During a National Emergency, Federal Law Gives the Prez Power to Seize Property:

[amborin]

http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/6216.pdf


"...................Federal law provides a variety of powers for the President to use in response to
crisis, exigency, or emergency circumstances threatening the nation. Moreover, they
are not limited to military or war situations. Some of these authorities, deriving from
the Constitution or statutory law, are continuously available to the President with little
or no qualification.

Others—statutory delegations from Congress—exist on a standby
basis and remain dormant until the President formally declares a national
emergency. These delegations or grants of power authorize the President to meet the
problems of governing effectively in times of crisis.

Under the powers delegated by
such statutes, the President may seize property, organize and control the means of
production, seize commodities, assign military forces abroad, institute martial law,
seize and control all transportation and communication, regulate the operation of
private enterprise, restrict travel, and, in a variety of ways, control the lives of United
States citizens. Furthermore, Congress may modify, rescind, or render dormant such
delegated emergency authority."

snip



then there's also FEMA


does anyone think this situation is NOT a national (actually, international,) emergency?

And, when an extra-national corporation disses the U.S. EPA, how can it be permitted to do so with impunity?

[neverforget]

1. Yes. I posted that already but I was told that I wanted a dictatorship

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8391891

[amborin]

2. i'm sorry, i didn't see your OP! "a dictatorship" ....echoes of Rand Paul....

[Swamp Rat]

13. This should be posted a thousand times until some of my friends here 'get it'

This is going to affect them too, but they do not yet know it.




And I so fucking pissed I'd like to shove a funnel down the throat of BP CEOs and pour a quart of oil down their gullets.

:grr:

[amborin]

19. unfathomable how some don't seem to realize how catastrophic this is

[neverforget]

20. Or that they seem more concerned about the politics of the situation...

[Swamp Rat]

22. The time for politics is OVER!

The ecosystem and humanity as we know it is at stake!

[neverforget]

26. Absolutely!

[earth mom]

88. Totally agree with you!

What in the hell is it gonna take for people to wake up to the cold hard reality of this catastrophe?! :wtf:

[Individualist]

31. and that's beyond despicable, given the magnitude of this catastrophe.

[William Z. Foster]

70. sad to say...

They are not friends.

[Lorien]

105. I'd like to help you do that

I'm furious beyond words! :grr: :nuke:

[neverforget]

17. No problem. The more the merrier!

[girl gone mad]

45. Seems like the apologists have a Rand Paul mentality..

It's a bit ironic that some of the very same people who spend all day bashing Rand Paul over his psychotic libertarian views are in the end really no different from him philosophically. Big daddy corporations know best, private enterprise will save the day, the government is inept to fix things, we must let the free market work it out, BP is the only entity capable of fixing its own fuck up, accidents happen. These are all ideas that came from the keyboards of Obama acolytes, right here on DU.

[amborin]

59. +1000 ironic indeed!

do they see their hypocrisy and equivocation?

[Lorien]

103. Somewhere the ghost of Ronnie Raygun is grinning from ear to ear

the DLC has finally fully transformed Democrats into Reagan Republicans. :puke:

[amborin]

112. the stance toward this catastrophe speaks volumes

as you've said, it's the reincarnation of Reagan Republicanism

[amborin]

111. ironic, indeed; only not so ironic and not so surprising; there's consistency, in the sense

that championing corporate power and impunity occurred with health care reform, too; HCR supporters readily dismissed both single payer and robust PO, and touted a bill which puts behemoth corporations in charge of their very own lives, with weak gov't oversight at best

[Cleita]

9. Never mind.

There's always a naysayer that pops up in every thread. Don't even pay attention. That person is wrong.

[underseasurveyor]

3. Remember cheney has some mighty powerful pockets to contend with.

But it would be nice if Obama did some serious seizing.

[northernlights]

115. Obama has the guns

if only he would recognize that and use them.

[sandnsea]

4. And then do what?

Every agency that can contribute anything has been deployed. They're all there.

They've repeatedly said they don't have the equipment or the expertise to deal with the problem.

Can people not comprehend that sometimes there isn't a magic wand?

[amborin]

15. stop the Corexit, for starters; allow ind scientific assessments, next, etc..

[sandnsea]

21. Like these guys?

Dr. Tom Hunter, Director of the Department of Energy's Sandia National Labs
Dr. George A. Cooper, an expert in materials science and retired professor from UC Berkeley
Richard Lawrence Garwin, a physicist and IBM Fellow Emeritus
Dr. Jonathan I. Katz, professor of physics at Washington University
Dr. Alexander H. Slocum, professor of mechanical engineering at MIT

http://www.energy.gov/news/8980.htm

and these guys?

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/22/science/earth/22latest.html

And if you don't believe anything the government says, then what the hell difference does it make whether they're involved anyway.

[amborin]

23. Jonathan Katz is a global climate change denier; and admits he

has nothing to offer, as his field is astrophysics

that's how i calibrate the criteria used to select those scientists as the "best and brightest"

[sandnsea]

62. And has been removed

So we'll never know if he had anything to offer or not.

[amborin]

25. Dr. Tom Hunter---Lockheed Martin guy; Military Indus Complex.....

[sandnsea]

61. Sandia Labs, the government

It just goes to show, some people will bitch no matter what is done.

[amborin]

97. Sandia, A Lockheed Martin Corporation

one of those gov't private corporations mish mash

Lockheed Martin Corp. owns Sandia Corp and runs Sandia National Labs

but my point remains

[CrispyQ]

27. We're not asking for a magic wand.

Simply deny BP the right to make the decisions on what action to take. Use their resources, tap their expertise, but any decisions on what actions to take should be made by agencies/people who didn't cause this disaster & whose motive is the well being of the Gulf, not profit. Also keep the People fully informed about the situation.

[sandnsea]

60. May 20 Update

PAST 24 HOURS

Admiral Allen Will Stay On as National Incident Commander

Secretary Napolitano today announced that U.S. Coast Guard Admiral Thad Allen has agreed to remain in his current role as National Incident Commander for the administration’s continued, coordinated response to the Deepwater BP Oil Spill after stepping down from his post as Coast Guard Commandant later this month as planned—enabling him to focus solely on managing the unprecedented response effort. As planned and previously announced, Admiral Robert J. Papp, Jr., will relieve Admiral Allen as Commandant later this month.

