Punting the Pundits

“Punting the Pundits” is an Open Thread. It is a selection of editorials and opinions from around the news medium and the internet blogs. The intent is to provide a forum for your reactions and opinions, not just to the opinions presented, but to what ever you find important.

Thanks to ek hornbeck, click on the link and you can access all the past “Punting the Pundits”.

Abraham Lustgarten: A Stain That Won’t Wash Away

TWO years after a series of gambles and ill-advised decisions on a BP drilling project led to the largest accidental oil spill in United States history and the death of 11 workers on the Deepwater Horizon oil rig, no one has been held accountable.

Sure, there have been about $8 billion in payouts and, in early March, the outlines of a civil agreement that will cost BP, the company ultimately responsible, an additional $7.8 billion in restitution to businesses and residents along the Gulf of Mexico. It’s also true that the company has paid at least $14 billion more in cleanup and other costs since the accident began on April 20, 2010, bringing the expense of this fiasco to about $30 billion for BP. These are huge numbers. But this is a huge and profitable corporation.

Richard (RJ) Eskow: Should We “Means Test” Your Auto Insurance? Then Why Do It for Social Security?

Picture this: You’re driving down the road one rainy day as someone bearing an uncanny resemblance to Mitt Romney approaches you from the other direction in a Cadillac. One of you hydroplanes and there’s a collision.

After both of you have confirmed that nobody’s hurt — and that the dog and his carrier are still securely fastened to the roof — you call your insurance companies. Soon the claims adjusters show up in their little cars — you know, the ones with the insurance company logo on the door. (I know that doesn’t happen in real life. This is a story.)

Your claims adjuster punches some figures into an electronic device, then smiles and says “You’re all set! The check will be mailed out tomorrow.” So far, so good.

But then you overhear the other driver arguing with his adjuster: “What do you mean, my claim is rejected! The headlight is cracked. On a car like this that’s going to run me six grand, easy! Why won’t you guys honor my claim? I paid my premiums just like everybody else.”

“I’m sorry, sir,” the adjuster replies. “At your income level you’re not entitled to file a claim. But we sure do thank you for all those payments. Keep ’em coming — and have a good day!”

If that scenario doesn’t make sense to you, why do it for Social Security?

Rep. Charles Rangel: Prosperity for Whom?

After Republicans in the House of Representatives voted to pass the so-called “Ryan Budget,” Committee Chairman Paul Ryan proclaimed that he was “happy to say we have taken another step on the path to prosperity.” But given that this budget makes across-the-board slashes to social safety net programs that all but the richest Americans rely on at some point in their lives, we have to ask, “Prosperity for whom?”

Finding an answer to this question requires an examination of the Ryan Budget and its stark contrast with the budget proposed by President Barack Obama. Both budgets aim to reduce America’s growing deficit. But how do they pay for it?

Robert Sheer: For He’s a Jolly Good Scoundrel

How evil is this? At a time when two-thirds of U.S. homeowners are drowning in mortgage debt and the American dream has crashed for tens of millions more, Sanford Weill, the banker most responsible for the nation’s economic collapse, has been elected to the American Academy of Arts & Sciences.

So much for the academy’s proclaimed “230-plus year history of recognizing some of the world’s most accomplished scholars, scientists, writers, artists, and civic, corporate, and philanthropic leaders.” George Washington, Ralph Waldo Emerson and Albert Einstein must be rolling in their graves at the news that Weill, “philanthropist and retired Citigroup Chairman,” has joined their ranks.

Steve Fraser and Joshua B. Freeman: Locking Down an American Workforce

Sweatshop labor is back with a vengeance. It can be found across broad stretches of the American economy and around the world.   Penitentiaries have become a niche market for such work.  The privatization of prisons in recent years has meant the creation of a small army of workers too coerced and right-less to complain.

Prisoners, whose ranks increasingly consist of those for whom the legitimate economy has found no use, now make up a virtual brigade within the reserve army of the unemployed whose ranks have ballooned along with the U.S. incarceration rate.  The Corrections Corporation of America and G4S (formerly Wackenhut), two prison privatizers, sell inmate labor at subminimum wages to Fortune 500 corporations like Chevron, Bank of America, AT&T, and IBM.

Sophie Meunier: The French Presidency Is a Bargain

Ten candidates — that’s the field of presidential hopefuls competing for votes in the first round of the French presidential election on Sunday, April 22. Some of them are household names, like incumbent president Nicolas Sarkozy and his main challenger, the socialist Francois Hollande. Others are still relatively unknown, even to French voters, such as the candidate representing the Trotskyist party, Lutte Ouvrière, or the head of the LaRouche movement in France (both currently polling at 0 percent).

The multitude of candidates stems in part from a two-round electoral system, whereby everyone competes in the first round but only the two candidates with the highest number of votes face off in the second round (on May 6). What also enables so many candidates to run is that French electoral campaigns are cheap. As long as you can gather 500 signatures of support from about 47,000 elected representatives throughout France, you can stand for election to the presidency.