Written by Adrianne Madden
Wednesday, 25 June 2008
Today started out rather nicely. Summer has arrived, even here in what has been damp and cool Maine. The sky is blue, it's a warm and sunny 80 degrees, and I could feel my mood brightening by the minute.
Then I saw the news. The Supreme Court voted 5-3 to reduce the punitive damages resulting from the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill from $2.5 billion to $507.5 million.
That pretty much killed the good mood.
According to a Reuters article http://uk.reuters.com/article/oilRpt/idUKN2544489520080625 on the decision, the court ruled that the $2.5 billion sum — which previous legal wrangling had whittled down from the original $5 billion total a jury determined in 1994 — was excessive under federal maritime law. Instead, the court set the award amount at $507.5 million, limiting the total to an amount equal to relevant compensatory damages.
I wish I knew how to elegantly sum up the feelings that are surely welling up with this decision. Anger, disillusionment, despair, depression, bitterness are just some of the emotions I imagine the 33,000 people whose livelihoods and lives have been irreparably harmed by the Valdez spill are feeling.
For years, Exxon has fought against having to pay the $2.5 billion award. According to the Reuters article, Exxon-Mobil generated $2.5 billion in two days during the first quarter of 2007 — a year in which the oil giant enjoyed record earnings of $40.6 billion.
Alaska Sens. Lisa Murkowski and Ted Stevens and Rep. Don Young aren't pleased.
"Today's ruling adds insult to injury to the fishermen, communities and Alaska natives who have been waiting nearly 20 years for proper compensation following the worst environmental disaster in our nation's history," they said in a joint press statement.
"As a result of today's ruling, we are redoubling efforts to get signed into law the delegation plan to give the 33,000 victims of the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill the ability to increase retirement contributions and to provide tax relief through income averaging of the individual settlement amounts."
As the legal wrangling stretched out year after year, some 6,000 of the plaintiffs died. The court battle also took a toll on fishermen, their marriages, their families, their communities.
But they waited for a resolution, hoping it would let them get on with their lives.
This is what everyone's been waiting for? This is closure?
National Fisherman Live: 3/10/15
In this episode, Online Editor Leslie Taylor talks with Mike McLouglin, vice president of Dunlop Industrial and Protective Footwear.
National Fisherman Live: 2/24/15
In this episode:
March date set for disaster aid dispersal
Oregon LNG project could disrupt fishing
NOAA tweaks gear marking requirement
N.C. launches first commercial/recreational dock
Spiny lobster traps limits not well received
NMFS announced two changes in regulations that apply to federal fishing permit holders starting Aug. 26.
First, they have eliminated the requirement for vessel owners to submit “did not fish” reports for the months or weeks when their vessel was not fishing.
Some of the restrictions for upgrading vessels listed on federal fishing permits have also been removed.Read more...
Alaskans will meet with British Columbia’s Minister of Energy and Mines, Bill Bennett, when he visits Juneau next week and will ask him to support an international review of mine developments in northwest British Columbia, upstream from Southeast Alaska along the Taku, Stikine and Unuk transboundary rivers.
Some Alaska fishing and environmental groups believe an international review is the best way to develop specific, binding commitments to ensure clean water, salmon, jobs and traditional and customary practices are not harmed by British Columbia mines and that adequate financial assurances are in place up front to cover long-term monitoring and compensation for damages.Read more...