Secretary Napolitano and Administrator Jackson Demand Transparency from BP

Secretary Napolitano and EPA Administrator Jackson sent a letter to BP CEO Tony Hayward stressing their expectation that BP to conduct all actions in a transparent manner, with all data and information related to the spill readily available to the U.S. government and the American people. The letter stated that BP must promptly provide to the United States Government and the public all data and information regarding the Deepwater Horizon oil spill and update it daily.

EPA Begins Posting Results from Monitoring of BP’s Subsea Dispersant Use

EPA last night began posting results from the ongoing monitoring of BP’s use of underwater dispersants in the Gulf of Mexico at http://www.epa.gov/bpspill. EPA received this data from BP last night and posted it within hours. Dispersants are a chemical used to break up oil into small droplets so that they are more easily degraded.

This is part of EPA’s continued commitment to make air, water, sediment and dispersant monitoring data available to the public as quickly as possible and to ensure the citizens of the Gulf region have access to all relevant public and environmental health information relating to the BP oil spill.

Directive Issued Requiring BP to Identify and Use Less Toxic, More Effective Dispersant

EPA issued a directive requiring BP to identify and use a less toxic and more effective dispersant from the list of EPA authorized dispersants. Dispersants are a chemical used to break up oil into small droplets so that they are more easily degraded.

The directive requires BP to identify a less toxic alternative—to be used both on the surface and under the water at the source of the oil leak—within 24 hours and to begin using the less toxic dispersant within 72 hours of submitting the alternative. If BP is unable to identify available alternative dispersant products, BP must provide the Coast Guard and EPA with a detailed description of the alternative dispersants investigated, and the reason they believe those products did not meet the required standards. EPA’s directive to BP can be found here.

Economic Cost and Societal Impact Modeling Continues

The Department of Energy’s national laboratories are working with DHS’ National Infrastructure Simulation and Analysis Center (NISAC), which is modeling the economic costs and societal impact of the oil spill on energy and other industries in the Gulf and along the coast to support the response efforts of the National Incident Commander and the Unified Area Command. NISAC is a modeling, simulation, and analysis center within DHS that leverages national expertise to address infrastructure protection.

Riser Insertion Tube Tool Continues to Divert Leaking Oil

BP’s riser insertion tube tool continues to capture a varying rate of leaking oil, bringing it to the surface for storage and disposal.

Progress Continues in Drilling Relief Wells

The Development Driller III, continues to drill the first relief well at approximately 30 feet per hour. The Development Driller II is being prepared to receive the blowout preventer, following which it will begin drilling the second relief well.

Natural Resource Conservation Service Continues to Build Response

USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service has deployed personnel and multiple vessels to assist the Louisiana Department of Fisheries and Wildlife in monitoring oil making landfall in Terrebonne Bay and Breton Sound areas in Louisiana, and continues to assist the Louisiana National Guard with technical engineering recommendations for stabilizing beach and headland areas where sand and earthen material is being placed to plug openings to prevent the oil from entering the wetlands.

Individual and Small Business Support Services Coordination Team Begins Work

An interagency team is developing and overseeing a unified approach for coordinating supportive services to individuals and small businesses impacted by the BP oil spill. In support of the National Incident Command, the Interagency Integrated Services Team is building a coordination plan based on the operational concept of “no wrong door” to ensure individuals, families, and small business can easily access the claims process, benefits, and other services.

This team will work closely among all levels of government to ensure that BP, as a responsible party, meets its obligations and that impacted individuals are made whole. Leadership from the interagency team briefed Governors from Gulf Coast states and identified next steps for a coordinated effort to ensure all claims are properly addressed.

As part of these efforts, a central resource for information on how to obtain assistance for dealing with the impacts of the current oil spill should visit www.disasterassistance.gov.

Navy Ocean Survey Vessels Assist in Boom Deployment and Skimming

Three Navy ocean survey vessels—the Wes Bordelon, the John Coghill and the Vanguard—continue to support boom deployment and skimming activities along the Gulf Coast.

By the Numbers to Date:

Personnel were quickly deployed and more than 24,000 are currently responding to protect the shoreline and wildlife.
More than 1,000 vessels are responding on site, including skimmers, tugs, barges, and recovery vessels to assist in containment and cleanup efforts—in addition to dozens of aircraft, remotely operated vehicles, and multiple mobile offshore drilling units.
More than 1.43 million feet of containment boom and 560,000 feet of sorbent boom have been deployed to contain the spill—and approximately 370,000 feet of containment boom and 1.28 million feet of sorbent boom are available.
Approximately 8.3 million gallons of an oil-water mix have been recovered.
Approximately 655,000 gallons of total dispersant have been deployed—600,000 on the surface and 55,000 subsea. More than 340,000 gallons are available.
17 staging areas are in place and ready to protect sensitive shorelines, including: Dauphin Island, Ala., Orange Beach, Ala., Theodore, Ala., Panama City, Fla., Pensacola, Fla., Port St. Joe, Fla., St. Marks, Fla., Amelia, La., Cocodrie, La., Grand Isle, La., Shell Beach, La., Slidell, La., St. Mary, La.; Venice, La., Biloxi, Miss., Pascagoula, Miss., and Pass Christian, Miss.
Resources:

For information about the response effort, visit www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com.
For specific information about the federal-wide response, visit http://www.whitehouse.gov/deepwater-bp-oil-spill.
To contact the Deepwater Horizon Joint Information Center, call [phone].
To volunteer, or to report oiled shoreline, call [phone]. Volunteer opportunities can also be found here.
To submit your vessel as a vessel of opportunity skimming system, or to submit alternative response technology, services, or products, call 281-366-5511.
To report oiled wildlife, call [phone]. Messages will be checked hourly.
For information about validated environmental air and water sampling results, visit www.epa.gov/bpspill.
For National Park Service updates about potential park closures, resources at risk, and NPS actions to protect vital park space and wildlife, visit http://www.nps.gov/aboutus/oil-spill-response.htm.
For daily updates on fishing closures, visit http://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov.
To file a claim, or report spill-related damage, call BP’s helpline at [phone]. A BP fact sheet with additional information is available here. For those who have already pursued the BP claims process and are not satisfied with BP’s resolution, can call the Coast Guard at [phone]. More information about what types of damages are eligible for compensation under the Oil Pollution Act as well as guidance on procedures to seek that compensation can be found here.
For information about the response effort, visit www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com.

