Posted on 07/26/2005 5:43:28 AM PDT by OESY
Never say Congress isn't willing to accept blame -- as long as it can assign it to someone else. Having mandated the use of the fuel additive MTBE, the Members now want to shake down the companies foolish enough to have made the product.
This is the real story behind the debate over MTBE, which has once again become the sticking point in the House-Senate conference over the energy bill. The House has passed modest liability protection for MTBE makers, while Senate Democrats are threatening a filibuster if there's any such thing in the final bill. If we're lucky, the dispute will cause the hot-air dirigible that is the energy bill to crash and burn one more time. But it's more likely the Members will "compromise" by dropping the House provision and thus blame private business for Congress's mistakes....
Congress required the use of oxygenates in 1990 in high-pollution areas as part of the Clear Air Act amendments....
While such small contaminations are harmless to public health (especially as MTBE is easy to detect and therefore to avoid), water companies and some cities have pounced like trial lawyers on MTBE makers with the deepest pockets.
Refiners and other companies now face more than 100 lawsuits.... Draining cash from these companies to finance trial-lawyer contingency bonanzas will not lower gas prices.
Bear in mind that the House liability waiver would only be for "product defect" lawsuits, which are the most frivolous and deadly because they only require plaintiffs to show that a company made the product for sale. Defendants would still be liable for larger MTBE spills, and the current Congressional negotiations include talk of some sort of industry-financed clean-up fund. In about 95% of spills, a responsible party has been identified and most are already paying for a cleanup....
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
This is right out of atlas shrugged.
png
Could we do worse if we had a lottery and said; "OK, now it's your turn to go up there."? Think of no elections, and the smile just starts to grow.
I've seen some serious propsals along those lines. Personally, I'm disposed to like them as well, but with a few caveats. First, only taxpayers would be eligible. (Some have propsed that each dollar in taxes you pay would be one "entry" to the drawing.) Second, we'd have to reign in government quite a bit to make sure that no real damage could be done by a single raving lunatic. (this ought to be done anyway, as H.Clinton is running for president.)
Another way to look at it is that anyone who actually wants the job should be automatically disqualified from having it. This is especially true of the office of the presidency. One of the reasons George Washington worked out so well for us as President is that he didn't really want the job very much.
That's a lie. Here's proof:
What are the oxygenate requirements of the Clean Air Act?The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAA) require the use of oxygenated gasoline in areas with unhealthy levels of air pollution. The CAA does not specifically require MTBE. Refiners may choose to use other oxygenates, such as ethanol.
At this time, about 30 percent of this country’s gasoline is reformulated gasoline, of which about 87 percent contains MTBE. Refiners have chosen MTBE as the main oxygenate in RFG in cities outside of the Midwest primarily for economic reasons and its blending characteristics.
Congress did not require the use of MTBE; The WSJ is shilling for the oil industry. In fact, one of the holdups on the energy bill has been that republicans want to spend over 10 billion dollars of taxpayer money to clean up private industry's mess, and amazingly, some rank and file GOPers seem to agree. Big gubmint definitely has a home in the GOP. Grab yer wallets.
The GOP wants to use 10 billion or more of our tax dollars to clean up the energy companies' mess, and amazingly, some so called conservatives support that idiocy.
MTBE is just one more example of the unintended consequences on a Nanny Government. Congress mandated the additive to close up the Ozone hole. The energy companies are not at fault here.
That is incorrect. The Congress (which is really just us, by the way) did not mandate MBTE.
Congress mandated the use of oxygenates and specified either MTBE or ethanol. Further, the EPA had approved their use.
The WSJ is "shilling for responsibility".
Incorrect.
The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAA) require the use of oxygenated gasoline in areas with unhealthy levels of air pollution. The CAA does not specifically require MTBE. Refiners may choose to use other oxygenates, such as ethanol.
At this time, about 30 percent of this country’s gasoline is reformulated gasoline, of which about 87 percent contains MTBE. Refiners have chosen MTBE as the main oxygenate in RFG in cities outside of the Midwest primarily for economic reasons and its blending characteristics.
The WSJ is shilling for gubmint providing free liability coverage to the oil industry, courtesy of us taxpayers.
Huck-ster, would there have been sufficient ethanol without sending gas prices through the roof (and making rotgut wine cost $100 a liter)?
You are absolutely right...keep sticking up for reality.
Sounds like Superfund is doing what it is supposed to, already.
MTBE in water at the levels we've been seeing it has only one substantiated ill effect, and that is to make water taste lousy. And it takes far more than what you get from homeowners spilling gas as they fill their lawn mowers, to get it up even high enough to taste. It takes an industrial sized muck-up, with an industrial-sized culprit.
Thank you.
Is your argument that because ethanol is more expensive than MBTE, the taxpayer should pick up the check? Why shouldn't it come from the producer's bottom line? What happened to letting the market dictate? Are we all socialists now?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.