OPINION: The final lesson of BP? Money talks

BP is starting over. It named a new chief executive, and its finances are looking up. Its second-quarter report showed surprisingly strong revenues, beating Wall Street's estimates. The company has started to sell $30 billion of its assets to ensure it has all the money it needs to pay liability claims. No wonder several Wall Street analysts are suggesting BP stock as a terrific buy.

If BP emerges from the worst environmental disaster in American history fatter and happier than anyone imagined a few months ago, what happened to the idea of corporate accountability? Does this mean any giant corporation can wreak havoc and then get back to business as usual?

Corporations aren't people. They have no brains, no consciences, no capacity for intent or guilt. Every one of their movable parts can be replaced, just like BP's former CEO, Tony Hayward, was replaced. Corporate accountability and responsibility are meaningless concepts. Corporations exist for only one purpose: to make money.

If we want corporations to act differently, we have to force them to do so through laws that are fully enforced and through penalties higher than the economic benefits of thwarting them.

Here's the real outrage: In the wake of the BP gusher, essentially no laws have been changed - not even a ridiculously low cap on damages private parties can collect from oil companies. Senate Republican leaders said recently that they wouldn't support a bill retroactively removing the liability cap - not even Democrats Mary Landrieu (D-La.) and Mark Begich (D-Alaska) will support it.

Why isn't Congress doing more - not only removing the cap on civil liability but also raising the level of penalties oil companies have to pay for violating safety and environmental regulations, permanently prohibiting deep-water drilling, and enacting a carbon tax?

Because of Big Oil's political clout.

The same anthropomorphic fallacy that accords human attributes to giant corporations like BP distorts clear thinking about how to limit their political influence.

Consider the grotesque Supreme Court decision earlier this year in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which gave corporations the status of people with First Amendment rights to spend unlimited amounts of money on political ads. In March, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals decided that in light of that decision, there was no longer any basis for limiting contributions to so-called independent committees, known as 527s, set up to support or oppose particular candidates. The old contribution limit was $69,900 every two years. Now even that's gone.

And the Federal Elections Commission has just interpreted these two court decisions to mean corporations - not just individuals - can now give unlimited amounts of money to 527s.

To top it off, the Senate failed to pass the "Disclose Act," which would have forced corporate sponsors of campaign ads to reveal themselves and not hide behind innocuous sounding names like "Americans for America." The bill also would have prohibited campaign ads run by U.S. subsidiaries of foreign companies. (Think BP.)

Now, all the limits are gone and the gloves are completely off. Even BP, incorporated in the United Kingdom, is officially free to influence American politics to its heart's content.

The will of the American people is being subordinated to the demands of giant moneymaking machines called global corporations that can now spend - or threaten to spend - unlimited amounts of money in support of any politician willing to help them make more and against any who might cause them to make less.

This is the final lesson of BP.

What should you do? As we should with the loophole-ridden finance reform and the new health law that richly rewards Big Pharma, voters should get angry, not cynical. We should commit to getting big money out of politics, even if it takes years.