E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
After yesterday vowing to seek an appeal quickly, administration officials now say the Justice Department will refrain from any legal action in response to yesterday's court order that temporarily blocks the Interior Department's moratorium on offshore drilling.
The plan now is for the government to seek a new moratorium, doing so in a way that avoids some of the legal problems identified by the judge who issued yesterday's injunction. For example, the judge chided the Interior Department for claiming that a panel of outside experts had endorsed the moratorium issued in late May, when, in fact, they favored something less sweeping.
Once the Interior Department issues its new moratorium, the government fully expects another legal challenge and very likely another court order blocking it. But on the second round, with a modified moratorium, the Justice Department believes it would be on firmer ground to seek an appeal.
Yesterday, the federal judge who temporarily blocked the government's moratorium on deepwater drilling was harshly critical of the Obama administration in his 22-page legal opinion, both on how the halt to drilling was conceived and on what effect it would have in Gulf states. The flavor of Judge Martin Feldman's order is captured in a single footnote. It quotes from an Interior Department report, which said the BP oil disaster was "commanding the Department of Interior's resources." He adds, "A disturbing admission by this Administration."
The judge notes that the moratorium was first proposed in a report by Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, issued in late May. It called for a six-month moratorium on permits for new wells being drilled using floating rigs. Such a conclusion, the report said, was peer-reviewed by a panel of outside experts. But that statement, Judge Feldman wrote, was a misrepresentation, because the experts "envisioned a more limited kind of moratorium."
The judge chided the administration for glossing over the difference between the dangers of drilling in up to 500 feet of water compared to drilling in depths of 1,000 feet or more.
"The court is unable to divine or fathom a relationship between the findings and the immense scope of the moratorium," he said. "What seems clear is that the federal government has been pressed by what happened on the Deepwater Horizon into an otherwise sweeping confirmation that all Gulf deepwater drilling activities put us all in a universal threat of irreparable harm."
He added, "Are all airplanes a danger because one was? All oil tankers like Exxon Valdez? All trains? All mines? That sort of thinking seems heavy-handed, and rather overbearing," he adds. Judge Feldman concludes by accusing the government of underestimating the effect of even a six-month drilling moratorium on the Gulf economy. "It is only a matter of time before more business and jobs and livelihoods will be lost," made worse, he says, by "the movement of the rigs to other sites around the world.
An Obama administration official had said the government would appeal the judge's order.
"We will take the legal and administrative steps necessary to ensure that deepwater drilling does not continue until more aggressive safety regulations, containment and clean-up plans are in place," the official said yesterday.
Leave a Comment:
It looks like President Obama is diggin in his heels and is starting to pay hardball. Now its the President's turn to apply some pressure. We had quite a bit of celebration yesterday on the right concerning this ruling, and now it seems that the Government STILL has the upper hand in this fight - for now.
Will this drive the right-wing NUTS again? Probably, but it also shows me that this President has probably had just about enough of everyone's whining.
Actions usually speak louder than words...
Pietro,
You are correct. Actions do speak louder than words. Let's see what the righties say now.
I like this. NOW we're playing chess.
From BP: at this moment the well is spewing oil in the Gulf uncontrollably. But that is not really the problem the problem is that the well is spewing money into the Gulf. We need to start drilling other wells right away to make up for that lost production. We hope to prevent our money from washing ashore and destroying everything as you have known it, we are just sick about it.
Anna Molly,
President Obama is always playing chess . . . while he media plays tic-tac-toe and wonders why the President "takes so long" to decide which of his funny shaped pieces to move.
What do they teach in journalism class these days . . . or do they even still have those?
Just look at Sarah Palin, Nash. THAT'S what they teach. But now they call it broadcasting.
I'm glad to see our President is proving he will take charge despite the Party of No trying to prove otherwise. First taking on McCrystal and now taking on Judge Feldman. YES WE CAN.
The judge ruling on this should have recused himself due to his financial ties with big oil...
Putting anything 'anti-big oil' in front of this guy is stacking the deck...
