Unanimous Consent Request--S. 3463

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. I thank him for his leadership, for his compassion. I was proud to join him as a cosponsor of his legislation. It is disturbing to me that his effort to speak for these families who have lost their loved ones has fallen on deaf ears and on a procedural objection that could just as easily have not stood. As we stand here in this empty room, where right now we could be voting on help for these 11 families, instead, we are milling about, killing time and waiting for something to happen.

I want to ask the chairman: If this oil rig that exploded and burned had been on land and these same 11 workers had been killed, would they be treated differently and far more generously, and would their families be treated differently and far more generously than in this actual case just because it happened to be out in the ocean as a deepwater drilling rig?

Mr. LEAHY. Madam President, the Senator is absolutely correct. When we held these hearings, he was an indispensable part. This is an inexplicable anomaly of the law that reflects a different era. Had they been assembling, for example, this oil rig, had they had it on land and it exploded, they would be able to recover as anybody could. If it was an onshore oil rig--of course, we have many in this country and throughout the world--if they had been working on that and there had been an explosion and they lost their lives, there would have been remedies available. But because it was at sea and even if it is just barely at sea, the remedies are entirely different. To put it in laymen's terms, they are basically limited to the value of what is left. Of course, there is nothing left.

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Under the circumstances of this case, I know the objection was founded upon concern that this would defeat the expectations of potential defendants who might otherwise have to pay this verdict. As I understand it, the two most likely responsible parties--indeed, the one already decreed by the government for pollution purposes to be the responsible party--are BP and Halliburton, two enormous multinational corporations. If I am not mistaken, what we have done today is to send 11 American families, whose father, brother, or husband was lost through no fault of that individual from a tragic accident that has been described as being the result of real ineptitude and very poor safety practices out on that rig by big corporations, we are now taking the side of BP and Halliburton against those 11 families here on the eve of the Christmas holidays, taking away rights they would have if this accident had happened on the land.

My question is, don't we think that BP and Halliburton could afford this? It is not as though it is the little Sisters of Mercy whom we are going to put out of business if we allow this to go forward.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source