More irrationality from the fringe right/tea party...
gimmesometruth27
St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
rand paul....putting principle over safety...even the industry supports this legislation... :roll:
where is the facepalm emoticon??
Senator blocks pipeline safety bill on principle
http://news.yahoo.com/senator-blocks-pi ... 09432.html
WASHINGTON (AP) — A senator who opposes federal regulation on philosophical grounds is single-handedly blocking legislation that would strengthen safety rules for oil and gas pipelines, a bill that even the pipeline industry and companies in his own state support.
Republican Sen. Rand Paul's opposition to the bill hasn't wavered even after a gas pipeline rupture last week shook people awake in three counties in his home state of Kentucky.
Paul, a tea party ally who shares with his father, Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, a desire to shrink the role of the federal government, won't discuss his role in stymieing the bill. But industry lobbyists, safety advocates and Senate aides said he is the only senator who is refusing to agree to procedures that would permit swift passage of the measure.
A deadly gas pipeline explosion near San Francisco last year — along with other recent gas explosions and oil pipeline spills — has created consensus in Congress, as well as in the industry, that there are gaps in federal safety regulations.
The Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee approved the bill in May without opposition. It would authorize more federal safety inspectors, and pipeline companies would have to confirm that their records on how much pressure their pipelines can tolerate are accurate.
Under the bill, federal regulators could order that automatic shutoff valves be installed on new pipelines so leaks can be halted sooner. And it directs regulators to determine whether mandatory inspections of aging pipelines in densely populated areas should be expanded to include lines in rural areas. It would be paid for by industry fees.
The bill is supported by the industry's major trade associations — the Interstate Natural Gas Association of America, the American Gas Association and the Association of Oil Pipelines — as well as the Pipeline Safety Trust, a safety advocacy group.
The measure is "a balanced solution to the very important issue of improving the safety of pipelines," said Martin Edwards, the interstate gas association's top lobbyist.
The bill's main sponsors — Sens. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., the committee's chairman, and Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J. — have been trying to bring it to the Senate floor for passage by "unanimous consent," essentially a voice vote. That requires Democratic and Republican leaders to check with each of their party members for objections.
No Democrat objected to the pipeline bill, but initially two Republicans did. They were Paul and Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, industry, safety and congressional officials told The Associated Press. Coburn has since withdrawn his objection, but Paul has resisted persuasion to drop his, they said.
Officials familiar with Paul's objections said he has told lobbyists and company officials that he's not opposed to any specific part of the bill, just to the notion of additional federal regulation.
"The rationale behind the hold is that he came to Congress as a person that doesn't want to provide more regulatory authority to the regulators. He wants to look at those (regulations) and pull back where he can," said Kyle Rogers, a vice president at the American Gas Association.
Support for the measure from Kentucky companies hasn't budged Paul.
"We thought (the bill) provided a reasonable framework and good congressional guidance for the regulators to go ahead and proceed down a path that would enhance pipeline safety over time," said Jerry Morris, president and CEO of Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline Inc. of Owensboro, Ky., who spoke to Paul about the issue during a meeting in Owensboro in June.
Industry is eager for Congress to pass a bill this year partly because the federal Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration is already working on new safety rules. They'd rather Congress provide direction to regulators as to what those rules should look like than leave the matter entirely up to the Obama administration.
Don Stewart, a spokesman for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., pointed out that Democrats could still bring the bill to the floor for a vote if they have the 60 votes necessary to clear the procedural hurdles a single lawmaker can erect under Senate rules. McConnell hasn't objected to the use of expedited procedures to pass the bill.
But as a practical matter, important but lesser measures like pipeline safety regulations that can't be approved quickly wind up languishing indefinitely.
"If you start down that road you don't have time for anything else," said Norman Ornstein, a congressional scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. Paul's ability to hold up a bill despite its wide, bipartisan support "is an indication of how dysfunctional the Senate has become," Ornstein said.
An anti-tax activist and ophthalmologist, Paul was elected to the Senate, his first public office, last year.
Meanwhile, two House committees have unanimously approved separate pipeline safety bills that are similar to the Senate bill. Differences between those measures are expected to be worked out in the coming weeks, with a single bill brought to the House floor before the end of the year.