[CrispyQ]

63. PAST 24 HOURS

PAST 24 HOURS???

>> Secretary Napolitano and EPA Administrator Jackson sent a letter to BP CEO Tony Hayward stressing their expectation that BP to conduct all actions in a transparent manner...

Oh, good. They sent a letter stressing their expectations. :eyes: I'm sure Tony "The amount of volume of oil and dispersant we are putting into it is tiny in relation to the total water volume" Hayward will take their plea to heart.

>> EPA last night began posting results from the ongoing monitoring of BP’s use of underwater dispersants...

>> The directive requires BP to identify a less toxic alternative ... within 24 hours...

>> An interagency team is developing and overseeing a unified approach for coordinating supportive services to individuals and small businesses impacted by the BP oil spill.

While I'm glad they are finally trying to take some control of this disaster, THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE THE FIRST WEEK, NOT 4 WEEKS INTO IT! :grr: :grr: :grr: :grr: :grr: Shame, shame on our government for not taking control of the situation in the first week!

Not surprising, though, from a government that has been compromised by 'free market' policies over the past 40 years & that protects the profits of big industry over the well being of the People. :banghead:

[sandnsea]

66. I need to post every day's update?

Because you don't have the ability to conclude that if there's one, there's many more?

And then think you're qualified to criticize anybody??

[CrispyQ]

117. I've read the news & dozens of online reports too,

& my assessment is that the government should have responded more aggressively weeks ago. But I get it - anyone who disagrees with your assessment is not qualified to criticize. :eyes:

[riskpeace]

127. + A Bazillion

It's 100% clear that BP is running the government.

[Individualist]

29. The condescending magic wand meme is BS!

[bluestateguy]

5. Would this be applicable to health insurance companies?

One could say that having 47 million people with no health insurance is a national emergency and therefore, the president will seize the companies and institute single payer health care.

Just throwing that out there.

[activa8tr]

30. Sounds good to ME! Let's get the private sector out of

our health and our bodies!

[sandnsea]

67. I want the private sector out of farming

I think the government should plan how much food the country needs and then grow only rice, legumes, and the most sustainable vegetables. Then they can charge families earning over $45,000 $400 a month and give it free to the rest. That should work.

Subsidized ag and retail grocery has gone on long enough.

[TheKentuckian]

100. Nope, we're talking an issue beyond just our own citizens or even humanity

[treestar]

6. If Bush had used that law, you'd be screaming

It is obviously meant to be used sparingly.

Obviously the government does not see a "national emergency" here. Care to argue why it is, under the standards of the law?

Declaring Martial Law - that's extreme.

[neverforget]

8. He doesn't need to declare martial law or use all the powers in that act.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8391891

[Cleita]

10. By all appearances, BP is being allowed to call all the shots and preventing

any aid from coming from other sources. We need all our resources of govt. agencies and military if necessary to keep this from getting worse. BP should be under surveillance, not allowed to perpetrate a cover-up with the government of the people looking the other way.

[kenny blankenship]

12. If Bush had empowered the Coast Guard, Nat'l Guard, Army etc. to seize and use

a fleet of private helicopters (say FedEx had an enormous depot of helicopters and fuel in Louisiana, which let's suppose multiplied the number of helicopters at the disposal of rescue workers by a factor of ten) to expedite the rescue of stranded people in New Orleans, America would remember him very differently. We DUers would continue to hate him, for lots of good reasons. On the subject of Katrina, though, we would be reduced to silence or else muted grumblings: he should have fixed the levees, harrumph, then none of this would have happened in the first place... But America would remember that he rode to the rescue of a drowning city.

Obama can declare a state of emergency in the Gulf, he could have from early on. The threat to public health and the economy of the region is immense. The size of the threat can be seen from space with a naked eye. It is an emergency that only the Federal government can match. The threat is imminent and getting worse by the minute. The only limitation is not a legal one, but merely political - does Obama have the stomach to go up against BP and its ideological allies? (who are turning up in some surprising places, I might add)

[Scuba]

14. +1

[Name removed]

108. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[amborin]

114. totally agree!

[Parker CA]

121. Incredibly stereotypical and myopic view of young Obama supporters. Nice generalizations you make.

[amborin]

113. great post! It's incomprehensible that Obama has not yet declared a state of emergency

It appears he's cast his lot with BP, which is not too surprising, I guess, given the record so far.

[amborin]

16. do i care to argue why it's a nat'l emergency? are you serious?

[Lorien]

107. I call bullshit. We were all just as furious when Bushco did nothing to help the

Katrina survivors. It's the government's job to PROTECT AMERICA AND HER CITIZENS, not "ensure corporate profits." Why is this so hard for you to understand?

[truedelphi]

7. Monsanto has been dissing the EPA since the early seventies.

And for its trouble, it has its key players heading the Department of Agriculture, the new fangled Food Safety Agency, The FDA, and many other top spots. (Never mind what its dioxin has done to cities across the USA.)

Thank you Obama. We should have known that CorpoRATions would flourish under your CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN.

And yes, I will take some oily shrimp with my vomitoxin wheat buns!

[Cleita]

11. Just before we went into WWII, the government seized all passenger ships

of American registry and assets of American airlines to use as troop transport and most of the factories to produce weaponry and other instruments of war. This is why we went on rations in this country at a time when we were emerging from the Great Depression. No one objected because it was a matter of saving a part of the world being destroyed by a madman and his corporate supporters. This also calls for tough measures outside of the normal conventions of our day to day lives.

[amborin]

18. this "calls for tough measures" yes!

[harkadog]

28. Where in the world are you getting this from?

Seizure of "most of the factories"?! Sorry it never happened. Truman tried to seize the steel companies during the Korean War and the Supreme Court slapped him down.

[Cleita]

34. Where am I getting it from? I lived through it.

The ship my parents arrived on with me just before Pearl Harbor was seized at the harbor in San Pedro as were most ships coming into American harbors were because they knew war was about to happen. So were airplanes. My dad had to return to his job in a foreign country on military transport. My mother and I had to stay here until the war ended, then we returned to my dad on a freighter as passenger ships and airlines had not been returned to commercial uses. Textile factories were turned over to produce uniforms and parachutes, making nylon stockings and other clothing items unavailable. Car factories were turned over to producing tanks. It went down the line including food that fed the military and that we were rationed on. My grandmother had an ice box because they had stopped making appliances for non-military use. My uncle, who worked in a machine shop made me a pair of homemade roller skates for my birthday because toys using metals weren't being manufactured.

The Korean War, which I was also lived through, was the first war that we weren't asked to make sacrifices for. All the regular goods were available. The military liked war and didn't want people to suffer and demand peace hence Truman's failure to seize the steel companies. We were on our way to being governed by the corporations as early as then. They bullshitted us with propaganda about how capitalism gave us a free society and communism was more evil than Satan worship. Yes, I lived through all the wars from WWII, one more heinous than the previous one. Now we blatantly do it to raid other countries' resources in the name of freedoms but we are never asked to make sacrifices unless it's the lives of our children or our jobs.

[Swamp Rat]

36. rubber and oil too

:thumbsup:

[harkadog]

38. Of course factories went to a war footing

But they were not seized and they were not taken over by the government. If you believe they were I'm sure you will provide a link.

[Cleita]

43. You probably have your own definition of seized.

Any good history book of WWII will give you the facts.

Here's a link that has a brief history of preparing for war time. http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1661.html

I recommend though that you go to the library and go through the archives of any newspaper or news magazine that published at that time and it will be all there for you. The ship that my family that was on was called the President Garfield if you want to research that. I know what we lived through so don't patronize me.

[harkadog]

69. Of course you could not provide any link for your assertion

Because it never happened. With all the resources available on the internet you say "Go to the library". I would say the same but I'm afraid in your case it would be of little help.

[Cleita]

76. I provided you with a link to start with. Did you read it?

If you think I'm going to waste my time doing research for you because you have already made up you mind about things you never experienced or witnessed, I'm not. I don't give a fuck what you think. I know what I lived through.

[harkadog]

82. I read your link. Not a word about seizure or anything close to it.

It didn't happen but if in your fantasy world you want it to have happened then go for it. What ever helps you get through the day.

[Cleita]

84. What do you call it when factories on the order of the government

were changed over to producing war good for the government and nothing else? It's there in my link. There was no choice there. In WWII they were told to do it. The ships were boarded by navy and everyone including the merchant marine crew escorted off for further assignments. Passengers who were on around the world cruises were dumped off in the ports and flown back to their original destinations in military aircraft or trains to their home towns if they were Americans. They also had to draft women in the workforce to free the men to go to war. Most of the internet references are about the women entering the workforce, so if you want the whole picture, you need to go to the archives. I'm more interested in today and there is a precedent there for our government to nationalize and take over the oil industry.

[harkadog]

132. I am interested in the present also.

The only time this has been to the Supreme Court was during the Korean War. The court said Truman could not seize the steel mills to help out in the war effort.

[William Z. Foster]

141. now it is the Supreme Court

Decide what your point is going to be, and then make a case for it.

[Lorien]

110. You are being deliberately obtuse

and obviously had a substandard history class in High School. This is common knowledge-it's shameful that you don't know it already.

[harkadog]

126. Since it is "common knowledge" then you should be able to

provide a link to it. It is so common that no mention is made of it on the internet? I guess so.

[Petrushka]

89. During WWII, the world's largest toy manufacturer (Louis Marx & Co. ) made 75mm shell casings

. . . at its Glendale WV factory.

FWIW: I remember only four people with automobiles during WWII:
our grade-school principal; our family doctor; a life-insurance
salesman; and, the chief-of-police. The man who came around
our neighborhood collecting iron and old rags, etc., during
scrap drives, he came with a horse and wagon---as did a
couple of other men (hucksters) selling locally grown produce,
fresh eggs and farmers' cheese.

Every family planted a Victory Garden in our neighborhood; but I remember
seeing no refrigerators anywhere. My mother's first ice-box was purchased
after my father joined the Army and was shipped overseas (leaving her with
two toddlers and a first-grader). Until then, there hadn't been enough food
to go around---much less anything left over to make an ice-box necessary.

[ljm2002]

96. Thanks for the insights!

Wish I could recommend your post, that was very informative and yes it does shed some real light on the progression of the Military Industrial Complex and how we have gone onto a footing of Permanent War without any sacrifices required of the general population.

[William Z. Foster]

72. sorry

Seizure is not always necessary, but in times of emergency it is the necessary and proper role of the government to coordinate, oversee, manage and direct resources and personnel and to protect the public interest.

The government during WWII, to cite merely one of thousands of examples, directed who could and who could not make what sort of railroad equipment and where it should go. During WWI the USRA - United States Railway Administration - did in fact "seize" and operate the railroads.

War Production Board

During World War II, the War Production Board (WPB) was granted supreme authority to direct procurement of materials and industrial production programs. Established by Executive Order 9024 on January 16, 1942, the WPB replaced the Supply Priorities and Allocation Board as well as the Office of Production Management. The national WPB constituted the chair (Donald M. Nelson, 1942 44; Julius A. Krug, 1944 45) appointed by the president, the secretaries of war, navy, and agriculture, the federal loan administrator, lieutenant general in charge of war department production, administrator of the office of price administration, chair of the board of economic warfare, and special assistant to the president who supervised the defense aid program. The board created advisory, policy-making, and progress-reporting divisions.

...

The national WPB's primary task was converting civilian industry to war production. The board assigned priorities and allocated scarce materials such as steel, aluminum, and rubber, prohibited nonessential industrial activities such as producing nylons and refrigerators, controlled wages and prices, and mobilized the people through propaganda such as "give your scrap metal and help Oklahoma boys save our way of life." In September 1942 Oklahoma newspapers publicized a statewide campaign for scrap metal collection to run from September 28 to October 17. N. D. Welty, publisher of the Bartlesville Examiner and Enterprise, was selected to direct the drive. The scrap metal collected in each county was sold to authorized junk dealers, and the proceeds went to a worthy cause designated by each county scrap metal committee. Children participated in the drive by bringing scrap metal to collection points at schools. Two weeks into the campaign Oklahoma ranked seventeenth in the nation with collections averaging seventeen pounds per person for a total of 19,139 tons. When the drive closed on October 17, Oklahoma ranked twenty-seventh with an average of seventy pounds collected per person, compared to a national average of almost eighty-two pounds per person.

The WPB and the nation's factories effected a great turnaround to war production. The construction of military aircraft that totaled six thousand in 1940 jumped to eighty-five thousand in 1943. Factories that had manufactured silk ribbons produced parachutes, automobile factories built tanks, typewriter companies converted to machine guns, undergarment manufacturers sewed mosquito netting, and a roller coaster manufacturer converted to the production of bomber repair platforms. Factories were expanded and new ones built. In Oklahoma new construction occurred in Beckett, Choteau, McAlester, Pryor, Ponca City, Tulsa, and Oklahoma City. The Douglas Aircraft Company built a bomber plant in Tulsa and a facility in Midwest City. The plants went into production in 1942 and 1943, respectively. The U.S. Naval Ammunition Depot in McAlester, constructed in 1942, employed more than eight thousand in 1945. The WPB ensured that each factory received materials it needed to operate, in order to produce the most war goods in the shortest time.

http://digital.library.okstate.edu/encyclopedia/entries/W/WA021.html

[harkadog]

75. Sorry what you have cited is not seizure in any sense of the word.

The factories remained private, with their own management and kept their own profits. The government coordinated the war production (and happily gave the companies contracts which assured them of profits). There was no risk involved at all.

[William Z. Foster]

77. seizure is but one method

The government seized fixed plant and rolling stock during WWI. Having experienced that, the railroad owners fully cooperated during WWII to avoid a repeat and seizure was not needed.

[harkadog]

83. As you know the comments on this thread were about seizure.

The poster said it happened and I said it didn't. You can go back in history and come up with your reasons about why it didn't but that is not the point. It never happened.

[William Z. Foster]

85. and I will now prove that it did

I also will point out that debating seizure is something of a red herring and a distraction.

The USRA

The United States Railroad Administration was the name of the nationalized railroad system of the United States between 1917 and 1920. It was possibly the largest American experiment with nationalization, and was undertaken against a background of war emergency.

On April 6, 1917, the United States entered World War I, and very soon the nation's railroads proved inadequate to the task of serving the nation's war efforts. There were several sources of the problem. Although the carriers had made massive investments in first years of the twentieth century, there were still inadequacies in terminals, trackage, and rolling stock. Inflation struck the American economy, and when in 1906 the federal government empowered the Interstate Commerce Commission to set maximum rates, the rail firms had difficulty securing revenue sufficient to keep pace with rising costs. The Interstate Commerce Commission did allow some increases in rates, however. Also, investors had overexpanded the nation's trackage, so by late 1915 fully one-sixth of the railroad trackage in the country belonged to roads in receivership (bankruptcy). The railroad unions (commonly called "brotherhoods"), desiring shorter working days and better pay, threatened strike action in the second half of 1916. To avert a strike, President Woodrow Wilson secured Congressional passage of the Adamson Act, which set the eight hour day as the industry standard. When the Supreme Court ruled the law constitutional, the carriers had no choice but to comply.

The railroads attempted to join forces to coordinate their efforts and help the war effort, but private action proved inadequate. Observers noted, for example, that sometimes competitive practices prevailed that were not in the best interests of efficient mobilization. Also, government departments sought priority for shipment made on their behalf, and congestion in freight yards, terminals, and port facilities became staggering.

Finally, in December 1917 the Interstate Commerce Commission recommended federal control of the railroad industry to ensure efficient operation. The resulting efficiencies were to go beyond simply easing the congestion and expediting the flow of goods; they were to bring all parties, management, labor, investors, and shippers, together in a harmonious whole working on behalf of the national interest.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Railroad_Administration

"...to bring all parties, management, labor, investors, and shippers, together in a harmonious whole working on behalf of the national interest..."

[harkadog]

90. Please read. The comments were about seizure in WW II not WW I

It did not happen in WW II.

[William Z. Foster]

92. ROFL

I have never seen goalposts moved so quickly and so far from where they originally were.

[harkadog]

124. See post #11

That is what started these comments. The poster said factories were seized in WW II. I said they were not. You are the one who wanted to move goalposts to something else.

[William Z. Foster]

128. sigh

New York Times, October 13, 2008

U.S. not always averse to nationalization, despite its free-market image

In times of war and national emergency, Washington has not hesitated. In 1917, the government seized the railroads to make sure goods, armaments and troops moved smoothly in the interests of national defense during World War I. Bondholders and stockholders were compensated, and railroads were returned to private ownership in 1920, after the war ended.

During World War II, Washington seized dozens of companies including railroads, coal mines and, briefly, the Montgomery Ward department store chain.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/13/business/worldbusiness/13iht-nationalize.4.16915416.html

Smith–Connally Act

The Smith-Connally Act (also called the War Labor Disputes Act) was an American law passed on June 25, 1943, over President Franklin D. Roosevelt's veto. The legislation was hurriedly created after the third coal strike in seven weeks.

The Act allowed the federal government to seize and operate industries threatened by or under strikes that would interfere with war production. and prohibited unions from making contributions in federal elections.

The war powers bestowed by the Act were first used in August 1944 when the Fair Employment Practices Commission ordered the Philadelphia Transportation Company to hire African-Americans as motormen. The 10,000 members of the Philadelphia Rapid Transit Employees Union (PRTEU), a labor union unaffiliated with either the American Federation of Labor or the Congress of Industrial Organizations, led a sick-out strike for six days. President Roosevelt sent 8,000 United States Army troops to the city to seize and operate the transit system, and threatened to draft any PRTEU member who did not return to the job within 48 hours. Roosevelt's actions broke the strike.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith%E2%80%93Connally_Act

U.S. At War: Seizure!

For the 16th time in World War II the U.S. Army had seized private property, at the direction of the President, as the result of a labor dispute. But this time there was a difference. That night on the radio, in the early editions of morning newspapers, in news offices and corner drugstores, the questions were asked: Is Ward's a war plant? Do the President's wartime powers cover seizure of a mail-order house?

"You New Dealer!" Next morning 30 newsmen and photographers milled around Montgomery Ward's main entrance, their way barred by soldiers. A lieutenant came out, told the newsmen a press room had been set up on the seventh floor. Virtually imprisoned in this room for 20 minutes (a bayonet-wielding soldier barred the door), the newsmen were finally ushered into Sewell Avery's office.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,933315-2,00.html#ixzz0omdVAKcD

Immediately after the war, but relevant I think:

The World War II and post-war strike wave

Where fact-finding boards were not sufficient to set limits to the strike wave, the government turned to direct seizures, still authorized under wartime powers. On October 4, 1945, President Truman directed the Navy to seize half the refining capacity of the United States, thus breaking the oil workers' strike.49 On January 24, 1946, the packinghouses were seized on the grounds that the strike was impeding the war effort months after the war's end and the strike was thus broken. The nation's railroads were seized May 17 to head off a nationwide strike. Workers struck anyway on May 23, and only the president's threat to draft the strikers and call up the Army to run the railroads forced them back to work. On May 21, the government seized the bituminous coal mines; the miners continued to strike, however, forcing the government to grant demands unacceptable to the operators and continue its control of the mines for many months.

http://libcom.org/history/world-war-ii-post-war-strike-wave

[harkadog]

131. Go sigh somewhere else

Read post #11 which you refuse to do. What you have posted has nothing to do with the assertion made in that post and you know it.

[William Z. Foster]

134. ok

You said federal seizures never happened. I documented that they had.

:shrug:

You set the terms of the debate and defined the area of disagreement, not me. I answered on your terms.

[harkadog]

137. I was replying to a poster who said all the factories were seized.

That is totally false. Even you agreed with that in one of your posts. Perhaps you forgot. Isolated incidents do not make a general rule.

[William Z. Foster]

140. again...

We have covered "seizure," we have covered WWII as opposed to WWI.

You say - "it never happened."

You suggested that we "go back in history." Going back in history we discover several examples of federal seizures of plants and companies before, during and after WWII.

So you are wrong.

Now where?

[CreekDog]

120. seizure doesn't require changing ownership

this is where you're getting hung up.

[harkadog]

125. No I am not getting hung up.

Seizure implies the government dictates what is made and when it is made and functions as the management. This did not happen in WW II. Whether it should or should not happen with BP is another matter but using WW II as some sort of precedent will not work. In fact the precedent is opposed to it since Truman did seize the steel mills during the Korean War and the Supreme Court told him he had no such power.

[William Z. Foster]

129. it most certainly did

You argued against my example of the USRA from WWI, saying that in WWII actual seizures did not occur. That is false, as I have documented above. You rejected my point that in WWII direct seizure of the fixed plant was not necessary to achieve the same goals. It certainly seemed that it was the word "seizure" you were arguing about. If not, your case becomes even weaker.

But if you are now going to say that the government did not "dictate what is made and when it is made" you are on extremely thin ice.

Stop with the Truman example - you keep holding up one time when Truman was thwarted, while ignoring all of the times her was not. That is documented above.

[harkadog]

133. I won't stop with Truman because it is the only case that went to the Supreme Court.

[William Z. Foster]

135. LOL

Around and around we go.

Now it is about the Supreme Court.

I don't think it is the only case of federalization or nationalization that went to the Supreme Court, if I recall. I will look it up.

[William Z. Foster]

130. ok

We have covered "seizure," we have covered WWII as opposed to WWI.

You say right here - "it never happened."

You suggested that we "go back in history." Going back in history we discover several examples of federal seizures of plants and companies before, during and after WWII.

So you are wrong.

Now where?

[harkadog]

142. Your quote from #77

"The government seized fixed plant and rolling stock during WWI. Having experienced that, the railroad owners fully cooperated during WWII to avoid a repeat and seizure was not needed."

I said seizure never happened and you confirmed it. Thanks.

[Lorien]

109. Excellent point Cleita!

:thumbsup:

[DJ13]

24. Sadly, if Obama wouldnt seize the banks when they fell apart

I cant see him doing it to an oil company.

His WH is captured by corporate interests, he wont do anything that might hurt some rich people.

[activa8tr]

But oil companies have more assets and less debt than the

banks.

I think banks should be allowed to fail on their own, and oil companies should be forced to surrender their assets forever.

[socialist_n_TN]

119. Yeah, I think so too in general

But my slogan would be "If you're too big to fail, you're just the right size to nationalize!" See it even rhymes. :)

To try and appear "reasonable" in these still somewhat right wing times, I'd go for nationalizing BP assets under American control (that would include international bank accounts in US bank hands) until the gusher is capped for good AND all damages are paid off. Put a sunset provision in there and, like the Bush tax cuts, never use it.

[ProSense]

32. The President should seize all the oil rigs

Hell, why stop there? He should ban or confiscate all vehicles that depend on oil.

[Swamp Rat]

33. You are so 'pro-Obama' that you cannot see the oil lapping up onto your toes.

Coming to a Jersey shoreline near you:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8387118&mesg_id=8387118

[ProSense]

35. Sorry,

screaming a bunch of idiotic solutions is not going to stop the oil. People who think seizing the oil rig is the solution to stopping the gusher are deluding themselves.

[Swamp Rat]

39. "screaming a bunch of idiotic solutions" is just a passive aggressive response to a serious problem.

As a poster above stated, "The threat is imminent and getting worse by the minute."

Since you are not directly affected at this time (but you WILL be, and you will be really really sorry), perhaps you cannot fathom the magnitude of this disaster.

Mark these words: The BP oil spill will affect you personally in a very bad way.

[ProSense]

49. "is just a passive aggressive response to a serious problem."

Funny the passive aggressive screams are so weighted toward the administration and not BP.

Also, this still doesn't explain how seizing the rig solve the problem.

"Mark these words: The BP oil spill will affect you personally in a very bad way."

Really?

[Swamp Rat]

54. "Funny the passive aggressive screams are so weighted toward the administration and not BP."

Red herring.

And yes, you will suffer from this disaster. I am not saying this because I wish to be so. I like you and have no desire to see you or anyone in your area hurt by this, but the BP oil spill is a lot worse than you think.

I know this because I live 30 miles away from the oil slick (which is getting even closer by the second), and I am also an environmental scientist.

[CrispyQ]

64. Wow. You really are naive.

"Mark these words: The BP oil spill will affect you personally in a very bad way."

Really?

When the livelihood of the Gulf residents is destroyed, it will effect all of us. It will increase the numbers of unemployed. They will move to other communities, putting even more strain on the already stressed safety nets. You must be in a pretty cushy situation & somewhat heartless to be so caviler about this.

[ProSense]

65. "it will effect all of us"

The word is affect.

And "really" was sarcastic.

[CrispyQ]

116. Sorry. Your sarcasm fell flat & I didn't see your grammar police badge. --nt

[Cleita]

51. The oil rigs need to be nationalized first because competent people need to be put

in charge that aren't putting profits before safety. They have already proved they can't operate those rigs properly so it's time to change hands so further disaster is averted. Secondly, those resources belong to all of us, so we should be operating them and getting profits from them for our needs as a society.

[freddie mertz]

78. Until and unless Obama decides to seize control of the site and the operation...

At which point you will be posting that this is BEST IDEA EVER and that you SUPPORTED IT ALL ALONG!!!

It is just too transparent and predictable to take seriously.



:crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :nuke:

[Cleita]

37. Not a bad idea. There is no reason why we shouldn't be driving vehicles

that run on electricity generated by solar and wind, or those that use bio-diesel or other bio renewable fuels. The technology is there. We need a government to make it happen that isn't beholden to Exxon, Shell, BP and et al.

[Swamp Rat]

41. I am going to destroy my car in a week or so.

THAT is how serious and ENOJADO I am. :grr:

[Cleita]

47. I found out that I can actually use bio-fuel in my car.

I'm trying to find a way of getting it. There is a wholesaler in town, but he only pumps to big rigs. I think that I also need to do some small changes mechanically. In the meantime I drive as little as possible. I have managed to spend less than $40 a month in gas with staying home and making shopping trips all in one day. Since I don't live near a bus route I have to have a car, but I'm determined to give the industry as little money as possible. My next project is looking into solar panels on my house. Family is fighting me on this one but I keep working on them.

[Swamp Rat]

53. I recycled my car after it was destroyed by Katrina.

It makes 32 MPG average, but it is time to rid myself of this oil-burning beast. I like the idea of a bio-fuel car, and I'd love to have one myself if it is feasible, especially if I can convert an old Plymouth Roadrunner. :D

I'd love to know what you come up with regarding solar panels. Down here in the swamps near the Gulf it is not always conducive to energy collection by solar panels, but it may be the best solution in the long run.

The City of New Orleans should use windmills and also install large impellers at the bottom of the Mississippi River to obtain energy in order to power the City.

[Cleita]

56. There's also hydro power. It's the electricity Arizona supplies to

Los Angeles and Las Vegas through Hoover dam. I actually had a little hippie book once about living off the grid that had instructions on how to build a tiny dam on a stream that generated electricity for your homemade log cabin house. Dams, of course are also controversial and can do ecological damage, but I think if they are well planned they can do the job. You have the Mississippi River right there. Your idea probably is better than dams. Of course I know nothing about engineering so I'm sure others more knowledgeable than me could explain things better. I also under stand that bio-fuel can be created from hemp. We really need to lift the ban on growing hemp. It would give us fibers for clothing as well as bio-fuel.

[Swamp Rat]

58. I would love to drive a hemp-fueled Hemi Cuda

:loveya:



or an even more classic car:

[Cleita]

87. Love your taste in cars. I especially like the bottom one. It reminds me of one my dad owned.

However, getting back to the solar. One of my neighbors has a small cottage industry in it. I don't know if he actually makes them or just installs them. I guess I should go over one day and introduce myself and talk to him. Mostly I have been researching on the internet. I really have meant to talk to him in person, but hesitate because I can't commit right now and I also have been too concerned about these other things that are happening. However, about Louisiana, your humidity is very high and maybe the panels will corrode faster (I don't know for sure as I don't know what they are made of) or maybe they might be a big weight on the roofs in a very damp climate. I do know that in cloudy, rainy weather places like Germany, they are actually functioning quite well. So when I find out a lot I will let you know. My DH and I used to have solar panels on our trailer when we were Snowbirds and they functioned quite well through the summer in supplying us with basic electricity when we were dry camping, even in forests with tall trees.

Here, where I live in California right now, we get a lot of sun even though we are regarded as overcast and colder than in Southern California, so I think solar could be a real solution through a lot of California with maybe plenty to spare for other states. It just takes the will to do it and go up against a big mean industry and that is the oil industry.

[TheKentuckian]

102. Get it converted to an electric or to biofuel, if you can afford to.

Salvage something, resources have already been used even recycling uses power. The more you can reuse the better.

I know all that is not real important right now in the grand scheme, I'm just sayin'.

[girl gone mad]

50. You waste so much time building these little straw men.

I refuse to believe you're not smarter than this.

[neverforget]

74. I advocate taking over the cleanup by declaring a national emergency

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8391891

[O is 44]

40. How is seizing property going to stop the gusher?

I would love for someone to answer this, individuals keep posting that the government should seize the property...and then what, besides they have no idea how to use it.

[Swamp Rat]

42. Because BP is using its property to kill us.

There, I answered your question.

[O is 44]

44. Are you referring to the dispersants? If so I was referring to

the equipment being used. How is seizing their property going to stop the gusher?

