, but to that I say tough shit. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/73ab20/32.png) [@The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Tao_s_Revenge)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2010, 3:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-would-republicans-object-to-the-20-billion-bp-clean-up-fund/543634/42 "2010-06-18T15:04:17Z")
> [@msmith537](#): > > If I may play devil’s advocate for a moment. > > By what legal mechanism has the government mandated that BP pay $20 billion? Was there a lawsuit I missed? Is the $20 billion part of some sort of prior contract or agreement? > > That BP is responsible is not in doubt. The question is what gives the government the right to arbitrarily confiscate a companies assets with no legal due process. And if they can do it with BP, what is to stop them from doing it to any other business based on populism or simple convenience? Well a couple of things. As you say, that BP is is responsible is not in doubt. This is the equivalent of a plea bargain. “We have your bloody finger prints on the gun! Sign this confession and maybe we’ll knock a few years off”. BP could refuse but the government could come down on them like a ton of bricks through the courts, legal, and other channels such as purchesses. Further this deal is in the clear public interest of trying to make the victims of BP’s incompetence whole again with as minimal disruption to their lives as possible. Good Devil’s advocate, though. ---
**Author:** ![Kevbo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/e47774/32.png) [@Kevbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kevbo)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2010, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-would-republicans-object-to-the-20-billion-bp-clean-up-fund/543634/43 "2010-06-18T15:10:00Z")
The GOP objection to this is that it makes (or might make) Obama look good, and that is a very bad thing. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2010, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-would-republicans-object-to-the-20-billion-bp-clean-up-fund/543634/44 "2010-06-18T15:13:02Z")
They don’t need a reason. The GOBP will attack anything Obama says or does. If Obama gives the same speech that Ronald Reagan once made, they will call him a communist. The Democrats do much of the same. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2010, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-would-republicans-object-to-the-20-billion-bp-clean-up-fund/543634/45 "2010-06-18T15:24:17Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > The fund is basically a hand-out from BP to the US federal government. Obama will oversee how it is spent, so it is effectively his money. Those in Obama’s favor will get more than will those not in his favor. That is very objectionable, in my view. > > We have already set up a nice little justice system here that is more than capable of deciding claims brought by people against other people. There’s no need to private businesses with lots of claimants to hand a bunch of money over to politicians for them to distribute as they see fit. Amazing and wrong take again. The fund will be administered by an arbitrator who also oversaw the 911 funds. Obama will not be involved. In America you get the justice you can afford. Exxon got their damages dropped over and over until it was 10 percent of the original reward. They could afford the best lawyers and could go to court forever if needed. The Valdez people got about 15 thou apiece.It took 2 decades. In Bhopal the perpetrators got away with even less. We do not have a nice little justice system. You get all the justice you can pay for. BP can afford to buy the best. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2010, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-would-republicans-object-to-the-20-billion-bp-clean-up-fund/543634/46 "2010-06-18T15:25:07Z")
> [@Polycarp](#): > > There are certain things that are still across the line in civil discourse. Blatant accusations of actual treason is one of them. Discussed in quite some depth on this very forum, over the previous decade, nonetheless. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2010, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-would-republicans-object-to-the-20-billion-bp-clean-up-fund/543634/47 "2010-06-18T15:27:26Z")
> [@msmith537](#): > > If I may play devil’s advocate for a moment. > > By what legal mechanism has the government mandated that BP pay $20 billion? None. It’s something they’ve agreed to do under political pressure. > [@](#): > > That BP is responsible is not in doubt. Then you shouldn’t have used the word “arbitrarily” to describe their being held to that responsibility _in your very next sentence._ ---
**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2010, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-would-republicans-object-to-the-20-billion-bp-clean-up-fund/543634/48 "2010-06-18T15:40:56Z")
Based on the reaction of BP’s share holders, it doesn’t look like too much of a shake down. [BP’s stocks rose with the announcement](http://http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/investing/bps-stock-pops-on-20-billion-gulf-oil-spill-fund/19518875/). So it looks like it may have been a win/win. People hurt by the spill get money, BP gets some degree of stability. ---
