Joe Ryan, Candidate for Congress in the 52nd District, wants BP held responsible for all losses related to spill

ASSESSING RESPONSIBILITY AND OTHER POST-DISASTER ISSUES RELATED TO IMPLOSION OF BP'S OIL WELL IN THE GULF COAST

     JOE RYAN BELIEVES CAPITALISM CAN ONLY THRIVE WHERE IT ACTS TO BENEFIT THE MAJORITY OF THE NATION'S POPULACE, AND THAT DEPENDS ON HOLDING CORPORATIONS RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THEIR CONDUCT OF BUSINESS, INCLUDING COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH DAMAGES CAUSED BY AND RELATED TO A BUSINESS'S OPERATIONS
      Joe Ryan believes that capitalism is the only economic system inherently compatible with our nation's constitution; therefore, Joe Ryan also believes that BP must be held repsonsible for every single bit of damage it has caused (and that the spill will cause in the future).
     Joe Ryan believes that socializing the cost of the cleanup in any way shape or form, simply turns free market principles into a joke, as the cleanup costs are turned in to another form of taxpayer bailout of a corporation that acted irresponsibly. Thus holding BP less than 100% responsible for all damages caused, would only encourage more wreckless pursuit of profits. If corporations can socialize the cost of their losses and disatsers their operations cause, then the public will be forced to turn against capitalism, as a social self-defense mechanism agaisnt gettingrobbed, will seal capitalism's demise.

JOE RYAN BELIEVES CAPITALISM IS BEING GIVEN A BAD NAME BY PERSONS CONNECTED TO THE TWO MAJOR PARTIES, WHO DISTORT FREE MARKET PRINCIPLES IN THEIR PURSUIT OF SPECIAL INTEREST DRIVEN AGENDAS
Joe Ryan believes that Irresponsible capitalist, who use cheap equipment to drill wells in sensitive areas, perpetuate and enable Wall Street scams, use foreign based slave labor to produce products that are often counterfeit or of substandard quality, and who endanger the public's safety with cadmium laced products, and other harmful practices, are gradually destroying the public's confidence in the economic system that has been proven to lift the most economic-boats simultaneously, while encouraging innovation, ingenuity, and ultimately freedom itself.

IF ELECTED, JOE RYAN WOULD ALWAYS SUPPORT CAPITALISM, BY VOTING IN FAVOR OF MEASURES THAT ENSURE THAT CAPITALISM IS ABLE TO THRIVE IN AN ATMOSPHERE WHERE A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD EXISTS, UNFETTERED BY GOVERNMENT SUBSIDIZATION OF WASTEFUL AND IGNORANT BUSINES PRACTICES, RELIANCE ON ABUSIVE LABOR PRACTICES TO GAIN ADVANTAGE OVER COMPETITORS, AND OTHER MISCELLANEOUS SUPPORT FOR IRRESPONSIBLE BEHAVIOR, WWHICH ULTIMATELY LEADS TO OIL SPILLS, AND OTHER SOCIALIZED ECONOMIC LOSSES, DIRECTLY RELATED TO UNFAIR AND ILLEGAL CONDUCT OF BUSINESS

Conclusion: Bottom Line, Joe Ryan does not support the Democratic Party's efforts to minimize BP's losses, or the Republican Party's efforts to absolve BP of responsibility for the cost of doing business. Both parties are undermining capitalism by socializing the costs of the cleanup in one manner or another.

Note: Just before the 2008 election, Duncan Hunter sent out a flyer where - besides implying he was an "Independent" and not a Republican - he claimed that the solution to our nation's energy problems were simple: We just needed to expand deep water drilling for oil off our nation's coasts. You can't make this stuff up. Joe Ryan congratulates Duncan Hunter on stating his ideas publicly. Of course, his public pronouncements about how a surge would work in Afghanistan, and how we simply need to increase deep well drilling of our coats to solve our nation's energy woes, are intended to be 'safe' statements, sure to elicit praise from persons who lack foresight; but sometimes 'safe' statements can backfire, when they're written by campaign staff who care more about getting a candidate elected, than coming up with something original from the candidate's own mind.

      Joe Ryan is not just a candidate who criticizes others without offering alternative solutions. Here's a couple ways Joe Ryan would approach energy issues in a different way than most Republicans or Democrats beholden to lobbyist money:
      1)Joe Ryan advocates increasing fuel economy standards for all new cars sold in the US, on a continuing and predictable basis (so as to not unfairly impact manufacturers, by creating unpredictable mileage-standard increases tied to external standards), so that the fuel economy standards double within 10 years. Joe Ryan believes the constitution allows for federal regulation of damaging car emissions (not carbon); since verified damage to citizens lungs - caused by gasoline and diesal exhaust) provides a compelling reason for the government to increase fuel standards, without violating the constitution, or unduly involving the government in private business decisions. Joe Ryan does not believe that carbon emissions can be regulated without violating the constitution, so he's put together an alternative plan at www.CarbonTaxAlternative.com, that will please those who oppose carbon regualtion, as well as those who are concerned about carbon emissions. Check out CarbonTaxAlternative for the outline of a plan designed to solve the problem, without making anyone unhappy. Let's end the war over carbon regulation by regulating other pollutants, ensuring carbon production will drop as a sideffect of the plan, rather than because an expensive, wieldy, unenforceable carbon regulation apparatus has been built to accomplish the same task in an onerous, and heavy-handed manner by government employees. Joe Ryan's plan to increase monitoring and control over the release of pollutants of allkinds, would not necessitate an increase in the size of the EPA or it's enforcement staff. Joe Ryan's plan would require EPA personnel currently working on carbon regualtion programs to switch their efforts back to more traditional methods of monitoring environmental abuses, and documenting the same, so enforcement action can be taken where appropriate.
      2) Also Joe Ryan would try to see to it that Congress invoked greater control over federal dollars used to promote local mass transit, so that mass transit funding and control over mass transit operations would be localized as much as possible; thereby giving local community mebers greater year-to-year control over local mass transit services, to ensure that the local sytems are operated for the commuinty's benefit and not primarily for the benefit of upper level transit administration employees, and to benefit union members.