Josh Fox Rants About Ron Paul
A word about Ron Paul, because, I have disturbingly heard several of my "friends" endorsing him lately, which seems insane to me. Just FYI: Ron Paul’s official position is to completely eliminate the EPA. Without the EPA there would be no investigation and thus no proof in Pavilion, Wyoming of fracking contamination. Without the EPA there would be no government agency enforcing gas drilling malfeasance of any kind. Without the EPA there would be no rules governing gas drilling’s emissions or use of diesel fuel in fracking. Ron Paul believes that all pollution cases should be solved in civil courts. Individual people vs. the industry. This is a ludicrous position. This means that individual citizens would have to wage suits against huge corporations who have enormous power to out-lawyer and out-litigate them. Most, if not all civil cases against huge industries like the gas industry end in our of court settlements with records sealed by non-disclosure agreements. That means that there would never be any official proof or record of gas industry wrong doing. No legal precedents. No science other than the private studies done by individuals. No data bases. No cross-referencing. No basic consolidated source of information. Ron Paul, as far as gas drilling and pollution is concerned, has the same positions as Rick Perry. He’s charming and he’s anti-war, but on the environment, he’s a sham. If you don’t believe me, go look at his website.
More on Ron Paul (and all the Republicans) and the EPA, for those of you following this discussion: The idea, suggested by Ron Paul, recently on Jay Leno’s program, that the courts can protect the environment (and the people who have been wronged) while eliminating the EPA is so deeply flawed that I have to interpret it either as a veiled attempt to make sure that people get no protection at all or a such a grave misunderstanding of our current legal system that it’s laughable. That’s like saying that you can try murder cases without a coroner to do an autopsy. EPA provides the crucial science that allows citizens to prove wrongdoing, in many cases. But even in cases where EPA has not intervened, what this would mean is that citizens would be forced to try their cases in civil or state court against industries which have incredible legal might and unmatched resources to wage war in the courts, which is exactly what these corporations want. Imagine yourself in a lawsuit vs Halliburton for example, a multi billion dollar corporation: they have 300 lawyers, a team of researchers, interns and the like and you have one lawyer who you are paying, hourly. The more stuff they file, the more your lawyer has to respond, the more you have to pay your lawyer. Halliburton bankrupts you in a week with motions. Our court system often doles out justice based on who has the best lawyer, not on who is in the right. That translates to who has the most money in many cases. When Ron Paul is saying that the courts can handle pollution and contamination, he is saying, remove the government agency which will provide scientific back up to the citizens. And guess what, it’s not just Ron Paul. It is all the Republicans. They ALL want to eliminate EPA. They are (cynically and immorally) pitting you, the citizen, in a legal war which you have no capability of fighting. Ron Paul is essentially shilling for big corporations. Take government out of the equation, and you turn over the country to the most powerful institutions that will be left over: the corporations. His libertarian philosophy sounds populist, but in fact, it is the opposite, it means more corporate control over your basic freedoms.
Amen, Brother Man!
Technorati Tags: bp,oil spill,fracking,gasland,josh fox,rant,ron paul,politics,pollution,biohazard,environmental concer,toxic,air,water,food,republic,polliticians,corporate personhood,future,epa,american,gulf of mexico,corruption,power shift,money saving