And maybe Obama should recuse himself because of all his ties to radical environmentalists and the money they give him, especially the ones appointed to his oil leak commission.
and, KLM, don't forget the $77K BP gave Obama
Great, now we're going to be dependent on Saudi Arabia and welfare from Obama's Stash
People can argue over this but in an effort to make the government more efficient on this matter, the administration is doing the right thing, no need to tie up the courts with this, just redefine and issue a new moratorium.
Good to see everybody so upbeat.
You guys were beginning to be a real downer...
We're just trying to keep you happy, MB. Liberals live to serve.
Yesterday, the federal judge who temporarily blocked the government's moratorium on deepwater drilling was harshly critical of the Obama administration in his 22-page legal opinion,
------------------------------------------------------
did that 'legal opinion' mention the Judge's holdings in the Oil Industry ? Did it mention that that BOZO owns major stock in TransOcean ?
In some jurisdictions, this is considered 'Conflict of Interest' when a Judge rules on something that affects him financially
Just a 'technicality' huh ?
Not only holdings in TransOcean, but holdings in at least 17 other energy corporations including Halliburton. I heard on NPR that the majority of the judges in the gulf states should recuse themselves due to their involvment with the energy industry.
Hi Steven,
Good to see you! :0)
Where are the lunatics that spent the last day calling citizens of the Gulf region names because they wanted JOBS that happened to be with oil companies? Sick, heartless S.O.Bs.
*She raises hand.*
I confess to being sick and heartless, but I don't THINK I called anyone names, and certainly not "S.O.Bs," whatever that is.
Anna Molly, you are not a "Son". Just ignore those like CU and they will go away.
Maybe. But then what fun would it be?
Anna Molly-
You shine like a diamond in a coal scuttle.
I'm enchanted.
unfreakingbelievable! the difference between charlie crist and piyush jindal is glaring. charlie puts his peole first by realizing that oil is a known carcinogen while piyush continues with the drill baby drill slogan. How many more deep water wells are flawed? could be none could be many. why take a chance? a moratoroium is not a ban. we are already at 97% refining capacity. most of this oil will be going to foriegn consumers! I fear the gulf coast will see a 15-20% spike in various cancer rates over the next decade and I live with what I speak after working in refineries for over twenty years. both the burning oil and the emulsion(mixture) are cancer causing! The effects are dibilitating and do not manifest themselves for many years. And we know there will be no national healthcare or public option to help with these maifestations.
think about long term piyush. do not be short sighted. your people's health must be first and foremost.
Funny Leon... but I was thinking the same thing earlier. I'm actually hoping that Charlie Christ does win the Senate seat as he will no doubt caucus with the Dem's!
Which will ulitmately cause the right wing nuts heads to explode!
In the meantime check out this new documentary from HBO premiering Mon 6.28 on the dangers of unchecked deep water oil drilling - seems we have more to worry about than just oil!
http://www.mycentraljersey.com/article/20100621/ENTERTAINMENT/100617056/-Gasland-New-HBO-documentary-exposes-gas-drilling-hazards
Actually, I have given up on Lousiana and Mississippi, and maybe even some of Alabama, they are the very first to scream and cry "help us, help us"! then they state they want to keep drilling off shore where it is the most dangerous? Sorry folks, I'm one who was extremely concerned about you during each hurricane season (not just over Katrina), have donated money on many occassions to your rebuilding and clean up, make it a point to spend vacation dollars in the reagon every year that I can - but I'm not gonna feel one bit sorry for you if you are happy to have this same insanity repeat itself. Either you are upset and want the oil to stop, including the dangerous off shore drilling, or you aren't and want it to continue. so, which is it? Can't have it both ways and Piyush needs to decide if he is worried about his environment or his money, if he cares about the people's health of his state or the state of their wealth. If you want my sympathy, money, and help I'm glad to give it, but don't moan, groan, beg and plead and then turn around and invite the wolf back at your table, cause next time the wolf eats all your grub and you I might now want to come to your defense.
This is not the US taxpayer's mess to clean up! This mess belongs to BP, halliburton, and trans oceaniac - they are responsible for making it and for cleaning it up
Great, now we're going to be dependent on Saudi Arabia and welfare from Obama's Stash
---------------------------------------------------------
I'd Rather be Dependent on Saudi Arabia that BP I'd rather be dependent on Iran than Exxon I'd rather be dependent on Libya than Chevron
Those countries have a higher sense of morality than do the Oil Companies Those countries are MORE ETHICAL tha Big Oil
Better Moamar Khadaffi than Tony Hayward !!!
Forget about dependenc on Middle Eastern Oil, Worry about dependence on Big Oil Watch them try to take over alternative fuels and sell use nuclear power
Imagine BP running a Nuclear plant in YOUR neighborhood !!
WOW. What planet are you from???? Why don't you move to Saudi Arabia, Iran, or Libya if you love them and their ethics so much???? Good riddance!
Msierra, go on and go to one of those countries. see how much you can run your mouth, complain, call leaders names.
I remember seeing someone who weighed 400 lbs. wearing spandex, and wondering if they had looked in the mirror and said - "Damn, I look sexy"?
I remember reading one of the most stupid, ignorant comments of all time, and wondering if they had read their comments before hitting post and said - "Damn, that is intelligent"?
The better question is - Do you other liberals read the above and say - "Damn, that is intelligent"?
Ah, nevermind - that's a stupid question.
Hurrah! Smart move. Finally, an Administration putting what is actually good for us not to us first. The President has absolutely nothing to loose from this point on. It is clear his is the vioice of reason here, the Gulf Coast residents don't care the pollution, dangers or costs to the rest of us, they are bound to Big Oil. They will continue to rabidly bite the hand that is feeding and attempting to protect them. They are ingrates and should be abandoned to their folly if they do anything else to block efforts to secure the safe return to deep offshore drilling.
There's one pesky detail that will haunt Interior even with a new moratorium:
the panel of experts, called together by Obama, (and paid by you and me), argued AGAINST a moratorium as being TOO risky.
Deepwater Horizon was being shut down when the explosion happened.(It was going from'exploratory' to production status. The rig in place was an exploratory rig and needed to be moved. The rest is history). So,having relied on falsehood to both put this moratorium in place, and to justify it in federal court, what other cards does Salazar have up his sleeve?
We don't shut down all mines when there is a cave-in. Yes, the skies were shut down for a few days after 9/11, but it is not done everytime there is a plane crash. We don't idle all cars or trucks when there is a terrible crash.
I own property on the Gulf-in an area that, thank goodness, is not affected by this spill-but I don't think that kneejerk reactions are helping. Accepting help from our allies-waiving the Jones act-would be a positive in containing the spill. This? No help at all.
As an aside, I am consistently amazed by the leftist posters who excuse Obama's not accepting the help of our allies at the expense of his union buddies. I swear, the man could advocate drowning kittens, and you'd support him as being a leader in reducing the unwanted pet population.
Is there anything AllBlow's not an expert on? lol
We don't shut down all mines when there is a cave-in. Yes, the skies were shut down for a few days after 9/11, but it is not done everytime there is a plane crash. We don't idle all cars or trucks when there is a terrible crash.
No Jo you can't use this anology, car, trucks, planes when they crach don't put thousand of gallons of oil in the ocean. there are birds species that are being endangered, the wet lands are ruined. mines are another story, i wish the owners of mines were held to the same standards OSA holds construction projects. you don't see this kind of problems on construction sites.
Red herring, Jeff. The moratorium was only on the deep-water rigs, like the one that blew up, spilling a hundred twenty-five million gallons of oil -- and counting -- into the Gulf of Mexico. The moratorium covered only 33 out of something like 3,500 rigs currently operating in the Gulf. The moratorium is necessary because of the industry's and government's failure to ensure that this couldn't happen at the time these wells were opened. Think about this carefully, Jeff, because, if you didn't like the first one, it's for sure you won't like the second one. The judge played a game fo Catch 22 here, Jeff. He said the government didn't prove imminent danger. The only way for the government to prove there is imminent danger is by inspecting the wells. To inspect the wells, the moratorium was required. Without the moratorium, it will take another disaster -- one that might have been prevented by the moratorium -- to determine whether there was any other imminent danger.
You are right, we don't shut down the skies or roads when there are accidents!
On the other hand, the emergency plan in each event is up-to-date, has live people in charge and doesn't include walruses!
BP and the oil companies have obviously proven they cannot handle a deep water well problem, so why allow them to continue? After all, you get a result from a mistake, you should assume you will continue to get the same result for the same mistake!
Perhaps living down there amidst all the pollution has affected their brains, but I think it is more a case IGMFU. That area of Louisiana is very insular, not many choose to go live there, it is beautiful in many ways but the majority of the folks dont care, it is only if they make a living from the tourists that they appreciate the natural beauty, again only because it is a source of income.
The same for the oil workers, long before this disaster happened, driving down around, the smell of oil was always pervasive and one would wonder how people could live there. But when you make a decision to live under those circumstances, then you should not expect 'Big' government pull your a@@ out of the proverbial fire.
I applaud the President for trying to get some sense into this situation, we cannot and must not blindly deepwater drill and ignore the possible consequences.
"The flavor of Judge Martin Feldman's order is captured in a single footnote. It quotes from an Interior Department report, which said the BP oil disaster was "commanding the Department of Interior's resources." He adds, "A disturbing admission by this Administration."
Okay, I'm confused - should this NOT be commanding the Department of Interior's resources? Is there something better they should be working on?
And what's up with the "disturbing admission by this Administration"? Or are judges now political pundits too?
I don't know, either. If that isn't proof that NOT inspecting these wells could present imminent danger, I don't know what would be, short of inspecting the wells.
As for judges as political pundits, I give you Antonin Scalia.
Honey, judges are more worthless than any member of congress. Most stay drunk and stoned all day, even when in court and if someone happens to arrest or bring a complaint agains their supplier their supplier gets off while the person who causes them to come to court gets to live with constant intemidation.
How about this-if the spill is 'commanding' all of Interior's resources, (which istis not, by the way-there are resources they are not even using, like OHMSETT, Nor, by the way, do they have any PLANS to use those resources), would there not be SOME progress on containment?
What, precisely, are the INSPECTORS doing during this moratorium? Are they inspecting? If not, why not? What possible value do inspectors add to clean-up efforts?
How much research is being done on the hundreds of containment ideas that have been contributed to BP/Interior? I can answer that question, based on an article in the Star Ledger this week: NONE. ZIp, Zilch. Nada. The only facility that could be used for such testing is shut down for 'regularly scheduled maintenance"; and, if Michael Thomson is correct, there was never any intention of testing any of these containment materials.
I presume that Salazar believes that engagement extends to having deep meaningful discussions that may, in fact, occasionally result in raised voices. I KNOW that Obama believes that his little speech last week was all the attention he needed to pay to this spill.
Oh, and let's not forget, Interior just shut down the dredges that were being used to construct berms to protect the beaches-they want them moved to another area. Why? Who the heck knows why. More bureaucratic nonsense, is my guess.
And, of course, MMS has been 'reformed' as a result of this disaster: they had their name changed. All that letterhead, all those desktops, to say nothing of the nameplates on the desks and doors, now need to be changed.
So much to do, so little time to do it. Ah, yes, Interior is fully engaged.
Too bad they accomplish so little for all the tax dollars they spend.
no joe ~ I find myself curiously in agreement with you, but I also have a question -- What are you asking for? More government? More regulation? More spending? Because I don't see what the solution would be otherwise. You can't possibly be counseling to get rid of the Interior Department because, if there was no Interior, who else would do all of these things that you more-or-less admit need to be done? Not private industry, apparently. They proved in this case how woefully inadequate they are to police themselves. So then, what?
No, not more-better utilization. Look at it this way-if you earn $100,000, but you are in debt, it is because you need to change your spending habits.
Why on earth are inspectors not down in the gulf at this very moment, inspecting rigs? Why is there a multi billion dollar testing site that simulates the ocean, and it is not just off-line, but not scheduled to be used to test any containment methods?
Why was the solution to the problems at MMS to change the name? But I digress.
The problem with bureaucracies, and the people who are drawn to the lifetime jobs within them, is that they thrive on inefficiency. If they solved any problems, they would be out of business-so there is a built in incentive to make sure that the status quo remains.
So, no, I don't want to get rid of interior=I want someone to go in there with the authority to fire the corrupt and useless, motivate those who are not giving 100%, and make it plain to all who remain that there is a job to be done, and to remain employed, it had better GET done.
Well, doggone it, I'm all for that. What do you know? Common ground.
Union Baby, I am curious; exactly where do you get your information?
no joe and Anna Molly - Ditto on the common ground - I don't know of anyone who's AGAINST more government efficiency, except maybe career government paper-pushers themselves. As a side note, my younger brother works in the Defense Department and I recall how excited he was years ago to be working for months to prepare some sort of report as part of Al Gore's "Re-Inventing Government" initiative - a report which I'm sure is now serving as a dusty doorstop in some other bureaucrat's office, however well-intended it was at the time.
That being said, my original question was about what the judge himself found to be so "disturbing". I should probably hunt up the full text of his order and read it. But in the meantime, the excerpts above still sound more like they came from a talk-show host or political "analyst" than from a supposedly impartial justice.
thanks fiesty one. I tried to post to you but just found out the problem. Since I signed as just leon, it will no longer let me be from houston...
BTW that Atlantis well came on line at the end of 2007 and rumors are it has even bigger problems. how much longer can we rely on just luck? these people haven't even begun to realize the health problems that go with oil. I have!
Gotcha Leon... I sent you a friend request!
It's good seeing you around here again...
I have a question for someone. I went to check out a post that said the Judge had oil stock and came away with many more questions. He did in fact have stock at one time but while there I read that some of the shut down rigs are leaving for Petrobras Oil in Brazil. I also learned that the United States loaned this semi private company 12 Billion dollars last Aug. Why would we loan money to a semi private company that has a large share holder named George Soros? We are broke so where did we get the 12 billion to loan? Will this company benefit from our shut down wells? I was much happier before I became hooked on the news and the internet. Do any of you have the answer?
I would ask you what website you were on. I have a brother who works on an oil rig in the gulf, we were both born and raised in Louisiana,and he assures me that it would be cost inhibitive for the rigs to go anywhere right now. Unless they have a lease already signed in Brazil and were planning to go later, they may go ahead and leave now, but that is unlikely. These are huge ocean going vehicles and it is not a easy or cheap to move them. They are here in the gulf because they have the leases and the permits to drill in hand.
I am brand new at this internet game but I started out with Judge Martin Feldman and ended up with 'US oil crisis a win win for Petrobras and Soros" I have no idea where I went in the middle but you could type in the end result and perhaps go back. Sorry. I was sort of wishing I read it wrong and someone would point out the error of my ways.
maggie-965735
If you are new at this then there is a lot to learn. There is much misnformation from all sides out there. The only way to trust what you read is to verify it through multiple sources. It won't take too long before you know which sites to trust and which ones to stay away from. There is nothing worse, for me, than to use wrong information in debates. The more you learn and educate yourself, the better it will be for you. I tried to post this last night but it wouldn't take so I hope you read it today.
okay, this has gone on long enough. the berms were NEVER a good idea. they would just create a backlog of oil until the first hurricane busted through them and then you would have a flood of oil infected water that would create a whole new series of problems. The only real answer is to skim the oil but after the flow has been stopped. The problem is they are using too small a diameter top hat. you need at least a tank thirty feet in diameter to drop over that rupture and then you could tie youere siphon line to a flange on the very top of said tank. You need the diameter size to help expand the pressure until siphoning could begin. the trouble is this is a theory, the logistics of the opration would undoubtedly be a nightmare as I'm sure bp eggheads have already thought of that.
Agreed as to long enough, but isn't the problem with skimming that the oil is emulsifying in the ever-churning water, meaning for now that it can't be burned, and eventually making it very hard to extract from the water? Sort of like undoing oil and vinegar salad dressing after it has spilled out onto the table. How do you think we should deal with that?
Just so you righties know, the moratorium affects only 33 deep water rigs, 3600 other oil rigs will continue to operate. This is a very precise shut down. It took me less than 2 minutes to get this info. Try it sometime!