Given that the Senate and House bills were approved by committees without a single no vote, it's clear lawmakers believe "there is enough information and enough tragedies of late that something needs to change," said Carl Weimer, executive director of the Pipeline Safety Trust, a safety advocacy group. "In the face of a bunch of significant incidents in the last 15 months, this bill addresses some of the root causes of those accidents."
where is the facepalm emoticon??
Senator blocks pipeline safety bill on principle
http://news.yahoo.com/senator-blocks-pi ... 09432.html
WASHINGTON (AP) — A senator who opposes federal regulation on philosophical grounds is single-handedly blocking legislation that would strengthen safety rules for oil and gas pipelines, a bill that even the pipeline industry and companies in his own state support.
Republican Sen. Rand Paul's opposition to the bill hasn't wavered even after a gas pipeline rupture last week shook people awake in three counties in his home state of Kentucky.
Paul, a tea party ally who shares with his father, Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, a desire to shrink the role of the federal government, won't discuss his role in stymieing the bill. But industry lobbyists, safety advocates and Senate aides said he is the only senator who is refusing to agree to procedures that would permit swift passage of the measure.
A deadly gas pipeline explosion near San Francisco last year — along with other recent gas explosions and oil pipeline spills — has created consensus in Congress, as well as in the industry, that there are gaps in federal safety regulations.
The Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee approved the bill in May without opposition. It would authorize more federal safety inspectors, and pipeline companies would have to confirm that their records on how much pressure their pipelines can tolerate are accurate.
Under the bill, federal regulators could order that automatic shutoff valves be installed on new pipelines so leaks can be halted sooner. And it directs regulators to determine whether mandatory inspections of aging pipelines in densely populated areas should be expanded to include lines in rural areas. It would be paid for by industry fees.
The bill is supported by the industry's major trade associations — the Interstate Natural Gas Association of America, the American Gas Association and the Association of Oil Pipelines — as well as the Pipeline Safety Trust, a safety advocacy group.
The measure is "a balanced solution to the very important issue of improving the safety of pipelines," said Martin Edwards, the interstate gas association's top lobbyist.
The bill's main sponsors — Sens. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., the committee's chairman, and Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J. — have been trying to bring it to the Senate floor for passage by "unanimous consent," essentially a voice vote. That requires Democratic and Republican leaders to check with each of their party members for objections.
No Democrat objected to the pipeline bill, but initially two Republicans did. They were Paul and Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, industry, safety and congressional officials told The Associated Press. Coburn has since withdrawn his objection, but Paul has resisted persuasion to drop his, they said.
Officials familiar with Paul's objections said he has told lobbyists and company officials that he's not opposed to any specific part of the bill, just to the notion of additional federal regulation.
"The rationale behind the hold is that he came to Congress as a person that doesn't want to provide more regulatory authority to the regulators. He wants to look at those (regulations) and pull back where he can," said Kyle Rogers, a vice president at the American Gas Association.
Support for the measure from Kentucky companies hasn't budged Paul.
"We thought (the bill) provided a reasonable framework and good congressional guidance for the regulators to go ahead and proceed down a path that would enhance pipeline safety over time," said Jerry Morris, president and CEO of Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline Inc. of Owensboro, Ky., who spoke to Paul about the issue during a meeting in Owensboro in June.
Industry is eager for Congress to pass a bill this year partly because the federal Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration is already working on new safety rules. They'd rather Congress provide direction to regulators as to what those rules should look like than leave the matter entirely up to the Obama administration.
Don Stewart, a spokesman for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., pointed out that Democrats could still bring the bill to the floor for a vote if they have the 60 votes necessary to clear the procedural hurdles a single lawmaker can erect under Senate rules. McConnell hasn't objected to the use of expedited procedures to pass the bill.
But as a practical matter, important but lesser measures like pipeline safety regulations that can't be approved quickly wind up languishing indefinitely.
"If you start down that road you don't have time for anything else," said Norman Ornstein, a congressional scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. Paul's ability to hold up a bill despite its wide, bipartisan support "is an indication of how dysfunctional the Senate has become," Ornstein said.
An anti-tax activist and ophthalmologist, Paul was elected to the Senate, his first public office, last year.
Meanwhile, two House committees have unanimously approved separate pipeline safety bills that are similar to the Senate bill. Differences between those measures are expected to be worked out in the coming weeks, with a single bill brought to the House floor before the end of the year.
Given that the Senate and House bills were approved by committees without a single no vote, it's clear lawmakers believe "there is enough information and enough tragedies of late that something needs to change," said Carl Weimer, executive director of the Pipeline Safety Trust, a safety advocacy group. "In the face of a bunch of significant incidents in the last 15 months, this bill addresses some of the root causes of those accidents."
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
do you think the people in his state are happy with him now nearly a year later??
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
people in his state, and even the industry in his state wants this to pass, but he refuses. this is the same shit this asshat pulled during the debt ceiling ordeal. the lone holdout....it just proves that any idealogue can be a senator, and this is precisely why the tea party is polling so poorly in national polls...
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
so the vote has to be unanimous?? politics is such horseshit. i guess with the way his fed gov vetoes everything in favour of resolving the palestinian/israel issue is an excellent guide for him.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
and yes, my government's bull headed foreign policy towards that conflict provides an excellent example for freshman senators to follow...oppose everything...
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
well it seems open debate would be a good thing here. cause pauls bogging it down anyway.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
oh i know that.. perhaps they could debate what an arsehat paul is for stalling... though thats not much of a debate either.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
history shows that most industry can not be trusted to regulate itself, therefore there needs to be federal guidelines or else they will surely cut corners.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Had the same thought. But I think it boils down to competition. Companies want to do it, but they want everyone to have to do it so they don't spend $ that their competitors don't.
Sad, but a reality in business.
But they're supposedly overwhelmingly in favor of these guidelines, so who is going to cut corners? It makes no sense to me. In my industry (HVAC / construction), as in most industries, there are guidelines put in place all over the place by professionals in those industries: UL, SMACNA, NFPA, AIA (architectural), etc... There are standards set, and they are followed all the time without actual mandates. It's just good practice, and even most public works projects more or less just defer to the standards set by these private entities as their specifications. The most popular and successful GC that my company works for has safety standards that make OSHA's look like they were written by a Chinese sweatshop owner-- it's what their customers want, which is, no accidents on the job and no lawsuits. Unless the pipelines are crossing state lines, I see no reason to make federal regulations about it.
There are always these arguments that industries cannot regulate themselves. When the regulations are written by government agencies who are formerly industry fat cats, I can think of no greater example of industry "regulating" itself to all of our detriment. I do agree that goverment should regulate industry, and that it should be done locally, and should focus on people not getting ripped off by not allowing destruction of anyone's lives or property, and making sure that theft and fraud is not being committed.
I think the financial "industry" is the most glaring example of the "regulators" needing more regulating than anything else. Every one of these people at the top of the SEC, the Treasury, The Fed, etc... are all just corporate cronies who write regulations that favor their buddies and the "industry" itself. I mean, fuck, they legalized counterfeitting for the banks-- what good does any other "regulation" do when banks can create all they money they want and have a permanent bailout mechanism in place? Talk about rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. The system is broke, changing the people in charge fixes nothing as the system itself gives MORE power to people who could not abuse it in a free market with the only regulations being those protecting against theft, fraud, extortion, and coercion. The current system grants those abuses as legal powers to the people most ripe to use them.
If there were to be federal regulation over an industry, I do favor the above example, through Congress over some government agency, headed by some former fat cat with his friends still in business, making laws by decree.
but the bottom line is this: this industry needs to be regulated ... if the associations and industry groups are not willing nor able to regulate themselves ... what alternative is there?
In my eyes it's all about voluntary exchange through contracts, where the government's only role is proper enforcement of those contracts. This applies to both companies and their relationships with their employees as well as companies and their clients.
i agree wholeheartedly with you ... but in the same token as why we have laws for people crossing interstates ... there really is no alternative here ...
when industry is left to its own devices - it will always act in the interests of profits ... consumers / society has not shown the ability to deter from that motivation ...
what you are asking for is people / corporations to do the "right" thing ... when we know in reality ... that is hardly ever the case ...
I agree with what you are saying, but part of competition is differentiating yourself from the competition. If you have a product that is better than the competition there will be a market for it. So, what we have here is pipelines blowing up. All it would take is for a company to jump on this opportunity to market their pipelines and the features included that would prevent blowups. If people are so concerned about this there will be a demand for it. Part of getting an edge when competing against someone is having a product you can stand behind. If pipelines are blowing up, there will be companies that have pipelines that they guarantee will not by implementing the procedures themselves even without a mandate.
Everyone always just wants to fall back on the government to do everything for us. So, I can respect that there are people who were elected on a platform of getting government out of our lives as actually holding true to that message.
Great post.
What I think is being missed in your explanation here is that even when industry is acting in the interest of profits, consumer safety plays into that. If everything you sell is known to harm the buyer, you are going to have a hell of a lot less buyers so it is in the seller's best interest to ensure they have a safe product. If a certain seller is unwilling to do that, you can bet there will be someone ready to replace that seller with a better product...in a free market that the government doesn't constantly intervene in, that is.
what!? ... really? ... what's so great about that post?
what company promotes itself as having pipelines that don't blow up? ... it's absurd simply because it would denote that other companies pipelines DO explode ...
in these industries ... competitive advantage is primarily pricing ... when the bid goes to tender - the majority of contracts will be awarded either because of pricing or connections ...
having said all of that - regulation can only do so much ... "accidents" like the exxon valdez and the BP oil spill are NOT really accidents ... they are corporations purposefully ignoring regulations because it would be much cheaper to either have an accident than to follow the rules ...
sure ... in some utopian society ... but not in the world we live in now ... just go to your local supermarket ... all the products that contain carcinogens and toxic chemicals ... the shit that is in food these days ... sure, there is competition for each and everyone of those products but they are more expensive and many consumers ultimately decide on price ... it would be the same here ...
But to market yourself you have to have something to sell. People expect pipelines to not blow up, they aren't going to pay extra for it. Harsh reality of Safety and Quality, it's all overhead until people start to pay more attention and are willing to pay for it.
When buying your laundry detergent do you consider the safety records of the manufacturer?
You state the obvious but also overlook the obvious. No company is going to say their pipeline is going to blow up, but you can bet there will be companies there that outline the deficiencies of the competition and what they themselves are doing to correct those deficiencies. How many bid openings have you ever been to? I’ve been to several and while pricing does play into things, so does the quality of work. I’ve spoken with some people at engineering firms at these bid openings about the bids they received and who they hoped would win the bid. Yes, low prices are looked at, but so is quality of work. The people I’ve spoken with will not award a bid to certain companies because of poor past performance regardless of how much lower the bid comes in.
The accidents you outline would also be taken care of better in a free market. Are people allowed to sue Exxon Valdez and BP for the oil spills or does it just get swept under the rug in our current system? Chances are, if it is being swept under the rug it is because of government involvement. If the government was there to enforce contracts as Vinnie pointed out in an earlier post, these companies would be taken to task for their failings and others would take note of this and what to do to prevent the same from happening in the future in order to avoid monetary losses and messy litigation.
There is too much protectionism of corporations in today’s world. You argue that the way to prevent this is more regulation. I argue that it is because of regulations this protectionism exists. I argue that in a free market it would be a level playing field and if you knowingly fuck up, you can be taken to task for that. I just don’t see that happening in today’s world with all the ‘regulations’ we currently have.
And that is part of the responsibility of the consumer...not the government.
You talk about food, but look at what 'regulation' has brought us in that industry. Can I just go out and purchase raw milk if I want to because I know of its beneficial properties and I'm willing to take on the risk associated with consuming raw milk? Fuck no, because most people aren't willing to sell it because they are afraid of the FBI kicking down their door for selling an 'illegal' substance. Can we sue Monsato for fucking with famers who want to plant crops that don't include what you mention above? We can try, but the reality of things is Monsato is more successful at suing these farmers for contaminating their farmers' use of their product.
hey ... i already wrote in my post near the top of the page that the feds do a horrible job and that they are lackeys to the major corporations ... which is what you are alluding to with raw milk and monsanto ...
but that still does not alter the need for regulation ... you guys can argue that the gov't is horrible at implementing and enforcing regulations and i would agree with you but it still does not negate the need for it ...
if we left everything up to the free market ... all we would have is a world similar to what is shown in WALL-E ... massive corporations controlling everything ...
consumers are ill equipped to make decisions like this because by nature we are short sighted ... it is why so many people live with unreasonable amounts of debt ...
without the gov't we would still have lead in our gasoline, ddt sprayed everywhere ... and all our resources would be either used up or contaminated ...
It is...and the consumer while bitching about their own jobs and safety standards continue to only care about price and nothing else. So, this in translated to the manufacturers. The better ones still go above and beyond because it makes good business sense to protect your employees and your assets, but without some regulation, some of these standards would slip...potentially greatly.