Senate Standoff on Spill Liability

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


After a third Republican block of a Democratic bill to raise the liability on oil spills, the GOP put forward its own bill on Tuesday afternoon. This one would eliminate the cap only for the current spill, but not change the cap set under the Oil Pollution Act for future spills, which stands at $75 million.

The new bill comes from Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and David Vitter (R-La.), and also contains provisions that would expedite the claims process for Gulf residents. Vitter said on the floor that their measure would hold BP to its pledge to cover all costs related to the current spill. “That’s a contract offer,” he said on the floor Tuesday. “We’re saying we’ll take it.”

Murkowski blocked a first effort from Democrats to bring up a bill that would have raised the cap to $10 billion. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) blocked the same measure last week as well as a revised measure that would eliminate the cap outright on Tuesday. Murkowski said in a statement that she thinks the standard liability should be raised, but that “Congress needs to carefully consider what the appropriate cap should be” before proceeding.

Robert Menendez (D-NJ), cosponsor of Democratic effort to remove the cap, in turn blocked the Murkowski-Vitter bill Tuesday. “What happens when, God forbid, this happens again and the company doesn’t make this kind of offer,” Menendez said.

Both parties have accused the other of grandstanding on the issue. Meanwhile, oil is still gushing into the Gulf at an unknown rate and the liability cap remains a measly $75 million. Our Senate at work, folks! Never letting a good environmental disaster get in the way of partisan squabbling.

A BETTER WAY TO DO THIS?

We have an ambitious $350,000 online fundraising goal this month and we can't afford to come up short. But when a reader recently asked how being a nonprofit makes Mother Jones different from other news organizations, we realized we needed to lay this out better: Because "in absolutely every way" is essentially the answer.

So we tried to explain why your year-end donations are so essential, and we'd like your help refining our pitch about what make Mother Jones valuable and worth reading to you.

We'd also like your support of our journalism with a year-end donation if you can right now—all online gifts will be doubled until we hit our $350,000 goal thanks to an incredibly generous donor's matching gift pledge.

payment methods

A BETTER WAY TO DO THIS?

We have an ambitious $350,000 online fundraising goal this month and we can't afford to come up short. But when a reader recently asked how being a nonprofit makes Mother Jones different from other news organizations, we realized we needed to lay this out better: Because "in absolutely every way" is essentially the answer.

So we tried to explain why your year-end donations are so essential, and we'd like your help refining our pitch about what make Mother Jones valuable and worth reading to you.

We'd also like your support of our journalism with a year-end donation if you can right now—all online gifts will be doubled until we hit our $350,000 goal thanks to an incredibly generous donor's matching gift pledge.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate