Caving in for the mining industry

When presidential campaigns are in full swing is of course no time to discuss issues and stuff. But take the recent disclosure of documents showing just how scummy bosses can be, combine it with Bush's promise to veto new mine safety legislation, and you get yet another in the long line of so many little reminders of why it's important that a Democrat wins the White House.

Remember in August when the Crandall Canyon mine in Utah collapsed and killed those six men, and then three more lives were lost trying to rescue them? Mine co-owner Robert Murray said at the time that gosh, an earthquake must have caused the cave-in. Murray, upon questioning, also insisted there was no "retreat mining" going on, referring to the dangerous practice by which miners are ordered to squeeze out every last little drop of possible profit by mining out the very pillars that hold the world atop their heads.

Nobody ever believed the earthquake crap. And earlier this month, the Salt Lake Tribune obtained minutes of meetings involving Murray and other mine owner/operators from March 2007, months before the August disaster, that reveal Murray knew retreat mining was taking place. The minutes also show that although Murray had denied knowing anything about it in August when the mine collapsed, Murray had months earlier learned of a "bounce" within the mine that raised serious questions about the mine's structural integrity.

Federal regulators have yet to complete the official investigation of the Crandall Canyon collapse. But the first lawsuits are starting to be filed and if there's any justice left in the world those miners' families will ultimately end up owning every asset in the Murray Energy portfolio and Murray can spend the rest of his miserable life in a van down by the river.

Meantime, the House passed a bill a couple weeks ago to add more safeguards and oversight to "retreat mining." Other provisions of the bill would put the Mine Safety and Health Administration in charge of rescue efforts (instead of blithering nimrods like Murray), give MSHA subpoena power, stiffen penalties for safety violations and require mines to install tracking technology that doesn't suck (AP).

The bill passed mostly on party lines. Bush (pictured above, demonstrating underground mine safety technology preferred by Republicans) has threatened to veto it. He and the industry and the rest of the War Party drones are making their usual  objections — if additional burdensome regulations are allowed to strangle American industry's freedom to boost bottom lines and enhance shareholder value by endangering the workforce, then the terrorists have won.

Besides, the industry and its apologists say, Congress passed a bill the last time the teevee paid attention to miners who lost their lives because of shoddy regulatory oversight of the sort that happens in an administration that hates government, i.e., after the Sago disaster in West Virginia. Ergo, another bill is unnecessary.

The United Mine Workers, families of the Crandall Canyon miners and Democratic supporters of the legislation answer that the earlier bill contained no additional safeguards for retreat mining. "The 2006 MINER Act is primarily concerned with what happens after a safety incident occurs in a mine," UMWA said in a statement. "There is next to nothing in that legislation that does anything to address keeping incidents from happening in the first place."

Opposing the bill amounts to putting the interests of corporations and industry ahead of public health and safety and the well-being of American workers, so needless to say Nevada's Dean Heller and Jon Porter voted against the so-called S-MINER bill. Shelley Berkley didn't make the Jan. 16 vote, as she was in Nevada that week conducting assimilation missions on behalf of the Borg.

The bill didn't pass by near enough of a margin to override Bush's threatened veto, but upon the House action Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee Chairman Ted Kennedy said "I intend to see that the Senate acts as soon as possible."

Harry Reid of course is pretty much the mining industry's bitch. Doing whatever the mining industry says or wants so as to placate a Republican or two in Elko is a key part of Reid's continuing electoral aspirations, such as they are.

But that's all about gold, not coal, right? Surely Harry, who has been known to rail against Bush and Co. and their knee-jerk impulse to put profits ahead of people, can break free of his goldmasters' brethren in the coal patch and get on board legislation to put safety ahead of shareholders, no?

Asked for Harry's position on the legislation that passed the House, his office sent the Gleaner this:

"Sen. Reid knows personally how dangerous mining can be. He strongly supported last year’s MINER Act and worked to ensure its passage. The safety of our nation's miners is a priority and he is monitoring the progress of S-MINER with this mind."

Almost certainly, that's supposed to read "with this in mind." Apart from a missing preposition, there isn't much else that's recognizable in that statement — certainly not a position on the bill the House passed, for instance.

It's worth noting, though, that Bush, the industry and everybody in Congress of both parties "supported last year's MINER Act" too. Backing legislation that Bush eagerly signed might not be exactly the powerful testament to protecting miners' health and safety that Reid's office intended.

Oh well. A year from now Reid will no longer have to dither over his position on legislation that a president is threatening to veto. Instead, Nevada's senior senator will no doubt be delighted to get behind aggressive mine safety legislation that a Democratic president will promise to sign.

Comments

Sam's $100 bets the new prez
is a republican.. likely Romney..
maybe Mac.
Yup!
PS
Where's the FBI?

[enough]

And the question remains as to who will run against the inept Majority Leader(??), one Harry Reid, who is prepared to once again cower to the worst president in American history and give him everything he wants in the new FISA bill, including amnesty for the telecommunications companies?

He is a disgrace to Nevada and America.

How do we retire him as Majority Leader?

[Lilly]

Shelley Berkley is the truly worthless one. Can't we find a Democrat to run against her?

[enough]

Lilly,

Hooray for you! You are correct. Congresswoman Berkley also needs to be replaced. Another disgraceful member of the war party.

[The Penguin]

Dang, I love that pic. Mary Poop-ins, indeed!