Results 1 to 23 of 23

Thread: Rand Paul puts hold on oil and gas pipeline safety bill

  1. #1

    Rand Paul puts hold on oil and gas pipeline safety bill

    Senator blocks pipeline safety bill on principle
    By JOAN LOWY, Associated Press – 5 hours ago

    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.
    Read more:
    http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...84e6027d52a747



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    It would be paid for by industry fees.

    fees? why not pay for it out of industry profits?

    fees, what corporations/government calls it when they don't want to say taxes. lol

  4. #3
    If the industry is so excited about the regulations, why can't they implement the contents of the law without the law being there?

    It sounds to me like the companies want legislative cover from any potential screw-ups they may cause.

  5. #4

    AP: Sen. Rand Paul blocks pipeline safety bill on principle

    http://www.nola.com/politics/index.s..._pipeline.html

    So, insisting on taking a vote as opposed to passing by unanimous consent is now considered blocking?

  6. #5
    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.

    ...

    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.
    So the gas industry wants to pay fees so that federal regulators can come out and check their pipes???

    Something doesn't seem right. Why don't these companies inspect their pipes themselves? Why would a company want a tragedy like that to occur?
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc


    "Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    "Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
    So the gas industry wants to pay fees so that federal regulators can come out and check their pipes???

    Something doesn't seem right. Why don't these companies inspect their pipes themselves? Why would a company want a tragedy like that to occur?
    Isn't it obvious? If they have government inspectors and something goes wrong, they can blame the inspectors and regulations. If they inspect it themselves and say everything is fine and something goes wrong they get the full blame.

  8. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by eduardo89 View Post
    Isn't it obvious? If they have government inspectors and something goes wrong, they can blame the inspectors and regulations. If they inspect it themselves and say everything is fine and something goes wrong they get the full blame.
    Wow - wasn't obvious to me at first but this makes a ton of sense. Very perceptive.
    Waiting for the day the classical liberals drive the hateful alt-right out of the republican party, and the libertarians can rise again.

  9. #8
    Statement from Congresswoman Jackie Speier:

    Speier Criticizes Paul for Blocking Congressional Action on Pipeline Safety

    09/27/2011

    Congresswoman Jackie Speier (D-CA) today released the following statement in response to Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) blocking pipeline safety legislation.

    “Senator Paul is blinded by ideology and in my view, indifferent to the overwhelming evidence that self regulation of the gas industry is a prescription for further death and injury. We must learn the lessons of the deadly pipeline explosion in San Bruno that killed 8 of my constituents. The gas industry is in desperate need of strong regulation and oversight. The Senate bill is a good start but fails to take into account many of the recommendations released this week by the National Transportation Safety Board in its report on San Bruno, such as making sure older pipelines are pressure tested. The Senate bill should serve as a baseline for pipeline safety legislation with room for Congress to go further and embrace the NTSB’s recommendations. But Senator Paul won’t even allow us to begin that conversation. Senator Paul should stop being an industry apologist and allow the important debate on pipeline safety to proceed.”
    http://speier.house.gov/index.php?op...ases&Itemid=14



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9

  12. #10
    statement from Rand's office:

    The Senate can deal with and likely pass the new pipeline regulations bill. In fact, they could have done so at any time since this bill has been ready since July. Time could have been scheduled for debate and votes during any one of the many weeks we sit here all week with few votes. The fact is Senate Democrat leaders woefully mismanage the process in the Senate, leaving days and weeks of ineffectively used time, then asserting that bills need to pass with no debate or vote at all.

    I believe legislation should have open debate and votes. It need not take weeks. Certainly we could spend an afternoon for the people’s elected representatives to discuss whether they got massive new regulations right. In the case of the pipeline bill, absolutely nothing in the current bill would have prevented the recent pipeline problems, or would have prevented the tragedy in San Bruno last year. The bill puts in place new mandates; it hires new bureaucrats. But it doesn’t properly diagnose the problem, and it grandfathers in the very pipelines that have had recent problems. It makes no sense. As a doctor, I find it offensive to rush through treatment when you haven’t diagnosed the problem properly.

    I am happy to work with Senate leadership to schedule time to discuss and vote on this bill soon. Perhaps they can even work to correct the fact that this session of the Senate has held the fewest votes in decades, paralyzed by the fear of the majority to do things in the light of day.
    http://blogs.kqed.org/newsfix/2011/0...y-legislation/

  13. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by brandon View Post
    Wow - wasn't obvious to me at first but this makes a ton of sense. Very perceptive.
    this is how all regulations work and why the free market is the harshest regulator in town...
    Those Who Do Not Move, Do Not Notice Their Chains.

