May, 26 2010, 08:16am EDT
![Center for Biological Diversity](https://assets.rbl.ms/32012680/origin.jpg)
Controversial Salazar 'Moratorium' on Gulf Drilling Was Only Verbal
Gov. Prof: 'so ridiculous that it defies understanding;' Law Prof: 'moratorium does not even cover the dangerous drilling that caused the problem in the first place'
SAN FRANCISCO
In response to a scandal created by Center for
Biological Diversity
research demonstrating that the Minerals Management Service (MMS)
approved 19
new drilling plans after
the
explosion of BP's Deepwater Horizon-all with exemptions from
environmental review-Secretary of Interior Ken Salazar announced on May
6, 2010, a moratorium on the issuance of final permits for "any new
offshore drilling activity."
Since then, the Department of Interior, and
President Obama himself,
has repeatedly changed the definition of the increasingly controversial
moratorium
as ongoing Center research has shown that the agency was still issuing
new
drilling permits. The moratorium description has become steadily
narrower as
the Interior Department changes it to exclude whatever drilling permits
MMS issues
on any given day.
As currently defined, the moratorium is so
narrow it allows continued
issuance of the exact drilling permit type that BP was operating under
when the
Deepwater Horizon exploded.
Daniel J. Rohlf, a law professor
at Lewis
& Clark Law School, told the New
York
Times last week that he was losing confidence that Salazar
was
capable of instituting needed offshore drilling reforms since "(t)he
moratorium does not even cover the dangerous drilling that caused the
problem
in the first place."
"Under pressure from the oil
industry
and an agency he seems incapable of controlling, Secretary Salazar has
watered
down the drilling moratorium to a point where it is virtually
meaningless,"
said Kieran Suckling, executive director of the Center for Biological
Diversity.
"He seems more interested in
political
damage control than ensuring the Gulf of Mexico is protected from
another oil
industry explosion," said Suckling. "Salazar's so-called
moratoriums and reforms are little more than rhetorical dispersants
designed to
breakup and hide the political scandal threatening to wash up on his
shore."
Yesterday, Interior spokespeople
revealed
why the "moratorium" has changed so often and caused so much
confusion: it does not exist in writing. In keeping with the lax
environmental
oversight he allowed to rein at MMS, Secretary Salazar never
communicated his
moratorium to the agency in writing.
New York University Government
Professor,
Paul Light, told NPR yesterday that a verbal moratorium is "so
ridiculous
that it defies understanding. It could not be more important to
enforce this moratorium and make absolutely clear to the oil industry
what is
and is not permissible. And yet you have the execution of a critical
order that
appears to have been basically done through the most casual way possible
under
federal law."
Secretary Salazar himself became
the victim
of his confused, shifting sands moratorium when he falsely told Congress
that
it stopped all new drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. Interior spokes
people told
NPR that "the Secretary misspoke at the hearing."
Background
Salazar's 5-6-10
press release announcing the moratorium says:
"In a media availability after the meeting,
Secretary Salazar
announced that, as a result of the Deepwater Horizon explosion and
spill, beginning
April 20 - the date of the explosion - no applications for drilling
permits will go forward for any new offshore drilling activity
until the Department
of the Interior completes the safety review process that President Obama
requested. In accordance with the President's request, the Department
will
deliver its report to the President by May 28, 2010. The only exceptions
to the
new rule regarding permit approvals are the two relief w ells that are
being
drilled in response to the Deepwater Horizon disaster."
His 5-7-10
press release says the same thing:
"Offshore Drilling Permit Applications Halted
Secretary Salazar announced that, as a result
of the Deepwater Horizon
explosion and spill, beginning April 20-the date of the
explosion-no applications for drilling permits will go forward for any new offshore
drilling activity
until the Department of the Interior completes the safety review process
that
President Obama requested. In accordance with the President's request,
the Department will deliver its report to the President by May 28. The
only
exceptions to the new rule regarding permit approvals are the two relief
wells
that are being drilled in response to the Deepwater Horizon disaster."
When confronted with the fact that MMS has
issued 17 new drilling
permits since April 20th, Interior spokespeople inexplicably
denied
that the moratorium applied to "any new offshore drilling activity,"
saying that it actually only applied to drilling of new wells. This allows the majority
of MMS
drilling permits, including the kind used by the Deepwater Horizon, to
proceed
unabated.
Salazar subsequently told Congress (and Carol
Browner told the media)
that no new wells had been drilled since April 20th.
Confronted with
the fact that new wells have been drilled since April 20th,
Interior
spokespeople said the Secretary was mistaken and that the moratorium
only
applies to new permits.
While the permit moratorium at least halts a
minimal number of
projects, Salazar has placed no moratorium at all on the approval of
drilling
plans without environmental review even though the president himself has
declared on May 14th: "It seems as if permits were too often
issued based on little more than assurances of safety from the oil
companies.
That cannot and will not happen anymore...We're also closing the
loophole that has allowed some oil companies to bypass some critical
environmental
reviews..."
MMS to this day is approving drilling plans
without environmental
review. Many are for ultradeep water drilling which is much more
dangerous than
the Deepwater Horizon.
At the Center for Biological Diversity, we believe that the welfare of human beings is deeply linked to nature — to the existence in our world of a vast diversity of wild animals and plants. Because diversity has intrinsic value, and because its loss impoverishes society, we work to secure a future for all species, great and small, hovering on the brink of extinction. We do so through science, law and creative media, with a focus on protecting the lands, waters and climate that species need to survive.
(520) 623-5252LATEST NEWS
'Tragic Outcome' for Gig Workers as California Supreme Court Hands Win to Uber, DoorDash
"Today's ruling only strengthens our demand for the right to join together in a union so that we can begin improving the gig economy for workers and our customers," the case plaintiff said.
Jul 25, 2024
Labor advocates on Thursday decried a ruling by the California Supreme Court upholding a lower court's affirmation of a state ballot measure allowing app-based ride and delivery companies to classify their drivers as independent contractors, limiting their worker rights.
The court's seven justices ruled unanimously in Castellanos v. State of California that Proposition 22, which was approved by 58% of California voters in 2020, complies with the state constitution. Prop 22—which was overturned in 2021 by an Alameda County Superior Court judge in 2021—was upheld in March 2023 by the state's 1st District Court of Appeals.
The business models of app-based companies including DoorDash, Instacart, Lyft, and Uber rely upon minimizing frontline worker compensation by categorizing drivers as independent contractors instead of employees. Independent contractors are not entitled to unemployment insurance, health insurance, or compensation for business expenses.
There are approximately 1.4 million app-based gig workers in California, according to industry estimates.
While DoorDash hailed Thursday's ruling as "not only a victory for Dashers, but also for democracy itself," gig worker advocates condemned the decision.
"Over the last three years, gig workers across California have experienced firsthand that Prop 22 is nothing more than a bait-and-switch meant to enrich global corporations at the expense of the Black, brown, and immigrant workers who power their earnings," plaintiff Hector Castellanos, who drives for Uber and Lyft, said in a statement.
"Prop 22 has allowed gig companies like Uber, Lyft, and DoorDash to deprive us of a living wage, access to workers compensation, paid sick leave, and meaningful healthcare coverage," Castellanos added. "Today's ruling only strengthens our demand for the right to join together in a union so that we can begin improving the gig economy for workers and our customers."
Lorena Gonzalez, president of the California Federation of Labor Unions, AFL-CIO, said that "we are deeply disappointed that the state Supreme Court has allowed tech corporations to buy their way out of basic labor laws despite Proposition 22's inconsistencies with our state constitution."
"These companies have upended our social contract, forcing workers and the public to take on the inherent risk created by this work, while they profit," she continued. "A.B. 5 granted virtually all California workers the right to be paid for all hours worked, health and safety standards, unemployment insurance, workers compensation, and the right to organize."
"Rideshare and delivery drivers deserve those rights as well," Gonzalez stressed.
The Gig Workers Rising campaign said on social media that "Uber and other app corporations spent $220 million to buy this law, and they did it by tricking Californians."
Prop 22's passage in November 2020 with nearly 59% of the vote was the culmination of what was by far the most expensive ballot measure in California history. App-based companies and their backers outspent labor and progressive groups by more than 10 to 1, with proponents pouring a staggering $204.5 million into the "yes" campaign's coffers against just $19 million for the "no" side.
"Voters were told the initiative would provide us with 'historic new benefits' and guaranteed earnings," said Gig Workers Rising. "But since it went into effect, drivers have seen our pay go down, learned the benefits are a sham, and have to accept unsafe rides because of the constant threat of being 'deactivated,' kicked off the app with little explanation or warning."
"If Uber really cared about good benefits and fair wages, it could make that happen tomorrow," the campaign added. "Instead, it has shown it would rather slash pay, bamboozle voters, and put drivers' lives and livelihoods in danger—all while promising $7 billion in stock buybacks to banks and billionaires."
Veena Dubal, a law professor at the University of California, Irvine who focuses on labor and inequality, toldCalMatters that Thursday's ruling was "a really tragic outcome," but "it's not the end of the road."
Dubal's sentiment was echoed by some California state legislators, who said the ruling presents an opportunity to act.
"While this decision is frustrating, it must also be motivating," said state Senate Labor Committee Chair Lola Smallwood-Cuevas (D-28). "I'm more determined than ever to ensure that all workers—including our diverse and Black, Indigenous, and people of color-led gig workforce—have the basic protections of workers compensation, paid sick leave, family leave, disability insurance, and the right to form a union."
Prop 22 has served as a template for lawmakers in other states seeking to deny or limit basic worker rights, benefits, and protections.
In Massachusetts, app-based companies have been fighting for years to get a measure to classify drivers as contractors on the state ballot. In 2022, Lyft made the largest political donation in state history—$14.4 million—to a coalition funding one such proposal.
Last month, Uber and Lyft reached an agreement with the office of Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell, a Democrat, to pay $175 million to settle a lawsuit filed in 2020. As part of the deal, the companies also agreed to increase driver pay and provide paid sick leave, accident insurance, and some health benefits. The agreement does not address how app-based gig workers should be classified.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Young Voters Tell Kamala Harris to 'Fight for Our Future'
"This is your chance to energize young people and our communities to vote, mount one of the greatest political comebacks in decades, and deliver a resounding defeat to the far-right agenda of Trump and Vance."
Jul 25, 2024
Four youth-led groups on Thursday urged Vice President Kamala Harris, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, to "fight for our future" by pursuing a policy agenda the coalition unveiled in a March letter to U.S. President Joe Biden.
It's been less than a week since Biden left the race and endorsed Harris, who is expected to face former Republican Donald Trump and his running mate, U.S. Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio), in the November election. Since then, she's racked up endorsements from Democratic members of Congress and progressive groups focused on issues including climate, labor, and reproductive rights.
March for Our Lives, which was launched after the 2018 mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, honored Harris with the group's first-ever endorsement on Wednesday, calling her "the right person to stand up for us and fight for the country we deserve."
"To defeat Trump, you must rebuild support and enthusiasm among young voters."
The gun violence prevention organization is part of the youth-led coalition behind the new letter, which also includes the climate-focused Sunrise Movement; Gen-Z for Change, which advocates on a range of issues; and the national immigrant network United We Dream Action.
"You have an urgent and important task. To defeat Trump, you must rebuild support and enthusiasm among young voters," the coalition told Harris on Thursday, noting that she sought the Democratic nomination during the last cycle. "You should build on your 2020 campaign platform where you put forward a strong vision to make the economy work for everyday people and ensure a livable future for us all."
The groups urged Harris to support the Green New Deal, Medicare for All, and the Reverse Mass Incarceration Act. They pushed her to expand pathways to citizenship, keep families together, end fossil fuel subsidies, and create good, union jobs. They also called on her to prioritize gun violence prevention and investments in public health solutions and green, affordable housing.
"Democrats are at a critical crossroads with young people," the coalition wrote to Harris on Thursday. "Polls showed Biden and Trump neck-and-neck among young voters."
ANew York Times/Siena College poll conducted July 22-24 shows Trump leading Harris 48% to 47% among likely voters and 48% to 46% among registered voters—differences that fall within the margin of error.
Forbesnoted Thursday that "Democrats are far more enthusiastic about Harris than they were Biden, the Times/Siena survey found, with nearly 80% of voters who lean Democrat saying they would like Harris to be the nominee, compared to 48% of Democrats who said the same about Biden three weeks ago."
The outlet also pointed to two other polls conducted by Morning Consult and Reuters/Ipsos since Biden dropped out, which both show Harris with a narrow lead over Trump.
"You have an opportunity to win the youth vote by turning the page and differentiating yourself from Biden policies that are deeply unpopular with us, such as approving new oil and gas projects, denying people their right to seek refuge and asylum, and funding the Israeli government's killing of civilians in Gaza," the youth coalition highlighted Thursday. "You must speak to the economic pain young people are facing from crushing student debt and skyrocketing housing and food prices."
Looking beyond November, the groups told Harris—who could be the first Black woman and person of Asian descent elected to the country's highest office—that "you could be a historic president. Not just because of who you are, but what you can accomplish."
"Young people are energized and ready to organize against fascism and for the future we deserve," they concluded. "This is your chance to energize young people and our communities to vote, mount one of the greatest political comebacks in decades, and deliver a resounding defeat to the far-right agenda of Trump and Vance."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Video Game Actors Strike for AI Protections
"The video game industry generates billions of dollars in profit annually," said one union leader. "The driving force behind that success is the creative people who design and create those games."
Jul 25, 2024
After nearly two years of negotiations with video game giants and no deal that would protect performers from artificial intelligence, unionized voice and motion capture actors who work in video game development announced Thursday that they will go on strike starting at 12:01 am on Friday, July 26.
The performers are represented by Screen Actors Guild-American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA), which last year won a contract for TV and film actors that included "unprecedented provisions for consent and compensation that will protect members from the threat of AI," after the union went on strike for four months.
The union has been negotiating on behalf of video game actors with major production companies including Disney Character Voices Inc., Activision Productions Inc., and WB Games Inc., and has won concessions over wages and job safety—but "AI protections remain the sticking point," said SAG-AFTRA on Thursday as the impending strike was announced.
Unionized actors want protections that would stop video game companies from training AI to replicate actors' voices or likeness without their consent and without compensating them.
"The video game industry generates billions of dollars in profit annually," said Duncan Crabtree-Ireland, national executive director and chief negotiator for SAG-AFTRA. "The driving force behind that success is the creative people who design and create those games. That includes the SAG-AFTRA members who bring memorable and beloved game characters to life, and they deserve and demand the same fundamental protections as performers in film, television, streaming, and music: fair compensation and the right of informed consent for the AI use of their faces, voices, and bodies."
"Frankly, it's stunning that these video game studios haven't learned anything from the lessons of last year—that our members can and will stand up and demand fair and equitable treatment with respect to AI, and the public supports us in that," he added.
Sarah Elmaleh, negotiating committee chair for the union's interactive media agreement, said the negotiations have shown the companies "are not interested in fair, reasonable AI protections, but rather flagrant exploitation."
"We look forward to collaborating with teams on our interim and independent contracts, which provide AI transparency, consent, and compensation to all performers, and to continuing to negotiate in good faith with this bargaining group when they are ready to join us in the world we all deserve," said Elmaleh.
The unionized actors voted in favor of the strike authorization with a 98.32% yes vote, said SAG-AFTRA.
The strike was announced as more than 500 workers who help develop the popular World of Warcraft video game franchise voted to join the Communications Workers of America (CWA), with the games publisher, Blizzard Entertainment, recognizing the bargaining unit.
CWA noted that the workers' journey to union representation began with a walkout in 2021 at Activision Blizzard, which was later bought by Microsoft, over sexual harassment and discrimination.
"What we've accomplished at World of Warcraft is just the beginning," Eric Lanham, a World of Warcraft test analyst, said in a statement. "We know that when workers have a protected voice, it's a win-win for employee standards, the studio, and World of Warcraft fans looking for the best gaming experience."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular