Imagine for a moment that Gargantuan Gas Co., a large gas exploration company, was in the process of drilling a gas well, the pipes of which would reach under Greers Ferry Lake.
This could happen with today’s technology giving gas companies the ability to drilling laterally as well as vertically.
Imagine also that a miscalculation was made by Gargantuan Gas in drilling the lateral pipe too close to the bottom of the Lake, and that, in “fracking” the well – a process in which water, chemicals and other substances are forced from the pipe into the surrounding formation under very high pressure, causing cracks in the shale – the drilling muds and chemicals were injected into the bottom of the Lake. The muds and chemicals turned the Lake shades of red and black, killing all living things in the Lake and in the Little Red River.
Naturally, nobody wants to swim, fish or boat in such water, nor do they want to drink it. As a result of this drilling accident, nobody visits the Greers Ferry Lake area.
Almost immediately, marina owners, merchants and eventually everyone in the area suffers economically from lack of business. Everyone who is dependent upon the Lake for domestic water supplies is required to buy their own water from other sources. The mud and chemicals coat the shoreline, reducing the prospect that it will ever be the same Lake whose clear waters and clean shoreline once attracted 6 million visitors a year.
Would you be angry with Gargantuan Gas for the disruption of our lives and threats to our livelihoods? You bet’cha, as Sarah Palin would say. But if you had to sue Gargantuan Gas, it would take money and years to ever obtain any damages. Left to do that yourself, Gargantuan knows that you are at a severe disadvantage, and that you would probably wind up accepting pennies on the dollar to settle.
But if, before you have to resort to that, the President of the United States calls Gargantuan Gas officials into the White House, tells them that they are responsible for all damages arising out of the leak, and – without a lawsuit – persuades the company to set up a $20 billion fund to begin immediately to pay everyone in the Greers Ferry Lake area for their damages. Wouldn’t that come as a great relief to the good people of the Lake area, and wouldn’t most reasonable people say to the President: “Good job! Thanks for helping us.”
Most reasonable people would agree with that, but the word “reasonable” is not applicable to the Republican leadership in the United States Congress. On the day that Barack Obama took the office of the presidency, the Republican Party adopted a strategy of reacting negatively to every measure, every proposal, every action taken by Obama, regardless of Obama’s attempts at bipartisanship, and even in some cases even where Obama has adopted Republican proposals.
This strategy has resulted in such a persistent, negative kneejerk reaction to anything President Obama says that it has evolved into a disease known as Obama Obsession Syndrome, which afflicts Republicans and is manifested by nervous, jerky movements, irrational, mindless outbursts, and paranoia.
This Syndrome was clearly evident last week when Tony Hayward, the reviled chief executive of the reviled British Petroleum (BP) appeared to testify before the U.S. House of Representatives’ Energy and Commerce Committee about the infamous and reviled Gulf Oil Spill. The day before, President Obama had called BP’s executives to the White House and persuaded BP to establish a $20 billion fund from which to immediately commence paying claims of fishermen, oil workers, restaurants, hotels and other people and businesses affected by the spill – a major achievement by most standards.
At the Congressional hearing, Congressman Joe Barton from Texas, the top-ranking Republican on the Committee, made this remarkable statement: “I’m ashamed of what happened in the White House yesterday. I think it is a tragedy of the first proportion that a private corporate can be subjected to what I would characterize as a shakedown.”
He also called the $20 billion a “slush fund,” and apologized to Mr. Hayward on behalf of the Committee for the President’s mistreatment of BP. From that point on, it was difficult to determine whether Mr. Hayward or Congressman Barton was the most reviled person in the room.
Barton was indisputably the most despicable. Mr. Hayward, after all, is the head of BP, and a British citizen, and is paid to defend his company. Congressman Barton, on the other hand, is supposed to represent the interests of America and American citizens – even if Barack Obama is doing something to help them.
It seems inconceivable that a person who has the political acumen to get elected to Congress – especially from a state that borders the Gulf of Mexico – has the political stupidity and the moral insensitivity to apologize to a gargantuan British corporation for being asked – not by force or edict, but by reasoned persuasion – to voluntarily establish a large fund to pay for the hardship and suffering that its mistakes are inflicting on people and the environment in the Gulf area.
Assuming that Congressman Barton is not genetically challenged in a way that affects his cognitive abilities, the only reason for his siding with BP instead of American citizens is his (and his Party’s) obsessive opposition to anything that Obama does – even if it helps America and Americans. Barton’s position on the BP “slush” (the money, not the oil) is shared by numerous other conservative leaders.
The national Republican Party used to be an honorable political institution.
It stood for fiscal responsibility and stable, if not staid, government. It lost the right to claim the latter during the Nixon Administration, and lost the right to claim fiscal responsibility during George W. Bush’s administration.
Today, the national Republic Party is captive to its ultra-conservative wing who have no original ideas, and whose agenda focuses almost solely on opposing abortion, homosexuals, immigrants and Barack Obama.
To them, apologizing to a foreign oil corporation that has severely damaged a substantial part of our country and its citizens is a means to their end of discrediting Obama – even when the American public would have suffered far more had Obama not acted. In doing so, the Republican Party has also lost any claim to moral responsibility.
(Richard Mays, a Heber Springs attorney and environmentalist, offers a liberal viewpoint on politics and social issues in each Friday’s edition)
