May, 26 2010, 08:16am EDT
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
Why Can't We Fund Universal Public Goods? Blame the Tax-Dodging Billionaire Nepo Babies
"In 2024, these billionaire families used their enormous wealth to make record-breaking political contributions to secure a GOP trifecta," reads a new report.
Dec 13, 2024
The children of the richest families in the U.S. are well-known for spending their vast wealth on frivolous luxuries—constructing a replica of a medieval church on their acres of property, in the case of banking heir Timothy Mellon, or starting a brand of T-shirts described by one critic as "terrible beyond your wildest imagination," as Wyatt Koch, nephew of Republican megadonors Charles and David, did.
But a report released by Americans for Tax Fairness (ATF) on Thursday shows how "billionaire nepo babies" don't just waste their families' fortunes. They also benefit from "a rigged system" that allows them to "pass that wealth down over generations without being properly taxed–often without being taxed at all."
In addition, the heirs of the country's biggest fortunes spend vast sums "to elect politicians who protect their unearned wealth and manipulate the country's economy in their favor," said ATF.
Along with Mellon and Koch, the report profiles Samuel Logan of the Scripps media dynasty; Nicola Peltz-Beckham, daughter of billionaire investor Nelson Peltz; Gabrielle Rubenstein, whose family has made its fortune in private equity; and President-elect Donald Trump's son, Eric Trump.
The nepo babies are part of a small group of billionaire families in the U.S. who benefit from tax loopholes that ensure little of their immense wealth ever goes to benefit the public good.
At least 90 billionaires have passed away over the last decade, leaving their beneficiaries $455 billion in collective wealth.
But according to ATF, "$255 billion (56%) of that amount was likely entirely exempt from the capital gains tax because of a special break called 'stepped up basis.'"
"Trump and his allies in Congress are doing their donors' bidding by rigging the system in their favor and pushing a $4 trillion giveaway to wealthy elites and giant corporations."
Without loopholes included the stepped up basis tax cut, the current estate tax on billionaires and centimillionaires would yield enough revenue to fund universal childcare, preschool, and paid family leave for U.S. workers, with hundreds of billions of dollars left over, according to ATF's report.
The wealthy heirs profiled in the report and their families are some of the Republican Party's top donors—contributing hundreds of millions of dollars to candidates including Trump in the hopes of securing even more tax cuts.
Mellon, for example, is Trump's "biggest supporter, giving $140 million to a pro-Trump PAC in 2024 alone," reads the report.
A previous analysis by ATF found that as of late October, just 150 billionaire families had spent $1.9 billion on the 2024 elections.
As the Center for American Progress found earlier this year, Trump's plan to extend the tax cuts that he pushed through in 2017 would cost $4 trillion over the next decade.
"The vast wealth inherited by centuries-old billionaire families is staggering. While these heirs and their billions go undertaxed, enormous sums are squandered on lavish mansions, private jets, and vanity projects instead of funding crucial public investments," said ATF executive director David Kass. "In 2024, these billionaire families used their enormous wealth to make record-breaking political contributions to secure a GOP trifecta. Now, Trump and his allies in Congress are doing their donors' bidding by rigging the system in their favor and pushing a $4 trillion giveaway to wealthy elites and giant corporations—all while advocating for cuts to vital programs that working and middle-class Americans depend on."
The report calls for Congress to pass "proven, pragmatic proposals to unrig the tax system that enjoy high levels of popular support," such as the Ultra Millionaire Tax Act that was proposed by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Reps. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) and Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.) this year. The bill would tax fortunes between $50 million and $1 billion at 2% and wealth above $1 billion at $1 billion.
The small tax on enormous wealth would generate "a whopping $3 trillion over 10 years," said ATF.
The estate tax could also be "restored so that it can play a meaningful role in promoting fairness and equal opportunities" through the passage of the For the 99.5% Act, which was introduced in 2023 by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Jimmy Gomez (D-Calif.).
Under the bill, the estate tax exemption would be lowered to $7 million per couple and the current 40% flat rate would be replaced with a sliding scale that would charge higher rates as a family's wealth grows.
"None of these tax reforms would impoverish the ultra wealthy, nor even inconvenience them in any meaningful way–but they would reduce the concentration of wealth that is so corrosive to society," reads the report. "At the same time, they would raise trillions of dollars that could be used to reduce inequality and improve the lives of families that can only dream of the kind of security and opportunity enjoyed by the nation’s richest clans."
"And if rich families ever did need to tighten their belts a bit to pay their taxes," the report continues, "the economizing might begin by reducing the flow of money funding the extravagant lifestyles of America's Billionaire Nepo Babies."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'The Next Recession Starts Here': Trump Team Weighs Abolishing Bank Regulators
The president-elect's advisers are reportedly discussing plans to shrink or eliminate key bank watchdogs, including the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
Dec 13, 2024
President-elect Donald Trump and his advisers are reportedly considering plans to weaken—or abolish altogether—top bank regulators, including the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and Office of the Comptroller of the Currency.
The Wall Street Journalreported Thursday that members of Trump's transition team and the new Elon Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency have asked nominees under consideration to head the FDIC and OCC if the bank watchdogs could be eliminated and have their functions absorbed by the Treasury Department, which is set to be run by a billionaire hedge fund manager and crypto enthusiast.
"Bank executives are optimistic President-elect Donald Trump will ease a host of regulations on capital cushions and consumer protections, as well as scrutiny of consolidation in the industry," the Journal reported. "But FDIC deposit insurance is considered near sacred. Any move that threatened to undermine even the perception of deposit insurance could quickly ripple through banks and in a crisis might compound customer fears."
The Trump team's internal and fluid discussions about the fate of the key bank regulators broadly aligns with Project 2025's proposal to "merge the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the National Credit Union Administration, and the Federal Reserve's non-monetary supervisory and regulatory functions."
The FDIC, which is primarily funded by bank insurance premiums, was established during the Great Depression to restore public trust in the nation's banking system, and the agency played a central role in navigating the 2023 bank failures that threatened a systemic crisis.
Observers warned that gutting the FDIC and OCC could catalyze another economic meltdown.
"The next recession starts here," tech journalist Jacob Silverman warned in response to the Journal's reporting.
Eric Rauchway, a historian of the New Deal, wrote that "even Milton Friedman appreciated the FDIC," underscoring the extreme nature of the incoming Trump administration's deregulatory ambitions.
Musk, the world's wealthiest man, is also pushing for the elimination of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, an agency established in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis.
The Journal noted Thursday that "Rep. Andy Barr, a Republican from Kentucky and Trump ally on the House Financial Services Committee, has backed the plan to eliminate or drastically alter the CFPB and said he wants to get rid of what he calls 'one-size-fits-all' regulation for banks."
Barr has received millions of dollars in campaign donations from the financial sector and "introduced many pieces of pro-industry legislation, including significant rollbacks of protections stemming from the 2008 financial crisis," according to the watchdog group Accountable.US.
Keep ReadingShow Less
UN Chief Warns of Israel's Syria Invasion and Land Seizures
United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres stressed the "urgent need" for Israel to "de-escalate violence on all fronts."
Dec 12, 2024
United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres said Thursday that he is "deeply concerned" by Israel's "recent and extensive violations of Syria's sovereignty and territorial integrity," including a ground invasion and airstrikes carried out by the Israel Defense Forces in the war-torn Mideastern nation.
Guterres "is particularly concerned over the hundreds of Israeli airstrikes on several locations in Syria" and has stressed the "urgent need to de-escalate violence on all fronts throughout the country," said U.N. spokesperson Stephane Dujarric.
Israel claims its invasion and bombardment of Syria—which come as the United States and Turkey have also violated Syrian sovereignty with air and ground attacks—are meant to create a security buffer along the countries' shared border in the wake of last week's fall of former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and amid the IDF's ongoing assault on Gaza, which has killed or wounded more than 162,000 Palestinians and is the subject of an International Court of Justice genocide case.
While Israel argues that its invasion of Syria does not violate a 1974 armistice agreement between the two countries because the Assad dynasty no longer rules the neighboring nation, Dujarric said Guterres maintains that Israel must uphold its obligations under the deal, "including by ending all unauthorized presence in the area of separation and refraining from any action that would undermine the cease-fire and stability in Golan."
Israel conquered the western two-thirds of the Golan Heights in 1967 and has illegally occupied it ever since, annexing the seized lands in 1981.
Other countries including France, Russia, and Saudi Arabia have criticized Israel's invasion, while the United States defended the move.
"The Syrian army abandoned its positions in the area... which potentially creates a vacuum that could have been filled by terrorist organizations," U.S. State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller said at a press briefing earlier this week. "Israel has said that these actions are temporary to defend its borders. These are not permanent actions... We support all sides upholding the 1974 disengagement agreement."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular