Take over British Petroleum says Robert Reich former Secretary of Labor under Bill Clinton. “…under temporary receivership, BP would continue to have the equipment and expertise. The only difference: the firm would unambiguously be working in the public's interest. As it is now, BP continues to be responsible primarily to its shareholders, not to the American public.”
Reich argues that President Obama should take over British Petroleum giving the US authority until the gusher is controlled. He maintains that it is the only way the US public will be confident that enough resources are being put to use to stop the disaster.
No President, he says would allow a nuclear reactor owned by a private for profit company to melt down in the US while remaining under control of that company.
Here are his five reasons and a link to the full article :
1. We are not getting the truth from BP.
2. We have no way to be sure BP is devoting enough resources to stopping the gusher.
3. BP's new strategy for stopping the gusher is highly risky.
4. Right now, the U.S. government has no authority to force BP to adopt a different strategy
5. The President is not legally in charge.
The President should temporarily take over BP's Gulf operations. We have a national emergency on our hands. No president would allow a nuclear reactor owned by a private for-profit company to melt down in the United States while remaining under the direct control of that company. The meltdown in the Gulf is the environmental equivalent.
but I have a hunch that exercising that kind of unilateral power would be all the Right would need to bring down the government and end all hope of any kind of long-lasting reforms. And it is questionable whether or not anyone has any better ideas or technology to bring to the for, should the President actually take control away from BP. It’s a mine-field, one way or the other.
Remember, the Right demanded the bailout; and as soon as it was fete accompli and their man was out of power, they used it to attack to the new administration and undermine his principle campaign agenda of reforms.