On the recordMay 25, 2010
Madam President, I appreciate the Senator came up with a proposal. It is 40 pages. I just saw it. I look forward to reading it and seeing whether it truly achieves the goal we mutually have. We are moving the ball forward because both the Senator from Louisiana and the Senator from Alaska, who I understood originally opposed lifting the cap to an unlimited amount, now both believe the cap, at least in this instance, should be lifted to an unlimited amount. But reading the last 2 pages of the proposal we just got, and listening to the words of the Senator from Louisiana, there is a suggestion here that BP has, in essence, made a commitment or a contract, yet we have nothing before us other than testimony about a supposed willingness to pay all legitimate claims. They have equivocated when they have been asked before the committee, What does ``legitimate'' mean, and several members asked them a series of different elements of ``legitimate,'' and they would not commit to that. Secondly, the letter the Senator has in his legislation that he wants to propound to pass right now says BP is ``prepared'' to pay above $75 million. It does not say it ``shall'' pay above $75 million. It does not say ``will'' pay. There is no legal obligation for them to do it. So to consume that and say that is the basis under which we are making some contractual relationship is a problem.…