**Author:** ![msmith537](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d9b06d/32.png) [@msmith537](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/msmith537)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2010, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-would-republicans-object-to-the-20-billion-bp-clean-up-fund/543634/49 "2010-06-18T16:13:17Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > None. It’s something they’ve agreed to do under political pressure. Then I would argue that the government should not be able to take your assets simply because it’s politically desirable to do so. > [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Then you shouldn’t have used the word “arbitrarily” to describe their being held to that responsibility _in your very next sentence._ You do understand that there is a difference between “everyone knows someone is responsible” and actually legal responsibility? ---
**Author:** ![Merijeek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f05b48/32.png) [@Merijeek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merijeek)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2010, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-would-republicans-object-to-the-20-billion-bp-clean-up-fund/543634/50 "2010-06-18T16:18:04Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > This. The Republicans don’t care or not if something is a good idea; if Obama supports it, they oppose it and will do everything they can to make it fail to make him look bad. Oh, that’d only be true if before this they were complaining that he wasn’t doing enough. Oh, wait…! -Joe ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2010, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-would-republicans-object-to-the-20-billion-bp-clean-up-fund/543634/51 "2010-06-18T16:21:05Z")
> [@msmith537](#): > > Then I would argue that the government should not be able to take your assets simply because it’s politically desirable to do so. Did you miss the “voluntary” part, even though under pressure? > [@](#): > > You do understand that there is a difference between “everyone knows someone is responsible” and actually legal responsibility? You do understand that _legal_ responsibility is not a consideration here? Are you acting as devil’s advocate here, or Limbaugh’s? :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![bordelond](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bordelond/32/150_2.png) [@bordelond](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bordelond)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2010, 5:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-would-republicans-object-to-the-20-billion-bp-clean-up-fund/543634/52 "2010-06-18T17:41:11Z")
FWIW, [Barton retracted his apology to BP yesterday](http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2010/06/17/4524162-barton-retracts-apology-to-bp): > [@](#): > > Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) has apologized – for the third time today. > > This time, he apologized for apologizing to BP. Earlier, during testimony, he apologized “if anything I’ve said this morning has been misconstrued.” > > He said, “And if anything I’ve said this morning has been misconstrued … I want to apologize for that … misconstruction.” > > But now Barton has put out a written statement explicitly apologizing for his original comments this morning and went so far as to “retract my apology to BP.” > > Here’s his statement: > > _“I apologize for using the term ‘shakedown’ with regard to yesterday’s actions at the White House in my opening statement this morning, and I retract my apology to BP. As I told my colleagues yesterday and said again this morning, BP should bear the full financial responsibility for the accident on their lease in the Gulf of Mexico. BP should fully compensate those families and businesses that have been hurt by this accident. BP and the federal government need to stop the leak, clean up the damage, and take whatever steps necessary to prevent a similar accident in the future. I regret the impact that my statement this morning implied that BP should not pay for the consequences of their decisions and actions in this incident.”_ I don’t believe that Barton’s comment ever had majority support among Republicans, despite Bachman, Tom Price, Limbaugh, _et al_. Anyone who did side with Barton definitely got a white-hot spotlight shone upon them … that probably gave the illusion of actual numbers. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2010, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-would-republicans-object-to-the-20-billion-bp-clean-up-fund/543634/53 "2010-06-18T17:43:34Z")
> [@msmith537](#): > > Then I would argue that the government should not be able to take your assets simply because it’s politically desirable to do so. That’s nice, now where’s my refund for that stupid Iraq conquest Republicans thought would result in a permanent conservative majority in the house and senate? ---
**Author:** ![miss\_elizabeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/838e76/32.png) [@miss\_elizabeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/miss_elizabeth)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2010, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-would-republicans-object-to-the-20-billion-bp-clean-up-fund/543634/54 "2010-06-18T17:45:30Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Are you acting as devil’s advocate here, or Limbaugh’s? :dubious: Wait… what’s the difference again? ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2010, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-would-republicans-object-to-the-20-billion-bp-clean-up-fund/543634/55 "2010-06-18T17:47:33Z")
The Repub position is purely political. If the fund starts helping the locals get on their feet, it would help Obama. They can not allow that. They have Rush, the liar in chief, talking as if there is no problem. Oil leaks into the ocean naturally ,therefore this is not much different. I suppose he does not actually have eyes. If he did ,what is happening to the innocent people of the gulf would by obvious. Ben Stein was on last night repeating over and over that Obama’s actions are unconstitutional. Since the constitution does not specifically address the creation of a fund, it is not allowed. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/73ab20/32.png) [@The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Tao_s_Revenge)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2010, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-would-republicans-object-to-the-20-billion-bp-clean-up-fund/543634/56 "2010-06-18T17:52:04Z")
> [@msmith537](#): > > Then I would argue that the government should not be able to take your assets simply because it’s politically desirable to do so. And I would argue that we have taxes and only the most diehard libertarian would argue all taxes are wrong. What I think you meant was the government shouldn’t be able to seize an entity’s assets without proving harm through due process in court? However even that point doesn’t apply in this case. BP was completely free to take it to court ad not pay a dime until court ordered. They would have lost and lost hard, and they know it, but they’re free to. > [@](#): > > You do understand that there is a difference between “everyone knows someone is responsible” and actually legal responsibility? And that’s why this was a great devil’s advocate. It probes the conflict inherent in democracy of the rights of the individual verses the tyranny of the majority. BP can’t be arbitrarily legally punished without proving a crime in court, even if everyone hates them and thinks they smell funny. However the government can use the threat of court. If it has a weak case the threat has fee teeth, but how many teeth does a public trial have for BP in this case? ---
**Author:** ![msmith537](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d9b06d/32.png) [@msmith537](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/msmith537)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2010, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-would-republicans-object-to-the-20-billion-bp-clean-up-fund/543634/57 "2010-06-18T19:38:42Z")
> [@miss\_elizabeth](#): > > Wait… what’s the difference again? About 100 lbs and a drug habbit. **The Tao’s Revenge** - That’s correct. I wasn’t including taxes as they are part of “legal due process”. Regardless of your stance on the issue of taxes, there is at least a tax code that tells you how much you owe each year. The government doesn’t just say “you are too rich” and just take all your money. **ElvisL1ves** - If I threaten you with financial ruin if you don’t pay me a lot of money, is that really “voluntary”? ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2010, 7:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-would-republicans-object-to-the-20-billion-bp-clean-up-fund/543634/58 "2010-06-18T19:49:51Z")
> [@msmith537](#): > > **ElvisL1ves** - If I threaten you with financial ruin if you don’t pay me a lot of money, is that really “voluntary”? What threat was made? And, assuming you can find out what that was, how does holding them to the responsibility you already acknowledge they have constitute a “threat”? And, for that matter, who is getting paid the “lot of money” here? When come back, bring argument. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2010, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-would-republicans-object-to-the-20-billion-bp-clean-up-fund/543634/59 "2010-06-18T20:25:53Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > What threat was made? **Obamanation**? There are some who are scared witless by that. ---
**Author:** ![Ogre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/ecb155/32.png) [@Ogre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ogre)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2010, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-would-republicans-object-to-the-20-billion-bp-clean-up-fund/543634/60 "2010-06-18T20:36:34Z")
I’ll ask this again: why is it that almost everyone (and especially the Righties - see Rand Rover’s first post) is ignoring the word “escrow” in this deal? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-would-republicans-object-to-the-20-billion-bp-clean-up-fund/543634.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-would-republicans-object-to-the-20-billion-bp-clean-up-fund/543634.md?page=4)