Jerry BowyerChief Economist, Benchmark Financial Network
Not mainly because of the screw up in the Gulf, but because of the bigger screw up of trading with the enemy in Iran.
Kellyanne ConwayCEO and President
the polling company™
That punishment would not fit the crime until we understand the circumstances of what happened, who knew what when, and what actions have been taken.
David P. GoldmanSenior Editor
If BP is liable for damages, it should be sued. If it committed criminal acts, it should be prosecuted. BP is a corporation, nonetheless, and should be entitled to do legitimate business.
Yes, but first things first: raise the statutory liability cap above the meaninglessly small level it is today to make sure that (a) BP has to pay for this mess, and (b) every other oil company is on notice that they had better invest appropriately in safety precautions.
Jim LaCampPortfolio Manager, Portfolio Focus, RBC Wealth Management
Co-Host, Opening Bell Radio Show, Biz Radio Network
The courts can decide the damages to BP, not the government. If they violated specific laws/safety standards, there should be legal recourse and penalties. Barring them would simply be political posturing. It's not a free-market solution; it would be a mercantilist solution.
Donald L. Luskin Chief Investment Officer, Trend Macrolytics LLC
Instead, the incompetent federal government should be barred from regulating the oil industry or anything else.
Daniel J. Mitchell
BP already is losing billions of dollars because of this unfortunate accident. Any ban on federal contracts or oil leases would be a senseless penalty on a firm that has learned a very important bottom-line lesson on the importance of safety.
Steve MooreSr. Economics Writer, The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board
This was a completely unforeseen accident that does not appear to be based on any negligence on the part of BP. We need more, not fewer, companies engaged in drilling to keep energy prices low.
University of California, Irvine
At least until it pays for all costs of the spill, including all economic damages.
Money & Politics Columnist
Such a move would be a terrible precedent as to the treatment of US companies overseas. It might also be illegal under the World Trade Organization. While protectionism might not be the intent, it would certainly be the result.
Former Labor Secretary
Professor of Public Policy, UC Berkeley
Yes, until it proves it has taken sufficient measures to prevent another disaster.
Political Strategist and Campaign Innovator
The statements of their CEO and US Chief are shameless. The company should not be given US government money through a contract.