Bobby Jindal and the Gulf oil spill. Would you please take a realistic stand?

Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal has made it quite clear that he is not pleased with the way the federal government is handling the Gulf oil spill. He has also made it clear that he is not pleased with BP's response. He feels that government agencies and President Obama need to show a greater sense of urgency. It seems he also feels that their relationship with BP is a bit too cozy; he remarked to Fox News, "we don't understand why our federal government would be making excuses for BP." As far as BP is concerned, he has lambasted the company for taking too long in getting the monies promised to the people that this disaster has so far affected the most.

Now, I'm not denying that any of the above is true, nor am I agreeing with it. It does seem to me, however, that the above opinions are a bit at odds with Governor Jindal's latest letter to President Obama. Jindal has requested that the president rethink his decision to enact a moratorium on all offshore drilling in the wake of the Gulf oil disaster. He believes that the people of Louisiana have already suffered enough of an economic impact from the spill, and to add to that the job losses of a drilling moratorium would be more than the state could handle. He does admit that there needs to be more oversight, and that the federal government should verify that all affected drilling rigs are in compliance with safety standards. That is all fine and good. But at this time it is not known just what caused this current catastrophe. Until that is determined, how is proper oversight to be conducted? It seems that Jindal is saying it's OK to keep drilling before we even know what caused the Deepwater Horizon rig explosion. Is he willing to bet all that we will figure it out before we see another like it?

In his letter to Obama, Jindal declared:

“…it is not reasonably foreseeable that . . . development and production of an oil discovery located more than 50 miles seaward of the coastline will adversely affect resources near the coastline…”

BP's Deepwater Horizon oil rig was about 50 miles off of the coast and is, of course, 'adversely' affecting the coastline. The facts simply are not backing up Jindal's assessments.

Another gusher in the Gulf will have far more dire consequences then those imposed by a drilling moratorium. If it is deemed that offshore drilling simply has too much inherent risk, and the next catastrophic event is just a matter of time, then does that not make the argument that the moratorium will cost too many jobs a moot point? Another disaster will cost more. Governor Jindal knows that this oil spill is ruining Louisiana's economy. He states: "Let’s be clear: Every day that this oil sits is one more day that more of our marsh dies.” Yet he is willing to risk another.

This last blast against Obama simply does not hold water with respect to Jindal's valid criticism of the government and BP. It smacks more of political posturing than of actual environmental damage control.

Before we 'drill baby drill', we had better know what we are getting into.