Not looking to make this any more political that it is already, but I agree with your comments on a lot of fronts. The entire concept of deregulation was assuming that the markets would correct things naturally. Ain't gonna happen. Then the argument about how costly it is for government agencies to staff up enough to do the proper job, so let the industries, who supposedly know more plus all the ins and outs, do it with just government oversight. Well, that is not working either. Then there is the false belief that industries have the interest of the general public in mind. Nonsense. They answer only to shareholders, and when they fail to show sufficient profits, shareholders will move on to something/somebody else. It should be in the interest of companies within an industry to be stewards to both the shareholders AND the rest of the environment in which they are being permitted to operate. However, reality is company and profits first, end of story. Not even a second place thing without being forced by regulations, and held accountable by serious oversight. We do not need a total government control, as one side of the extreme argument goes, but where the resources, livelihoods, health and other critical things of millions are concerned, and environmental impact can be devastating (this applies to energy and financial stuff alike), we do need a stronger hand regulating things, and not just paying lip service, being bought off, or litigated to diminishing returns.
Most folks do not really want more government intervention on some things like this until it really messes with their lives and such. Well, we are at that point once again. We cannot trust any industry to practice self-regulation and policing. It just does not work without there being some independent oversight that also has some "teeth" with respect to penalties for breeching regs. BP may not have really done anything "wrong" with respect to the economics and plans it built for approval of the project. At issue is just how lax those plans may be to close scrutiny before approval. I am not against harvesting the resources we may need, but we must do it, and a lot of other things much more safely, environmentally securely, and if it costs more, so be it, or find those other energy sources that will cause less damage.
Just my thoughts....
LJ