  14. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by teacherone View Post
    this is how all regulations work and why the free market is the harshest regulator in town...
    Also see the bolded phrase:

    The Senate can deal with and likely pass the new pipeline regulations bill. In fact, they could have done so at any time since this bill has been ready since July. Time could have been scheduled for debate and votes during any one of the many weeks we sit here all week with few votes. The fact is Senate Democrat leaders woefully mismanage the process in the Senate, leaving days and weeks of ineffectively used time, then asserting that bills need to pass with no debate or vote at all.

    I believe legislation should have open debate and votes. It need not take weeks. Certainly we could spend an afternoon for the people’s elected representatives to discuss whether they got massive new regulations right. In the case of the pipeline bill, absolutely nothing in the current bill would have prevented the recent pipeline problems, or would have prevented the tragedy in San Bruno last year. The bill puts in place new mandates; it hires new bureaucrats. But it doesn’t properly diagnose the problem, and it grandfathers in the very pipelines that have had recent problems. It makes no sense. As a doctor, I find it offensive to rush through treatment when you haven’t diagnosed the problem properly.

    I am happy to work with Senate leadership to schedule time to discuss and vote on this bill soon. Perhaps they can even work to correct the fact that this session of the Senate has held the fewest votes in decades, paralyzed by the fear of the majority to do things in the light of day
    An incumbent corporation using the power of the state to increase costs for new competitors to build a pipeline while creating an exemption for its own pipelines? I'm shocked! Shocked!



    Why are the Democrats pro-pipeline explosion to protect evil corporations?

    But, but regulation! Evil corporations! Government good!

    Last edited by Libertea Party; 09-28-2011 at 08:45 PM.
    "The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack...that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation." "Attack Libya UPDATE 8/13: and Syria"

    "We can track down terrorists without trampling on our civil liberties.... the federal government will only issue warrants and execute searches because it needs to, not because it can." "Need to murder UPDATE 8/13: and track citizens" ~ Barack H. Obama

  15. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by eduardo89 View Post
    Isn't it obvious? If they have government inspectors and something goes wrong, they can blame the inspectors and regulations. If they inspect it themselves and say everything is fine and something goes wrong they get the full blame.
    Also see Gabriel Kolko:

    Kolko was considered a leading historian of the early New Left, joining William Appleman Williams and James Weinstein in advancing the corporate liberalism idea whereby the old Progressive historiography of the "interests" versus the "people" was reinterpreted as a collaboration of interests aiming towards stabilizing competition [Novick, 439]. According to Grob and Billias, "Kolko believed that large-scale units turned to government regulation precisely because of their inefficiency" and that the "Progressive movement - far from being antibusiness - was actually a movement that defined the general welfare in terms of the well-being of business" [Grob and Billias, 38]. Kolko, in particular, broke new ground with his critical history of the Progressive Era. He suggested that free enterprise and competition were vibrant and expanding during the first two decades of the twentieth century; meanwhile, corporations reacted to the free market by turning to government to protect their inherent inefficiency from the discipline of market conditions. In other words, "the corporate elite—the House of Morgan, for example—turned to government intervention when it realized in the waning 19th century that competition was too unruly to guarantee market share."[3] This behavior is known as corporatism, but Kolko dubbed it "political capitalism." Kolko's thesis "that businessmen favored government regulation because they feared competition and desired to forge a government-business coalition" is one that is echoed by many observers today [Grob and Billias, 39]. Former Harvard professor Paul H. Weaver uncovered the same inefficient and bureaucratic behavior from corporations during his stint at Ford Motor Corporation (see Weaver's The Suicidal Corporation [1988][page needed]).
    "The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack...that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation." "Attack Libya UPDATE 8/13: and Syria"

    "We can track down terrorists without trampling on our civil liberties.... the federal government will only issue warrants and execute searches because it needs to, not because it can." "Need to murder UPDATE 8/13: and track citizens" ~ Barack H. Obama

  16. #14
    Mercury News editorial: Rand Paul's blocking of pipeline safety measures is an outrage
    http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_18998151

    Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul is single-handedly blocking gas pipeline legislation that would strengthen safeguards against the huge and probably widespread problems discovered since the San Bruno tragedy.

    It's outrageous -- a slap in the face to the families of the eight people who died in the explosion and an affront to anyone in America who lives on or near a gas line. Which, in urban areas, is just about everyone. It's not as if it's a choice most families can make.

    ...

    Paul's website describes his entry into politics as a "desire to diagnose problems and provide practical solutions.''

    Hogwash.

  17. #15
    These companies want this regulation so bad yet can't impose it upon themselves and their own industry without the government?

  18. #16
    Supporting Member
    Phoenix, AZ
    Cleaner44's Avatar


    Blog Entries
    4
    Posts
    8,247
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by teacherone View Post
    this is how all regulations work and why the free market is the harshest regulator in town...
    + rep
    This is what Ron was saying on The Daily Show, the free market provides the tougher regulations than governments and corporations conspiring together.
    Citizen of Arizona
    @cleaner4d4

    I am a libertarian. I am advocating everyone enjoy maximum freedom on both personal and economic issues as long as they do not bring violence unto others.



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Good for Rand. He is taking a lot of heat for this one.

  21. #18
    California senators to Rand Paul: Stop blocking pipeline safety bill
    By Ben Geman - 10/04/11 02:33 PM ET

    California’s two Democratic senators are pressing Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) to end his procedural “hold” on pipeline safety legislation they call needed in the wake of a 2010 natural gas pipeline explosion San Bruno, California that killed eight people.

    “This legislation was unanimously passed out of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation and includes many safeguards drawn from a bill we introduced earlier this year,” states a letter Tuesday to Paul from Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.).

    “We believe that implementing these safety upgrades and precautions could prevent more communities from suffering the fate of San Bruno, and therefore we ask that you reconsider your hold. We would be happy to meet with you in order to further discuss the importance of this legislation,” they write.

    Paul said through a spokeswoman last week that he had placed a procedural hold on the bill – which takes 60 votes to overcome – because he doesn’t believe the measure should be fast-tracked through the Senate.

    “Sen. Paul doesn't think new regulations and the creation of dozens of bureaucratic positions should be swept through without sufficient debate and vote,” spokeswoman Moira Bagley said Sept. 27.
    http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677...ne-safety-bill


    Full letter from Senators Boxer and Feinstein to Senator Paul here:
    http://boxer.senate.gov/en/press/releases/100411.cfm

  22. #19
    Sen. Paul to meet with pipeline officials over bill he’s blocking
    By Ben Geman - 10/04/11 03:12 PM ET

    Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) is planning to meet with National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) officials Wednesday to discuss pipeline safety legislation that he is blocking in the Senate.

    ...

    But Paul, in a statement Tuesday, said he’s not yet convinced the bill is the answer and plans to meet with the NTSB, which probed last year’s accident.

    “It is a disservice to the families of the victims of the San Bruno pipeline incident to not carefully read this legislation before demanding it be passed without sufficient debate or vote,” Paul said in a statement to The Hill.

    “I have serious concerns about whether older pipelines, such as the one at San Bruno, will be grandfathered in and exempt from the regulations presented in this bill. I am meeting tomorrow with experts on this incident from the NTSB and will ask for specific answers on this issue,” he said.
    Read more:
    http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677...l-hes-blocking
    Last edited by jct74; 10-05-2011 at 02:50 AM.

  23. #20
    Sen. Paul Statement on NTSB Pipeline Recommendations

    Oct 5, 2011

    WASHINGTON, D.C. - Sen. Rand Paul today met with members of the National Transportation Safety Board responsible for the investigation of the 2010 San Bruno, Calif., pipeline explosion to discuss their report and findings, as well as the recommendations that came as a result of their investigation.

    "The pipeline legislation at hand was written months before the NTSB report was released - yet the bill authors went ahead without the NTSB's recommendations, creating regulations that do not address a major issue in pipeline safety. Had this bill been brought before the Senate for sufficient debate, I would like to think this particular issue would have been addressed," Sen. Paul said. "I met with NTSB members today, and I agree with their assessment that to fully address the problems that happened at San Bruno, their recommendations should be adopted, including removing the grandfather clause for older pipelines. However in the current pipeline legislation before the Senate, this clause is not lifted, perpetuating potential danger in older pipelines and neglecting to fix the problem that caused the San Bruno explosion."
    http://paul.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=343

  24. #21
    Give em hell Rand!
    I am the spoon.

  25. #22
    "Rand Paul's inner liberal steps out for tougher pipeline safety regs."

    http://www.louisville.com/content/ra...ety-regs-arena
    Zatch

  26. #23
    Rand Paul needs to do some interviews IN KY on why he does this and give some freaking history on how government enforces cartels that otherwise would fail without government force.
    " Anyone can become angry. That is easy. But to be angry with the right person, to the right degree, at the right time, for the right purpose and in the right way - that is not easy." --Aristotle



Similar Threads

  1. Rand Paul puts synthetic drug bill on hold
    By sailingaway in forum Rand Paul Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-16-2012, 06:54 PM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-30-2011, 04:45 PM
  3. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-19-2011, 06:07 AM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-05-2011, 09:53 PM
  5. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-27-2011, 12:18 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •