How does a corporation get out of paying 2.4 billion in fines ?
- Thread starter uscitizen
- Start date
uscitizen
Villified User
No one else knows about this ?
Beck not talking about it ?
Nor Ron Paul ?
Energy nominee drawing fire
WATCHDOGS BLAST EX-MASSEY EXEC OVER VIOLATIONS
By Samira Jafari
ASSOCIATED PRESS
PIKEVILLE --
President Bush's pick for a top Department of Energy post is a former executive from Massey Energy, a company with a lengthy history of mine safety and environmental violations.
Bush last week nominated Stanley C. Suboleski to be the point person in developing policies related to coal and other fossil fuels.
Suboleski, who was chief operating officer at Massey from 2001 to 2003, continues to work as an independent consultant with Massey. The company faces an estimated $2.4 billion in threatened federal fines for more than 4,000 alleged U.S. Clean Water Act violations within the past six years at its West Virginia and Kentucky coal operations.
Suboleski's nomination to be assistant secretary for fossil energy is drawing fire from environmental and other watchdogs; the White House defended its decision.
http://www.kentucky.com/news/state/story/260491.html
Beck not talking about it ?
Nor Ron Paul ?
Energy nominee drawing fire
WATCHDOGS BLAST EX-MASSEY EXEC OVER VIOLATIONS
By Samira Jafari
ASSOCIATED PRESS
PIKEVILLE --
President Bush's pick for a top Department of Energy post is a former executive from Massey Energy, a company with a lengthy history of mine safety and environmental violations.
Bush last week nominated Stanley C. Suboleski to be the point person in developing policies related to coal and other fossil fuels.
Suboleski, who was chief operating officer at Massey from 2001 to 2003, continues to work as an independent consultant with Massey. The company faces an estimated $2.4 billion in threatened federal fines for more than 4,000 alleged U.S. Clean Water Act violations within the past six years at its West Virginia and Kentucky coal operations.
Suboleski's nomination to be assistant secretary for fossil energy is drawing fire from environmental and other watchdogs; the White House defended its decision.
http://www.kentucky.com/news/state/story/260491.html
cawacko
Well-known member
The article says 'threatened' fines and 'alleged' violations. Now the company could be guilty as hell and very corrupt in their practices. But it could also be a case of an over active government trying to step into the market and impose its will with threatened fines.
Don't be so dramatic.
The article state's the company has 4,000 violations of the clean water act (CWA). The CWA is a law passed by our elected representatives, and civil servant's job is to enforce OUR laws. CWA, and its associated regulations is very specific about what constitutes a violation. Civil servants don't make shit up out of whole cloth, to go after companies. If you don't like the CWA, repeal it.
uscitizen
Villified User
LOL, of course that is the way governments and societies function.
You mght want to ease back a bit on the false outrage.
cawacko
Well-known member
I have the master complimenting me on my dramatics.
It states 'alleged' violations. Like I said this company could be bad news. I'm not familar at all with the CWA so I have no idea how its enforced. But I will not back off the comment that government will step in and enforce its will on a company or an industry. You can go back and look at Elliot Spitzer if you want a recent example.
I have the master complimenting me on my dramatics.
It states 'alleged' violations. Like I said this company could be bad news. I'm not familar at all with the CWA so I have no idea how its enforced. But I will not back off the comment that government will step in and enforce its will on a company or an industry. You can go back and look at Elliot Spitzer if you want a recent example.
Broadly speaking, government under both GOP and Dem executives, bend over backwards to not be over zealous in enforcement, and giving companies every reasonable chance to mitigate a problem, before enforcing civil penalities.
You and I don't get any slack for running a stop sign, as somebody mentioned previously.
If you don't like the laws, or think they are too tough on business, then repeal them. Don't pretend like you're enforcing them, when your not.
BushCo is an especially egregious example of lax enforcement, IMO
Right Bush is....
Enron did most of its mess under the previous administration with the help of a Democratic Governor in one of the most populous states, they were caught at it under the current one. Same with Worlcom. I can't see how pretending otherwise is even possible. But heck, I guess the economy is all that mattered, not that a ton of it was printed with disappearing ink on degrading paper...
the statistics don't lie Damo. Under BushCo, civil penalties and enforcement cases on businesses who violate environmental laws has plummeted.
Yet the most egregious cases were simply overlooked previously and were caught and prosecuted under the current administration.
There is no use denying it. Just look up "Enron Timeline" in google and read it for yourself.
While Lay was able to gain control in the late 80s, it wasn't until the 90s when they began the real crimes, all under the "watchful" eye of the Clinton's Administration.
Statistics often do lie. The reality is, contrary to predictions, Enron was caught and they were prosecuted. Even though they were supposedly Bush's pals. It seems that Clinton acted like more of a friend than did Bush.
Okay Damo, BushCo is more rigourous and aggresive about enforcing environmental laws, that Clinton was.
Who said environmental? I was speaking of prosecuting corporations. It was the subject of the thread. That you now want to pretend it was solely about environmental issues is solely pretense.
It began with a post of "tough on business". I gave examples of other administrations that seemed to have their special corps that got a pass...