[Swamp Rat]

48. Has BP stopped the gusher using their equipment?

It's been a month now, but it's still gushing.

[O is 44]

55. exactly my point so why is the OP asking for us to seize it?

It will not help the gusher. My whole point is this I have seen angry rants throughout the left leaning blogs and none of them offer solutions on how to stop the gusher. The government does not have the equipment or the know how, so seizing a company's property does not lead to the gusher being stopped.

[Swamp Rat]

57. So we scientists and engineers can use it to stop the oil volcano.

This has nothing to do with 'left' or 'right' politics.

This is about our survival.

[janx]

68. How correct you are, Swampy.

:cry:

[William Z. Foster]

71. I will answer

I will assume that in good faith, you seriously do not understand.

People are calling for federal management of the crisis, rather than allowing privatized management of it continue. That is to use the federal government to marshal and coordinate efforts and resources and skill, and to make sure that the public welfare is protected, rather than the needs and desires of a private corporation.

I am not sure why that is so difficult for people to understand - if it in fact is. There is a long history of this. It is the obvious and appropriate thing to do, and has been done often on the past in times of national emergency, such as war, obviously, and also when a project was needed for the public good - rural electrification, public schools and thousands of other examples.

The alternative argument - the one argued by conservatives throughout our history - is to argue for privatization.

Some of those arguing - so vehemently and aggressively - for privatization of the management of this catastrophe claimed that the government "did not have the power" to take over management of the response to this catastrophe. It was a red herring, but never the less the OP responded to that excuse and refuted it.

[ShortnFiery]

81. Yes, well put.

:thumbsup:

"People are calling for federal management of the crisis, rather than allowing privatized management of it continue. That is to use the federal government to marshal and coordinate efforts and resources and skill, and to make sure that the public welfare is protected, rather than the needs and desires of a private corporation."

[ljm2002]

99. Well put! n/t

[TheKentuckian]

104. + infinity. How did this simple concept become so hard to get folks to process?

Fuckin Ray Gun!

[greencharlie]

46. ... but what if BP wouldn't contribute any money this November?

don't wanna' make them mad.

:sarcasm:

[Cleita]

52. And that is the real problem.

I'm looking really carefully at where campaign money is coming from for all the candidates on my ballot. No oil and bank whores will get a vote from me, thank you.

[WillyT]

73. HUGE K & R !!!

:kick:

[Petrushka]

79. K & R

:kick:

[William Z. Foster]

80. recommended

Fascinating that the same members are arguing the conservative positions on every issue now. We are getting some clarity in that regard.

I don't object to people holding or expressing conservative positions, but the political left and the Democratic party, and all of us, have been severely crippled by people posing as allies while expressing extreme right wing and libertarian views on everything, and then attacking any and all people speaking for the left. There has been a lack of clarity, and so a handful of conservatives have been able to influence the political discussion and this has been very hard to detect and counter. Things are becoming much more clear, and it is getting easier to make the case for "the Democratic wing of the Democratic party."

[amborin]

122. That's a great way to characterize it:

"the Democratic wing of the Democratic party." It's astonishing to see libertarian and/or conservative viewpoints regarding this catastrophe (but pretty much every issue) being championed. And, as someone else remarked, it's typically by those who express horror at Rand Paul's recent insane statements. A continued laissez faire response to this event is unacceptable.

[ShamelessHussy]

86. the gov has the authority to commandeer any resource it needs in times of emergency

if the perps or their ally's refuse to assist in containing and stopping this mess.

[rucky]

91. We don't even need national emergency. Just look at landlord/tenant law.

They're leasing from us. They should be evicted.

[pitohui]

93. what would you like him to seize?

queen elizabeth's crown jewels, as i assume she's the primary bp shareholder????

or would you like him to seize some free-floating oil in the gulf of mexico which GUESS WHAT, if YOU know how to seize that oil and put it in your own personal bank acct, just do it and be a hero by monday, crap

[William Z. Foster]

94. control

Control over the response to the catastrophe. BP controls it now.

Do people truly not understand this very simple concept (I fear that the anti-government liberation and right wing propaganda has been so effective that this may be true) or do they understand it and are they merely trying to throw sand in people's eyes (I fear that may be happening as well.)

[ShamelessHussy]

98. why is this such a difficult concept for some to grasp

:shrug:

[amborin]

138. that's the crux of it! we're still allowing untrustworthy BP to remain in control

not only of stopping the leak, but of a large portion of the containment.

[ljm2002]

95. Instead they are hiding behind the Oil Pollution Act of 1990...

...as a reason why they can't, they just can't take control of this operation.

Oh, and they couldn't "order" BP to release the live feed of the gusher, either, because "it's a private company". Perish the thought! Now I'm a private citizen, but I'm pretty sure the governmnet could order me to release information if I had caused a disaster.

What a crock.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

106. Lease

since BP leased the oil rig from Transocean. Does the law relate to leases?

[Rosa Luxemburg]

101. if we seize it can we then fix it?

the crucial thing is can anyone plug it up for good? Also plug up all the rest of them.

[William Z. Foster]

118. that is our best hope

Certainly, if the federal government does not take control then things will be much worse - are much worse.

("Seize" is not necessarily what is needed, and that has become a red herring for people to use to argue for continuing privatization of the management of the catastrophe.)

[Starry Messenger]

123. Thank you amborin.

Excellent thread. Recommend.

[amborin]

136. thank you, Starry Messenger! and thanks to everyone else for their excellent comments

[amborin]

139. Finally? US gov't may remove BP!

VENICE, La/HOUSTON (Reuters) – The U.S. government threatened on Sunday to remove BP from efforts to seal a blown-out oil well in the Gulf of Mexico if it doesn't do enough to stop the leak, though it acknowledged only the company and the oil industry have the know-how to halt the deepwater spill.

The Coast Guard said on Sunday that over 65 miles of Gulf Coast has experienced "shoreline impact" and less than half of it could be cleaned up relatively quickly, underscoring the growing ecological toll of the disaster.

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said Washington is frustrated and angry that BP Plc missed "deadline after deadline" in its efforts to seal the well more than a month after an oil rig explosion

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100523/pl_nm/us_oil_rig_leak